The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 11-01-99 AGENDA CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL ~ REGULAR MEETING CUPERTINO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ~ REGULAR MEETING 10300 Torte Avenue, City Hall Council Chamber Monday, November 1, 1999 6:45 p.m. CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL MEETING PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS Remembrance of Mr. Saleem Shaikh, Vice-Chairperson, Parks and Recreation Commission. POSTPONEMENTS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the council from making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR Unless there are separate discussions and/or actions requested by council, staff, or a member of the public, it is requested that items 1 through 15 be acted on simultaneously. 1. Minutes: October 18, 1999, regular meeting. 2. Accounts payable: (a) October 15, 1999, Resolution'No. 99-310 (b) October 22, 1999, Resolution No. 99-311 3. Payroll: October 15, 1999, Resolution No. 99-312. 4. Monthly Treasurer's and Budget Report- September 1999. 5. Improvement agreements: (a) Cbamdravadan N. Pat~l & Aarti C. Pat¢l, 10220 Dubon Ave., APN 342-14-051, Resolution No. 99-313 (b) Kennce& A. Clark, 10151 Amelia Ct., APN 326-17-022, Resolution No. 99-314 Page 2 Cupertino City Council & November 1, 1999 Cupertino Redevelopment Center (c) Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri, 10002 N. De Anza Boulevard, APN 316-26-017, Resolution No. 99-317 6. Quitclaim deeds: (a) Chandravadan N. Patel & Aarti C. Pate1, 10220 Dubon Ave., APN 342-14-051, Resolution No. 99-315 (b) Kenneth A. Clark, 10151 Amelia Ct., APN 326-17-022, Resolution No. 99-316 7. Grants of easement: (a) Roadway, Kenneth A. Clark, 10151 Amelia Ct., APN 326-17-022, Resolution No. 99-318 (b) Sidewalk, Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri, 10002 N. De Anza Boulevard, APN 316-26-017, Resolution No. 99-319 (c) Roadway, Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri, 10002 N. De Anza Boulevard, APN 316-26-017, Resolution No. 99-320 (d) Landscape, Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri, 10002 N. De Anza Boulevard, APN 316-26-017, Resolution No. 99-321 (e) Public Art, Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri, 10002 N. De Anza Boulevard, APN 316-26-017, Resolution No. 99-322 8. Approving appropriation fi~om the General Fund for local match. 9. Review of application for Alcoholic Beverage Control license for Dar's Hideaway, 10095 Saich Way. 10. Setting date for consideration of reorganization of area designated '~. Stelling Road 99- 06," property located on the west side of N. Stelling Road between Gardena Drive and Greenleaf Drive, approximately 0.24 acre, Sect (APN 326-08-051), Resolution 99-324. 11. Setting public hearing for abandonment of emergency vehicle access easement, parcels 2 and 3, 22831 Mercedes Road, Resolution No. 99-325. 12. Electing to comply with certain animal sheltering provisions set forth under state law in effect on June 30, 1999, pursuant to the terms of AB 1482 (Alquist), Resolution No. 99- 326. 13. Acceptance of municipal improvements: (a) Parviz Namvar, Phase H, Miramonte at Stevens Canyon Road, APN 356-01-036 and 037 (b) SCS Development Co., Citation Homes Phase III (16 lots, 140 units), Tract No. 9797, APN 316-01-122 (c) SNK Arioso LP, West Side Wolfe Road @ Pruneridge, Tract No. 8990, Tandem Site (201-unit apartments). 14. Authorizing execution of agreement with Santa Clara Valley Water District for removal of graffiti, Resolution No. 99-327. November 1, 1999 Cupertino City Council & Page 3 Cupertino Redevelopment Center 15. Confirmation of amended wording in Resolution 99-308, "A Resolution of the Cupertino City Council Calling for a Special Municipal Election for the Purpose of Submitting a Measure before the Qualified Voters." ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS 16. Consideration of appeals, Application 4-ASA-99 - Public hearing to reconsider appeals filed by Mr. Erh-Kong and Ms. Ding-Wei Chieh and Dr. Nancy and Mr. Henry Adelman. The application requested architectural and site approval to allow the construction of first and second story additions to an existing one-story duplex located at 10333 Degas Court, Resolution No. 99-328. (Petition for rehearing filed by the Law Offices of Owen Byrd. - continued from meeting of September 7.) 17. Consideration of appeal of the Planning Commission decision regarding Applications 8- U-99 and 21-U-99 of HOK Architects (for Symantec Corporation). The application requested a use permit to construct a 1,750 sq. /t. addition (Learning Center) to an existing office building located at 20330 Torre Avenue. (Mayor Wally Dean, appellant). 18. Public hearing to consider Application 7-Z-99, City of Cupertino, which requests Pre- zoning of a portion of the Stelllng Road fight-of-way, from north of Greenleaf Drive to Hazelbrooki)rive (Garden-Gate), to Pre-RI-10 Zone for later annexation. The Planning Commission recommends granting a Negative Declaration and denying the request for prezoning. NOTE: Staff recommends removing the item from the agenda because the project does not comply with Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) requirements. PLANNING APPLICATIONS U]VI~S~D BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 19. Road Bumps: (a) First reading of Ordinance No. 1837, "An Ordinance of thc City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Section 11.34 of thc Cupertino Municipal Code Relating to Roadway Design Features, Section 11.34.010 Relating to Road Bump- Definition." Co) First reading of Ordinance No. 1838, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cup~o Amending Section 11.34 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Relating to Roadway Design Features, Section 11.34.020 Relating to Administrative Authority." Page 4 Cupertin~ City Council & November 1, 1999 Cupertino Redevelopment Center (c) First reading of Ordinance No. 1839, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Section 11.34 of the Cupertino Municipal Code Relating to Roadway Design Features, Section 11.34.030 Relating to Establishment of Warrants for the In~allation and Maintenance of Road Bumps." Actions to be taken: 1. If approved, conduct first readings of Ordinances No. 1837, 1838, and 1839. 20. First reading of Ordinance No. 1840, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 11.24.150 Relating To Parking Prohibition, Chapter 11.24.160 Relating To Parking Prohibition During Certain Hours on the East and West Sides Of Mary Avenue, and Chapter 11.24.180 Relating To Diagonal Parking on the West Side Of Mary Avenuc." Actions to be taken: 1. If approved, conduct first reading of Ordinance No. 1840. 21. First reading of Ordimmce No. 1841, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Section 11.20.020 of the Cupertino Municipal 'Code Relating to Establishment of Vehicular Stop and Section 11.20.030, All Directional Vehicular Stop Required at Certain Intersections to Include Bald Street at the Intersection of Ainsworth Drive, Kendle Street at the Intersection of Ainsworth Drive, and Carta Blanca Street at the Intersection of Ainsworth Drive." Actions to be taken: 1. If approved, conduct first reading of Ordinance No. 1841. 22. Consideration of canceling the December 20, 1999, City Council meeting. ORDINANCES STAFFREPORTS COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Dean: Cupertino Audit Committee Economic Development Team- Alternate Environmental Review Committee Legislative Review Committee Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Commission Santa Clara County Solid Waste Committee West Valley Mayors and City Managers November 1, 1999 Cupertino City Council & Page Cupertino Redevelopment Center Vice-Mayor Statton: Association of Bay Area Governments - Alternate Bconomic Development Team Public Dialog Liaison Santa Clara County Committee on Housing and Community Development Block Grant Program- Alternate Santa Clara County Library ~PA Board Sister City Committee - Toyokawa West Valley Mayors and City Managers - Alternate Councilmember Bumett: Environmental Review Committee - Alternate Library Expansion Committee North Central and Northwest Flood Control Zone Advisory Committee Santa Clara County Cities Association Representative, ABAG Board of Directors Santa Clara County Committee on Housing and Community Block Grant Program Santa Clara County Library ~PA Board - Alternate Santa Clara County Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee Santa Clara Valley Water Commission Senior Center Expansion Design Committee Councilrnernber Chang: Association of Bay Area Governments Joint Venture Silicon Valley Public Sector Round Table - Alternate Leadership Cupertino Legislative Review Committee Library Expansion Committee Public Dialog Liaison Santa Clara County Cities Association Santa Clara County Emergency Preparedness Commission - Alternate Councilmember lames: Cupertino Audit Committee Economic Development Team Leadership Cupertino Santa Clara County Cities Association - Alternate Santa Clara County Drug and Alcohol Board Senior Center Expansion Design Committee CLOSED SESSION Page 6 Cupertino City Council & November 1, 1999 Cupertino Redevelopment Center REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING ROLL CALL CEREMONIAL MATTERS & PRESENTATIONS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS APPROVAL OF MINUTES UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT mp 10~28~99 MINUTES CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Monday, October 18, 1999 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE At 6:45 p.m. Mayor Dean called the meeting to order in the Council Chambers, 10300 T°rre Avenue, Cupertino, California, and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL City Council members present: Mayor Wally Dean, Vice-Mayor John Statton, and Council members Don Bumett, Michael Chang, and Sanclra James. Council members absent: None. Staff present: City Manager Don Brown, City Attorney Charles YAlian, Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood, Community Development Director Bob Cowan, Parks and Recreation Director Steve Dowling, Public Works Director Bert Viskovich, and City Clerk Kimberly Smith. CEREMONIAL MATTERS - PRESENTATIONS - None -- POSTPONEMENTS - None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None CONSENT CALENDAR James moved to approve the items on the consent calendar as presented. Statton seconded and the motion carried $-0. 1. Minutes: October 4, 1999, regular meeting. . 2. Accounts payable: (a) October 1, 1999, Resolution No. 99-284 Co) October 8, 1999, Resolution No. 99-285 3. Payroll: October 1, 1999, Resolution No. 99-286. 4. Declaring weeds to be a nuisance and setting public hearing for December 6, Resolution No. 99-287. 5. Certifying the San Tomas/Saratoga Creek Trail mitigated negative declaration and monitoring program, Resolution No. 99-288. October 18, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page 2 6. Approving the recommendation from the Telecommunications Commission for awarding a public access grant. 7. Requesting County of Santa Clara to create a task force on the Union Pacific Railroad Trail, Resolution No. 99-289. 8. Impwvement Agreements: (a) Blossom-Pasadena Ltd. Partnership, 20569 Blossom Ln., APN 359-18-034, Resolution No. 99-290 (b) Blossom-Pasadena LP, 10155 Pasadena Ave., APN 357-17-047, Resolution No. 99-291 (c) Lisa L. Wang, 20819 C-reenleaf Dr., APN 326-09-005, Resolution No. 99-309 (d) Kelvin & Martha Kang, 10334 Mira Vista Rd., APN 357-02-021, Resolution No. 99-292 (e) Optimum Investments LLC, 21870 Almaden Ave., APN 357-15-029, Resolution No. 99-293 (f) Lie K. Tan & Yuet M. Hing, 10472 Johnson Ave., APN 375-26-043, Resolution No. 99-294 (g) Gregory & Joan Price, 18671 Starrett Court, APN 375-26-023, Resolution No. 99-295 (h) Dhesikan Rajagopalan, 10310 Calvert Dr., APN 375-18-015, Resolution No. 99-296 (i) Behzad Askadnam, 10645 Felton Way, APN 359-18-019, Resolution No. 99- 297 9. Roadway Easements: (a) Blossom-Pasadena LP, 10155 Pasadena Ave., APN 357-17-047, Resolution No. 99-298 (b) Optimum Investments LLC, 21870 Almaden Ave., APN 357-15-029, Resolution No. 99-299 10. Public Utilities Easements: (a) Kelvin & Martha Kang, 10334 Mira Vista Rd., APN 357-02-021, Resolution No. 99-300 (b) Dhesikan Rajagopalan, 10310 Calvert Dr., APN 375-18-015, Resolution No. 99-301 11. Quitclaim Deeds: (a) Blossom-Pasadena LP, 10155 Pasadena Ave., Parcels 1 and 2, APN 357-17- 047 Resolution No. 99-302 (b) Kelvin & Martha Kang, 10334 Mira Vista Rd., APN 357-02-021, Resolution No. 99-303 (c) Optimum Investments LLC, 21870 Almaden Ave., APN 357-15-029, Resolution No. 99-304 October 18, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page 3 12. Declaring an intention to order a vacation of roadway casement, C. I. W. Trust, Diana Wong, Trustee, 10067 Bianchi Way, APN, 359-07-009, Resolution No. 99-305. 13. Declaring intent to conduct a public hearing concerning a nuisance on parcel 375-27- 025, 18781 Tuggle Avenue, overgrown weeds in the front and side yards, Resolution No. 99-306. Vote Councilmembers Ayes: Bumett, Chang, Dean, James, and Statton Noes: None. Absent: None. Abstain: None. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR- None PUBLIC HE~GS 14. Public hearing concerning a nuisance on parcel 369-24-048, 862 Bette Avenue, weeds and accumulation of garbage and refuse in front and side yards, Resolution No. 99- 307. Mayor Dean opened the public hearing. Council viewed a video summary of the item, and Human Resources Officer Bill Woska reviewed the history of complaints. He said that several letters had been returned unclaimed, and neighbors indicate that no one has lived in the house for some time. There were no speakers from the public, and the public hearing was closed. Bumett moved to adopt Resolution No. 99-307 and to accept staff's recommendations to (1) Declare the property to be a public nuisance; (2) Direct the City Attorney to obtain an inspection warrant; (3) Enter into a contract to remove all weeds and debris from the property; and (4) Bill all costs related to the investigation and abatement to the property owner. Chang seconded and the motion carried 5-0. PLANNING APPLICATIONS - None UNFINISI:I~.D BUSINESS - None October 18, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page 4 NEW BUSINESS 15. Call for special election on March 7, 2000, Resolution No. 99-308: - construction of new library (advisory measure) - extending utility tax to 2025 Public Works Director Bert Viskovich said that during the Council workshop on October 15, it was decided not to place the utility tax extension on the ballot. Administrative Services Director Carol Atwood distributed a chart illustrating fund balance trends that highlighted the impact on the city's reserves if they used cash, certificates of participation, or both. Staff recommends that the project be paid for through a combination of both of these funding sources in order to keep the rescrvc balancc close to the recommended level of 75% of general operations and debt service. She noted that the other recent CIP projects included $6 million for the Stocklmeir property, which will be used for open space and $4.4 million for the Senior Center. $1 million will be used to widen Stevens Canyon Road, $400,000 for modifications to meet requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and $250,000 for park renovations. Mr. Leslie Burnell, 21466 Holly Oak Drive, said he was in favor of library expansion, and asked if he could see the questions which were asked in the telephone survey about the library. City Manager Don Brown said he would provide a copy of the survey that was asked of 400 participants. Burner compared some results from the resident satisfaction survey done in January 1998 with some of results from the most recent library survey. The recent survey indicates that the order of priority was preserving the environment, preserving land .for open space, providing more activities for teens, reducing crime, and then expanding the library. He said he was in favor of building a new library and of putting the matter on the ballot, but felt that the budget of $22 million was too high in light of the other CIP pwjects and the number ofunprogrammed expenditures. Dean said that the $22 million was a not-to-exceed amount. Council may choose to construct a new library with a smaller budget, such as $16 million. Chang agreed with Bumett's concerns but said the library has reached its maximum capacity and the need is there. The $22 million figure was chosen to be conservative, so that the final construction cost would not go over that. He suggested showing a range for the budget of $16 million to $22 million, and specify that the hours of operation would be increased. lames said this vote is to give advice to Council, and they have not yet made up their minds about the final project. She suggested changing the phrase to "not-to-exceed $22 million" and that thc funding be from a combination of cash reserves and public financing. October 18, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page 5 Station said these were all valid points. Staff has studied the issue, held a number of meetings and done the survey, and now it is time to hear from the community via the. ballot measure. Station moved to adopt Resolution No. 99-308 with the following amendments: Note in the t/fie that it is an advisory measure; change the word "estimated" in the measure to "an amount not to exceed"; and change the words in the measure indicating that the funds will come from "a combination of the city's cash reserves and public financing." Sames seconded and the motion carried 5-0. 16. Report on commission and committee terms expiring January 15, 2000; selection of application deadlines and interview dates. Station moved to set the deadline for incumbent applications on December 17, the extended deadline for non-incumbents on December 22, and to conduct interviews on Wednesday, January 5, 2000. lames seconded and the motion carried 5-0. 17. 1999-2000 Human Services Funding Program. Public Information Officer Donna Krey reviewed the staff report and the recommendations of thc Human Services Funding Committee. Ms. Mary Ellen Cheil, Executive Director of Cupertino Community Services, thanked the community for ongoing support. She said they have lost over 60% of their staff and will have to begin paying benefits to staff in order to retain them. She said that CCS is the safety net for the community, and 35% of those receiving assistance are Cupertino residents. Mr. Floyd Meyer, 10186 Westaeres Drive, said that CCS is doing good work at a notable cost, but there is built-in problem in the system because rents continue to increase and more people are forced out of homes. There are no intermediate stages between renting a room and being homeless. Until there is a graduated level of shelter, the pwblem will continue. Mr. Bob Levy said he was representing the League of Women Voters. He said that in prior years the Honsing Committee reported that it was illegal to rent out a room unless there were a second exit. The City Attorney said he did not think that was the case. Mr. John Guinn, 10259 Nile Drive, said he has just completed training with Catholic Charities to be a Long-Term Care Omb~dsmsn and hoped to be assigned to Cupertino. He wanted to express his appreciation to Council for their endorsement of that charity. October 18, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page 6 Discussion followed regarding a suggestion by Bumett to increase the funding for Cupertino Community Services. He also suggested that the following issues be identified: (1) Level of need in the community; (2) Level of funding; and (3) Appropriate level of public and private partnership. James moved and Burnett seconded to approve the recommendations of the Human Services funding committee with two amendments: (1) Increase funding for Cupertino Community Services to $50,000, and (2) Increase fimding for Cupertino Senior Day Services to $12,000. James seconded and the motion carried 5-0. The funds will be distributed as follows: Support Network for Battered Women $5,500 Long-T~u., Care Ombudsman $4,555 Outreach & Escort $10,000 Cupertino Community Services $50,000 Cupertino Senior Day Services $12,000 Second Harvest Food Bank $5,000 Staff was directed to develop alternative approaches to evaluating the level of need in the community, the level of funding, and the appropriate level of public and private participation, and report back to Council ORDINANCES - None STAFF REPORTS - None COUNCIL REPORTS James reported that she had met with the new West Side Captain Jeff Miles and Undersheriff Bob Wilson regarding local issues. She attended the first meeting of the Chamber of Commerce Women's Business Council, which was very good. She serves business-education link and affordable housing constraints are a constant topic in the community, acknowledged the death of Mr. Michael Meyers, a young resident of the community who was killed last week while on a dive trip which was a fundraiser for an international charity. Cupertino National Bank has set up an account in his memory. James added that she was appointed to the Housing Leadership Council of the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group. Vice-Mayor Statton reported that the League of Women Voters was hosting a meeting about "Untying the Traffic Knots" at the Santa Clara Library on Thursday, October 21 at 6:30 p.m.. He also said that he was in favor of a request from the granddaughter of Al Carter, a former Postmaster, to name a street in Cupertino after her grandfather. October 18, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page 7 Burnett said he had met with Capt. Miles and a resident to resolve a problem, and he was very impressed with Capt. Miles sensitivity in handling the matter. He noted that he appealed the fencing in the Oak Valley project. The City had spent a lot of time selecting appropriate fencing and now they are requesting a change from a dark color to a galvanized fence. CLOSED SESSION - None At 8:45 p.m. the meeting was adjourned. Kimberly Smith City Clerk October 18, 1999 Cupertino City Council Page 8 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING ROLL CALL CEREMONIAL MATTERS & PRESENTATIONS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS APPROVAL OF MINUTES UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT RESOLUTION NO. 99-310 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING OCTOBER 15, 1999 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinafter set forth in Exhibit "A". CERTIFIED: Director of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of ,1999, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino 10/14/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 1 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between "10/11/1999" and "10/15/1999" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCTCHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 570195 V 06/30/99 214 DEPARTMENT OF TRAIqSPORTA 1108602 SAFETY LIGHTING 4/99 0.00 -89.28 1020 570465 V 07/16/99 M BAEK, KAY 5800000 REFUND YOGA 0.00 -60.00 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1107501 PETTY CASE REIMEUESEME 0.00 20.00 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1104400 PETTY CASH REIMBUESEME 0.00 56.69 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1107405 P~-I'~ CASH REIMBUESEME 0.00 33.00 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 6109850 PETTY CASE REIMEURSEME 0.00 42.76 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 6104800 PETTY CASH REIMEURSEME 0.00 18.38 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1107301 P~-£H CASH REIMEURSEME 0.00 36.00 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 ~J~SH 1104100 PETTY CASH REZMEURSEME 0.00 3.24 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1106100 PETTY CASH REIMEUESEME 0.00 38.82 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1107301 PETTY CASH REIMEURSEME 0.00 30.00 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1104100 PETTY CASH REIMEURSEME 0.00 11.00 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1108001 P~-rH CASE REIMEURSEME 0.00 19.00 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1104510 PETTY CASH REIMEURSEME 0.00 42.90 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1107501 PETTY CASH REIMEURSEME 0.00 20.00 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1104000 PETTY CASH REIMEURSEME 0.00 27.44 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1101200 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 31.28 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1108601 PETTY CASH REIMEURSEME 0.00 5.50 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1101070 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 14.02 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1103300 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 30.' 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 5208003 PETTY CASH REIMEURSEME 0.00 4. 1020 572581 10/11/99 149 CASH 1104000 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 52.01 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 537.49 1020 572582 10/12/99 1562 SANTA CI~M~A COUNTY SURVE 1107305 ANNEXATION MAP/I~GAL D 0.00 1365.00 1020 572583 10/12/99 214 DEPARTMENT OF TRAHSPORTA 1108602 REPLACE CK 570195 6/30 0.00 89.28 1020 572583 10/12/99 214 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA 1108602 SAFETY LIGHTING 6/99 0.00 113.60 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 202.88 1020 572584 10/15/99 9 ABA~ POWER PURCHASING 1108507 GA~ LEVKLIZED PMT 10/9 0.00 295.51 1020 572584 10/15/99 9 ABA~ POWER PURCHASING 5708510 GAS LEVELIZED PMT 10/9 0.00 499.21 1020 572584 10/15/99 9 ABA(~ PO~ER PURCHASING 1108504 GAS LEVEhIZED PMT 10/9 0.00 1640.48 1020 572584 10/15/99 9 ABAG POWER PURCHASING 5606620 GAS LEVELIZED PMT 10/9 0.00 592.93 1020 572584 10/15/99 9 ABAG PONER PURCHASING 1108509 GAS LEVELIZED PMT 10/9 0.00 47.69 1020 572584 10/15/99 9 ABAG PO~ER PURCHASING 1108503 GAS LEVELIZED PMT 10/9 0,00 581147 1020 572584 10/15/99 9 ABACi POWER PURCHASING 1108505 CAS XJgVELIZED FMT 10/9 0.00 189,01 1020 572584 10/15/99 9 ASAC~ PUNER PURCHASING 1108508 ~ LEVELIZED FMT 10/9 0.00 44.62' 1020 s72584 10/15/99 9 ABAG POWER PURCHASING 1108506 GAS LEVELIZED PMT 10/9 0,00 98,56 1020 572584 10/15/99 9 ABAG POWER PURCHASING 1108501 GAS LEVELIZED PMT 10/9 0,00 1010,52 TOTAL CHECK 0,00 5000,00 1020 572585 10/15/99 M AMERICAN MC44T ASSOCIATIO 1104100 ACCTS PAYABlE.SEMINAR 0,00 195,00 1020 572586 10/15/99 44 AMERICAN RED CROSS 5806449 SUPPLIES 0,00 30,00 1020 572586 10/15/99 44 AMERICAN RED CROSS 1104400 SUPPLIES 0.00 55,00 1020 572586 10/15/99 44 AMERICAN RED CROSS 1104400 SUPPLIES 0,00 200,00 1020 572586 10/15/99 44 AMERICAN RED CROSS 1104400 SUPPLIES 0,00 234 1020 572586 10/15/99 44 ANERICANRED CROSS 1104400 CREDIT REF#103420 0.00 -48.. RUN DATE 10/14/99 TIME 17:04:58 - FXHAHCXAL ACCOUNTING 10/14/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 2 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND S! ~ON CRITSRIA: transact.trane date between '10/11/1999' and #10/15/1999' FUND - 110 - G~IqERAH FUND CASE ACC'I' CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX 1020 572586 10/15/99 44 AMERZC. A/~ RED CROSS 1104400 SUPPHIE8 0.00 144.00 1020 572586 10/15/99 44 Ar4BR. ICAN RED C3~OSS 5806449 SUPPHIES 0.00 115.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 ?30.00 1020 572587 10/15/99 1533 A.M ARRAY OE PI.,O~ERS 5606620 SUPPHIgS 0.00 38.89 1020 572508 10/15/99 1561. JU~UATIC MAHAGENEIqT ~ 5806449 SUBSCRIPTION 0.00 79.00 1020 572589 10/15/99 M BAEKo KAY 5800000 REPLACE CK 570485 7/16 0.00 60.00 1020 572590 10/15/99 M BENNE'i'I', NANCY 1106200 REIMRURSEMENT 0.00 76.15 1020 5725}1 10/15/99 1375 CJtLIFOIUqI& EHEC'I3~IC SERV 1106265 WIRE BASKET 0.00 40.04 1020 572592 10/15/99 132 CAHIFORWIA WATF, R SERVXCH 1108312 WATER SERVICE 9/99 0.00 18.14 1020 572592 10/15/99 132 CALIFORNIA WATER SBRVXCH 1108314 WATER SERVICE 9/99 0.0O 525,24 1020 572592 10/15/99 132 CAHIPORIqIA WATER SERVICE 1108322 WATER SERVICE 9/99 0.00 3907.54 1020 572592 10/15/99 132 C. AL]FOR]~IA WATER SERVICE 1108322 WAFER SERVICE 9/99 0.00 123.07 1020 572592 10/15/99 132 CAHIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 1108314 WATER SERVICE 9/99 0.00 492.27 1020 5?2592 10/15/99 132 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 1108312 WATER SERV/CE 9/99 0.00 36.75 1020 572592 10/15/99 132 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 1108322 WATER SERVICE 9/99 0.00 81.45 1020- 572592 10/15/99 132 CALXFOREXA WATER SERVICE 1108508 WATER SERVICE 9/99 0.00 131.32 1( 572592 10/15/99 132 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE 1108509 #ATER SERVICE 9/99 0.00 22.62 TOI,.~CHECK 0.00 5418.40 1020 572593 10/15/99 146 CASH 1106647 PETTY CASH REXMEURSE~E 0.00 20.84 1020 572593 10/15/99 146 CASH S806249 PE'I~ CASH REXMBURSFJ4E 0.00 97.87 1020 572593 10/15/99 146 CASH 5800000 PETTY CASH REXMBURSENE 0.00 4.00 1020 572593 10/15/99 146 CASH 5806349 PETTY CASH REX~BURSEME 0.00 8.61 TOTALCHECE 0.00 131.42 1020 572594 10/15/99 1156 (:HA, 110 ENPLY CONTRIBUTXOI~S 0.00 140.00 1020 572595 10/15/99 1094 CROWH BUSINESS SYSTEMS ! 1104100 CASH RECHIPTS 0.00 225.07 1020 S72596 10/15/99 214 DEPA,RTMEHT OF TRAI~SPORTA 1108602 SAFETY LIGHTING 7/99 0.00 91.52 1020 572597 10/15/99 1448 STEPHEN DO~LING 1106100 TIUtVEL & M'FG EXPF,~SES 0.00 1365.00 1020 572598 10/15/99 242 BMPLOYMBITF DEVIL DSPT 110 STATE WITHHOLDING 0.00 14114.87 1020 572599 10/15/99 243 1~4PI,OYMBNT DEVELOI:~4BHT 110 STATE DISABILITY INS 0.00 107.04 1020 572600 10/15/99 256 P.D. SqJOW & ASSOCIATES 1104530 INSTALl, DATABASE/CODS 0.00 1022.92 1020 572601 10/15/99 260 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 2607401 PRIORITY OVSR/~IGHT 0.00 15.75 1020 572601 10/15/99 260 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 1107301 STANDARD OVEIU~IGHT 0.00 14.00 1020 572601 10/15/99 260 FBDERAH EXPRKSS CORP 6308540 STAI'JDARD OVEP~IGITI~ 0.00 26.00 TOTALCRECE 0.00 55.75 10, 572602 10/15/99 1560 TItB HEALTH TRUST 5506549 S HOT ~ 0.00 30.00 RUE DATE 10/14/99 TIME 17:04:59 - F'IHANCIAH ACCOUt~rTING 10/14/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 3 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: Cransac~.trans_date between "10/11/1999" and ~10/15/1999' FUND - 110 - GENERA~ FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. PUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572603 10/15/99 1400 HERITAGE TOURS & TRAVEL 5506549 SHENANDOAH/APPLE BILL 0.00 258.00 1020 572604 10/15/99 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108530 SUPPLIES 0.00 45.50 1020 572604 10/15/99 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1108530 SUPPLIES 0.00 13.93 1020 572604 10/15/99 334 HOME DEPOT/GECF 1106265 SUPPLIES 0.00 42.80 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 102.23 1020 572605 10/15/99 M HONIG, LUCILLE 1103300 REIMBURSEMENT 0.00 751.32 1020 572606 10/15/99 343 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUSTo45 110 DEFERRED COMPENSATION 0.00 6813.25 1020 572607 10/15/99 1563 ING CI.~SSIFIEDS 5208003 GARAGE SALES AD 9/22/9 0.00 47.00 1020 572608 10/15/99 1242 ZNSTY-PRINTS 1101031 BUSINESS CARDS 0.00 27.47 1020 572608 10/15/99 1242 INSTY-PRINTS 1104100 IqATCHING ENVELOPES 0.00 4433.59 1020 572608 10/15/99 1242 INSTY-PRINTS 1104100 LETTERHEAD 0.00 3776.85 1020 572608 10/15/99 1242 INSTY-PRINTS 1104510 BUSINESS CJ~RDS 0.00 27.47 1020 572608 10/15/99 1242 INSTY-PRINTS 1108601 BUSINESS C~S 0.00 60.78 1020 572608 10/15/99 1242 INSTY-PRINTS 6104800 BUSINESS CARDS 0.00 27.47 1020 572608 10/15/99 1242 INSTY-PRINTS 1104100' WINDOW ENVELOPES 0.00 2542.25 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 10895. 1020 572609 10/15/99 676 DEPARTMENT OF t]USTICE 1106442 FINGERPRINTS 7/99 0.00 56.00 1020 572609 10/15/99 676 DEPARTMENT OF 0~JSTICE 5806349 FINGERPRINTS 7/99 0.00 308.00 1020 572609 10/15/99 676 DEPARTI~ OF JUSTICE 5806449 FINGERPRINTS 7/99 0.00 308.00 1020 572609 10/15/99 676 DEPAItTMENT OF JUSTICE 5806349 FINGERPRINTS 7/99 0.00 56.00 1020 572609 10/15/99 676 DEPARTMENT OF JUST/CB 5806449 FINGERPRINTS 7/99 0.00 56.00 1020 572609 10/15/99 676 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1106442 FINGERPRINTS 7/99 0.00 308.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1092.00 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 KELLY-MOORE PAINT CO 1NC 5708510 SUPPLIES 0.00 45.31 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 KELlY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 5708510 SUPPLIES 0.00 121.80 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 KELlY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 1108503 SUPPLIES 0.00 67.09 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 KE/J~Y-MOORE PAINT CO INC 1108~02 SUPPLIES 0.00 88,03 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 KELlY-MOORE PAINT CO /NC 5708510 SUPPLIES 0.00 108.02 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 RHLIY-MOOKE PAINT CO /NC 1107405 SUPPLIES 0.00 275.79 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 I~LLY-M(X)RS PAINT CO 1NC 5708510 SUPPLIES 0.00 398.65 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 KELIY-HOOR~ PAINT CO INC 2708405 SUPPLIES 0.00 43.60 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 K~LIY-MOORH PAINT CO INC 1108312 SUPPLIES 0.00 155.13 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 KELlY-MOORE PAINT CO 1NC 2708405 SUPPLIES 0.00 36.13 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 KELlY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 1108506 SUPPLIES 0.00 27.95 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 KELlY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 5708510 SUPPLIES 0.00 54,10 1020 572610 10/15/99 369 KELlY-MOORE PAINT CO IRC 1108314 SUPPLIES 0.00 436,57 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1858.17 1020 572611 10/15/99 879 KEYSERMARSTON AssOCIATE 2507304 PROFESSIONAL SVC 8/99 0.00 3024.61 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 lUCKY STORIL$ INC - NO CA 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 41.7' 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 LOC*ICY STORES INC - NO CA 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 40.~ 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 lUCKY STORES /NC - NO CA 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 25.48 RUN DATE 10/14/99 TXME 17:05:00 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/14/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 4 A¢COUHTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSENENT FUND SI ON CRITERIA: transact.trans_da~e between m10/11/1999~ and m10/15/1999~ FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCTCHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. PUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 LUCKY STORES INC - NO CA 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 41.96 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 LUCKY STORES INC - NO CA 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 50.77 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 LUCKY STORES INC - NO CA 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 22.35 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 LUCKY STORES INC - NO CA 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 4.74 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 LUCKY STORES INC - NO CA 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 6.18 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 LUCKY STORES INC - NO CA 5606&20 SUPPLIES 0.00 37.96 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 LUCKY STORES INC - NO CA 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 8.83 1020 572612 10/15/99 412 LUCKY STORES INC - NO CA S606620 SUPPLIES 0.00 11.12 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 291.44 1020 572613 10/15/99 448 MISSION VALLEY POND INC 6308540 P/~HTS 0.00 216.50 1020 572613 10/15/99 448 MISSION VALLEY FORD INC 6308540 PARTS 0.00 30.98 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 247.48 1020 572614 10/15/99 M MPLC 5506549 LICENSE/MOTION PICT'S 0.00 162.00 1020 572615 10/15/99 485 NE~4AN ~31APPIC SIGNS 2708405 SIGNS 0.00 493.35 1020 572616 10/15/99 M OBEREOFER, JIM 1104400 REIMBURSEMENT 0.00 103.88 1020 572617 10/15/99 500 OPERATING ENGIN~ 1104510 HLTH & WELFARE RETIRED 0.00 2980.00 10~'''~ 572617 10/15/99 500 OPBRATII~ EI~INEF, qS 110 HLTH&WELFARE P W EMP 0.00 4836.00 10 572617 10/15/99 500 OPEP. ATING ENGINEERS 1104510 HLTH& WSLFARR/O RIVERA 0.00 596.00 TOTAI~CHECK 0.00 8412.00 i020 572618 10/15/99 501 OPERATXI~ ENGINEERS #3 110 UNION D~ 0.00 405.00 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCiiARD SUPPLY HAR~ARE 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 215.83 102~ 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHJ~ SUPPLY HARDMARE 1108503 SUPPLIES 0.00 32.62 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 2708405 SUPPLIES 0.00 32.61 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HANDMAIdS 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 32.61 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDMARB 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 32.61 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 33.80 1020 S72619 10/15/99 981 OR(3IA~D SUPPLY HARDWARE 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 22.34 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDMARE 4209110 SUPPLIES 0.00 43.70 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDMARE 1108302 SUPPLIES 0.00 48.12 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDMA~ 1108312 SUPPLIES 0.00 16.17 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 1108312 SUPPLIES 0.00 113.26 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLYHARI3WARE 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 188.20 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HA~ 4209110 SUPPLIES 0.00 65.30 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HAP~ARE 1108321 SUPPLIES 0.00 39.27 1020 572619 10/15/99 981 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE 2708403 SUPPLIES 0.00 6.69 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 926.13 1020 572620 10/15/99 833 P S R S 110 RETIRI~4ENT 0.00 2897.58 1020 572620 10/15/99 833 P g R $ 110 RETIRID4~NT 0.00 579.37 1020 572620 10/15/99 833 P E R S 110 RETIRENBNT 0,00 21412,77 1020 572620 10/15/99 833 P E R S 110 RETIREMENT 0,00 73,65 1020 572620 10/15/99 833 P E R S 110 RETIREMENT 0,00 67,68 10f 572620 10/15/99 833 P E R S 110 RETIREMENT 0,00 305,65 T0'1. ,HECK 0,00 25336,70 RON DAT~ 10/14/99 TTME 17.'05:00 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTIKI 10/14/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 5 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER o DISBURSEMENT FUND SEI~CTION CRITERIA: transac=.=rans_date between ~10/11/1999' and '10/15/1999' FUND - 110 - GENERAl, FUND CASH ACC'~ CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SA~ES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572621 10/15/99 509 P W SUPERMARKETS INC 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 47.53 1020 572621 10/15/99 509 P W SUPERMARKETS INC 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 24.12 1020 572621 10/15/99 509 P W SOPER~KETS INC 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 52.15 1020 572621 10/15/99 509 P W SUPERMARKETS INC 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 0.99 1020 572621 10/15/99 509 P N SUPERMARKETS INC 1106342 SUPPLIES 0.00 38.72 1020 572621 10/15/99 509 P # SUPERMARKETS INC 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 28.70 1020 572621 10/15/99 509 P W SUPERMARKETS /NC 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 9.95 1020 572621 10/15/99 509 P W SUPERMARKETS INC 1106647 SUPPLIES 0.00 28.29 1020 572621 10/15/99 509 P N SUPERMARKETS INC 1106647 SUPPLIES 0.00 19.55 TOTAL CHECK o.oo 250.00 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1108504 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 30.58 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1108201 TEI~PHONE SERVICE 0.00 321.22 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BE~.v. 1108509 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 41.66 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BEll, 2617402 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 64.47 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BElL 5708510 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 580.06 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BEI/, 1108508 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 47.40 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BEll, 5606640 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 208.30 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BEI~ 1108507 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 41.66 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1108503 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 1053.02 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1108501 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 1118.' 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1108322 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 28.i 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BglJa 1108102 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 64.45 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BEIJ~ 1108101 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 748.30 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1108001 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 257.80 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1107503 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 128.90 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1107502 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 128.90 1020 572624 10/15/99 Sll PACIFIC BELL 5606620 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 707.59 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BEI~ 1107501 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 773.41 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1107302 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 128.90 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1107301 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 580.06 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELl, 1107200 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 128.90 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1106500 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 535.92 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1106529 TELEPHONE SERVICH 0.00 64.45 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1106360 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 34.57 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1108706 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 209.97 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BBI~ 1106265 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 1353.47 1020 S72624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BEI~ 1108602 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 257.80 1020 $72624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 5208003 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 64.45 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BEI~ 1106100 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0'.00 193.35 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1108601 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 257.80 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1104200 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 64.45 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1101200 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 193.35 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1104530 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 128.90 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC NELL 1101000 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 386.70 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1104510 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 128.90 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BEI~ 1104510 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 257.80 1020 572624 .10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BBI~ 1104200 TELEPHONE S~RVICE 0.00 64.4~ 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1104100 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 644.! 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1104000 T~LEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 386.70 RU~ DATE 10/14/99 TIME 17:05:01 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISEt~tSEMENT FUND SE 3N CRITERIA: transact.trans_date between w10/11/1999' and m10/15/1999~ FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX M4OUNT 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1103500 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 193.35 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1103300 ?ELEPHOHE SERVICE 0.00 128.90 1020 5?2624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BET*T' 1104300 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 4?8.?0 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BELL 1101500 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 322.25 1020 572624 10/15/99 511 P&CIFIC BELL 2308004 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 64.45 1020 5?2624 10/15/99 511 PACIFIC BET'T' 1102100 TELEPHONE SERVICE 0.00 128.90 TOTAIJ CHECK 0.00 13726.54 1020 572625 10/15/99 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108530 STREET LIGHTING 8/99 0.00 20710.93 1020 572625 10/15/99 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108530 STREET LIGItTING 7/99 0.00 7349.50 1020 572625 10/15/99 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108530 STREET LIGHTS 0.00 8133.95 1020 5?2625 10/15/99 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108530 CREDITS 5/25/99 0.00 -4905.13 1020 572625 10/15/99 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 1108530 STREET LIGHTS 0.00 8352.28 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 39641.53 1020 572626 10/15/99 513 PACIFIC ~ & ELECTRIC 4209110 ELECTRICITY YVV??09343 0.00 24?.26 1020 572626 10/15/99 513 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC 4209110 GAS SVC YVV77093436 0.00 13.37 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 260.63 1020 5?2627 10/15/99 516 PAGING NETMORK OF S ~ 1104510 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 36.17 1020 5?2627 10/15/99 516 PAGING Iq~IMORE OF S ~ 1106265 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 9.45 10~~''~* 5?262? 10/15/99 516 PAGING IqL~MORK OF S ~ 1108102 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 50.29 It 572627 10/15/99 516 PAGING NETMORK OF S ~ 1108501 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 17.95 1020 5?262? 10/15/99 516 PAGING NETEORK OF S ~ 1108201 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 13.71 1020 572627 10/15/99 516 PAGING NETWORK OF S ~ 1108501 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 5.45 1020 572627 10/15/99 516 PAGING NI~MORK OF S ~ 5706450 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 15.95 1020 572627 10/15/99 516 PAGING NETMORE OF S ~ 1108601 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 17.95 1020 5?262? 10/15/99 516 PAGING NETWORK OF S ~ . 6104800 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 12.45 1020 572627 10/15/99 516 PAGING NE/MORE OF S ~ 1108501 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 5.45 1020 572627 10/15/99 516 PAGING NETMORK OF S ~ 1108501 PAGER SVC 10/99 0.00 5.45 TOT~ CHECK 0,00 190.27 1020 5?2628 10/15/99 520 PAPBRDIRECT INC 1101201 SUPPLIES 0.00 151.60 1020 5?2629 10/15/99 526 PENINSUI~BI~UEPRINT 1108201 BLUELINE PRINTS 0.00 121.84 1020 5?2629 10/15/99 526 PEIqINSUI~ BI~UEPRINT 110 BMJELINE PRINTS #10665 0.00 323.67 1020 572629 10/15/99 526 PENINSUIa~ELUEPRINT 110 EI~JELINE PRINTS #11741 0.00 301.22 1020 572629 10/15/99 526 PENINSUId~ BLUEPRINT 110 BLUELINE PRINTS #11668 0.00 194.10 1020 572629 10/15/99 526 PENINSUX~ BLUEPRINT 1108101 BIAIELINE PRINTS ~.00 22.15 1020 572829 10/15/99 S26 PENINSUId~ BLUEPRINT 110 BLUELINE PRINTS #11967 0.00 672.26 1020 572629 10/15/99 526 PgHINSUId~BIAIBPRINT 110 BLUELINE PRINTS #11648 0.00 263.66 1020 572629 10/15/99 525 PENINSUI~BLUBPRINT 110 BLU~LINE PRINTS #11967 0.00 186.85 1020 572629 10/15/99 526 PEiqINSUI~ BI~IBPRINT 110 BLU~INE PRINTS #11635 0.00 43.15 1020 572629 10/15/99 526 PENINSUX~ BLUEPRINT 110 BMiELIIqE PRINTS #11648 0.00 194.10 1020 572629 10/15/99 526 PENINSUI~ BLUEPRINT 110 B~UE~INE PRINTS #10665 0.00 173.12 1020 572629 10/15/99 526 PERINSUI~A BLUEPRINT 1108101 BLUlgLINE PRINTS 0.00 48.?5 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2544.89 102~0. 572630 10/15/99 533 PEltS L01~T~RMCARB PROG 110 LONG TERMCARE 0.00 456.45 lv 572631 10/15/99 M PHIllIPS, CARO~ 1106500 REPId~CB P/R CK 5/28/99 0.00 502.29 DATE 10/14/99 TXNS 17:05:02 - FXNAIqCXAL ACCOUNTXNG ~ 10/14/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 7 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.trans_da=e between ~10/11/1999# and "10/15/1999" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572632 10/15/99 633 SANTA CI~ COUNTY SHERI 1106248 SECURITY 9/25-9/26/99 0.00 798.42 1020 572633 10/15/99 1146 COUNTY OF SANTA CI~ 2610000 RLF INVESTMENT EARNING 0.00 3475.95 1020 572634 10/15/99 677 STATE STREET BANK & TRUS 110 DEFERRED COMPENSATION 0.00 538.68 1020 572635 10/15/99 1564 TEACHERS~ HELPER 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 39.50 '1020 572636 10/15/99 1154 UNITED WAY OF SANTA C~AR 110 EMPLY CONTRIBUTIONS 0.00 135.25 1020 572637 10/15/99 302 W~HINGTON MUTU~ 110 DEFERRED COMPENSATION 0.00 19297.44 1020 572638 10/15/99 774 WESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS 2708405 DRIVE RIVETS 0.00 741.48 1020 572639 10/15/99 M WHERE-TO-GUIDE 5506549 SUBSCRIPTION 0.00 35.00 1020 S72640 10/15/99 962 LINDA YELAVICH 5506549 REIMBURSEMENT 0.00 23.54 1020 572641 10/15/99 835 PERFORMANCE EXCAVATORS I 4209801 RD SITE REMEDIATION 0.00 65000.00 1020 572642 10/15/99 835 PERFORMANCE EXCAVATORS I 4209801 APP 5/REMEDIATION 0.00 5476.3~ .. TOTAh CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 245383.3~ ~ TOTAL FUND 0.00 245383.39 TOTAL REPORT 0.00 245383.39 RUN DATE 10/14/99 TIME 17:05:02 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING RESOLUTION NO. ff--.y/f A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURES FOR THE PERIOD ENDING OCTOBER 22, 1999 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services or her designated representative has certified to accuracy of the following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds as hereinafter set forth in Exhibit "A". CERTIFIED: Director of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of ,1999, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino 10/~2/~'9 z CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 1 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572643 10/18/99 M PRONI, ANTHONY 1108602 REPLACE CK572511 10/8 0.00 290.00 1020 572644 10/19/99 M HETLAND, JOHN B 1100000 ACH RETURN/CLOSED ACCT 0.00 1164.95 1020 572645 10/22/99 1569 A E C TECHNOLOGIES 6104800 INFRASOFT MX-ROAD MAX 0.00 8339.97 1020 572646 10/22/99 3 A RENTAL CENTER 2708404 RENTAL 0.00 123.15 1020 572647 10/22/99 7 ABAG PLAN CORPORATION 6204550 ADMIN FEE 0.00 774.21 1020 572648 10/22/99 M ABDOLAHI, MORTEZA 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R 5625 0.00 100.00 1020 572649 10/22/99 M ABTA~I, HAMID 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R6995 0.00 123.33 1020 572650 10/22/99 13 ACME & SONS SANITATION C 5606640 PORTABLE TOILET 9/99 0.00 175.34 1020 572650 10/22/99 13 AC~ & SONS SANITATION C 1108321 TOILET RENTAL 9/99 0.00 162.38 1020 572650 10/22/99 13 AC~ & SONS SANITATION C 1108005 TOILET RENTAL 9/99 0.00 98.43 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 436.15 1020 572651 10/22/99 18 ADONA OIL CORPORATION 1108005 DISPOSAL FEE 0.00 1485.00 1020 572652 10/22/99 20 ADVANTAGE GRAFIX 1104530 SUPPLIES 0.00 238.68 1020 572652 10/22/99 20' ADVANTAGE GRAFIX 1107301 SUPPLIES 0.00 48 TOTAL CHECK 0.00' 28t 1020 572653 10/22/99 28 AIRGAS 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 31.10 1020 572654 10/22/99 918 ALAMO WORLD TRAVEL AND T 5506549 TOUR/S F AIRPORT 0.00 2142.00 1020 572654 10/22/99 918 ALAMO WORLD TRAVEL AND T 5506549 TOUR/JELLY BELLY FACTO 0.00 1287.00 1020 572654 10/22/99 918 ALAMO WORLD TRAVEL AND T 5506549 TOUR/BP, ANSON 0.00 49219.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 52648.00 1020 572655 10/22/99 36 ALLEN'S PRESS CLIPPING 1103300 PRESS CLIPPINGS 0.00 36.00 1020 572656 10/22/99 888 ALOHA POOL MAINTENANCE I 5708510 MAINTENANCE 0.00 342.80 1020 572657 10/22/99 45 AMERICAN TRAFFIC SUPPLY 2708405 SUPPLIES 0.00 84.18 1020 572658 10/22/99 1533 AN ARRAY OF FLOWERS 5606680 SUPPLIES 0.00 46.82 1020 572659 10/22/99 50 A~ERSON CHEVEOLET/GEO 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 36.20 1020 572660 10/22/99 M APPLE COMPUTER 1100000 REFUND DEPOSIT 0.00 30.00 1020 572661 10/22/99 M ;%PPLE COMPUTER 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R2637 0.00 145.44 1020 572662 10/22/99 57 AR~K 5506549 COFFEE SUPPLIES 0.00 188.06 1020 572662 10/22/99 57 A~AMARK 1104510 EMPLOYEE COFFEE 0.00 322.51 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 510.57 1020 572663 10/22/99 60 ELLE ARNOT 5806349 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 3273 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:48 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10~22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 2 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572664 10/22/99 61 ARTISTIC PLANT CREATIONS 1108501 PLANT CARE 10/99 0.00 200.00 1020 572664 10/22/99 61 ARTISTIC PLANT CREATIONS 1108504 PI~NT CARE 10/99 0.00 81.00 1020 572664 10/22/99 61 ARTISTIC PLANT CREATIONS 1108503 PLANT CARE 10/99 0.00 65.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 346.00 1020 572665 10/22/99 1450 AUTODESK INC 6104800 AUTOCAD LANDDEVELOPME 238.34 3127.34 1020 572665 10/22/99 1450 AUTODESK INC 6104800 AUTOCAD LAND DEVELOI~qE 167.64 2199.64 TOTAL CHECK 405.98 5326.98 1020 572666 10/22/99 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN CO~IPANY 1108315 SUI~PLIES 0.00 147.17 1020 572666 10/22/99 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108407 SUPPLIES 0.00 146.32 1020 572666 10/22/99 67 AUTOt~ATIC RAiN COMPANY 1108312 SUPPLIES 0.00 372.97 1020 572666 10/22/99 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108312 SUPPLIES 0.00 919.70 1020 572666 10/22/99 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108312 SUPPLIES 0.00 356.29 1020 572666 10/22/99 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 110~312 SUPPLIES 0.00 550.22 1020 572666 10/22/99 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 400.00 1020 572666 10/22/99 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 759.37 1020 572666 10/22/99 67 AUTOMATIC RAIN COMPANY 1108407 SUPPLIES 0.00 1130.32 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 4782.36 1020 572667 10/22/99 1005 KARLA N BAILEY 1101042 SUPPLIES 0.00 54.13 1~''' 572668 10/22/99 1557 DAVID BARNES 5806249 CATERING SERVIC~ 0.00 98.00 I 572668 10/22/99 1557 DAVID BARNES 5806249 CATERING SERVICE 0.00 70.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 168.00 1020 572669 10/22/99 78 JO ANN BARNEY 5806249 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 115.00 1020 572670, 10/22/99 83 BATTERIES PLUS 1108501 SUPPLIES 0.00 151.10 1020 572671 10/22/99 720 BATTERY SYSTEMS 6308540 PARTS 4.95 64.90 1020 572671 10/22/99 720 BATTERY SYSTEMS 6308540 PARTS 6.68 87.63 1020 572671 10/22/99 720 BATTERY SYSTEMS 6308540 PARTS 3.78 49.58 1020 572671 10/22/99 720 BATTERY SYSTEMS 6308540 PARTS 4.00 52.50 TOTAL CHECK 19.41 254.61 1020 572672 10/22/99 1377 BAY AREA DISTRIBUTING CO 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 360.96 1020 572673 10/22/99 87 BEARCO~ 1108602 MOBILE RADIOS 76.73 1006.73 1020 572674 10/22/99 M BEAVERS, NANCY 5500000 REFUND/SUNSET BLVD 0.00 73.00 1020 572675 10/22/99 M BEN-ZVI, JAI~IA 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 42.00 1020 572676 10/22/99 M BENCHMARK HO~IES SEVEN, L 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R100815 0.00 1363.35 1020 572677 10/22/99 M BENC]~4ARK HOMES SEVEN~ L 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R100816 0.00 1268.46 1020 572678 10/22/99 90 BENEFIT~MERICA 110 AD, IN FEES 09-30-99 0.00 20.50 10' 572679 10/22/99 91 DR JOEL BERGER 5806449 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 84.00 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:49 - FIN~/~CIAL ACCO~qTING~/~ , 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 3 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643" and "572923" F~ND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572680 10/22/99 M BETHEL LUTHERAN CHURCH 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R6102 0.00 140.96 1020 572681 10/22/99 M BIRCH, IZETTA E 1104510 REIMBURSEMENT 0.00 88.50 1020 572682 10/22/99 98 BLAINE TECH SERVICE INC 6308540 FIELD SERVICES 0.00. 155.00 1020 572683 10/22/99 M BLAKE-BURKE, PETER & CAR 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R3846 0.00 137.26 1020 572684 10/22/99 100 BMI IMAGING SYSTEMS 1104300 MICROFI[~MING 5.69 74.69 1020 572685 lO/22/99 1272 R~NS BOOI~MA 5806349 DJ 11/5/99 0.00 350.00 1020 572686 10/22/99 114 BUBBLE MACHINE CAR WASH 6308540 CAR WASH 0.00 234.00 1020 572687 10/22/99 1570 BUSINESS & LEGAL REPORTS 1108005 OSHA COMPLIANCE RENEWA 0.00 320.08 1020 572688 10/22/99 127 THE CALIFORNIA CHANNEL 1103500 BROADCAST FEE 10/99 0.00 205.92 1020 572689 10/22/99 147 CASH 5506549 PETTY CA~N REIMBURSEME 0.00 1.99 1020 572689 10/22/99 147 CASH 5506549 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 98.01 1020 572689 10/22/99 147 CASH 5506549 PETTY CASH REIMBUBS~ME 0.00 16 1020 572689 10/22/99 147 CASH 5506549 P~TTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 · 3i 1020 572689 10/22/99 147 CASH 5506549 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMB 0.00 85.$6 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 236.20 1020 572690 10/22/99 148 CASH 1108503 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 7.57 1020 572690 10/22/99 148 CASH 6308540 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 28.00 1020 572690 10/22/99 148 CASH 1108303 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 4.27 1020 572690 10/22/99 148 CASH 1108312 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 8.25 1020 572690 10/22/99 148 CASH 1108201 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 1.82 1020 572690 10/22/99 148 CASH 1108312 P~&-~-f CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 65.21 1020 572690 10/22/99 148 CASH 6308540 PETTY CASH REIMBUBSEME 0.00 50.68 1020 572690 10/22/99 148 CASH 1108201 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 6.60 1020 572690 10/22/99 148 CASH 1108501 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 3.88 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 176.28 1020 572691 10/22/99 149 CASH 6104800 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 10'.81 1020 572691 10/22/99 149 CASH 1106100 P~TTY CASH REIMBURS~ 0.00 72.79 1020 572691 10/22/99 149 CASH 1103300 PETTY CASH REIMBURS~ME 0.00 15.15 1020 572691 10/22/99 149 CASH 1101200 P~q-rf CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 73.19 1020 572691 10/22/99 149 CASH 1104510 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 30.80 1020 572691 10/22/99 149 CASH 1101000 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEM~ 0.00 18.84 1020 572691 10/22/99 149 CASH 6109850 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 31.43 1020 572691 10/22/99 149 CASH 1104400 PETTY CASH. REIMBURSEME 0.00 75.70 1020 572691 10/22/99 149 CASH 1104000 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEME 0.00 20.00 1020 572691 10/22/99 149 CASH 1104100 PETTY CASH REIMBUBSEME 0.00 9.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 357.71 1020 572692 10/22/99 M CHALET WOODS INC 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R 97412 0.00 2385, 1020 572693 10/22/99 M CHANG, J~NNY 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 19.00 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:49 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 4 ACCOUNTING PERIOD; 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND ~ION CRITERIA: =ransac=.check_no be=ween "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENER~J~ FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572694 10/22/99 M CHANG, MEI-TEH 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 123.50 1020 572695 10/22/99 M CHENG, JIM 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 13.00 1020 572696 10/22/99 M CHENG0 JINN-HWEI 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 50.00 1020 572696 10/22/99 M CHENG, JINN-HWEI 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 50.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 100.00 1020 572697 10/22/99 M CHO, SIN SROU 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R1577 0.00 6750.00 1020 572698 10/22/99 M CHU, HO-WEI 5800000 RECJ~ATION REFUND 0.00 55.25 1020 572699 10/22/99 M ' CHU, WEI-LUH 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R100751 0.00 723.59 1020 572700 10/22/99 M CITY GUIDES 5506549 MYSTERY TRiP 0.00 400.00 1020 572701 10/22/99 170 GEORGE CLOWARD 5806249 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 440.00 1020 572702 10/22/99 173 COCA-COLA BOTTLING OF CA 5706450 SODA 0.00 502.57 1020 572702 10/22/99 173 COCA-COLABOTTLING OF CA 5706450 SODA 0.00 189.73 10.~-- 572702 10/22/99 173 COCA-COLABOTTLING OF CA 5706450 SODA . 0.00 197.19 T CH~CK 0.00 889.49 1020 572703 10/22/99 1003 CONSOLIDATED PARTS INC 1108602 PARTS FOR TEST BOARDS 53.44 701.17 1020 572704 10/22/99 M CO0~S, ANN 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 20.00 1020 572705 10/22/99 1312 COUNTRY CLUB CAR WASH 6308540 COf4PLETE AUTO DBTAIL 0.00 145.00 1020 572705 10/22/99 1312 COUNTRY CLUB CAR WASR 6308540 COMPLETE DETAIL 0.00 85.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 230.00 1020 572706 10/22/99 841 ROBERT COWAN 1107200 REIMBURSEMENT 0.00 382.30 1020 572707 10/22/99 187 MARY t"RAWFORD 5806349 RECREATION PRO~ 0.00 664.00 1020 572708 10/22/99 984 CHOSSROADS CHEVRON SERVI 6308540 GASOLINE/CITY VEHICLES 0.00 2545..36 1020 572709 10/22/99 191 CUPERTINO C~ER OF COM 1101000 1999 CITIZEN OF YR A~ID 0.00 60.00 1020 572710 10/22/99 194 CUPERTINO SUPPLY INC 1108407 SUPPLIES 8.78 115.15 1020 572710 10/22/99 194 CUPERTINO SUPPLY INC 1108407 SUPPLIES 0.18 3.42 1020 572710 10/22/99 194 CUPERTINO SUPPLY INC 1108312 PART & SUPPLIES 0.00 442.35 TOTAL CHECK 8.96 560.92 1020 572711 10/22/99 197 CUPERTINO TOWN C~NTER 1101500 RENT 0.00 2894.00 1020 572712 10/22/99 198 CUPERTINO UNION SCHL DIS 5806449 FACILITY RENTAL 0.00 82.95 10~' 572713 10/22/99 M D'SA, VRINDA 5800000 RECREATION EEFUND 0.00 64.50 10. 572713 10/22/99 M D~SA, VRINDA 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 64.50 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:50 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 5 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 C74ECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT TOTAL CHECK 0.00 129.00 1020 572714 10/22/99 M DALY CITY, CITY OF 5806449 R GONZALES & D MCCARTH 0.00 80.00 1020 572715 10/22/99 201 DAPPER TIRE CO 6308540 TIRES 34.34 450,64 1020 572716 10/22/99 M DEAN, LAURIE 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R1676 0.00 200.00 1020 572717 10/22/99 1474 DENCO SALES COMPANY 2708405 SUPPLIES 40.84 525.94 1020 572717 10/22/99 1474 DENCO SALES COMPANY 2708405 SUgPLIES 28.44 366.25 TOTAL CHECK 69.28 892.19 1020 572718 10/22/99 1335 DENISE GOSS 5806249 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 251.50 1020 572719 10/22/99 214 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA 1108602 SAFETY LIGHTING 8/99 0.00 165.83 1020 572720 10/22/99 M DING, IGNATIUS 1100000 REFUND DEPOSIT R3940 0.00 140.00 1020 572720 10/22/99 M DING, IGNATIUS 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R3940 0.00 100.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 240.00 1020 572721 10/22/99 1354 DIRECT SAFETY COMPANY 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 251.90 1020 572722 10/22/99 225 DONE RIGHT ROOFING & GUT 5708510 INSTALLATION 0.00 150. 1020 572723 10/22/99 1434 EDWARD S. WALSH CO. 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 144.71 1020 572724 10/22/99 812 EMERGENCY VEHICLE SYSTEM 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 813.56 1020 572724 10/22/99 812 EMERGENCY VEHICLE SYSTEM 6308540 ALLEY LIGHTS 0.00 56.03 TOTAL C~ECK 0.00 869.59 1020 572725 10/22/99 1473 EMPIRE EQUIPMENT CO 6309820 JOEN DEERE 344H 7488.57 87159.17 1020 572726 10/22/99 249 ESBRO CHEMICAL 5606620 SUPPLIES 0.00 375.72 1020 572726 10/22/99 249 ESHRO CHEMICAL 5606620 SUPPLIES 0.00 180.88 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 556.60 1020 572727 10/22/99 250 EUPHi~AT MUSEUM OF ART 5806349 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 3922.00 1020 572728 10/22/99 253 EXC~%NGE LINEN SERVICE 5606620 SUPPLIES Q.00 12.75 1020 572728 10/22/99 253 EXCT{ANGE LINEN SERVICE 5606620 SUPPLIES 0.00 223.22 1020 572728 10/22/99 253 EXCHANGE LINEN SERVICE 5606620 SUPPLIES 0.00 74.64 1020 572728 10/22/99 253 EXCT~%NGE LINEN SERVICE 5606620 SUPPLIES 0.00 217.69 1020 572728 10/22/99 253 EXCT~ANGE LINEN SERVICE 5606620 SUPPLIES 0.00 10.20 1020 572728 10/22/99 253 EXCT{ANGE LINEN SERVICR 5806249 LINEN SERVICE 0.00 80.59 1020 572728 10/22/99 253 EXCHANGE LINEN SERVICE 5606620 SUPPLIES 0.00 47.66 1020 572728 10/22/99 253 EXC~E LINEN SERVICE 5806249 LINEN SERVICE 0.00 22.05 1020 572728 10/22/99 253 EXCF2%NGE LINEN SERVICE 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 82.73 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 771.53 1020 572729 10/22/99 260 FEDEHAL EXPRESS CORP 1104400 PRIORITY OVERNIGHT 0.00 25 1020 572729 10/22/99 260 FEDEP~%L EXPRESS CORP 1108501 ~PRESS SAVER 0.00 8... RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:51 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 6 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND TXON CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572729 10/22/99 260 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 5208003 PRIORITY OVERNIGHT 0.00 16.25 1020 572729 10/22/99 260 FEDERA/~ EXPRESS CORP 1108503 STAND~/~D OVERNIGHT 0.00 14.00 1020 572729 10/22/99 260 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 2607401 PRIORITY OVERNIGHT 0.00 15.75 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 80.70 1020 572730 10/22/99 M PINCH, BARBARA 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 6.00 1020 572731 10/22/99 N FINGER, AMY 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 33.00 1020 572732 10/22/99 1255 FIRST AUTOMOTIVE DISTRIB 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 183.98 1020 572733 10/22/99 M FIRST WEST INVESTMENT 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R8470 0.00 142.44 1020 572734 10/22/99 1502 JUDITH A FORD 5606620 CATERING SERVICE 0.00 45.00 1020 572735 10/22/99 1210 FORMA TOP 1108501 PLASTIC LAMINATE TABLE 0.00 556.50 1020 572736 10/22/99 268 FOSTER BROS SECURITY SYS 1108503 PARTS & SUPPLIES 0.00 78.59 1020 572737 10/22/99 M FREY, KIM 5806449 REIMBUNSEMEHT 0.00 90.15 1~~-- 572738 10/22/99 274 FRY'S ELECTRONIC 1108602 HP DESKJET PRINTER 45.31 594.57 I 572738 10/22/99 274 FRY'S ELECTRONIC 1108408 SUPPLIES 0.00 184.93 102u 572738 10/22/99 274 FRY'S ELECTRONIC 6104800 LAP TOP COMPUTER 183.23 2654.17 TOTAL CHECK 228.54 3433.57 1020 572739 10/22/99 1571 FUEL FILTRATION 6308540 LABOR/CLEAN SYSTeM 0.00 942.86 1020 572740 10/22/99 M FU%IIO SUDAARCHITECT 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R97294 0.00 143.64 1020 572741 10/22/99 277 JOHN F~ 5806249 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 37.20 1020 572742 10/22/99 1268 GALLI PRODUCE 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 220.80 1020 572742 10/22/99 1268 GA~I PRODUCE 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 78.25 1020 572742 10/22/99 1268 C~LLI PRODUCE 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 39.70 1020 572742 10/22/99 1268 GALLI PRODUCE 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 97.20 1020 572742 10/22/99 1268 GALLI PRODUCE 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 44..15 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 480.10 1020 572743 10/22/99 1275 C~HN CITY SUPPLY INC 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 14.12 1020 572744 10/22/99 H GENARD, FABIENNE 5700000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 43.00 1020 572745 10/22/99 1572. GENERAL FEE E SEED CO 1106647 SUPPLIES 0.00 23.39 1020 572746 10/22/99 M GHAZVINI, HAMID 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R6101 0.00 126.31 1020 572747 10/22/99 1140 GLOB~ DATA CENTER INC 6104800 SUPPLIES 0.00 910.00 1Q'~ 572748 10/22/99 291 GOLD~NTOUCHLANDSCAPING 1108314 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE 0.00 2092.00 1020 572749 10/22/99 1276 GO~ET EXPRESS 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 267.78 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:51 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE ? ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. V~NDOR ............. FUND/DEFT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX ANOUNT 1020 572749 10/22/99 1276 GOURMET EXPRESS 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 91.50 1020 572749 10/22/99 1276 GOURMET EXPRESS 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 247.09 1020 572749 10/22/99 1276 GOURMET EXPRESS 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 222.78 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 829.15 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 177.42 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 13~.85 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 55.92 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 47.09 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINOER INC 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 55.17 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108504 SUPPLIES 2.97 38.89 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108507 CREDIT 9/28/99 0.00 -106.18 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108507 SUPPLIES 8.09 106.18 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108505 SUPPLIES 26.07 342.08 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108504 SUPPLIES 2.64 34.64 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108315 SUPPLIES 0.00 43.96 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108315 SUPPLIES 0.00 218.88 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108530 SUPPLIES 0.00 12.29 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108315 CREDIT 10/6/99 0.00 -43.96 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108315 SUPPLIES 0.00 183.61~. 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108530 SUPPLIES 0.00 214 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAING~R INC 1108315 CREDIT 10/6/99 0.00 -43 .... 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 6308540 CREDIT 9/24/99 0.00 -177.42 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 C~AINGER INC 1108315 SUPPLIES 0.00 112.67 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108314 SUPPLIES 0.00 84.34 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108530 SUPPLIES 0.00 78.23 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108530 SUPPLIES 0.00 109.88 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAIN(ER INC 1108530 SUPPLIES 0.00 183.77 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108314 SUPPLIES 0.00 133.50 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 2708405 SUPPLIES 0.00 29.96 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 2708405 SUPPLIES 0.00 77.97 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108530 SUPPLIES 0.00' 29.28 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAIN(ER INC 2708405 SUPPLIES 0.00 35.05 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINIER INC 1108314 SUPPLIES 0.00 32.65 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAINGER INC 1108408 SUPPLIES 0.00 296.59 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 ~RAINGER INC 1108408 SUPPLIES 0.00 66,39 1020 572751 10/22/99 298 GRAIN(ER INC 1108501 SUPPLIES 0.00 164.43 TOTAL CHECK 39.77 2730.88 1020 572752 10/22/99 1349 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION COM 2708404 ANNUAL OVER~AY #99-108 0.00 363294.79 1020 572752 10/22/99 1349 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION COM 2708404 SCR OVERLAY PRJT 99-10 0.00 107245.62 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 470540.41 1020 572753 10/22/99 301 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO INC 1108602 SUPPLIES 0.00 178.21 1020 572754 10/22/99 M GREATER BAY CONSTRUCTION 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R6076 0.00 1251.90 1020 572755 10/22/99 M G~UDMUNDSON, DAVID 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R8417 0.00 146.7~ 1020 572756 10/22/99 1378 GYM PRECISION 5706450 gYM EQUIP MAINTENANCE '0.00 95.1~ 1020 572757 10/22/99 313 H & H ATHLETIC TFJ%M SUPP 1108312 KWIK GOAL 8'X24' 123.34 1868.34 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:52 - FINANCIA~ ACCOUNTING ~"/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 8 · NTING PERIOD= 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITEHIA: =ransac=.check_no be=ween "572643# and #572923# FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572758 10/22/99 M HANDEL & SYNESI TRUSTEES 5800000 REcREATIoN REFUND 0.00 72.50 1020 572759 10/22/99 M HARGIS, KATHY 1100000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 20.00 1020 572760 10/22/99 M HEE, CHOI 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 123.50 1020 572761 10/22/99 M HEY, YUKIKO 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 61.00 1020 572762 10/22/99 M HUTTLINGER, PETER 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 85.25 1020 572763 10/22/99 M IAEI CODE CHECK SEMINAR 1107503 SEMINAR/A DORSETT 0.00 125.00 1020 572764 10/22/99 995 INSERV COMPANY 1108501 WATER TREATMENT 10/99 0.00 159.49 1020 572764 10/22/99 995 INSERV COMPANY 1108504 WATER TREATMENT 10/99 0.00 159.49 1020 572764 10/22/99 995 INSERV COMPANY 1108502 WATER TREATMENT 10/99 0.00 159.49 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 478.47 1020 572765 10/22/99 1514 INTELECOM 1103500 PROGRAM LICENSE FEE 43.50 1685.50 1, 572766 10/22/99 1524 JEFFREY JADRICK 5806249 CATERING SERVICE 0.00 78.00 1020 572766 10/22/99 1524 JEFFREY JADRICK 5806249 CATERING SERVICE 0.00 110.50 · 1020 572766 10/22/99 1524 JEFFREY JADRICK 5806249 CATERING SERVICE 0.00 104.00 1020 572766 10/22/99 1524 JEFFREY JADRICK 5806249 CATERING SERVICE 0.00 91.00 1020 572766 10/22/99 1524 JEFFREY JADRICK 5806249 CATERING SERVICE 0.00 91.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 474.50 1020 572767 10/22/99 1382 JOHN DEERE COMPANY-RALEI 6309820 CAB TRACTOR/LOADER 4428.41 58106.16 1020 572768 10/22/99 M JOHNSON, BETTY 5500000 REFUND/SUNSET BLVD 0.00 73.00 1020 572769 10/22/99 363 JUST PLAY SPORTS ACADEMY 5806449 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 4674.25 1020 572770 10/22/99 M FJuNG, KELVIN & MARTHA SH 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R100381 0.00 6300.00 1020 572771 10/22/99 M KELLY-GORDON DEVELOPMENT 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R 99975 0.00 2067.29 1020 572772 10/22/99 879 KEYSER MARSTONASSOCIATE 2507304 PROF SVC 7/99-8/99 0.00 14580.60 1020 572773 10/22/99 1501 KATHLEEN KING 5606620 CATERING SERVICE 0.00 45.00 1020 572774 10/22/99 377 PETER KOEHLER 5806249 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 769.30 1020 572775 10/22/99 M KU, WILLIAM 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 123.50 1020 572776 10/22/99 385 LAB SAF~ SUPPLY 1108501 SUPPLIES 0.00 161.77 10' 572777 10/22/99 386 MICHAEL LAMB 1106647 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 330.00 1020 572778 10/22/99 M LANKA, SRIDHARA 5800000 RECREATIONREFU~ID 0.00 52.50 1020 572?79 10/22/99 M LAU, DARYN 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R2926 0.00 146.72 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:53 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 9 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572780 10/22/99 391 LEAGUE OF CALIF CITIES 1101000 CONFERENCE/K SMITH 0.00 130.00 1020 572781 10/22/99 1217 THE LEARNING GA/~ 5806649 SUPPLIES 0.00 11.85 1020 572781 10/22/99 1217 THE LEARNING GAME 1106647 SUPPLIES 0.00 12.18 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 24.03 1020 572?82 10/22/99 M T.~E, JI-CH~NG 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R2626 0.00 143.20 1020 572783 10/22/99 M LEIGH, STACY 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R8082 0.00 500.00 1020 572784 10/22/99 396 PHILLIP M LENIHAN 5806449 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 70.00 1020 572785 10/22/99 M LESLIE, BRITON 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 110.50 1020 572786 10/22/99 M LINDA EVANS FITNESS 110 REFUND DEPOSIT'R2219 0.00 151.52 1020 572787 10/22/99 M LITTLE ANGELS 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R2639 0.00 90.~~ 1020 572788 10/22/99 404 LONGS DRUG STORES #260' 1106342 SUPPLIES 0.00 49.9, 1020 572788 10/22/99 404 LONGS DRUG STORES #260 1106265 SUPPLIES 0.00 11.4.5 1020 572788 10/22/99 404 LONGS DRUG STORES %260 5806249 SUPpLIEs 0.00 22.90 T~DTAL CHECK 0.00 84.12 1020 572789 10/22/99 405 LONGS DRUGS #114 1107503 SUPPLIES 0.00 24.89 1020 572790 10/22/99 1089 LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES 5606640 PHONE SVC 0100442273 0.00 9.52 1020 572791 10/22/99 M MAPLE LEAF INVESTMENTS 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R2641 0.00 47.12 1020 572792 10/22/99 M MARVIN, GWEN 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 79.00 1020 572792 10/22/99 M MARVIN, OWEN 5800000 .RECREATION REFUND 0.00 79.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 158.00 1020 572793 10/22/99 M MCNAIR, THOMAS 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R7944 0.00 144.62 1020 572794 10/22/99 436 METRO GOOD TIME FOOD/A-1 5706450 SNACK ITEMS FOR RESALE 0.00 308.56 1020 572795 10/22/99 437 METRO NEWSPAPERS 1101070 LEGAL NOTICE 0.00 82.50 1020 572796 10/22/99 439 MICHaeLS #13333 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 98.68 1020 572797 10/22/99 1238 MICRO CENTER 6104800 SUPPLIES 0.00 410.10 1020 572798 10/22/99 443 MILLENNIUm4 MECHANICAL IN 1108503 LABOR & MATERIALS 0.00 7500.00 1020 572798 10/22/99 .443 MILLENNIUM MECHANICAL IN 1108505 SERVICE CALL 0.00 70.r TOTAL CHECK 0.00 7570. 1020 572799 10/22/99 M MILLER, ELIZABE~ 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 181.50 1020 572800 10/22/99 M MILLER, HON 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 117.00 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13=42=53 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING ~ /99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 10 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER o DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: =ransac=.check_no between "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572801 10/22/99 M MILOSAVLJEVIC, MRKAILO 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 62.00 1020 572802 10/22/99 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201 UNIFORM SERVICE 0.00 72.43 1020 572802 10/22/99 447 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE 1108201 UNIFORM SERVICE 0.00 72.43 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 144.86 1020 572803 10/22/99 M MONTA VISTA HIGH SCHOOL 1100000 REFUND DEPOSIT 0.00 60.00 1020 572804 10/22/99 465 MOUNTAIN VIEW GARDEN CEN 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 286.76 1020 S72805 10/22/99 M MOUNTFOND, SARAH 110 REPLACE CK 570624 R956 0.00 500.00 1020 572806 10/22/99 466 MPA DESIGN 4219310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0.00 225.53 1020 572807 10/22/99 M NA, KI BONG 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R 4892 0.00 141.92 1020 572808 10/22/99 M N~ESH, MEERA 5700000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 43.00 1~'~ 572808 10/22/99 M NAGESH, MEERA 5700000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 43.00 I 572808 10/22/99 M NAGESH, MEERA 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 62.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 148.00 1020 572809 10/22/99 1191 NAKANURSERY INC 1108408 SUPPLIES 0.00 443.83 1020 572810 10/22/99 475 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RE 1108312 FENCE R~TAL 9/21-10/1 0.00 41.65 1020 572810 10/22/99 475 NATIGNAL CONSTRUCTION RE 1108312 FENCE R~TAL 8/24-9/21 0.00 41.65 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 83.30 1020 572811 10/22/99 1550 ADONIS L NECRSITO 1103501 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0.00 240.00 1020 572812 10/22/99 480 NEIaSEN ENGINEERING 1107305 PREP ANNEX OO~S 0.00 1200.00 1020 572813 10/22/99 M NEWSOM, GINA 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 72.50 1020 572814 10/22/99 1162 NICKELL FIRE EQUIPMENT 1104400 TRAINING/FIRE EXTINGUI 0.00 389.55 1020 572815 10/22/99 489 NOTEWORTHY MUSIC SCHOOL 5806349 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 4559.21 1020 572816 10/22/99 192 NOVACARE OCCUPATIONAL HE 1108201 HEP A & B VACCINE 0.00 230.00 1020 572816 10/22/99 192 NOVACARE OCCUPATIONAL HE 1108201 NEP A & B VACCINE 0.00 150.00 1020 572816 10/22/99 192 NOVACARB OCCUPATIONAL HE 1108201 HEP A & B VACCINE 0.00 150.00 1020 572816 10/22/99 192 NOVACAR~ OCCUPATIONAL HE 1108201 HEP A & B VACCINE 0.00 150.00 1020 572816 10/22/99 192 NOVACAR~ OCCUPATIONAL HE 1108201 HEP A a B VACCINE 0.00 4255.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 4935.00 1020 572817 10/22/99 M O~BRIENGROUP 110 REFUteD DEPOSIT R6423 0.00 200.00 1~ 572818 10/22/99 1190 RONALD OLDS 1103500 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0.00 135.00 1020 572819 10/22/99 1379 OPTIM NUTRITION INC 5706450 SUPPLIES 0.00 171.95 1020 572820 10/22/99 503 ORCHARD SUPPLY 5606620 SUPPLIES 0.00 51.82 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:54 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 11 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572820 10/22/99 503 ORCHARD SUPPLY 5606620 ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT 0.00 -4.82 1020 572820 10/22/99 503 ORCHARD SUPPLY 5606640 ON TIME PMT DISCOUNT 0.00 -4.83 1020 572820 10/22/99 503 ORCHARD SUPPLY 5606640 SUPPLIES 0.00 147.86 1020 572820 10/22/99 503 ORCHARD SUPPLY 5606620 SUPPLIES 0.00 61.22 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 251.25 1020 572821 10/22/99 504 ORIENTAL TRADING CO S806649 SUPPLIES 0.00 77.81 1020 572821 10/22/99 504 ORIENTAL TRADING CO 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 17.44 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 95.25 1020 572822 10/22/99 507 DAN OSBORNE 4209110 PROGRESS PAYMENT 0.00 560.90 1020 572822 10/22/99 507 DAN OSBORNE 1108501 PROGRESS PAYMENT 0.00 785.42 1020 '572822 10/22/99 507 DAN OSBORNE 4209110 PROGRESS PAYMENT 0.00 1241.16 1020 572822 10/22/99 507 DAN OSBORNE 1108504 PHOGRESS PAYMENT 0.00 2418.60 1020 572822 10/22/99 507 DAN OSBORNE 1108303 PROGRESS PAYMENT 0.00 986.52 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 5992.60 1020 572823 10/22/99 510 P.D.M. STEEL 2708403 SUPPLIES 0.00 220 1020 572823 10/22/99 510 P.D.M. STEEL 2708403 CREDIT 10/13/99 0.00 -138. 1020 572823 10/22/99 510 P.D.M. STEEL 2708403 SUPPLIES 0.00 138.66 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 220.35 1020 572824 10/22/99 1039 PACIFIC COAST FLAG 1108503 SUPPLIES 0.00 103.85 1020 572824 10/22/99 1039 PACIFIC COAST FLAG 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 137.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 240.85 1020 572825 10/22/99 M PACIFIC NEON 110 REFUND DEPOSIT 27239 0.00 200.00 1020 572826 10/22/99 515 PACIFIC WEST SECURITY IN 1108504 SERVICE CALL 0.00 175.00 1020 572827 10/22/99 520 PAPERDIRECT INC 1106265 SUPPLIES 0.00 189.50 1020 572828 10/22/99 M PAPP, DOROTHY 5500000 REFUND/SUNSET BLVD 0.00 73.00 1020 572829 10/22/99 M PATWARDHAN, JAYA 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 132.00 1020 572830 10/22/99 M PATWARDHAN, JAYA 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 114.00 1020 572831 10/22/99 1099 PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INC 2708404 ANNUAL OVERLAY PROJECT 0.00 14890.00 1020 572831 10/22/99 1099 PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INC 2708404 ANNUAL OVERLAY PROJECT 0.00 19630.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 34520.00 1020 572832 10/22/99 1573 PEARSON DEL PRETE & CO L 1101002 PROFESSIONAL SVC 9/99 0.00 4750.00 1020 572833 10/22/99 M PECSOK, KETM 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R 4627 0.00 500.0~ 1020 572834 I0/22/99 1494 PENNY SAVER 5208003 DISPLAY AD 0.00 516.. 1020 572834 10/22/99 1494 PENNY SAVER 5208003 GARAGE SALE NOTICE 0.00 223.54 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 740.40 1020 572835 10/22/99 531 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 112.68 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:54 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO P~E 12 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: ~ransac~.check_no between #572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENEP. AL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572835 10/22/99 531 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 5806349 SODA 0.00 297.16 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 409.84 1020 572836 10/22/99 534 PET CENTRE 1106647 SUPPLIES 0.00 20.47 1020 572836 10/22/99 534 PET C'~ 1106647 SUPPLIES 0.00 8.44 1020 572836 10/22/99 534 PET CENTRE 1106647 SUPPLIES 0.00 19.45 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 48.36 1020 572837 10/22/99 537 PETPRO PRODUCTS INC 1108315 SUPPLIES 0.00 414.96 1020 572837 10/22/99 537 PETPRO PRODUCTS INC 1108314 SUPPLIES 0.00 414.96 1020 572837 10/22/99 537 PETPRO PRODUCTS INC 1108302 SUPPLIES 0.00 414.97 1020 572837 10/22/99 537 PETPRO PRODUCTS INC 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.0O 414..97 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1659.86 1020 672838 10/22/99 543 PINPOIIVT 1108201 ~NIFORM 184.24 2417.40 1020 572838 10/22/99 543 PINPOINT 1108201 EI~ROIDERY 0.00 151.09 1020 572838 10/22/99 543 PINPOINT 1108407 SUPPLIES 0.00 40.72 T~ CHECK 184.24 2610.01 1020 572839 10/22/99 545 JEFF PISERCHIO 5606640 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 0.O0 1705.00 1020 572840 10/22/99 M QUALITY DESIGN CONCEPTS 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R2890 0.00 66.60 1020 572841 10/22/99 1406 RANIES CHEVORLET 6308540 PARTS 0.63 8.24 1020 572841 10/22/99 1406 P. ANIES CHEVORLET 6308540 PARTS 2.51 32.93 TOTAL CHECK 3.14 41.17 1020 572842 10/22/99 1044 PATRICK REED 4209110 LABOR & MATERIAL~ 0.00 250.00 1020 572843 10/22/99 581 RELIABLE 1107501 SUPPLIES 0.00 15.50 1020 572843 10/22/99 581 RELIABLE 1107301 SUPPLIES 0.00 111.07 1020 572843 10/22/99 581 RELIABLE 1107301 SUPPLIES 0.00 13.99 1020 572843 10/22/99 581 RELIABLE 1107503 SUPPLIES 0.00 11.04 1020 572843 10/22/99 581 RELIABLE 1107301 S~PLIES 0.00 30.90 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 182.50 1020 572844 10/22/99 845 REITH REUTER 1108303 LABOR & SUPPLIES 0.00 1100.00 1020 572844 10/22/99 845 REITH P.~R 1108314 LABOR a SUPPLIES 0.00 600.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1700.00 1020 572845 10/22/99 S87 RHINO LININGS OF SAN JOS 6308540 INST~ BEDLINERS 0.00 1110.88 1020 572846 10/22/99 1223 RICHARD A HEAPS ELEC CON 4209525 HOMESTEAD AERIAL MGMT 0.00 31051.44 1020 572846 10/22/99 1223 RICHARD A HEAPS ELEC CON 4209526 SCB AT SAICH WAY 0.00 71197.30 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 102238.74 1G 572847 10/22/99 594 RIVERVIEW SYS~ GROUP 1103500 SUPPLIES 0.00 295.52 1020 572848 10/22/99 M ROUDSARE, MAHIN 110 REPUND DEPOSIT R1850 0.00 100.00 1020 572849 10/22/99 602 ROYAL COACH TOURS 5506549 TRANSPORTATION 9/23/99 0.00 568.05 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:55 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 13 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572849 10/22/99 602 ROYAL COACR TOURS 5506549 TRANSPORTATION 7/21/99 0.00 499.95 TOTAL'CHECK 0.00 1068.00 1020 572850 10/22/99 M RUTTER GROUP, THE 1101500 SUBSCRIPTION 0.00 81.46 1020 572851 10/22/99 610 S a S WORLDWIDE 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 19.46 1020 572851 10/22/99 610 S & S WORLDWIDE 5606249 SUPPLIES 0.00 84.65 1020 572851 10/22/99 610 S & S WORLDWIDE 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 10.65 1020 572851 10/22/99 610 S & S WORLDWIDE 5806349 CREDIT 9/8/99 0.00 -64.95 1020 572851 10/22/99 610 S & S WORLDWIDE 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 24.85 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 74.66 1020 572852 10/22/99 611 S C CO TRANSPORTATION 5506549 MONTHLY FLASH PASS 0.00 144.00 1020 572853 10/22/99 345 SAN FRANCISCO ELEVATOR 1108502 SERVICE CALL 0.00 540.00 1020 572854 10/22/99 617 SAN JOSE BLUE 5208003 SUPPLIES 0.00 87.~ ' 1020 572855 10/22/99 621 SAN JOSE MERCURY CLASSIF 5208003 C~S SALE MAP AD 0.00 39.'~ 1020 572855 10/22/99 621 SAN JOSE MERCURY CLASSIF 5208003 GA~E SALE MAP AD 0.00 7.20 1020 572855 10/22/99 621 SAN JOSE MERCURY CLASSIF 5208003 GA~E SALE MAP AG 0.00 2543.10 1020 572855 10/22/99 621 SAN JOSS MERCURY CLASSIF 5208003 GA~E SALE AD 0.00 503.82 1020 572855 10/22/99 621 SAN JOSE MERCURY CLASSIF 5208003 C~GS SALE AD 0.00 719.73 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 3813.64 1020 572856 10/22/99 M SANDERS, NATE 5800000 RECREATION RSFUND 0.00 20.00 1020 572857 10/22/99 628 SANTA CLARA COUNTY SHSRI 5606620 SECURITY 0.00 1347.28 1020 572858 10/22/99 637 SARATOC, A BUILDERS 2809213 PARTS & LABOR 0.00 1600.00 1020 572859 10/22/99 638 SARAT(X]A TREE SERVICE 4209110 PARTS & LABOR 0.00 1450.00 1020 572860 10/22/99 1049 SAVIN CORPORATION 5506549 COPY PLAN QUARTERLY PM 0.00 1329.71 1020 572860 10/22/99 1049 SAVIN CORPORATION 5706450 COPY PLAN QUARTERLY PM 0.00 66.78 1020 572860 10/22/99 1049 RAVIN CORPORATION 1104310 COPY PLAN QUARTSRLY PM 0.00 4966.50 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 6362.99 1020 572861 10/22/99 1488 SEARS 1108503 COMPACTOR BAGS 0.00 321.47 1020 572862 10/22/99 M SETHURAM, ANTRA 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 8.50 ~020 572863 10/22/99 652 SIERRA SPRING WATER COMP 1106265 WATER 8/25-9/22/99 0.00 60.65 1020 572864 10/22/99 658 SILVSP~%DO SPRIN(]S BOTTLE 1104510 FZ4PLOYSE WATER 10/6/99 0.00 77.' 1020 572864 10/22/99 658 SILVERADO SPRINGS BOTTLE 1104510 EMPLOYEE WATER 10/5/99 0.00 143. TOTAL CHECK 0.00 220.00 1020 572865 10/22/99 1574 SIZZLING SENIORS 5506549 SERVICES 11/1/99 0.00 25.00 1020 572866 10/22/99 M SKYLINE PUBLISHING COMPA 6308540 SUBSCRIPTION 0.00 195.00 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:55 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 14 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURS]D4ENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643' and "572923# FUND - 110 - GENERA~ FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOU~T 1020 S72867 10/22/99 200 LESLIE SOKOL 5806449 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 2656.00 1020 572867 10/22/99 200 LESLIE SOKOL 5806349 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 371.31 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 3027.31 1020 572868 10/22/99 1116 SONY ELECTRONICS INC 1103500 MATF, RIALS AND PARTS 137.04 1809.09 1020 572869 10/22/99 665 SOU'TH BAY METROPOLITAN 5806449 ~PIRES 9/99 0.00 1895.00 1020 572870 10/22/99 1575 SOUTH BAY PAINTS 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 139.86 1020 572871 10/22/99 1421 STANLEY STEAMER 1108504 LABOR 0.00 380.00 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 110 SALES/USE TAX QTR 9/30 0.00 -7554.00 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EOUALIZAT 5700000 SALES/USE TAX (~ 9/30 0.00 9.50 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 560 SAL~S/UBE TAX QTR 9/30 0.00 16663.27 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 630 SALES/USE TAX QTR 9/30 0.00 123.56 1~~-'' 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 5600000 SALES/USE TAX ~TR 9/30 0.00 261,61 I 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQUALI~AT 560 SAL~S/USE TAX QTR 9/30 0.00 -261.61 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF E~UALIZAT 110 SALES/USE TAX OTR 9/30 0.00 554.91 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 560 SALES/USE TAX OTR 9/30 0.00 20.34 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EOUALIZAT 520 SALES/USE TAX QTR 9/30 0.00 22.28 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 610 SALES/USE TAX QTR 9/30 0.00 5499.20 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQU~LiZAT 110 SALES/USE TAX 0TR 9/30 0.00 2.75 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 270 SALES/USE TAX QTR 9/30 0.00 458.04 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 580 SALES/USE TAX OTR 9/30 0.00 334.16 1020 572872 10/22/99 1011 STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZAT 580 SALES/USE TAX OTR 9/30 0.00 98.91 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 16233.00 1020 572873 10/22/99 1012 STOREFRONT DOOR S~RVICE 5708510 LABOR & SERVICE CHARGE 0.00 156.50 1020 572874 10/22/99 M SUNG, SAM a HELEN 110 REFOND DEPOSIT R6095 0.00 143.52 1020 572875 10/22/99 1576 SUNNYVAL~ REPTILE 1106647 SUPPLIES 0.00 23.46 1020 572876 10/22/99 1178 SELMA SUZUKI 5806249 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 92.00 1020 572877 10/22/99 M SWANPOOLS 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R03451 0.00 500.00 1020 572878 10/22/99 M SWANPOOLS 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R07510 0.00 $00.00 1020 572879 10/22/99 M SWANPOOLS 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R4400 0.00 500.00 1020 572880 10/22/99 M SWANPOOLS 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R83332 0.00 500.00 10T'~ 572881 10/22/99 M SYLVAN LEARNING 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R94908 0.00 149.07 1020 572882 10/22/99 695 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 475.86 1020 572882 10/22/99 695 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF S 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 319.75 1020 572882 10/22/99 695 SYSCO FOOD S~RVICES OF S 5806249 SUPPLIES 0.00 641.70 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1437 . 31 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:56 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/~9 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 15 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check no between "572643,, and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SAhES TAX , AMOUNT 1020 572883 10/22/99 M SYSCO SANITATION SEMINAR 5806249 SEMINAR 12/8/99 0.00 95.00 1020 572884 10/22/99 696 TADCO SUPPLY 1108321 SUPPLIES 0.00 91.45 1020 572884 10/22/99 696 TADCO SUPPLY 1108302 SUPPLIES 0.00 91.44 1020 572884 10/22/99 696 TADCO SUPPLY 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 91.44 1020 572884 10/22/99 696 TADCO SUPPLY 1108315 SUPPLIES 0.O0 91.45 1020 572884 10/22/99 696 TADC0 SUPPLY 1108314 SUPPLIES 0.00 91.45 1020 572884' 10/22/99 696 TADCO SUPPLY 1108312 SUPPLIES 0.00 91.44 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 548.67 1020 572885 10/22/99 698 TALLY'S ENTERPRISES 2708403 RECONSTRUCTION OF CURB 0.00 14308.92 1020 572886 10/22/99 M TANI, JOY 5800000 RECRF~TION REFUND 0.00 149.50 1020 572887 10/22/99 1520 TANK PROTECT ENGINEERING 1108503 REPLACE FUEL TANK 0.00 50556.96 1020 572887 10/22/99 1520 TANK PROTECT ENGINEERING 2308004 REPLACE FUEL TANK 0.00 14288."' TOTAL CHECK 0.00 64845 1020 572888 10/22/99 699 TAP PLASTICS INC 5208003 SUPPLIES 0.00 50.34 1020 572888 10/22/99 699 TAP PLASTICS INC 5208003 SUPPLIES 0.00 49.47 1020 572888 10/22/99 699 TAP PLASTICS INC 1108506 SUPPLIES 0.00 31.39 1020 572888 10/22/99 699 TAP PLASTICS INC 5208003 SUPPLIES 0.00 50.34 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 181.54 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108312 SUPPLIES 0.00 231.33 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 231.33 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108314 SUPPLIES 0.00 231.33 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108302 SUPPLIES 0.00 231.33 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 4229208. SOILMASTER 0.00 2143.35 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108314 SUPPLIES 0.00 163.07 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108302 SUPPLIES 0.00 163.07 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108315 SUPPLIES 0.00 163'.06 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108315 SUPPLIES 0.00 231.31 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108312 SUPPLIES 0.00 153.07 1020 572889 10/22/99 700 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCT 1108303 SUPPLIES 0.00 163.07 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 4115.32 1020 572890 10/22/99 701 TARGET STORES 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 52.3? 1020 572890 10/22/99 701 TARGET STORES 1106647 SUPPLIES 0.00 32.88 1020 572890 10/22/99 701 TARGET STORES 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 52.37 1020 572890 10/22/99 701 TARGET STORES 1106265 SUPPLIES 0.00 '93.94 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 231.56 1020 572891 10/22/99 M TER LEE, CHONG 5800000 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 100.° '. 1020 572892 10/22/99 M TERSINI CONSTRUCTION 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R8408 0.00 145.58 1020 572893 10/22/99 M THE HAGMAN GROUP 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R2643 0.00 144.80 1020 572894 10/22/99 ?09 LOU THUEMAN 5806449 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 547.50 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:57 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/42/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 16 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: ~ransac~.check_no between #572643# and m572923# FUND - 110 - GENERAL FOND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572895 10/22/99 710 EAREN TOONBS 5806249 RECT. EATION PROGRAM 0.00 5916.30 1020 572896 10/22/99 711 TOYS R US 5806349 SUPPLIES 0.00 43.29 1020 672897 10/22/99 718 TREE MOVERS 2709306 PLANTS 0.00 4150.00 1020 572897 10/22/99 718 TREE MOVERS 4209429 PLAITTS 0.00 4900.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 9050.00 1020 572898 ' 10/22/99 721 TONY TROPF. A 5806449 RECREATION PROGRAM 0.00 50.00 1020 572899 10/22/99 724 TU~F & INDUSTRIAL SQUIPM 6308540 SUPPLIES 27.81 364.94 1020 572899 10/22/99 724 TURF a INDUSTRIAL EQUIPM 6308540 SUPPLIES 43.05 564.88 1020 572899 10/22/99 724 ~F & INDUSTRIAL EQUIPM 6308540 SUPPLIES 10.97 143.97 1020 572899 10/22/99 724 TURF & INDUSTRIAL EOUI~ 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.56 7.32 TOTAL CHECK 82.39 1081.11 1(~-' 572900 10/22/99 727 U S POST~TER 1103400 POSTAGE 12/99-2/2000 0.00 7594.50 1020 572901 10/22/99 1578 UNITED R~IqTALS 2708404 EQUII~EIqT RENTAL 0.00 357.71 1020 572902 10/22/99 830 UNITED SOIL ENGINEERING 4249210 PLAN R~VIEWS 0.00 500.00 1020 572903 10/22/99 738 VALLEY OIL COMPANY 6308540 FUEL TANK RENTAL 0.00 220.00 1020 572903 10/22/99 738 V~TJT~y OI/. COMPANY 6308540 F~L 0.00 512.11 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 732.11 1020 572904 10/22/99 1029 VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AG 5506549 120 BART TICKETS 0.00 480.00 1020 572905 10/22/99 742 COSETTE VIAUD 5806349 RECREATION PROGPJ~M 0.00 338.33 1020 572906 10/22/99 M ViDLOCK, REVA 5500000 REFUND/SUNSET SLVD 0.00 73.00 1020 572907 10/22/99 749 VISA 1104300 CONFBRE~UE 0 · 00 295.00 1020 572907 10/22/99 749 VISA 1101200 MEETING SUPPLIES 0.00 204.13 1020 572907 10/22/99 749 VISA 1101200 CONF~CR 0.00 295.00 1020 572907 10/22/99 749 VISA 1101000 P~GIST~TION 0.00 100.00 1020 5'72907 10/22/99 749 VISA 1103300 SUPPLIES 0.00 88.92 1020 572907 10/22/99 749 VISA 1101000 BREAKFAST MEETING 0.00 20.10 1020 572907 10/22/99 749 VISA 1101200 ANt~AL FEE 0.00 40.00 TOTAL CHECK 0. O0 1043.15 1020 572908 10/22/99 749 VISA 5506549 FOOD & SUPPLIES 0. O0 74.12 1020 572909 10/22/99 749 VISA 5806249 CATERING SERVICES 0.00 882.00 10"--- 572909 10/22/99 749 VISA 5806449 SUPPLIES 0.00 81.13 TC ,'HECK 0.00 963.13 1020 572910 10/22/99 749 VISA 1101200 CONFEP~IqCES 0.00 1355.24 1020 572910 10/22/99 749 VISA 1101000 MEETING SUPPLIES 0. O0 94.23 TOTJtL CHECK 0.00 1449.47 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42.'57 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 17 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between .572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 572911 10/22/99 749 VISA 6104800 PRINTER & SUBSCRIPTION 0.00 740.21 1020 572911 10/22/99 749 VISA 1104001 AOL 0.00 21.95 1020 572911 10/22/99 749 VISA 1104100 SPEAKERPEONE 0.00 499.15 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1261.31 1020 572912 10/22/99 745 VMI INC 6309820 F~%NTECH EMITTER 102.30 1567.30 1020 572912 10/22/99 745 VMI INC 6309820 SANYO LCD PROJECTOR 835.81 10966.81 1020 572912 10/22/99 745 %/MI INC 6309820 EXTRON VGA SWITCHER 37.95 497.95 1020 972912 10/22/99 745 %~4I INC 6309820 SUPPLIES 0.00 243.56 TOTAL CHECK 976.06 13275.62 1020 572913 10/22/99 M WARD, NELL 5500000 REFUND/COLUMBIA RIVER 0.00 325.00 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108501 FIXTURE 32.83 430.79 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LiTE SUPPLY CO 1108511 FIXTURE 32.83 430.76 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108507 FIXTURE 32.83 430.76 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108505 FIXTURE 32.83 430 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108504 FIXTURE 32.83 430. 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108503 FIXTURE 32.83 430.7~' 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LiTE SUPPLY CO 5708510 FIXTURE 37.62 493.66 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108502 FIXTURE 32.83 430.76 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108530 SUPPLIES 0.00 128.60 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108530 FIXTURE 396.49 5202.41 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108503 FIXTURE 0.73 9.58 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108511 FIXTURE 0.73 9.58 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108507 FIXTURE 0.73 9.58 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY'CO 1108504 FIXTURE 0.73 9.58 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108530 FIXTURE 8.82 115.72 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108502 FIX~ 0.73 9.58 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108505 FIXTURE 0.73 9.58 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 1108501 FIXTURE 0.73 9.59 1020 572914 10/22/99 779 WEST-LITE SUPPLY CO 5708510 FIXTURE 0.84 10.98 TOTAL CHECK 678.69 90~3.79 1020 572915 10/22/99 782 TRAVICE WHITTEN 5606660 PROF SVC 9/9-10/19/99 0.00 1554.83 1020 572915 10/22/99 782 TRAVICE W~ITTEN 5609105 PROF SVC 9/7-10/19/99 0.00 484.86 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2039.49 1020 572916 10/22/99 M WILSON, RACHEL 110 REFUND DEPOSIT R8882 0.00 500.00 1020 572917 10/22/99 951 WOOLWORTH NURSERY 5606680 SUPPLIES 0.00 202.85 1020 572917 10/22/99 951 WOOLWORTH NURSERY 1108314 SUPPLIES 0.00 21.64 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 224.49 1020 572918 10/22/99 1131 WORDELL, CIDDY 1107301 REIMBURSEMENT 0.00 340 1020 572919 10/22/99 M WU, 1U3N-J~ & CHIN-YON 110 REF%]ND DEPOSIT R 1526 0.00 200.00 1020 572920 10/22/99 794 XEROX CORPORATION 1104310 BASE CHARGE 9/99 95.81 1257.18 1020 572920 10/22/99 794 XEROX CORPORATION 1104310 SUPPLIES 79.78 1046.78 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 13:42:58 - FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING 10/~2/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 18 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between "572643" and "572923" FUND - 110 - GENEraL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEFT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT TOTAL CHECK 175.59 2303.96 1020 572921 10/22/99 802 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPAN 6308540 SUPPLIES 0.00 83.41 1020 572922 10/22/99 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209524 PROFESSIONAL SVC 9/99 0.00 564.90 1020 572922 10/22/99 805 ZU~qWALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209530 PROFESSIONAL SVC 9/99 0.00 153.00 1020 572922 10/22/99 805 ZU~4WALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709413 PROFESSIONAL SVC 9/99 0.00 603.00 1020 572922 10/22/99 805 ZU~qWALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709412 PROFESSIONAL SVC 9/99 0.00 3103.50 1020 572922 10/22/99 805 ZUM~ALT ENGINEERING GROU 4209529 PROFESSIONAL SVC 9/99 0.00 102.00 1020 572922 10/22/99 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709437 PROFESSIONAL SVC 9/99 0.00 331.50 1020 572922 10/22/99 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709440 PROFESSIONAL SVC 9/99 0.00 333.00 1020 572922 10/22/99 805 ZUIqWALT ENGINEERING GEOU 2709438 PROFESSIONAL SVC 9/99 0.00 650.00 1020 572922 10/22/99 805 ZUMWALT ENGINEERING GROU 2709436 PROFESSIONAL SVC 9/99 0.00 153.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 5993.90 1020 572923 10/22/99 1558 JOSE ZUNXGA JR. 1106265 SECURITY 0.00 105.00 1020 572923 10/22/99 1558 JOSE ZUNIGA JR. 1106265 SECURITY 0.00 90.00 10'~-' 572923 10/22/99 1558 JOSE ZUNIGA JR. 1106265 SECURITY 0.00 105.00 'It CHECK 0.00 300.00 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 15263.11 1163154.41 TOTAL FUND 15263.11 1163154.41 TOTAL REPORT 15263.11 1163154.41 10/22/99 CITY OF CUPERTINO PAGE 1 ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 4/00 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUND SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.t_c="20" and transact.trans_date between "10/18/1999" and "10/22/1999" FUND - 110 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT .............. VENDOR ............. FUND/DEPT ..... DESCRIPTION ...... SALES TAX AMOUNT 1020 570624 V 07/16/99 M MOUNTFORD, SARAH 110 R#9561 REFUND 0.00 -500.00 1020 572306 V 10/01/99 492 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SVCS 1108101 SUPPLIES 0.00 -16.30 1020 572347 V 10/08/99 20 ADVANTAGE GRAFIX 1107301 COLOR COPIES 0.00 -48.06 1020 572347 V 10/08/99 20 ADVANTAGE GRAFIX 1107301 COLOR COPIES 0.00 -48.06 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 -96.12 1020 572511 V 10/08/99 M PRUNI, ANTHONY 1108602 REIMBURSEMENT 0.00 -290.00 1020 572534 V 10/08/99 637 SARATOGA BUILDERS 4209110 PARTS & LABOR 0.00 -1450.00 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 -2352.42 TOTAL FUND 0.00 -2352.42 TOTAL REPORT 0.00 -2352.42 RUN DATE 10/22/99 TIME 16.'20:24 o FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING RESOLUTION NUMBER 99-312 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS PAYABLE IN THE AMOUNTS AND FROM THE FUNDS AS HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED FOR SALARIES AND WAGES PAID ON OCTOBER 15, 1999 WHEREAS, the Director of Administrative Services, or their designated representative has certified to the accuracy of thc following claims and demands and to the availability of funds for payment hereof; and WHEREAS, the said claims and demands have been audited as required by law; NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the. City Council hereby allows the following claims and demands in the amounts and from the funds set forth: GROSS PAYROLL $355,969.58 Less Employee Deductions $(113,457.33) NET PAYROLL $242,512.25 Payroll check numbers issued 43912 through 44147 Dir~tor of Administrative Services PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of ,1999, by the following vote: Vote Members oftha City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: -- City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino City Hall ._. 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 CITY OF Telephone: (408) 777-3220 CUPEI INO (408)777_3366 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUMMARY Agenda Item No. Meeting Date: November 1, 1999 SUBJECT Monthly Treasurer's and Budget Report -September 1999 BACKGROUND Attached is the Treasurer's and Budget report for the period ended September 30, 1999. The report includes all funds in control of the City. Investments The market value of our current portfolio totaled $40.6 million at month end with a maturity value of $40.4 million. The City intends to hold investments until maturity to redeem full value of the securities currently with a maturity value below market value. The increase in our current investment portfolio is a result of an additional $1.4 million sales tax remittance received from the State of California. The investments of the City of Cupertino are in full compliance with our City investment policy and/or State law. Investments are tiered to adequately provide the City with sufficient cash flows to pay its obligations over the next six months. Revenue/Expenditure Trends General fund revenues are below budget projections at the end of September due to the timing of major tax payments received from the State and County. Operating expenditures for the General Fund remain below budget by 13.51%. Prin,ed on Flecy~ Peper Z~.....~ / RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council review and accept the September Treasurer's and Budget report. Submitted by: Approved for submission: Loi~t K. Thornton Donald D. Brown Deputy Treasurer City Manager c:\winword~treas~rcas.rpt City of Cupertino Budget Report Actual Actual % of Budget 9/30/99 1998/99 Budget 1999/00 Budget YTD 09-30-98 YTD 09-30-99 Over/Under Anaivsis of Trends GENER3L FUND Taxes: Sales Tax 8,606,000 9,497,000 2,133,335 3,404,955 43.41% Property Tax 3,708,000 3,862,000 89,016 179,117 -81.45% Payments tee Nov-Jan & Apr-June Utility Tax 1,964,000 2,308,000 461,094 255,327 -55.75% Franchise & License ... 2,027,000 2,238,000 172,107 138,019 -75.33% Other 1,628,000 2,015,000 189,216 336,023 -33.30% Construction tax lower than expected Uae of Money & Property 2,158,000 1,930,000 458,045 183,374 -61.99% Intergovernmental 2,041,331 2,331,000 533,334 828,141 42.11% Increased grant and motor vehicle revenues Charges for Services 1,428,000 1,465,000 625,353 414,364 13.14% Fines & Forfeitures 180,000 361,000 44,628 68,107 -24.54% Other Revenue 61,000 61,000 8,078 54~630 258.23% Total Revenue 23.801.331 26.068.000 4.714.206 5.862.056 -10.05% Operating Expenditures: A~trafive 1,168,017 1,241,287 202,244 231,744 -25.32% Law Enforcement 5,008,479 5,091,252 1,I08,309 1,158,961 -8.94% Community Service 596,465 551,696 117.288 92,759 =32.75% Administrative Service 2,110,092 2,442,644 609,543 658,664 7.86% Annual Insurance paid 7/99 Recreation Service 1,305,016 1,516,572 342,621 349,163 -7.91% Community Development 1,681,868 1,952,521 343,537 357,416 =26.78% Public Works 7.912.243 7.573.494 1.514.624 1.555.529 -17~84% Total Expenditures 19.782.180 20.369.466 4.238.166 .4.404.235 -13.51% Operating Transfers In 475,000 725,000 118.749 181,251 0.00% Operating Transfers Out -9.498.000 -8.266.000 -2.374.502 -2.066.502 0.00% Net Income/Loss -5.003.849 -1.842.466 4.779.713 -427.430 -7.20% Page I Investments By Type Managed Portfolio Corporate Bonds LAIF 33% US Treasury Note 49% Rate of Return Comparison 6.00% 5.80~ · __ 5.00% '.'-' COMPLIANCE WITH INVESTMENT POLICY City of Cupertino September 30, 1999 Category Standard Comment Treasury Issues No limit Complies US Agencies (eg FHLMC) No limit Complies Medium Term Corporate Bonds/Notes 30% with A rating Complies LAW $20 million Complies Money Market Funds 20% Complies Maximum Maturities 25% up to 15 years Complies (FHLMC at 9.5 yrs) " Remainder up to 5 years Complies Per Issuer Max 10% (except govts) Complies Bankers Acceptances 270 days & 40% · Complies Commercial Paper 15% Complies Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 30% Complies Repurchase Agreements 365 days Complies Reverse Repurchase agreements Prohibited Complies City of Cupertino September 1999 ACTIVfl Y DAT/~ ADJUSTF, D MA'I LIRITY MARKE'I [ UNREALIZED ~URCHASE MATURrrY DESCRIPTION REF YIELD COST VALUE VALUE [ PROFIT/LOSS SECUKI'I'IES SOLD ~one SECuRI'~ lES MA'lURED 10/08/97 09/30/99 r'l~asury Note 6a 5.64% 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 0 SECUIOTIES PURCHASED CURRENT Iq3RTFOLIO CASH 09/30/99 Cupertino National 563,431 563,431 563,431 0 563,431 563~431 563,431 0 CORPORATE BONDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LAIF 09/30/99 State Pool 6f 5.08% 13,3SS,242 13,3S$,242 13,.3S~,242 0 MONEY MARKET FUNDS 09/30/99 Cupertino Natl Bank 6j 4.68% 226,876 226,876 226,876 0 09/30/99 Schwab 6j 4.18% 64,208 64,208 64,208 0 291,084 291,0~4 291,084 0 MORTGAGE OBLIGATIONS 07/09/93 04/15/07 FHLMC(P) 6k 6.11% 1,021,909 ~,000,000 ~,009,520 (12,3S9) 09/30/93 09/15/07 FHLMC(P) 6k 7.42% 2,511,621 2,400,000 2,456,520 (55,101) 09/30/93 05/15/08 FHLMC(P) 6k 6.62% 2,954,880 2,860,000 2,802,056 (152,824) 6,4SS,411 6,260,000 6,26S,0~ (220,31S) US GOVERNMENT SECURI~ES 12/12/96 06/30/00 Treasury Note 6a 6.00% 999,141 1,000,000 1,003,750 4,609 12/12/96 06/30/00 Treasury Note 6a 6.00% 999,141 1,000,000 1,003,750 4,609 01/23/97 11/15/99 Treasury Note 6a 6.07% 2,499,440 2,500,000 2,503,125 3,685 08/04/9/ 11/30/00 Treasury Note 6a 6.01% 2,489,833 2,500,000 2,503,900 14,067 08/06/97 05/31/01 Treasury Note 6a 6.05% 2,516,553 2,500,000 2,532,825 16,272 08/29/97 07/31/00 Treasury Note 6a 6.03% 1,000,715 1,000,000 1,005,940 5,225 10/08/97 03/31/00 Treasury Note 6a 5.69% 2,010,900 2,000,000 2,017,500 6,600 10/08/97 09/30/00 Treasury Note 6a 5.71% 1,003,784 1,000,000 1,006,250 2,466 10/08/97 03/31/01 Treasury Note 6a 5.75% 2,016,720 2,000,000 2,020,620 3,900 10/08/97 09/30/01 Treasury Note 6a 5.79% 2,020,753 2,000,000 2,026,260 5,507 06/25/99 11/30/02 Treasury Note 6a 5.90% 2,498,247 2,500,000 2,498,450 203 20,0~q,228 20,000,000 20,122,~370 67,142 'l'otal Managed Portfolio 40,753,396 40,469,757 40,600,224 (153,172} Average Yid~ S.T'/% Average Length to Maturity (in years) 1.96 City of September 1999 AC'I IVrl'¥ DATI~ . ADJUSTED MATURITY MARK.ET UNREALIZi:iD ~URCHASE MATUKfl Y DESCRIPTION REF YIELD COST VAL-U I:; VALUE PROFIT/LOSS TRUST & AGENCY PORTFOLIO CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSI' ': 07/26/99 07/26/00 Cupertino Natl(Kester Trust) 6b 4.15% 3S,674 3S,674 3S,674 0 Total =l'rust & Agency Portfo io ' 35,674 35,674 35,674 City of Cupertino September 1999 ACTIVI'I'¥ DATI= ADJUSTI~D MATURITY MARKET UNREALIZED ~UKCHASE MATURITY' DESCRIPTION REF YIELD COST VALUE VALUE PROFIT/LOSS 3OND RESERVE PORTFOLIO Traffic Impact ~ Franklin Fiduciary Trust 5.68% 19,100 19,100 19,100 0 Memorial/Wilson Escrow B (# 400948) Cash 978 978 978 0 12/16/92 11/15/99 U.S. Treasury- S~pped 6.59% 228,486 230,000 228,583 97 12/16/92 05/15/00 U.S. Treasury- Stripped 6.75% 6,523,193 6,744,000 6,531,969 8,775 6,752,6S8 6,974,978 6,761,.q30 8,872 Escrow ReseFves 04/06/93 01/01/03 RL'pro - Escrow A (400972) 6.25% 2,833,464 2,833,464 2,833,464 0 12/16/92 12/16/99 Repro - Escrow A (400957) 6.10°4 835,430 835,430 835,430 0 12/16/92 12/16/99 Repro - Escrow B (400963) 6.10% 1,327,919 1,327,919 1,327,919 0 4,996,813 4,996,813 4,996,813 0 Blackberry/Fremont Older 1993 Escrow A (~/400966) Cash 605 605 605 0 04/06/93 02/15/00 U.S. Treasury 6.07% 1,826,602 1,810,000 1,833,191 6,589 04/06/93 08/15/00 U.S. Treasury 6.23% 935254 915,000 941,592 6,338 04/06/93 02/15/01 U.S. Treasury Sl~ipped Iht 6.05% 27,011,961 28,910,000 26,799,859 (212,102) 29,774,422 31,63S,60S 29,.q7S,247 (199,176') Total Bond Reserve Portfolio 41,S42,992 43,626,496 41,3S2,689 (190,302) City of Cupertino Summary of Budget Transfers 9/30/99 Budget Revenue Expenditure Description Acct# Adjustment Budget Budget 1999/00 ADOPTED BUDGET 47,967,000 49,753,447 PROJECT CARRYOVERS various 1998/99 CARRYOVER: Encumbrances various 3,461,392 3,461,392 Deparlment carryovers 610-98xx-9400 107,572 107,572 Grant carryovers 110-2401-7014 127,689 127,689 Grant carryovers 110-2402-7014 28,366 28,366 Project carryovers various 7,989,841 7,989,841 Budget carryovers various 1,166,310 1,166,310 RgV'KNUE ADJUSTMI~NTS: Grant funded projects various 1,742,354 Grant carryovers 1100000=4432 105,811 Block Grant carryover 110-0000-4431 28,366 TCI equipment purchase 110-0000-4054 155,000 EXPENDITURE ADJUSTMENTS: Youth Leadership 220-4011-6111 5,000 5,000 Grant funded projects various 1,742,354 1,742,354 City channel equipment 110- 3500-9400 155,000 155,000 1999100 ADJUSTED BUDGET 49,998,531 64,536,971 I Revenue Comparison 4,000,000 3,5O0,000 - 1 Sales Tax 3,O00,O00 - 2 Property Tax 3 Utilit~ Tax 4 Franchise & License 2,5O0,000 - $ Other 6 Monm7 ~nd Prol~ny 7 Intergovernmental 2,000.000 - 8 Charges For Services 9 Fines & Forfeitures 10 Other Revenue 1,500.000 - 1,5O0,000 - 0 . n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Expenditure Comparison 1,800,000 800,000 - BYTD 9/a0/~ [ 400,000 - I 2 3 '4 5 6 7 i Capital Projects 06/30/99 Fund *new ;)roi D~ion C/O enc.-997/9 CIO budget-998 Adopted & BCR Total BudQet Expenditure Encumbrance Current Bal. 210 9612 Minor Storm Drain Improv 75,000.00 75,000.00 75,000.00 215 9620 Storm Drain Projects 50,700.00 0.00 1,500,000.00 1,550,700.00 465,956.96 1,084,743.00 270 9306 Stev Crk/Tantau to E.city Imt. 57,585.00 57,585.00 57,585.00 270 9309 DeAnza Rainbow-Prospect 75,000.00 75,000.00 59,163.50 15,836.50 270 9401 Barrier Removal 45,439.00 45,439.00 3,600.00 41,839.00 ~ 940~ Miner P. ead Iml~ravement~ ~ _=3~..?_n ~ ~ 270 9405 DeAnza/Stev Creek to ANes 301,690.00 301,690.00 301,690.00 270 9422 Stevens Creek Impmvaments 57,175.00 57,175.00 36,255.00 14,297.00 6,623.00 270 9502 Saratoga/Sunnyv'l TIS interconne 30,000.00 30,000.00 3,824.17 13,588.00 12,587.83 270 9517 Miller at Phil 34,076.00 34,076.00 34,076.00 270 *9307 Stev Crk specific plan phase II -300,000.00 -300,000.00 -203,309.35 -26,518.76 -70,171.89 270 '9311 Foothill Blvd landscaping 200,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 0.00 0.00 270 '9312 Miller Ave median landscaping 100,000.00 100,000.00 100,000.00 0.00 270 '9410 Bikeway master plan 32,000.00 32,000.00 32,000.00 270 '9411 W.Stev Creek bike lane 30,174.00 30,174.00 4,732.02 1,617.98 23,824.00 270 '9412 S.Stelling bike lane 100,000.00 100,000.00 13,500.00 86,500.50 270 '9413 De Anza bike lane 50,000.00 60,000.00 60,000.00 280 '9213 McClellan Ranch bide impmv. 120,000.00 120,000.00 19,976.98 100,023.02 420 9101 Jollyman Park 32,055.00 0.00 32,055.00 32,055.00 0.00 420 9108 Park Renovations 123,053.76 26,446.24 150,000.00 299,500.00 191,161.18 108,338.82 420 '9110 Stocklmeir Property Acquisition 6,042,700.00 6,042,700.00 6,017,684.19 4,990.00 .20,025.81 420 9206 ADA 91 0.00 130,453.96 160,000.00 290,453.96 18,489.96 271,964.00 420 9429 DeAnza Bddge Widening 20,264.46 20,264.46 20,264.46 4~ ~ Light Pelet 366~69~0{} 366,~60~00 2~F~'M;)~ 420 9523 85 O Sty. Creek RT lane 14,900.22 0.00 14,900.22 8,973.42 5,926.80 420 9524 DeAnza/Stev Creek arterial mgmt 151,964.00 573,036.00 725,000.00 146,572.25 266,257.14 312,170.61 420 9525 Homestead Artarial Mgmt ProJ. 102,000.00 102,000.00 21,332.62 77,928.81 2,738.57 420 9526 Stevens Crk O Saich Signal 150,000.00 150,000.00 29,745.00 117,719.83 2,535.11 420 9801 Stevens Canyon Landfill 0.00 1,797,470.00 1,797,470.00 1,797,465.25 4.75 420 *9430 Stev Canyon Rd widening 50,000.00 50,000.00 21,808.00 17,732.00 10,460.00 420 *9527 Homestead/Tantau TIS upgrade 71,000.00 71,000.00 71,000.00 420 *9528 280/Wolfe traffic safety impmv. 500,000.00 500,000.00 500,000.00 421 9310 Stev. Craek Specflc Plan 1,809.87 232,144.21 200,000.00 433,954.08 369,722.45 63,477.16 754.47 422 9208 Creek. side Park 5,200.00 144,398.40 149,598.40 10,94 1.85 138,656.55 423 '9214 - Library expansion 100,000.00 100,000.00 47,477.58 7,400.00 45,122.42 424 9210 Senior Center Expansion 124,886.39 4,275,113.61 4,400,000.00 208,798.86 335,218.73 3,855,982.41 425 9313 Four Season Comer 100,000.00 100,000.00 3,309.35 26,518.76 70,171.89 560 9105 Blackbeny Farm 7,584.17 46,592.98 300,000.00 354,177.15 176,315.20 12,216.46 165,645.49 560 9211 Slue Pheasant ADA 64,945.25 64,945.25 49,215.65 15,729.60 l ~ B~F picnic ama bddget 40~0~ 40~0~ ~ ~ 4~00~0 570 9209 SPO~ cantar ADA 40,000.00 40,000.~ 27,983.90 8,648.15 3,467.95 570 '9212 Sports Cfr.fitness expansion 440,000.00 440,000.00 3,430.57 0.00 436,569.43 Note: PO#2999¢bal. 9518.76 __ P0#5036~ bal. 17000 ~ i RESOLUTION NO. 99-313 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPBRTINO AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND DEVELOPER CHANDRAVADAN N. PATEL AND AARTI C. PATEL, 10220 DUBON AVENUE, APN 326-17-022 WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a proposed improvement agreement between the City of Cupertino and developers, Chandravadan N. Patel and Aarti C. Patel, for the installation of certain municipal improvements at 10220 Dubon Avenue and said agreement having been approved by the City Attorney, and Developers having paid the fees as outlined in the attached Exhibit A; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized to sign the aforementioned agreement on behalf of the City of Cupertino. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meoting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1" day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members o._fthe City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino Resolution No.99-313 Page 2 EXHIRIT "A" SCHEDULE OF BOND, FEES, AND DEPOSITS DEVELOPMENT: Single Family Homes Chandravadan N. Patel and Aarti C. Patel LOCATION: 10220 Dubon Avenue A. Faithful Performance Bond: Off-site: $ 5,000.00 On-site: $1,500.00 FIVE THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS B. Labor and Material Bond: $ 5,000.00 FIVE THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS C. Checking and Inspection Fees: $1,515.00 ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED FIFTEEN AND 00/100 DOLLARS D. Indirect City Expenses: N/A E. Development Maintenance Deposit: $1,000.00 ONE THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS F. Storm Drainage Fee: Basin #3 $ 275.00 TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY-FIVE AND 00/100 DOLLARS G. One Year poWer Cost: N/A H. Street Trees: By Developer I. Map Checking Fee: N/A J. Park Fee: N/A K. Water Main Reimbursement: N/A L. Maps and/or Improvement Plans: As specified in Item #23 of agreement RESOLUTION NO. 99-314 A RESOLUTION OF THE crrY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND DEVELOPER KENNETH A. CLARK, 10151 AMELIA COURT, APN 326-17-022 WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a proposed improvement agreement between the City of Cupertino and developer, Kenneth A. Clark, for the installation of certain municipal improvements at 10151 Amelia Court and said agreement having been approved by the City Attorney, and Developer having paid the fees as outlined in the attached Exhibit A; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and the City Clerk are 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 1*t day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members o._f the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino Resolution No. 99-314 Page 2 EXHIBIT "A" SCHEDULE OF BOND, FEES, AND DEPOSITS DEVELOPMENT: Single Family Home Kenneth A. Clark LOCATION: 1 O151 Amelia Court A. Faithful Performance Bond: $13,000.00 THIRTEEN THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS B. Labor and Material Bond: $13,000.00 THIRTEEN THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS C. Checking and Inspection Fees: $ 1,975.00 ONE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SEVENTY-FIVE AND 00/100 DOLLARS D. Indirect City Expenses: N/A E. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 500.00 FIVE HUNDRED AND 00/100 DOLLARS F. Storm Drainage Fee: Basin #3 $ 439.00 FOUR HUNDRED THIRTY-NINE AND 00/100 DOLLARS G. One Year Power Cost: N/A H. Street Trees: By Developer I. Map Checking Fee: N/A J. Park Fee: N/A K. Water Main Reimbursement: N/A L. Maps and/or Improvement Plans: As specified in Item #23 of agreement RESOLUTION NO. 99-317 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AUTHORIZING BXECUTION OF IMPROVEMENT AGKEBMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND DEVELOPER HOSSAIN E. KHAZIRI AND CHRISTINE V. KI-IAZ~, 10002 NORTH DE ANZA BOULEVARD, APN 316-26-017 WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council a proposed improvement agreement between the City of Cupertino and developers, Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khazifi, for the installation of certain municipal improvements at 10002 North De Anza Boulevard and said agreement having been approved by the City Attorney, and Developers having paid the fees as outlined in the attached Exhibit A; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and the City Clerk are 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 1 '~ day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino Resolution No. 99-317 Page 2 EXHIBIT "A" SCHEDULE OF BOND, FEES, AND DEPOSITS DEVELOPMENT: Gas Station Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri LOCATION: 10002 North De Anza Boulevard A. Faithful Performance Bond: Off-site: $100,000.00 On-site: $ 22,000.00 ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS B. Labor and Material Bond: $100,000.00 ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS C. Checking and Inspection Fees: $ 7,320.00 SEVEN THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED TWENTY AND 00/100 DOLLARS D. Indirect City Expenses: N/A E. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 3,000.00 THREE THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS F. Storm Drainage Fee: Basin #3 $ 1,178.00 ONE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY-EIGHT AND 00/100 DOLLARS G. One Year Power Cost: $ 150.00 ONE HUNDRED FIFTY AND 00/100 DOLLARS H. Street Trees: By Developer I. Map Checking Fee: N/A $. Park Fee: N/A K. Water Main Reimbursement: N/A L. Maps and/or Improvement Plans: As specified in Item #23 of agreement RESOLUTION NO. 99-315 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS FROM CHANDRAVADAN N. PATEL AND AARTI C. PATEL, 10220 DUBON AVENUE, APN 326-17-022 WHEREAS, Chandravadan N. Patel and Am'ti C. Patel Ires executed a "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization", which is in good and sufficieht form, quitclaiming all his rights in and authorizing the City of Cupe~qJno, County of Santa Clara, State of California, to extract water from the underground basin, underlying that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, as shown and delineated on the attached Exhibits "A" and "B". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino accept said "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization" so tendered; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization" and this re~olution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting, of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1~ day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members o._fth~e City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS 10220 Dubon Avenue APN 342-14-051 Chandrav. adan N. Patel & Aarti C. Patel, hereinafter referred to as the "GRANTOR', this day of Jo '] ! oc 1999M, hereby grant, bargain, assign, convey, remise, release and forever quitclaim unto the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation, hereinaf~r referred to as the "GRANTEE", its successors and assigns, all the right, title, interest, estate, claim and demand, both at law and in equity, and as well in possession as in expectancy of the GRANTOR as owner of that certain real property situate in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, and specifically described as follows: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" & "B" to pump, take or otherwise extract water from the underground basin or any underground strata in the Santa Clara Valley for beneficial use upon the lands overlying said underground basin, and GRANTOR hereby irrevocably authorized GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, on behalf of the GRANTOR and its successors in ownership or overlying lands in the said lots to take from said underground basin within the said lots any and all water which the owner or owners of said overlying lands may be entitled to take for beneficial use on said lands and to supply such water to such owner or owners or others as a public utility; provided, however, that nothing contained in this instrument shall be deemed to authorize GRANTEE to enter upon any of the lots delineated upon the above described map or to authorize GRANTEE to make any withdrawal of water which will result in damage to any building or structure erected upon said lots. This assignment, conveyance and authorization is made for the benefit of lots within the above described plat .and description and shall bind the owner of said lots within said plat and description. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, GRANTOR has executed this instrument the day and year first above written. OWNERS: dravadan N. Patel Aarii C. Patel (Acknowledgment and Notarial Seal Attached) ,.- REAL PROPERTY in the City of uupemno,'c, ounty of 8ants-Cl~'~-$t~t~ of California, described as follows:. / · All of Lot 14 in Block 3, as shown on that certain Map entitled Tract No. 1034 Carolyn Gardens unit No. ':'~ , 2, which Map was filed for record In the office of the Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, State of C~li[omls on ~gust 12, 1952, In Book 40 of MaI~ I:~ge{s) 8, ':'t APN: 342-14-051 !, '~, EXHIBIT A CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of Santa Clare On October 14, 1999, before, me, Roberta Ann Wolfe, Notary Public, personally appeared Chandravadan N. Patel and Aarti C Patel, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities and that by their signatures on the instrument the ~~:~_,~ ~ pemons, or the entities upon behalf of which the ~~~."~'~'~es ~ persons acted, executed the instrument. WIT/~,. S my hand and official sea~. Roberta Ann Wolfe, Notary Public OPTIONAL .. Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT E]INDIVIDUAL EICORPORATE OFFICER Quitclaim Deed and Authorization TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT E]PARTNERS DLIMITED E:]GENERAL ATTORNEY-IN-FACT ~TRUSTEE(S) r';GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR Four E]OTHER NUMBER OF PAGES October 14, 1999 SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: DATE OF DOCUMENT NAME OF PERSON OR ENTITY: Selves None SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE RESOLUTION NO. 99-316 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR I.rNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS FROM KENNETH A.'CLARK, 10151 AMELIA COURT, APN 326-17-022 WHEREAS, Kenneth A. Clark has executed a "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization", which is in good and sufficient form, 'quit¢l~iming all his rights in and authorizing the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, to exlract water from the underground basin, underlying that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, as shown and delineated on the attached Exhibits "A" and "B'. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Cupertino accept said "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization" so tendered; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record Said "Quitclaim Deed and Authorization" and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1'~ day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members o__f the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: , ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino QUITCLAIM DEED AND AUTHORIZATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS APN 326-17-022 10151 Amelia Court Kenneth A. Clark, hereinafter referred to as the "GRANTOR', this 7~.~clay ofo,-~o~,~1999 , hereby grant, bargain, assign, convey, remise, release and forever quitclaim unto the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter refgrred to as the "GRANTEE", its successors and assigns, all the right, rifle, interest, estate, claim and demand, both at law and in equity, and as well in possession as in expectancy of the GRANTOR as owner of that certain real property situate in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, and specifically described as follows: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT '%" & "B" to pump, take or otherwise extract water from the underground basin or any underground strata in the Santa Clara Valley for beneficial use upon the lands overlying said underground basin, and GRANTOR hereby irrevocably authorized GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, on behalf of the GRANTOR and its successors in ownership or overlying lands in the said lots to take from said underground basin within the said lots any and all water which the owner or owners of said overlying lands may be entitled to take for beneficial use on. said lands and to supply such water to such owner or owners or others as a public utility; provided, however, that nothing contained in this instrument shall be deemed to authorize GRANTEE to enter upon any of the lots delineated upon the above described map or to authorize GRAN~E to make any withdrawal of water which will result in damage to any building or structure erected upon said lots. This assignment, conveyance and authorization is made' for the benefit of lots within the above, described plat and description and shall bind the owner of said lots within said plat and description. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, GRANTOR has executed this instrument the day and year first above written. Kenneth A. Clark (Acknowledgment and Notarial Seal Attached) EXHIBIT A LEGAL DF~CRIPTION APN 326-17-022 Beginning at a point on the Southwesterly line of that cemin 10.06 acre tract of land described in the Deed from Amasa Eaton Company, a corporation, to John A. Chuk, dated August 3, 1940 and recorded August 17, 1940 in Book 993 of Official Records, page 591, Santa Clara County Records, distant thereon South 41 Degrees 27 Minutes East a distance of 103.91 feet from the Southwest comer thereof; thence from said Point of Beginning and leaving the Southwesterly line of said 10.06 acre tract, South 83 Degrees 17 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of 171.63 feet to a point where the Westerly line of that certain 0,202 acre tract described in the Deed from L. W. Northon, et ux, to W. L. Stapp, et al, dated September 12, 1945 and recorded September 13, 1945 in Book 1287 of Official Records, page 387, Santa Clara County Records, if prolongated, Southerly would intersect the same; thence along the Southerly prolongation of said 0.202 acre tract, South 01 Degree 08 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of 176.61 feet to the Southwesterly line of said 10.06 acre tract; thence along the Southwesterly line of said 10.06 acre tract, North 41 Degrees 27 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of 262.59 feet to the Point of Beginning of this description. Excepting therefrom an Ingress and Egress Easement as recorded on July 24, 1945 in Book 1266, page 516, Official Records of Santa Clara County, California. Also excepting therefrom a roadway dedication for Crescent Road. , . No. 4953 : No. 4953 WESTFALL ENGINEERS INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS 40' I 1458:5 Big BosinWoy, Saratoga, Co. 95 070 , _, .~:~ ~ California Acknowledgment State of California County of Santa Clara On ~e_.-~o ,~,~ ~' 7, 1999, before me, pe~onallyapp~d ~--~-~ ~. ~/~ pe~on~ly ~o~ to me-OR- a proved to.me on ~e b~h of safisf~o~ evidence to be the pe~on(s) whose nme(s) a~ subscribed to ~e within ~s~ment ~d ac~owledged to me that hdshd~ey executed the s~e in hi~er/~eir au~ori~d cap~i~(ies), and ~at by hi~er/~eir signam~(s) on the ~s~ment ~e pe~on(s) or ~e enfiW upon behalf of which ~e pe~on(s) acted, executed ~e ins~ment. WI~ESS my h~d and official seal. '"'"'"'""'" D~cription of A~ch~ Document -DocumentDate: ~c~o~p~ ~ /PP~ Number of Pa~es: Capaci~(ies) Claimed by Signe~s) Si~nees N~e: ~~ ~ ~ C/~ ~ Individual ~ Co~om~ Officer Title(s): e P~er-- ~ Limited a Gene~l ~ Attorney-in-Fact ~ Trustee ~ Gua~ian or Conse~ator ~ O~er: Signer is Representing: RESOLUTION NO. 99-318 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES FROM KENNETH A. CLARK, 10151 AMELIA COURT, APN 326-17-022 WHEREAS, Kenneth A. Clark has executed a Grant of Easement for Roadway Purposes which is in good and sufficient form, granting to the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, easement over certain real property for roadway purposes, situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B", attached hereto and made a part hereof, which is as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, located at 10151 Amelia Court. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Cupertino accept said grant so tendered; and _. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said grant and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1't day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES APN 326-17-022 10151 Amelia Court Kenneth A. Clark, grant(s) to the CITY OF CUPERTINO for public roadway purposes, together with the right to construct, repair, operate, and maintain any and all public utilities and improvements which shall be or become necessary for preservation of the public safety, welfare or convenience, the hereinafter described property which is situated in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, and as described as follows: (See Exhibit "A" & "B") IN WITNESS WHE~OF, executed this.~,~Tday of ~'~ 199 ~ Owners: Kenneth A. Clark (Notary acknowledgment to be attached) LEGAL DESCRIPTION CRESCENT ROAD DEDICATION Commencing at a point on the Southwesterly line of that certain 10.06 acre tract of land described in the Deed from Amasa Eaton Company, a corporation, to John A. Chuk, dated August 3, 1940 and recorded August 17, 1940 in Book 993 of Official Records, page 591, Santa Clara County Records, distant thereon South 41 Degrees 27 Minutes East a distance of 103.91 feet from the Southwest comer thereof; thence running South 83 Degrees 17 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of 171.33 feet, and South 01 Degrees 08 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of 176.61 feet to the True Point of Beginning of this description; thence North 41 Degrees 27 Minutes 00 Seconds West a distance of 102.61 feet to the beginning of a 230.00 foot non-tangent curve, concave to the. Southwest as said curve runs parallel to a curve with 220.00 foot radius, as shown on the Map of Russellhurst Monta Vista, recorded in Book "P" of Maps, at page 22, a radial to said beginning of the curve bears North 31 Degrees 35 Minutes 33 Seconds East; thence Southeasterly, along said curve, through a central angle of 16 Degrees 57 Minutes 27 Seconds an arc distance of 68.07 feet; thence tangent to said curve, South 41 Degrees 27 Minutes 00 Seconds l~-~st a distance of 23.74 feet; thence South 01 Degrees 08 Minutes 00 Seconds East a distance of 15.46 feet to the True Point of Beginning of this description. Containing 745.5 square feet, more or less. , No. 4953 , California Acknowledgment State of California County of Santa Clara On Or"/'o,~r" .gl 1999, beforeme, personally appeared ~ personally known to me -OR- = proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ' ~(~ ,z,~' ~-~,/'-' ~'~, ~.~'= ,,,....,..,....., ~ &tV ~ofrm Bq~lm,ka I I,_~0_ f Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: ~'~,~ ~-, ~ /'~ Number of Pages: ,.3 Capaci~(ies) Claimed by Si§ne~s) ~ Individual ~ Corporate Officer Title(s): ~3 Pa~ner-- D Limited D C~enerai ~ Attorney-in-Fact ~3 Trustee ~3 Guardian or Conservator Signer is Representing: RESOLUTION NO. 99-319 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR SIDEWALK PURPOSES FROM HOSSAIN E. KHAZIRI AND CHRISTINE V. KHAZIRI, 10002 NORTH DE ANZA BOULEVARD, APN 326-17-022 WHEREAS, Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri has executed a Grant of Easement for Sidewalk Purposes which is in good and sufficient form, granting to the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, easement over certain real pwperty for sidewalk purposes, situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B", attached hereto and made a part hereof, which is as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, located at 10002 North De Anna Boulevard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Cupertino accept said grant so tendered; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said grant and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular me=ting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1' day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members of the. City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino GRANT OF SIDEWALK EASEMENT APN: 316-26-017 10002 N. De Anza Blvd. Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri, hereinafter called Grantor, hereby grant(s) to the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation, hereina~¢r called Grantee, the right to excavate for, install, replace (of the initial or any other size), maintain and use for. sidewalk purposes as Grantee shall from time to time elect within the hereina~er described property of certain premises which are situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, and described as follows: (See Exhibit A & B) ._ Grantor hereby further grants to Grantee the right and privilege to enter upon his lands contiguous to and along the line of said hereinabove described strip for the purpose of locating, constructing, repairing, maintaining, or replacing said sidewalks or appurtenances thereto, for the purpose of doing any necessary or lawful act in connection with the construction or maintenance of said' sidewalk; there is also granted the right of the use of sufficient land contiguous to said strip on either or both sides thereof for the purposes of excavation of and deposit of earth and necessary building material during the time of constructing said sidewalk and any repair thereof. The foregoing is subject to the following express conditions: The Grantee agrees to restore the ground surface and any improvements thereon to its original grade or condition insofar as it is practicable and reasonable to do so. 'IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said parties have executed this Grant o£ Easement this c;).~' Owners: · (Notary acknowledgment to be attached) LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOIl ~IDI:WALK EASEMENT '-- ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, ' COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING A STRIP OF LAND FOR PUBLIC SIDEWALK PURPOSES, SAID STRIP OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF THAT 0.487 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND SHOWN UPON THAT CERTAIN RECORD OF SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 100 OF MAPS AT PAGE 9, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 1-SIDEWALK EASEMENT COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID 0.487 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND ABOVE DESCRIBED: THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID 0,487 ACRE PARCEL SOUTH 89' 54' 00" EAST 24.36 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; BEING ALSO A POINT ON A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WlTHAND DISTANT 84.36 FEET EASTERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE CENTER LINE OF NORTH DE ANZA BOULEVARD; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE SOUTH 0'04'00" WEST 118.31 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 23.50 FEETTHROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89'58'00" A DISTANCE OF 36.90 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 52.00 FEET NORTHERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE CENTER LINE OF · STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE SOUTH 89'54'00" EAST 100.99 FEETTOA POINTIN THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID 0.487 '- ACRE TRACT OF LAND ABOVE DESCRIBED; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE SOUTH O' 12' 00" WEST 7.00 FEETTOA POINT IN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF STEVENS CREEK BLVD.; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF STEVENS CREEK BLVD., NORTH 89' 54' 00" WEST 77.76 FEETTO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE, ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 110.00 F, EET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23° 15' 22"A DISTANCE OF 44.65 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 21' 47' 30"A DISTANCE OF 11.41 FEET.TO A POINT; THENCE NORTH 45' 05' 00" EAST 4.42 FEET TO A POINT ON A NONCONCENTRIC CURVE; THENCE, NORTHWESTERLY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE RIGHT, FROMA TANGENT WHICH BEARS NORTH 23'35' 55" WEST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23' 39' 55" 12.39 FEETTO A POINTOF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH O' 04' 00" EAST 118.32 FEET TOA POINTIN SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID 0.487 ACRE PARCEL; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE, SOUTH 89' 54' 00" EAST 5.50 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. · CONTAINING 1566 SQUARE FEET, 0.036 ACRES, MORE OR LESS DESCRIPTION PREPARED UND_E_/:LSUPERVISION OF KENNETH NELSON CIVIL ENGINEER. ~*'~,~ ' · /~~.~ ' '~ z...___ ,.~,~/,~ .'~.. ~\~*~,,,~, - -*--~,/~ i~"[ -_~fJ ~J' I~ENNETH Nil S6N, RCE#22023 '~,~.~-~.~...~ EXPIRATION 09-30-2001 LINE TABLE: CURVE TABLE: LINE BEARING DISTANCE CURVE RADIUS DELTA LENGTH LI N89o54'W 8.86' Cl 290' ?20'08" 6.76' L2 N89~54'W 24.36' C2 50' 5PI0'28" 26.79' SCALE: !"=30' k-~L3 N45°OS'E 4.42' C3 I10' 23015'22'' 44.65' L4 N 0° 04'E 7.00' C4 23.5~ 89'58'0d~' 36.90' C5 30' 23039'r::~5'' 12..39' C6 30' 21047'30" .11.41' GO. O0' "-~,,~. L2 .... ~. S 89°54' O0"E 149.17' M_. LI --- ~¥ ._ ~ / ~ "%¢ ~ ,o.0o'-/ 'x ' 5 50 '~.} '*m ~ ~0 ~J~~~ R.O.S. BK. IOOM. 9 ~ ~ [~ ' C6 N 8~54 O0 W 77.76 STEVENS CREEK BLVD. '~ / S 89"54' O0"E ~: '"'~' ' DIRE~ION ~:~ ........ JUNE 24, ~~. PLAT TO A~MPANY PREPARED UNDER ~,,',~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE 1"=30' KENNETH NELSON RCE No. 22023 DR. BY LICENSE EXPIRES: 09/30/200, SFN,~P SIDEWALK ,SEMENT NCSS .~ AS~CIATES JOB 99-,4~.[ :: N°~ 1' 125 E. SUNNYO~S AVE. ~ITE 204 SHEET · ' CAMPBELL. CA q~nn~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA On October 25, 1999 before me, D. PATRICK (Name, Title of Officer) personally appeared HOSSAIN E. KHAZIRI AND CHRISTINE V. KHAZIRI personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in hislherltheir authorized capacity(les), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. W,T. ES. ............... ...... · Ht NOTARY PUBUC-CALIFORNIA_ ~ ' Santa Clara County .~ (Signature (if Notary Public) My. Comm. Ex~ires Sept. 6, 2002 t (This area for notarial seal) RESOLUTION NO. 99-320 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES FROM HOSSAIN E. KHAZIRI AND CHRISTINE V. KHAZIRI, 10002 NORTH DE ANZA BOULEVARD, APN 326-17-022 WHEREAS, Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri has executed a Grant of Easement for Roadway Purposes which is in good and sufficient form, granting to the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, easement over certain real property for roadway purposes, situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B", attached hereto and made a part hereof, which is as follows: All that cert~ real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, located at 10002 North De Anza Boulevard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Cupertino accept said grant so tendered; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said grant and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1'~ day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members o__f the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY PURPOSES APN 316-26-017 10002 N. De Anza Blvd Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri, grant(s) to the CITY OF CUPERTINO for public roadway purposes, together with the right to construct, repair, operate, and maintain any and all public utilities and improvements which shall be or become necessary for preservation of the public safety, welfare or convenience, the hereina~er described property which is situated in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, and as described as follows: (See Exhibit "A" & "B") ~ w~r~ss w~OF, executed ~s~"~y ofC~, ~99~. Owners: ttossain E. Khaziri //~ / % (JV'otary acknowledgment to be attached) 940 Saratoga Ave. Suite 215 San Jose, CA 95129 (408) 247-2898 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR STREET DEDICATION ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING A PORTION OF THAT 0.487 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND SHOWN UPON THAT CERTAIN RECORD OF SURVEY FILED IN BOOK lO0 OF MAPS AT PAGE 9, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID 0.487 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND SHOWN ON SAID RECORD OF SURVEY: THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL SOUTH 89' 54' 00" EAST 8.86 FEET: THENCE ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 68.86 FEET EASTERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE CENTER LINE OF DE ANZA BOULEVARD SOUTH 0'04'00" WEST 113.81 FEET TO A NON TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 290.00 FEET AND TO WHICH POINT A RADIAL LINE BEARS NORTH 74' 36'06" EAST; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID 0.487 ACRE PARCEL 71.88 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14' 12'02"; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH O' 04'00" EAST 42.67 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 799 SQUARE FEET, 0.018 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. DESCRIPTION PREPARED UNDER SUPERVI SION OF KENNETH NELSON, CIVIL ENGINEER. '~ ~ 'KENNETH ~N, RCE#22023 D^TE :'.'i~..'.':? EXPIRATION 09-30-2001 CIVIL ENGINEERING ° STRUCTURAL DESIGN ° SURVEYING ' LAND PLANNING LINE TABLE: CURVE TABLE: . LINE BEARING DISTANCE CURVE RADIUS DELTA LENGT. HI LI N89°54'W B.8.&' CI 2.90' 10~..0'06" [ C5 290' 15~'10''. 78.6~ ~.-. 60~0~ -..~ LI ]~ S 89e54'00''E 149.17' m R.O.S. BK. IO0 M.~ z N 8 9'54'00"W 77.76' ~ STEVENS CREEK BLVD.~ ~ ~~,~ ~. ~ S. 8 9~ 54' O0"E. . PREPARED UNDER DIRECTION OF: DATE PLAT TO. ACCOMPANY JUNE 17, 19~. LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE I"= 30' KENNETH NELSON RCE NO,22023 LICENSE EXPIRES: 09/30/2001 DR. BY SFN ' NCSS & ASSOCIATES JOB 99-146 STREET DEDICATION IZ5 E. SUNNYOAKS AVE. ~I~E .204 SHEET STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA O'n October 25, 1999 before me, D. PATRICK (Name, Title of Officer) personally appeared HOSSAIN E. KHAZIRI AND CHRISTINE V. KHAZIRI personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS ~y ha~ official seal. No~C~oRymm. 11194801 ~ l'"~i,~._.. _""'"~ PUBLIC- CALIFORNIA 'f (Signatur o ~ary ru 'c) (This area for notarial seal) RESOLUTION NO. 99-321 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR LANDSCAPE PURPOSES FROM. HOSSAIN E. KHAZIRI A_ND CHRISTINE V. KHAZIRI, 10002 NORTH DE ANZA BOULEVARD, APN 326-17-022 WHEREAS, Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri has executed a Grant of Easement for Landscape Purposes which is in good and sufficient form, granting to the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, easement over certain real property for landscape purposes, situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B", attached hereto and made a part hereof, which is as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, located at 10002 North De Anza Boulevard. .... NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Cupertino accept said grant so tendered; and IT IS FURIHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said grant and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1'~ day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members o__fthe City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino GRANT OF LANDSCAPE EASEMENT APN: 316-26-017 10002 N. De Anza Blvd. Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri, a California Limited Liability Comp.any, hereinafter called Grantor, hereby grant(s) to the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation, her~'ma~er called Cwantee, the right to excavate for, install, maintain and use for landscape purposes as Grantee shall from time to time elect within the hereinafter described property of certain premises which are situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, and described as follows: (See Exhibit A & B) -- Grantor hereby further grants to Cnantee the right and privilege to enter upon his lands contiguous to and along the line of said hereinabove described strip for the purpose of locating, constructing, repairing, maintaining, or replacing said landscape or appurtenances thereto, for the purpose of doing any necessary or lawful act in eormeetion with the construction or maintenance of said landscape; there is also granted the right of the use of sufficient land COntiguous to said strip on either or both sides thereof for the purposes of excavation of and deposit of earth and necessary building material during the time of constructing said landscape and any repair thereof. The foregoing is subject to the following express conditions: The Grantor agrees to install and restore the ground surface and any improvements thereon to its original grade or COndition as reqtfired by the City of Cupertino. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said parties have executed this Grant oi~ Easement this of (3C/-, a9c2 Owners: (Notary acknowledgment to be attached) LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR LANDSCAPE EASEMENT ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING A STRIP OF LAND FOR LANDSCAPE PURPOSES, SAID STRIP OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF THAT 0.487.. ACRE PARCEL OF LAND SHOWN UPON THAT CERTAIN RECORD OF SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 100 OF MAPS AT PAGE 9, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 2-LANDSCAPE EASEMENT · COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID 0.487 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND ABOVE DESCRIBED: THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID 0.487 ACRE PARCEL SOUTH 89' 54' 00" EAST 8.86 FEETTO THE TRUE POINTOF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTtNUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 89' 54' 00" EAST 10.00 FEETTO. A POINTON A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL TO THE CENTER LINE OF NORTH DE ANZA BLVD. AND DISTANT 78.86 FEETTHEREFROM, MEASURED AT RIGHTANGLES; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE SOUTH 0'04'00" WEST 118.32 FEET TO A TANGENT CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL OF 23'39"55" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 12.39 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45° 05' 00" WEST 4.42 FEETTO A POINT ON A NONCONCENTRIC CURVE AND TO WHICH POINT A RADIAL LINE -' BEARS SOUTH 45' 08'52" WEST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF29'22'58" FOR A DI STANCE OF 15.38 FEETTO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, 'HAVING A RADIUS OF 290.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1'20'08" FOR A DISTANCE OF 6.76 FEET TO A POINT ON A LINE PARALLEL TO SAID CENTER LINE OF NORTH DE ANZA BLVD. AND BEING DISTANT 68.76 FEET THEREFROM, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES; THENCE , ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTH0' 04' 00" EAST 113.81 FEETTOTHE TRUE, . POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 1279 SQUARE FEET, 0.029 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. DESCRIPTION PREPARED UNDER SUPERVISION OF KENNETH NELSON , CIVIL ENGINEER. . ~.' .,a.:l,~'~,...,.... DATE i~.~ ~,,~~ );~/~E_N_N_ETH NELSON,. RCE#22023 ' ~B~ll'~411~,~,r~_-' ~I~';R AT I O N 09-30'2001 LINE TABLE: CURVE TABLE: 'LINE BEARING DISTANCE-CURVE RADIUS DELTA LENGTH LI N8~54'W §.$G' Cl 290' L2 N89~54'W I0.00' C2 ;50' 5l°10'28'' 26.7' ' SCALE: I" = 30'.~/ · L3 N 45°05'E 12.00' C3 ;30' 29~2~.58'' -15.55 ~.o.~/ L4 S44°55'E 12.00' C4 23.5d29~35'0~' 12.13' L5 S45°O5'W 12.00' C5 30.00 L6 N 4.5°05. E ~-~' C6 ~.Ed 50°11' 27" 12.39' ~' ~L~L~ S 89°54'00"E 149.17' I z r ~ ~ PUBLIC ~R'~.. C~ ~O~ , EASEMEN~ ~~ : S e~ 54' Od'E ' N 8~ 54'~' W 7Z76' ST EVEN S CREEK BLVD, ,?,.~.[~ ~"\ ~' :¥~\1 S 89°54' O0"E "~'![ _h%..__2~..3 ~-'!~J PLAT TO ACCOMPANY PREPARED UNDER DIRECTION OF~TE¢~';:..''' --"-,30NE Z4, IE LEGAL, DESCRI PTI ON SCALE ' KENNETH NELSON RCE No. 22023' ' 11'=30' · LICENSE EXPIRES: 09/30/2001 DR. BY SFN 8~ OBP LANDSCAPE EASEMENT NCSS 8~ ASSOCIATES JOB .9 9- 146 /'~ 'NoJ 2:' 125 E. SUNNYOAKS AVE. SUITE 204 SHEET CAMPBELL. n~ a~r~mo STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA On October 25, 1999 before me, D. PATRICK (Name, Title of Officer) personally appeared HOSSAIN E. KHAZIRI AND CHRISTINE V. KHAZIRI personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Comm. / 1194801 (Signature ~f Notary Public, ~ .............. ftC: c?_~:t ?_ _~t~ My. Comm. E~ir,, h.p.t. 6. 2002~ (This area for notarial seal) RESOLUTION NO. 99-322 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ACCEPTING GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC ART PURPOSES FROM HOSSAIN E. KHAZIRI AND CHRISTINE V. KI-IAZIRI, 10002 NORTH DE ANZA BOULEVARD, APN 326-17-022 WHEREAS, Hossain E. Khaziri and Christine V. Khaziri has executed a Grant of Easement for Public Art Purposes which is in good and sufficient form, granting to the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, easement over certain real property for public art purposes, situate in the City of Cupertino, more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B", attached hereto and made a part hereof, which is as follows: All that certain real property situate in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, located at 10002 North De Anza Boulevard. · -. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Cupertino accept said grant so tendered; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record said grant and this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1'~ day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino GRANT OF · PUBLIC ART EASEMENT APN: 316-26-017 10002 No. De Anza Blvd. Hossain E. Khaziri & Christine V. Khaziri, hereinafter called Grantor, hereby grant(s) to the City of Cupertino, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called Grantee, the right to excavate for, install, replace (of the initial or any other size), maintain and use for public art purposes as Grantee shall from time to time elect within the hercinatter described property of certain premises which are situatcd in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, and described as follows: (See Exhibit A & B) Grantor hereby further grants to Grantee the right and privilege to cnter upon his lands contiguous to and along the line of said hcreinabove described strip for the purpose of locating, constructing, repairing, maintaining, or replacing said public art or appurtenances thereto, for the purpose of doing any necessary or lawful act in connection with the construction or maintenance of said public an; them ~s also granted herewith the right of the use of sufficient land contiguous to said s~ip on either or both sides thereof for the purposes of excavation of and deposit of earth and necessary building material during the time of constructing said public art and any repair thereof. The foregoing is subject to the following express conditions: · The Grantee agrees to restore the ground surface and any improvements thereon to its original grade or condition insofar as it is practicable and reasonable to do so. The Grantee further agrees that such excavation or building materials arc to be removed from said contiguous land within a reasonable period of time and said placement of materials shall not interfere with the normal operation of existing facilities or land use. . WITNESS WHEREOF, said parties have executed this Grant of Easement this c~' day of {~/~ ,1999. Chnstme V Kha~m ~ · '[Please attach notary acknowledgment(s)] LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PUBLIC ART EASEMENT ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATE IN THE CITY OF CUPERTI NO, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING A PARCEL OF LAND FOR'PUBLIC ART EASEMENT PURPOSES, SAID PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PORTIO.N OF THAT 0.487 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND SHOWN UPON THAT CERTAIN RECORD OF SURVEY FILED IN BOOK 100 OF MAPS AT PAGE 9, SANTA CLARA COUNTY RECORDS, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 3-PU BLIC ART EASEMENT COMMENCING ATA POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID 0.487 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND, ABOVE DESCRIBED, SAID POINT LYING 7.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER THEREOF; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE , ALONG ALI NE WH ICH IS PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 52.00 FEET NORTHERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE CENTER LINE OF STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD NORTH89' 54' 00" WEST 100.99 FEETTOA POINTOF CURVATURE; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 23.50 FEET, THROUGHA CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30' 11' 27" A DISTANCE OF 12.39 FEET TOTHE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OFTHE PARCEL HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 23.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 29' 35' 06" A DISTANCE OF 12.13 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45' 05'00" EAST 12.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 44' 55' 00" EAST 12.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 45' 05' 00" WEST 12.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 145 S.F., MORE OR LESS. DESCRIPTION PREPARED UNDER SUPERVISION OF KENNETH NELSON , CIVIL ENGINEER. DATE' .~.1_, _---~, ,,l~ i~ .[ ( KENNETI REL'SON, RCE#22023 ~.ia~.~,a~a] ¥ EXPIRATION 09-30-2001 LINE TABLE: CURVE. TABLE: · LINE BEARING DISTANCE CURVE RADIUS DELTA LENGTH LI N89~54'W 8.$~ CI 290' 'l°~.0'0~" ~.~6' L2 NB~'W 10.00' C2 30' 51~10'28'' 26,7~' ~, SCALE: 1"=30~ ~/ L3~N45°O5'E 12.00' C3 ~e' ~°2~5~' .1~.3~ / L4 S 12.00' C4 23.~ 29°~'~' 12.13' 44o55'E 5 5 L5 S 45°05'w 12.00' C5 ~0.~.~ ~,~9'~'.'i L6 N ~'~ E 4.~' . C6 ~.Ed 30°1 I' 27" I - / ~z ~ /: o~ ~ R.O.S. BK. IOOM. 9 I > ~ ~15' ~ E~ ~~ ~ ~{~ PUBLIC ART ~ 'v~ EASEMENT ~RO.B. N0.5 ~ S 89° 54' Od' E i00.99' __ ~~.-,.. STEVENS CREEK "' '> ~"'"" '''~ D~vu, ~;~/~- ~. ~ ;'.',~ s e -5.' O0"E PREPARED UNDER DIRECTION o~:.~A~E.:'.' ..' PLATTO AC MPANY' LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCALE I" ' KENNETH NELSON RCE No.22023' ,. =30 LICENSE EXPIRES: 09/50/2001 DR. BY SFN ' : JOB PUBLI~ AR~ EABEMEN~ NCSS ~ ASSOCIATES 99-146/ ';No~ ~ 125 E. SUNNYOAKS AVE. SUITE Z04 SHEET CAMPBELL. CA 95Q~R STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA On October 25, 1999 before me, D. PATRICK (Name, Title of Officer) personally appeared HOSSAIN E. KHAZIRI AND CHRISTINE V. KHAZIRI personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(les), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf, of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNE~'my/~ and,official seal. -~ ~. P~,~c~ '"'~, /\ .......................... · (S~'gnatur~of Notary Public, ~ ~ ,0~,~.~.. ~ (This area for notarial seal) City Hall 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 (408) 777-3354 (.'4tv of FAX (408) 777-3333 Cupertino _ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summary AGENDA ITEM ~ AGENDA DATE November 1, 1999 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Approval of appropriation from General Fund for Bollinger Road Bicycle Facility Improvement Project, De Anza Boulevard - Stevens Creek Boulevard - Wolfe Road Arterial Management Project, and ALTRANS College/K-12 Trip Reduction Program BACKGROUNB In 1999, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District awarded grants for Bollinger Road Bicycle Facility Improvement Project and De Anz~ Boulevard- Stevens Creek Boulevard - Wolfe Road Arterial Management Project to the City. The City is also partners in the ALTRANS College/K-12 Trip Reduction Program with the City of Saratoga as the lead agency. The Bollinger Road Bicycle Facility Improvement Project (Lawrence to De Anza Boulevard) has a total budget of $175,000 with a local match of $35,000. · De Anza Boulevard - Stevens Creek Boulevard - Wolfe Road Arterial Management Project (interactive traffic control system) has a total budget of $150,000 with a local match of $30,000. · ALTRANS College/K-12 Trip Reduction Program is a regional effort by ALTRANS to reduce vehicle trips among students of the West Valley. ALTRANS is working with the public schools in Cupertino and with De Anza College. The City of Saratoga is the lead agency (sponsor) for this program. Cupertino's portion of the total budget is $140,000, with a local match of $25,000. The above projects total $465,000. Local matches are required for the three projects for a total of $90,000. A balance of $13,160 is available from the account for "Local Share of Grants." Therefore, an appropriation of $76,840 is necessary to cover the local matches. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve an appropriation in the amount of $76,840 from the General Fund for Bollinger Road Bicycle Facility Improvement Project, De Anza Boulevard- Stevens Creek Boulevard - Wolfe Road Arterial Management Project, and ALTRANS College/K-12 Trip Reduction Program. - W~orks~ DlYnald-D. B-'own City Manager Director of Public Pdnted on Recycled Paper ~'-~ / CITY OF CUPE INO Omee of the City Manager City Hall ! 0300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 Phone (408) 777-3312 Fax (408) 777-3366 SUMMARY AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ~ AGENDA DATE /,/ SUBJECT AND ISSUE Application for Alcoholic Beverage License. :,, BACKGROUND 1. Name of Business: Dars Hideaway Location: 10095 Saich Way Type of Business: Beer and Wine Bar Type of License: On Sale Beer and Wine Reason for Application: New License RECOMMENDATION There are no use permit restrictions or zoning restrictions which would prohibit this use, and staff has no objection to the issuance of the license. Submiggad~y: , Prepared by: C ity Planner Donald D. Brown, C'ty g r G:planning/misc/abcDARS Hideaway State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) ABC 211 (6/99) TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control File Number: 3S8313 .100 Paseo de San Antonio Receipt Number: 1249808 Room I 19 Geographical Code: 4303 San Jose, CA 95113 Copies Mailed Date: September 8, 1999 Issued Date: DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION: 8AN .IOSE First Owner: LUTZ DARLENE ANN Name of Business: DARS HIDEWAY Location of Business: 10095 SAICH WAY CUPERTINO, CA 95014 County: SANTA CLARA Is premise inside city limits? Yes Mailing Address: 4926 RUE BORDEAUX (If different from SAN JOSE, CA 95136 premise address) Type of license(s): 42 Transferor's license/name: / Dropping Partner: Yes... No l.icense Type Transaction Type Fee Type Master ~ Date Fee 42 ON-SALE BEER AND ORIGINAL FEES NA Y 0 09/08/99 $300.00 42 ON-SALE BI~ER AND ANNUAl. FEE NA Y 0 09~08~99 $205.00 42 ON-SALE BEER AND STATEFIN~ NA N I 09~08~99 $39.00 Total $$44.00 Have you ever been convicted of a felony? N o Have you ever Violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, or regulations of the Department pertaining to the Act? No Explain any "Yes" answer to the above questions on an atu~hment which shall be deemed part of this application. Applicant agrees (a) that any mnnager employed in on-sale licensed premise will have all the qualifications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be violated any of the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SANTA CLARA Date: September 8, 1999 Under panalty of Imrjury, naeh parson whose si~natom appears below, e~'tifie~ and' Says: (1) He is an applicant, or one of the applicant~, or an executive officer of the applicant ~orparation. named in the foregoing alq~lication, duly antheriaed to mak~ this application on its behalf: (2) that ' he has mad the fot~soins ned knows the contents thereof and that e,a~h of the above smmments therein made are true; (3) that no panon other titan the applicant or applieanu has any direct or indirect int~t in the al~linant or al~licant's Im~innss to he conducted under the license(s) 'f6r which this application is made; (4) that the uansfer application or proposed tmmf~r is not made to ~tisfy the payment of a loan or to fulfill an agreement entered into more than ninety (90) days preceding the day on which the transfer al~lication ia filed with the Department or to gain or establish a preference to or for any creditor or transferor or to dufsaud or injure any creditor of transferor; ($) that the transfer ~lie. a. tion may be withdrawn by either the a0plicant or the licensee with no resulting liability to the Department. ~' . ".~ Applicant Name(s) /~- ~ Applicant Signature(s)( ~, ~ ~ LUTZ DAI~I.~'~'E ANN /f ~, o State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) ABC 211 {6/99) File Number: 358313 '--' TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control 100 Paseo de Snn Antonio Receipt Number: 1249808 Geographical Code: 4303 Room 119 Copies Mailed Date: September 8, 1999 San .lose, CA 95113 Issued Date: DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION: SAN .IOSE First Owner: LUTZ DARLENE ANN Name of Business: DARS IHDEWAY Location of Business: 1009S SAICH WAY CUPERTINO, CA 9S014 County: SANTA CLARA Is premise inside city limits? Yes Mailing Address: 4926 RUE BORDEAUX (If different from SAN .JOSE, CA 95136 premise address) Type of license(s): 42 Transferor's license/name: / Dropping Partner: Yes.__ No y l.icense Type Transaction Type Fee Type Master ~ Date Fee 42 ON-SALE BEER AND ORIOINALI~=.q NA Y 0 09108/99 $300.00 42 ON-SALE BEER AND ANNUALFEE NA ' Y 0 09/08/99 $205.00 42 ON-SALE BEER AND STATE HNGERPRINTS NA N I 09/08/99 $39.00 Total $544.00 Have you ever been convicted of a felony? N o Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, or regulations of the Department pertaining to the Act? No Explain any "Yes" answer to the above questions on an attachment which shall be deemnd pa~t of this application. Applicnnt agrees (a) that any mnnager employed in on-sale licensed premise will have all tlie qualifications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be violated any of the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of SANTA CLARA Date: September 8, 1999 Under penalty of porjery, each person whnse signature al4~nan helow, enttifies and says: (!) He is an al~lican~ or one of the applicants, or an ~'utive officer of the applicant co~otetion, named in the foregoing al~lication, duly authol/nod to make this application on iu behalf; (2} that ' he has read the foregoing and knows the contents thereof and that e~eh of the above stn~monts therein made ate true; (3) that no ~ other than the al~licant or applicants has any direct or indirect intornst in the al~iicant or alq~licant's business to he conduetnd un~r the iie~nsa(s) 'for which this application is made: (4) that the ~runsfer al~lication or prulmsad transfer ia not made to sathfy the payment of a loan or to fulfill an agreement entered into more than ninmy (~0) days pmeedin~ the day on which thc transfer ai~lication is film with the Department or to gain or establish a preference to or for any creditor or transferor ot to dufmud or injure any ..'~iitor of transferor, ($) that the transfer .~ul~.a. tion may he withdrawn by either the al~licant or the licensee with no resulting liability to the Department. Applicant Name(s) ~ .... . Applicant Sig~.ature(s) ( LUTZ DAI~T-~NE ANN ,~ ~, o -- RESOLUTION NO. 99-324 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO SETTING DATE FOR CONSIDERATION OF REORGANIZATION OF AREA' DESIGNATED "lq. STELLING ROAD 99-06", PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF N. STELLING ROAD BETWEEN GARDENA DRIVE AND GREENLEAF DRIVE; APPROXIMATELY 0.24 ACRE, SEET (APN 326-08-051) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino has received a request for annexation of territory designated "Greenleaf Drive 99-03" from property owner, Lisa Lei Wang; and WHEREAS, the property, 0.24+ acre on the west side of N. Stelling Road between Gardena Drive and Greenleaf Drive (APN 326-08-051) is contiguous to the City of Cupertino and is within its urban service area; and WHEREAS, annexation would provide for use of City services; and WHEREAS, this territory is ,,nlnh~abited and was prezoned on May 17, 1999, to city of Cupertino Pre Rl-10 zone; and WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino, as Lead Agency for environmental review completed an initial study and granted a Negative Declaration for annexation; and WHEREAS, the County Surveyor of Santa Clara county has found the rasp and description (Exhibits "A" and "B") to be in accordance with Government Code Section 56826, the boundaries to be definite and certain, and the proposal to be in compliance with LAFCO's road annexation policies; and WHEREAS, the fee set by the County of Santa Clara to cover staff cost for above certification has been paid; and WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section $6826 the. City Council of the City of Cupeflino shall be conducting authority for a reorgsniT~,tion including an annexation to the City; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section $6837 provides that if a petition for annexation is signed by all owners of land within the affected territory the City Council may approve or disapprove the annexation without public heating; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Cupertino hereby initiates annexation proceedings and will consider annexation of the territory designated '~l. Stelling Road 99-06" and detachment from the Santa Clara '- County Lighting Service District at their regular meeting of December 6, 1999. Resolution No. 99-324 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1st day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino 2 "EXHIBIT A" ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF CUPERTINO N. STELLING ROAD 99 - 06 MAY 1999 REVISED SEPTEMBER 29, 1999 All that certain real property situate in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, more particularly described as follows; Lot ? and a portion of Stelling Road, as shown upon that certain Map entitled, "Tract No. 631, Garden Gate Village ", which Map was filed for record in the Office of the Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, State of California on May 23, 1949, in Book 22 of Maps, at pages 56, and more parti?larly described as follows; Beginning at the point of the intersection of the easterly prolongation of the Northerly boundary line of said Lot 7, 10 feet fi.om the Westerly line of Stelling Road ( 50 feet wide ) with the Westerly boundary line of certain annexation to the City of Cupertino entitled Stelling 2, Ordinance No. 5?; Thence running with Westerly boundary line of said annexation S 0 deg. 10' 20" W 77.45 feet; Thence leaving said Westerly boundary line and running with the easterly prolongation of the Southerly boundary line of said Lot N 89 deg. 54' W 135.00 feet to a point of the Westerly boundary line of said Lot; Thence running with said Westerly boundary line N 0 deg. I0' 20" E 77.45 feet to a point in the Northerly boundary line of the said Lot; Thence running with the said Northerly boundary line S 89 deg. 54' E 135.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing: 10,456 square feet, more or less. 0.24 acres, more or less ma. A. P. N.: 326 - 05 - 051 - /0-.-3 N ¢_ N · ci , P.O.B. .I , ~E,~.,~klEX. , z° ~ , ,.,}1"-Ir'; O~P. NO. 5 7 ~ TAMARIND < ~S 89'54 W 135.~?~1~ ~ CT. ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ 25.00'~/~oI ~ ~ o.~/////////~n'~, .~ ,~°1~,~, CT. ~ SCALE: 1"= 100' ~ ~/~125.00'~//~ Ira, . SITE N 89'54' E/135.0~' I Jz ~ LOT. 7 ~o, 4~ se. FT. ~ VICINITY MAP 0.24 AC~S NOT TO SCAL~ LEGEND EXHIBIT B .,, '"" 25538 ' ' BOUNDARY' LINE' OF ~-/"-',7/ TO THE CiTY OF CUPERTINO PROPOSED ANNEXA TION........""~ _~-~ ~IVJ%' EXISTING ANNEXATION EXISTING CITY LIMITS ~[~ly,~oI DATE: MAY 1999 SCALE: 1"=100' BY: d.C. REVISED: q/~q/qq · -,,, JAMES C. CHEN, C.E., S.E. o P.O.130X 20302, SAN JOSE, CA 95160 .- RESOLUTION NO. 99-32~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DECLARING 1TS INTENTION TO ORDER VACATION OF AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO PURSUANT TO SECTION $0430 ET SEQ. OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE THEREOF; 22831 MERCEDES ROAD, PARCELS 2 AND 3 WHEREAS, that certain Emergency Vehicle Access easement more particularly described in description and map attached hereto and made part hereof as Exhibits "A" and "B", is deemed unnecessary for present and prospective use; and WHEREAS, the City Council elects to proceed pursuant to the provisions of Section 50430 et seq. of the Government Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interests that the City Council initiates the vacation of said easement; NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED that the City Council hereby declares its intention to vacate the aforesaid Emergency Vehicle Access easement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the 6th day of December, 1999, at 6:45 p.m., in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 10300 ' Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, is the time and place fixed for hearing on the above proposed vacation; 2. That the aforesaid date is not less than 15 days from passage of this resolution pursuant to law; 3. That the City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of this resolution to be published in the manner prescribed by law, and shall cause certified copies to be posted along the line of said property proposed to be vacated at least 10 days before the date of hearing and no more than 300 feet apart with a minimum of 3 being posted. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1st day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members o_.f th.e City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino Giuliani & Kull, Inc. Engineers · Planners · Surveyors Cupertino - Oakc~ole - Aut3urn EXHIBIT A Leeal Description for Abandonment of Emergency vehicle Access Easement All that certain real property located in the City of Cupertino, County of Santa Clara, State of California, Described as follows: An Emergency Access Easement lying within Parcels 2 and 3, as described in that certain Parcel Map recorded in Book 563, Page 3, Official Records, County of Santa Clara. Said Emergency Access Easement being more particularly described in that certain Deed recorded in Book LO 19, Page 1544, Official Records, County of Santa Clara. and, An emergency access easement lying within Parcel 3, as shown upon that certain Parcel Map . recorded in Book 563, Page 3, Official Records, County of Santa Clara. 11899 Eclgewoocl Roacl · Suite Q · Auburn, California 95603 · (530) 885-5107 · Fax (530) 885-5157 0 582 ~CRES ~;~ I~ ~... I I ~ / ~ .' i ~&.~o ,~ IO'S.~E. ~~-- ~~ ~: PM ~ : ~, "' ~ '" ~-~ %~ ~/~ ~ ~--, ~. --,-, .~.~- , -- ' ~-~ ~ ~ ~. : ' ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1~.._ ". , ~ ., .... . LEGEND ~z4 ~ ~ ~ Z c ~ Y ~ ~~ ~/~/~~ (~ / ~ANITAflY SEWER EASEMENT ~LE' I' ,~' 4G~ O.R. PAGE 174. dOB NG, 99185 ~, ~o- ~ ~'~"~" SHEET -- -~ ...... ~ I SHEET .._ ~,....~m~.~ City Hall '~ 10300 Torre Avenue CITY OF Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 CUPFI INO Telephone: (408) 777-3213 FAX: (408) 777~109 HUMAN RESOURCES DIVISION SUMMARY Agenda Item No. ]2. Meeting Date: November 1, 1999 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Compliance With AB 1482 - Animal Sheltering BACKGROUND On September 7, 1999 the City Council held a public hearing in accordance with the requirements of AB 1482 to be eligible for a deferment in the implementation of the provisions of SB 1785, requiring longer holding periods for all animals. Subsequently, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 99-266 satisfying the initial requirements of AB 1482. The City of Cupertino is further required to adopt a second resolution within 60 days of Resolution No. 99-266 adopting a compliance plan to meet the longer animal holding requirements of SB 1785. The plan must include a schedule for implementation and identify funding sources for any facilities that may have to be built in order to comply with the longer holding requirements. The Humane Society of Santa Clara Valley (Humane Society) continues to provide animal shelterering services to the City for the current fiscal year. The City of Cupertino and other West Valley cities are currently negotiating a contract extension with the Humane Society for the period July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2001. The extended contract will allow countywide municipalities the time to plan, fund, and construct a new animal shelter facility and to hire the staff necessary to operate the shelter. AB1482 Compliance Plan for Fiscal Year 1999 - 2000 The following plan of action satisfies the requirements of AB 1482 and involves the following elements: Prlntecl on Recyclecl Paper November 1, 1999 Page 2 1. Work with other cities and the Humane Society to establish policies and programs to reduce the number of strays and increase the number of animals returned to owners, thereby providing some added capacity within the existing facility by: a. Pursuing, with other cities in Santa Clara County, a mandatory spay and neutering program. b. Enforcing the feasibility of an aggressive program to enforce the licensing of cats and dogs to facilitate the return of lost animals to their owners. c. Developing a process for more rapid and timely euthanization of animals determined to be vicious. 2. Begin implementation of the long-range plan for constructing and operating a regional animal services facility. Complete the following components of the facility construction and operation plan by July 1, 2000: a. Formation of a Joint Powers Authority (JPA). b. Acquisition of a site for the new facility. c. Award the design and construction contracts. d. Develop a cost sharing plan to be approved among members of the JPA for financing and operating the animal services facility. e. Approve the organizational structure for new operation and develop a recruitment timetable. Fiscal Impact The City of Cupertino's 1999 - 2000 budget authorizes $85,000 for animal control services. Funding for the construction and operation of a new regional animal control services facility will be provided by all cities in Santa Clara County electing to join the JPA. It is anticipated that this will include San Jose, Santa Clara, Milpitas, Sunnyvale, Campbell, Los Oatos, Monte Sereno, Saratoga, and Cupertino. Each city will contribute its share pursuant to an approved cost-sharing plan based on recorded animal activity within each city. It is expected that the City of Cupertino's cost will range from 2.5% to 3.0% for both capital and operational expenses, which is approximately $25,000 more than the current budget. St~'~m't ~d by: Appr~d~y-~ Human Resources Manager City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 99-326 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ELECTING TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN ANIMAL SHELTERING PROVISIONS SET FORTH UNDER STATE LAW IN EFFECT ON JUNE 30, 1999, PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF AB 1482 (ALQUIST), AND NOTING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 7, 1999 TO SPECIFY CERTAIN STATISTICS THAT WERE PROVIDED BY THE HUMANE SOCIETY IN COMPLIANCE WITH AB 1482 (ALQUIST), AND THE CITY HAS IDENTIFIED THE FUNDING SOURCES TO MEET THE PROVISIONS OF SB 1785, AND TO DECLARE THE CITY'S INTENTION TO PARTICIPATE IN A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH SELECTED COUNTYWIDE CITIES TO UNDERTAKE THE FUNDING, BUILDING, STAFFING, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR ANIMAL SERVICES ON OR BEFORE JULY 1, 2001 WHEREAS, following a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council hereby declares and states: WHEREAS, the City Council, following a public hearing, adopted Resolution No. 99- 266 on September 7, 1999, and directed the City Manager within sixty (60) days to develop a plan to meet the requirements of AB 1482. Specifically, that direction included a schedule of implementation and identification of funding source or sources for any facilities that may have to be built in order for the public agency to comply with the longer animal holding requirements of SB 1785; WHEREAS, the City Manager has presented, on this day, a schedule of implementation, and a plan for funding source or sources for any facilities that will have to be built in order for the public agency to comply with the requirements of SB 1785; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTttER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino has approved the Compliance Plan under AB 1482 for implementation and funding sources to meet the longer holding periods for ~nimsls in shelters under SB 1785, which becomes effective July 1, 2000. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1~ day of November, 1999, by the following vote: VOTE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino City Hall 10300 Ton Avenue ~ Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 (408) 777-3354 of FAX (408) 777-3333 Cupertino PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summary AGENDA ITEM ! ~-~ AGENDA DATE November 1, 1999 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Agreement with Santa Clara Valley Water District for removal of graffiti in the City of Cupertino. BACKGROUND Submitted is an agreement between the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the City for removal of graffiti from Water District facilities. This agreement would allow the City to remove graffiti on Water District facilities utilizing a contractor. This should improve response time by having the City's contractor perform the work as soon as it is visible. This agreement is for five years, renewable each year. The City will charge 6½% administrative fees. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 99-.,~ authorizing execution of an agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District for removal o-f grkffiti. Ap/~rT~ssi°n: wo s-/ ' AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AND THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT FOR REMOVAL OF GRAFFITI FROM CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNED BY THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO THIS AGREEMENT is dated for identification this __ day of , 1999, by and between the CITY OF CUPERTINO, a municipal corporation, whose address is 10300 Torte Avenue, Cupertino, California, 95014, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," and the SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, whose address is 5750 Almaden Expressway, San Jose, California, 95118, · hereinaRer referred to as "DISTRICT." RECITALS A. CITY and DISTRICT desire to remove graffiti from DISTRICT property located in Cupertino, California, in order to achieve compliance with the CITY's Graffiti Ordinance (Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 10.60); and B. DISTRICT has requested that CITY facilitate DISTRICT's compliance with the Graffiti Ordinance by hiring a contractor at DISTRICT's request to remove the graffiti and billing DISTRICT for the cost of this service; and C. CITY wishes to assist DISTRICT's compliance with CITY's Graffiti Ordinance in this manner° NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals and mutual obligations contained herein, CITY and DISTRICT agree as follows: 1. Description of Services. CITY agrees to hire an independent painting contractor who shall make reasonable efforts to clean or otherwise remove or paint over the graffiti located on the fences, walls, channels and other structures located on certain real property which belongs to DISTRICT and is located in the City of Cupertino. 2. Independent Contractor. DISTRICT understands and agrees that any contractor hired by CITY to perform the work authorized by this Agreement is an independent contractor and that such contractor shall not be deemed an agent or employee of CITY for any purpose. CITY shall use reasonable care in 'selecting the contractor, and DISTRICT shall have final approval of contractor. 3. Access to DISTRICT's Property. DISTRICT grants to CITY and/or contractor the right to enter and remain upon DISTRICT property to perform and/or inspect the work authorized by this Agreement, and DISTRICT shall pwvide keys or other means of access to secured properties for use by CITY and contractor in the performance of this Agreement. 4. Mutual Cooperation. DISTRICT shall cooperate with the efforts of CITY and CITY's contractor to remove the graffti. CITY has entered into a joint use agreement with DISTRICT to access these areas. The CITY will be responsible for the removal of graffiti in those areas where the joint use agreement(s) designates such responsibility. CITY will promote community participation in DISTRICT's Adopt-a-Creek program for graffiti _ removal. 5. Compensation. DISTRICT agrees to reimburse CITY for all costs and expenses incurred in contracting and/or performing the work authorized by this Agreement. Contractor's bills for services shall not exceed Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($?50.00) per single incident and shall not exceed Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) for the term of this agreement without the prior written consent of CITY and DISTRICT. 6. Administrative Overhead. CITY shall charge, and DISTRICT shall pay to CITY, an administrative overhead fee of six and one-half percent (6½%) of the contractor's bill as CITY's charge for contract administration. ?. Payment Schedule. DISTRICT shall make periodic payments within thirty (30) days of receiving billing statement from CITY for the costs and expenses incurred in having the work authorized by the Agreement performed to the satisfaction of CITY, and for CITY's administrative fee. 8. Term of A~reement. CITY and its contractor will commence this work following execution of this Agreement by both parties. The term of this Agreement shall be through Sune 30, 2000, unless terminated earlier. The term of this Agreement may be extended by mutual agreement of the pa~es in writing. The City Manager is hereby authorized to grant this extension on behalf of CITY for a period of up to five (5) years, a total of five (5) extensions starting June 30, 2000. · - 9. Termination. CITY or DISTRICT may terminate this Agreement at any time upon providing ten (10) days written notice to the other party. 10. Hold Harmless. DISTRICT hereby agrees to and shall indemnify, defend and hold CITY, its officers, agents and employees harmless from and against any liability for damages or claims or suits for personal injury, including death and/or property damage, which may arise from the negligent acts or omissions of DISTRICT, its officers, agents or employees, or of contractor, its officers, agents, employees or subcontractors, related to or arising out of this Agreement. CITY hereby agrees to and shall indemnify, defend and hold DISTRICT, its officers, agents or employees harmless from and against any liability for damages or claims or suits for personal injury, including death and/or property damage, which may arise from the willful misconduct or negligent acts or omissions of CITY or CITY's officers, agents or employees related to or arising out of the performance of this Agreement. 11. Insurance. Prior to the commencement of work pursuant to this Agreement, CITY's contractor shall provide CITY and DISTRICT with proof of comprehensive general liability insurance and owned, non-owned and hired automobile insurance coverage, in an amount satisfactory to CITY's City Attorney and Risk Manager. Such insurance shall name CITY and DISTRICT as additional insureds under such policy of insurance. Contractor shall comply with Workers' Compensation insurance laws. Such proof of insurance shall be in the form of a certificate of insurance or other documentation which is acceptable to CITY's Risk Manager. CITY understands that DISTRICT is self-insured for liability. 12. Notices. Any notice required to be given to DISTRICT shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if mailed to DISTRICT, postage prepaid, addressed to: Santa Clara Valley Water District Attention: Jose Ortiz 5750 Almaden Expressway San Jose, CA 95115-5686 or personally delivered to DISTRICT at such address or at such other addresses as DISTRICT may designate in writing to the CITY. Any notice required to be given to CITY shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if mailed to CITY, postage prepaid, addressed to: City of Cupertino Attention: Public Works Department 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 or personally delivered to CITY at such address or at such other addresses as CITY may designate in writing to DISTRICT. 13. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended I writing at any time prior to its expiration by mutual agreement of CITY and DISTRICT in writing. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Contract, in duplicate, the day and year first hereinabove set forth. CITY OF CUPERTINO: SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT: a public corporation By: Mayor Chair/Board of Directors Attest: Attest: City Clerk Clerk/Board of Directors APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney General Counsel -- RESOLUTION NO. 99-327 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AUI/~ORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF CUPERTINO FOR REMOVAL OF GRAFFITI FROM CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNED BY THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT IN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO WHEREAS, there has been presented to the City Council an "Agreement for Removal of Graffiti From C~ain Prop~u~y Owned by the Santa Clara Valley Water District" between the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the City of Cupertino; and WHEREAS, the Agreement provides for the removal of graffiti from Santa Clara Valley Water District property located in Cupertino, California, in order to achieve compliance with the City's Graffiti Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the provisions of the Agreement have been reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Works and the City Attorney. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Cupertino hereby approves the "Agreement for Removal of Graffiti From Certain Property Owned by the Santa Clara Valley Water District" and authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute said 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 1't day of November, 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members o_fth_e City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cup~o RESOLUTION NO. 99-308 (AMENDED)* A RESOLUTION OF ~ CUFERTI~O CITY COUNCIL CALLING FOR A SFECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITTING A MEASURE BEFORE THE QUALIFIED VOTERS WHEREAS, the presidential primary election will be held on Tuesday, March 7, 2000; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council of the City of Cupertino to call a special municipal election in the city to be held on March 7, 2000; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino does hereby call a special municipal election to be held Tuesday, March 7, 2000, to be consolidated with the presidential primary ejection, and directs that the following measure be submitted to the qualified electors of the city. Advisory Vote Only In order to construct a new library, without increasing taxes, shall the City Council spend an amount not to exceed $22 million from a combination of cash reserves and YES public financing? The new library will provide: · More space for books, reference materials, and computers NO · Separate areas for children's activities, community meetings, and quiet reading · Improved access to rest rooms and book stacks for the disabled · Safe parking for library patrons and the community THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL FURTHER RESOLVES: 1) The City Clerk is hereby directed to certify to the adoption of this resolution, to transmit a copy hereof to the Board of Supervisors of the County, and to file a certified copy with the Registrar of Voters of the County. 2) The City Attorney is hereby directed to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure not to exceed $00 words in length and to be filed with the City Clerk no later than Wednesday, October 27, 1999. 3) Arguments in favor or against the proposed measure shall be filed with the City Clerk by Thursday, November 11, 1999, at 5:00 p.m. 4) Rebuttals to arguments in favor or against the proposed measure shall be filed with the City Clerk by Monday, November 22, at 5:00 p.m. 5) The City Clerk shall publish a notice of election and synopsis of the measure. 6) The polls shall be open at 7:00 a.m. and closed at 8:00 p.m. RESOLUTION NO. 99-308 (AMENDED) Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a r~gular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1st day of November 1999, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino *The ballot measure wording was amended to meet word limitation requirements. --' ~,.["~/ i 03(~0 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 CITY OF (408) 777-3308 CUPERJINO Community Development Department SUMMARY Agenda No. //~ Agenda Date: November 1, 1999 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING ON THE RECONSIDERATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECISION TO DENY THE APPEAL OF THE APPROVAL OF File No. 4~ASA-99, an Architectural and Site Approval of a first and second-story addition to an existing duplex at 10333 Degas Court (Appellants: Mr. Henry Adelman and Dr. Nancy Adelman). BACKGROUND: On July 19, 1999, the City Council denied the Adelman's appeal of a Planning Commission approved-Architectural and Site Approval (ASA) to allow a first and second-story addition to an existing duplex located at 10333 Degas Court. Subsequently, the Adelman's attorney, Owen Byrd, filed a petition for reconsideration of the council decision (Exhibit A) pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code Section 2.08.096. The Adelman's petition requests that the City Council reverse its decision, approve their appeal and deny the ASA based on the grounds specified in Exhibit A. The hearing initially set for September 7, 1999 was continued at the Adelman's request to November 1= to accommodate the schedules of all affected parties. DISCUSSION: The City Council should review Exhibit A and the resolution findings carefully. The proposed City Council findings in Resolution 99-328 were prepared by staff, based upon a review of the public record. The City Council is free to add new findings or modify the proposed findings contained in the resolution. The petition lists 10 grounds (labeled: IA, lB, HA, liB, IIC, IIIA, IIIB, HIC, IHD and IIIE) for reconsideration of the Council decision. Each point is addressed by staff in the attached resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council reconfirm its denial of the Adelman appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's approval of 4-ASA-99 and adopt Resolution 99-328, as may be modified. EnclosuFes: City Council Resolution 99-328 Exhibit A: Petition for Reconsideration of City Council denial of Adeiman appeal Exhibit A-l: Letter from Robert Cowan to the Adelmans dated July 26, 1999 Exhibit B-l: Declaration of Charles Kilian Exhibit C- 1' Community Development Department Staff Report dated July 19, 1999 Printe~l on Recycled Pa~er /~ "-" / Reconsideration of'City Council decision to deny appeal of 4-ASA-99 November I, 1999 Page 2 Reviewed by: Approp~*d by: Robert S. Cowan, Director of Do Manager Community Development g:planning/pdreports/¢¢/¢¢4asa99 RESOLUTION NO. 99-328 A RESOLUTION OF THE C~TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ADOPTING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF APPLICATION 4-ASA-99 Recitals On July 19, 1999 the City Council denied the appeal of Mr. and Mm. Henry Adelman and upheld the architectural and site approval granted by the Planning Commission for a second-story addition proposed for a duplex located at 10333 Degas Court in Cupertino (applicants- Mr. and Mrs. Erh-Kong Chieh). On July 29, 1999, the Adelmans, through their attorney, requested a re- consideration pursuant to section 2.08.096 of the City's ordinance code. The hearing was -- initially set for September 7, 1999 before the City Council. The Adelmans requested a continuance of that hearing. The City Council, on September 7, 1999, with the concurrence of all parties, continued the heating to the City Council meeting of November 1, 1999. Resolved After all evidence has been presented and arguments by both the applicant and the appellant have been submitted, the City Council hereby determines as follows: 1. The appellants seek to offer the following new evidence, which they allege, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, could not be presented to the City Council or the Planning Commission at a prior hearing: a) The height of the partially constructed structure would not be reduced two feet as described in the proposal. [FindinR of the City Council] The two-foot (actually l foot 10") reduction in height was not to be measured from the existing structure but from the originally submitted plans. Both the Planning -- Commission and the City Council approved a plan which reduced the height of the structure from a 25' high roof to a 23' 2" roof. (See Exhibit ~1-1 letter of Robert Cowan to the ,4delmans dated July 26, 1999, a copy of which is attached hereto). This newly submitted evidence does not affect the City Council's decision in this matter b) The location of the west facing window for bedroom number 2 would not be changed as required by the City Council approval. [Finding of the City Council] The west-facing window for bedroom 2 has been shifted one foot towards the south to be consistent with the drawings approved by the City Couitcil. Said window is also one foot lower compared with the originally submitted drawings. (7'he upper floor was not raised 1 foot as proposed by the originally submitted plan set.) This newly submitted evidence does not affect the · City Council's decision in this matter. 2. The Adelmans allege that the City Council failed to provide a fair hearing in the following respects: a) The alleged influence of a partially constructed structure known by the Planning Commission and City Council. [Finding of the City Council] There has been presented by the ,4delmans no competent or relevant evidence that any councilmember or planning commissioner improperly considered the existence of the partially constructed second floor in its deliberations. In fact, the Planning Commission required a portion of the existing structure to be reduced. Both the Planning · Commission and City Council were properly advised of the necessity to treat the application as a new application without considering the existing structure (See Exhibit B-I Declaration of Charles T. Kilian). b) The failure of the City Council to apply the so called "35% Rule" to the project requiring that the project not exceed 35% of the combined square footage of unit A and one-half of the square footage of the garage, allegedly demonstrates lack of a fair hearing. [Finding of the City Council] The Planning Commission adopted a 50% rule, meaning that the floor area of the second story of the "owner" unit could not exceed 50% of the combined floor space of the lower floor of the "owner's unit" and ~ of the garage. The City Council adopts the Commission's position. PC/DIR/A/R/102199 2 c) The City Council allegedly failed to conduct its discussion on the appeal by analyzing the evidence and systematically applying the evidence to each required ASA Finding. [Finding of the City Council] The City Council was acting as an appeal body from the decision of the Planning Commission. There is no contention that the Planning Commission's approval was devoid of proper analysis. The City Council only addressed the issues raised in the ,4delmans' appeal The City Council specifically adopted the comments and analysis of the planning department's staff report dated July 19, 1999. (A copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C-l) 3. The City Council allegedly abused its discretion by rendering a decision in which the findings of fact were not supported by the evidence in the following respects: a) The project, at the proposed location, will be detrimental or injurious to the property in the vicinity. [Finding of the City Council] Both the applicant and the Adelmans own duplexes in a duplex zoning district. The zoning district contemplates possible two-story additions with architectural and design review. It is di.~cult to imagine any two-story addition which would not have some impact upon neighboring properties. Although it is true that section 19.134.080 requires a finding that the proposal will not be detrimental or injurious to property in the area, the Planning Commission and the City Council have always interpreted this provision as requiring an unreasonable detriment or injury to neighboring properties before an application must be denied. The City Council finds that the proposal is not unreasonably detrimental or injurious to property in the arec~ b) The project allegedly will cause a reduction in the Adelmans' property values. [Finding of the City Council] The only evidence presented by the Adelmans on this issue was a letter dated May 16, 1999from a person named Sharon Paulson who works at Coldwell Banker in some unnamed capacity. The proffered evidence is incompetent to prove a potential diminution in value allegedly caused by approving the Chieh 's applicatior~ Unless Ms. Paulson is a qualified real estate appraiser, her opinion is valueless. On the other hana~ city staff have presented studies of properties throughout the -- city where property values have increased due to the City's allowance of two-story additions. The City Council finds that the present application will not decrease the value of the Adelmans' property. PC/DIR/A/R/102199 3 c) The project allegedly proposes an "abrupt change" in building scale and will result in an "abrupt transition" ih height and bulk between new and existing buildings. [Finding of the City Council] The reference to an "abrupt change in building scale" is based upon General Plan Policy 2-25, strategy 5, which pertains to a more gradual transition between low buildings'and mid and high rise structures. It is not intended to regulate one and two story duplexes. d) The location and height of the walls allegedly "will not harmonize with adjacent development." [Finding of the City Council] The duplex zoning district does not contain building design criteria. The Planning Commission and the City Council have used the recently amended Single Family Residential zoning ordinance as a guideline with respect to this project. The amended residential ordinance contains design requirements which are intended to provide greater harmony between new and old houses. Y~ith few exceptions, the subject duplex meets or exceeds the $1 design standards, including second story wall offsets and reduced height of second story walls. In addition, there is consistency in building materials between the first and second stories to further harmonize the development with its surroundings. e) The design of the project allegedly will "not protect residents from noise, traffic, light, and visually intrusive effects." (Finding of the City Council) The project incorporates design elements referenced above to reduce the perceived mass of the building and incorporates landscape screening, high window sill heights, bedroom/bathroom reorientation, greater sideyard setbacks, and obscured glass to minimize privacy, noise, and light intrusion. The project does not result in the creation of an additional dwelling but rather increases the living space to accommodate an expanded family. The expansion is consistent with the growing trend to construct more living space per dwelling unit. The expansion does not trigger any city requirement for more parking spaces nor will the expansion result in an abnormal increase in vehicular trips. The Institute of Tra#ic Engineer's manual titled "Trip Generation" 6th Edition, which analyzes numerous tra~O~c studies, find a strong correlation between increased numbers of low density residential PC/DIR/A/R/102199 4 dwellings and increased traffic, not increased residential square footage and traffic. It is therefore the decision of the City Council that the original decision of the City's Planning Commission of application 4=ASA=99 is sustained and that appellants' appeal and re-consideration requests are denied. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Cupertino this day of 1999 by the following vote: AYES: MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST APPROVED Kimbefly Smith Wally Dean City Clerk Mayor g:planning/pc/DIR102599 Exhibit A LAW OFFICES OF OWEN BYRD 418 .FLORENCE STREET, SUITE 100 PALO ALTO, CA 94301-1705 RECEIVED [. TELEPHONE: 650-833-0286 FACSIMILE: 650-325-90¢1 JUL 2 9 1999 FAC$IMIL£ TRANSMITTAL ! ADDRESSEE: Mi, yor WallY Dean and FAC$1M]LE: i08-777-3366 i Ce.uncilmembers : Charles Killian, Esq. 408-777-3401 : i FROM: C~,,en Byrd ! RE: 1[~il33 Degas Court, t-ASA-g9 · i DATE: Jul,! 29,1999 j; PAG,E$: 11 (INCLUDING THIS TRANSMrfTAL) COMMENT: ?~ifior, for Reconsideration. This facsunile is mmnded c~ly for the use of em addressee only a~d may ¢~nmm iniomu~ion wha:h u privileged or cm4identmL If yau ate nat the addzessee, oe ~be employee er aSem of the addressee respamable ~or dehverin$ & facsimile 1o ~ addzessee, you are hereby notified tl~ ~m¥ chssemmamm, c~istributio~ or eopym& ot this taesimile is sttlcfly prohibised, ff you h~e retired ~t~ f~sunile h~ error, please immeaia~ely aodty the semier ami then zemm the orib. inal ~acsknge to the add.-ess listed above through the United Stares Postal Sez-~tce. LAw OFFICES OF OWEN BYRD TCb~PHONC ' Ci~ of Cup~o ~03~ Torte Avenue Cupertino. CA 95024 Re: Petition ~or ~eeonsMe.mtion o~ Ci~ Coencil ~isi~ to Den)' ~elman App~ o~ Planning Commission Approva~ of ]0333 De8~ ~u~, ~A-99 Way ~d appel~m for ~ .~v~re~e~ ad~tlve ap~ z~c~ly ~fion ~ Ci~ Co~ to r~~r il.~y 19, 1~, ~Mon m ~y ~ appeM ~ m upho~ ~ ~t~ a~ Dim ~ ~.,L ] appr~ for ~ ~-sm~ ~di~on p~o~ for ]033 revue i~ d~, ap~ove ~ a~ ~ ~y ~ ~ approv~ ba~ ~ ~ ~o~ s~ed below. ~~vt.ly, ~ ~eL~ requ~t ~at ~e Q~ ~1 ~di~ iu deci~ f~t. ~2. as s~ ~ &e [;ast ~auon ~t was a~r~ ~ ~e Piing Co~~ L ~W R~EVA~ E ~~ ~1~ CO~D NOT HAVE B~ PRODU~D AT A. ~e He~ht of th,I ennlal~ ~nns~nd ~re WiI] Net be ~du~ ~o F~. Pmventi~ ~he ~J~ ~ounei] From Ma~ the Requ~ Fiadinp ~ Approv;! · M~yo~ ~'aliy I~an and Coun~ilmembers )uly 29, Page 2 Ph~g Co~ion ~ co~rmed by the Ciw Co~l, that ~e ~ximum elevation of the s~uc~e must be r~ by ~o feet v~ a red'~uon ~ ~ elevau~n of ~e ~dge beam ~d ~e ~d sto~ wa~s. ~en Co~l~m~r S~d~.~ Ja~s visi~ ~e Ade~ at ~e~ ~me on July 17. s~ ~ in Ade~n~' ~s~,.r b~:oo~ ~m~ed t~ou~ t~ w~ow ~ ~.e exi~g ~a~al co~don, a~ stal~ t~r ~e ~i~ had j~t told her ~e heist of 't~ g~cture was ~g red, ed by ~o f~t. At ~ Ci~ Cou~l appeal h.~a~ng, ~ Ade~ showed a pho~aph of the papal c~~on, ~ ~ough ~.heir be~oom w~ow, ~o d~ons~a~e ~ pnva~ impacts of proj~. ~. Rie~rd Abra h, a~mey ior ~e C~ehs. sm~ m ~e G~ Co~ t~t p~m~ wm ~lea~g: ~e to show ~e effec:~, ~t doesnr mflec~ w~t ~e ~nt proposal is. ~a~,in ~d now, ~t u~ c,l~enr p~os~ ~ ~g ~o f~i lower ~ ~at, a~ I m a li~e s~ds~ &at ~ey put ~i on ~ a de~m~agon, ~cau~ th? ~w (emp~sis added) T~ failure m ~u~ ~ ~ij~h~ of the p~y com~ed s~u~e by ~o feet con~m~s ~de~e ~ar ~ proj~s h,dght ~d bulk ~ ~ve a de~~ ~pacr ~ pfiv~ ~d ~ it b~d~gs, ~ vio~gon of ~. ASA f~ r~ed by ~on 19.1~.~0. . ~ new e~d~ ge~a~i by ~ C~' o~ am~ co~d ~ ~ve ~ prod~d at ~y ea~ Cit~ h~$ ~ the ~ were pm~bi~ ~om prig ~ ~c~on a b~dmg pe~t was i~l af~ ~e ~1 ~g. . B. ~e Location of W~st. Faej~ Window for BOroom ~ Will No~ be ~hanR~. ~ve~ing ~e ('~W ~ounell From Ma~ the R~,ired~indin~ for Mmr ~he City Co~ a~o':~ ~ Ci~t ~su~ a ~il~ng pe~t ~ ~ ~'~ pm~d~ with ~m~l~ ~t l~a~ ~t~ wes:-fa~g ~ow ~ ~droom ~, on ~ ~ floor, ar · ~ s~ l~a~n w~m it wm ~ougy ~ ~dez ~ i~egaEy ~m~ ~ bulldog ~t. Su~ a loca~on do~ not ~ ~ wi~ ~e p~nm~om ~de by Ci~ stuff ~d ~e C~ehs to the ~g Co~ssion a~d to Ci~ Co~l, w~ch ~wed ~ po~gon of ~ w~ow Io~eer~ ~om its:s od~al p~:~i~on. ~ fagure to rel~am ~ w~ow co~gmm~ ~~ ~y ~a~ 19.1~.080. ~ n~w e~i~ g~erat~.d by ~ C~' ~ ~-!fl no~ ~ b~ p~du~ ar any e~lier ~il~g ~t was ~ ~r ~e ~ ~a~g. · Iviayor V~'ally D~an and Coul~,:ilrnembers luly 29, 1999 Page 3 11. PROOF OF FA~S $~HICH D~ONSTR~ ~T ~[ CITY COUNCIL F~LED TO PRO. DE A ~ R HE~G k. T~ Influence of.the [ll~al Papal Cnns~ction Demons~ates that the Ci~ Council Fa~led t~: Provide a ~alr The Ci~ Co~l fa~ed to provue a fak ~gby iai~g to ac~owledge ~d to address subje~ve biu in favor ~ ~' Chiehs o~d by ~e existe~e of ~e ~le~ pazgal cons~ of ~e pmj~t. ~ ~agon is prov~ by' ;~ fa~ ~t a si~ican~ d~t reefing ~o s~ch b~ was sub~tt~ by ~s office to ~.~ Cl~ p~ior to ~e CiW Co~l hear~ ~t It wns not provide~ to ~ Ci~ Co~l, or i~ it was provided, ~at su~ ia~ ~s ~t ~ere~ed d~g ~e ~ ap~ ~ l~y 19, 1~9, ~ office :,ub~n~ a d~zabon ~om K~ C~y, ~.. to Ci~ Charles ~ for m~ ~to ~ ~suagve record lot the Ade~' ~. A copy of de~aradon is a~c~d hereto as E~bn 'A." ~e de~rauon s~ ~t ~. ~i~ p~vio~y sta~ed ~ ~. C~ly ~ m ~ ~~ ~t ~ers of ~ P~i~ Co--sion ~u~ not ~lp bu~ m~ ~to account ~ fa~ ~t co~~ o~ ~ C~' addison ~o ~ready w~ ~e~ay, a~ t~t ~e Ci~ would be ~ue~ed by ~e p~ ~~on dam. ~ ~. ~'s ~a~: ~fe~A~ ~e Piing Co~on ~ not t~ City Co~, ad~si~ ~t ~ pa~ ~,~~ wo~d ~~ Ci~ de~om~ d~~ on ~ pa~ o~ ~ Ci~, ~lu.i~g ~ Ct~ Cou~l. ~at bias w~ ~ ~denced by cc~c~ to ~, . ~e ~1~ of ~e Ci~ Cou~ m exp~ly sta~ on ~e papal c~~on to d;~ s~.o~d ~t, and ~ ~t, ~ue~e i~ R. ~e F~lu~ to ~n~e~ ~p~ the Square Foot~e ~ Imitation Re~i~d by the Planni~ ~ommjs~on Demonsttat~ that the CiW ~n~,ndl Failed to Provide a Fair Hea~ At i~ k~y 10,1~, ~t. ~ P~ C~i~ ~d ~ ~ty m apply a squ~ pro~. ~ ~aB~ '3~% R~e r~u~ ~t ~ pr~ ~t ex~ ~% of ~ sq~e foomse of U~t A ~.d ~e-~f of ~ ~u~ ~fe of ~ $a~8e.' ~e 921 ~te · e ~ a ~y of w~clt ~ a~d hereto as ~bit "B.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ci~ Co~ ~ to ;apply ~ ~~ [m~ ~ ~ Plan~s ~de~ and to ~ apply ~ l~ta~o~ ~. ~e Ci~. ~ou~c.il~aHed tn ~ondnct Im ~is~,~slnn ol the ~eal by the ~ence at~d $~te~ageal~ ~p~ the ~ten~ to ~aeh Re~,~ ASA · indi~. Whleh nemOns~a~ th;Il the ~i~' ~o,m~! Failed to Pm~Ae a Fair Hea~ Mayor ~all¥ Dean and Cour,¢ilmembers July 29. 1999 Page 4 Section !9.134.080 ot the Zor mg Code requires that certain tmdin§s be made in order prolect to be approved. The Adelmans asserted at the hearing and in wrlnen correspondence to the City Council that the i.iadings could not be made for the project. The Ade]ma_ns . repeatedly asked t~e Cit~' C,',Uncil to make a systematic analy'~is of the e~.ldence and to apptv · to the findings, which ,~,oul¢l have led the Cit~ Co~mcll to uphold the appeal a~xi deny approval of the project. The Cit~, Council's discussio,~ of the appeal, which occurred a~ the close of the public hearing· did not ifldude dus systema,ic application of rt~ evidence to the findings. The Cit~' Council engaged in a policy dis,,c~s_ si,m more suimd for a leg~ative acric~ than this queasy-judicial act_ion. In fact. the Ci~ Council s di:~'ussion did not i,,n, clude any systematic evaluauon each piece of evidence p~esented, nor of rl~e _re!]uired Findings. Only' afmr each City ¢oundlrnember had spoken in favor of the proje~:: did the City Anorney ask a Coundlmember to read findings into the record. By fa~lin§ to apply the evicle ace to the findings, the C~ty C~mcll failed ~o pro¥ici~ a fair heagng. PROOI: OF FACTS ~ItlCH DEMONSTRATE THAT THE C1T~ COLINIL ABUSED ITS DISCRETION I~.¥ RE~ID1/RII~G A D£CISION IN WHICH THE FINDINGS 'O1~ FACT WERE NOT !;;UPPORTED BY THE £VIDI/IqCE The City Council abused its ,tis~efion by renderin~ a decliion where the r~.uired ASA findings for approval we~ not suPl~'~rted by *,he evidence. In fac~. the Adelmans presented substantial evidence that demm~srrated tha~ the required findings d fa~ could not ix made. The clear weight of the evidence presenrtd at the City Council hearing supported :t decision u) deny ~he appeal based on an inability ~ make the A. The Project. ~t ti;re Proposed Location. Will be Detr~me~ltal or I~urlous to Properl~ i, the The Adelmans stated that t.~e project will cause, a substantial loss of privacy by the surrounding ,neighbors, whc~ ~ill have a large cwo-story structure looming over them. The . proje~ will al~o cause the lc:ss of direct sunhghr and indirec~ natural light for its r, eig'.nlx~s, will. impose artificial light impa¢ ~s at night, and will subject neighbors ~o ~ noise emanating trom the second-story addition. The loss of direct sunlight will be eilx, ciall¥ in]urious to the Adelmans, because the wat.:..r in their ba,,ck~ard pool is heated by solar energy and the will prevent di~ su,nl~lht Irom reachin~ the pool Responses by City mf[ ~o t.~se assertions, ~ were contained in the staff report and incorporated by re!_~ h.:to the Ctty Coupxil s finding, di~ not provide suffioent evidence to support the C~ty Council s ..leclsmn. The staff report admitted that the required tandscapi I. which is part of the pro/eet, w~ block sunlight includin~ to rim pool. The staff report d/d present any evidence =ebut~in$ the assertion that the project would ~ubject .neighbors to . unbuffered noise fron', the ~econd story. The staff report also failed .m acknowledge that PC&l/ requut, s landscapinl~ m ~.e wire easement at the border of the Chiehs property to be pruned to a 15 foot height, eliminating: its ability to provide ef/ective privacy screening while still blocking sunlight from reaching the ,~delmans. lVla¥or Willy Dean a~d Cour,ciLmembers July 29, PaSe 5 IL The Pro~ect Will Ca,,~ a l~edaction in the Adelmans' Prope~ Value ~d C~dwell ~ perfon'a ~ ~fi~ p~azy appr~ of ~ 1~ of ~ Chehs pro~ ~ ~e~ pro~ v~'~e, w~ch is a~ac~d ~em ~ ~it 'C ~ w~ presen~ to Ade~' pro~ ~d ba los~. H ~e Ade~' du~ h~ed f~ $7~,~. foz e~mple, ~ is a real-world redu~ ~ ~ ~lue of 570,0~, w~& is de~ly de~ml ~ ~j~ious ~o ~e staff re~ C. Ab~t Tri~iti(:n in He~ht ~nd Bt, lk Behead N~ and ~xis~i~ Build~ors ~e A~~ e~d ~at ~ p~ propo~ ~ abrupt c~ge ~ b~d~g ~e ~d ~e ~p~ roof ~ wu ~ ad~ ~ ~ p~oj~t ~ not ~figa~e ~ ibmpt ch~ m ~e. HeiSt ~ bu~ ire ~. ~on of ~ ove~ ~ht of ~ s~, no: j~ ~e s~ of fll~al~ S~mgy 5, ~ev~, sram a p~ce io: · ~fion ~:om ~w b~dings m zaller D. The I ~afion ina He~ht of ~e Wails Will Mot Ha~onize ~th A~nt ~eval~ment Mayor Wally l~on and Cou~.cilraembe~s July 29, Page-6 L~ order to prol~c~ the neigl~:ors, ~he Plarmmg Commission chreczed that th~ project comply with ~he City's recently revis .~i Single Family Residenti~ Zoning (Ordinance lgOg, amending ~ection 19.28), Not only do !he location and height oi the w~lls of the proposed project not harmonize with adjacent de~.elopment, they do not comply with revised Section 19.28. The Stuff repor~ admitted th.It "it would be dii£cult to '~o~' ~e ~ond story wa~s adjaceni de~'elop~t ~e .dl of ~e abu~g duplexes ~ ~sto~ ~ ~i~t.~ e~dence r~ar~g ~ fi~ ~g. E. The Dean of T~tis N~ Proje~ in an ~xiitlnt Resiaenflal N~hborhnnd Will Not Pmte~ Resi,;Jen~ ~ No~se. Tra~c. I ~ht and Visually Intrusive Effects ~e Adel~ asse~ ~ ~e p~e~ ~ impose ~ ~ ~p~ on ~ ~ ne~y ~e stuff ~on d~ not directly ~d~s t~ issu~ ~ ~. ~t ~d ~lly ~ive efie~ ~ ~ iubje~ of ~ffic ~F ec~, ~e st~I report ~ ~ i~m of P~S ~th the i~ o~ ~affic. b~m~ly sn~g ~ ~e ~age is not ~g e~p~d~. ~t~ut ~e~mg the s~ff repo~ add.ss ~e ~,e~d ~-s~t ~g ~pa~ o~ ~ p~ ~e City Co~ abed its ~on m ~kin~ ~is ~ w~ch was ~t ~ppor~ by 1V. CONCLUSION For ~e reasons s~d a~.., ~e Adel~ r~l~ r~st ~t t~ ~ Co~ a$~d~ ~en Byrd r?'Zi'ig I~:ZtFRO~' - EXHIBIT bllol~b tree mi oorrt~ _ EXHIBIT B5% RULE pl~nin[, Commissio'~ Rule .. First Floor of Unit ~( 1,485 squ~e feet ~ H~f of 768 Squ~re Foot G~age Tot~ for U~t A 1,8~ sq~ f~t 35% of 1,~9 Square I~oot To~ for U~t A 6~ ~u~e f~t 921 ~uare F~t Propo~ = 49.3% ~crease Staff Calculagion Total Square Nootagt.: of Expanded Duplex 4,364 square feet -. 35% of 4,364 Total 1~527 square feet 21.1% of 4,~:)4 Total 921 square feet .! · C?-Z~-99 IS:Z? FROM- T-Z06 P.tl/!i F-6.~C 1 W~ TO S~~ MY~W~G or ~o~ ~~TY T~Y. ~ 10~ OF ~ ~ V.~ Of ~OUR ~L ~ ~~ i~ YOUR ~ ~~ ~~G YD~ V~ ~W ~ TO YOUR Y~ ~ ~K · window0 of VO~ nOM:~ ~ ~ W W~ L~ ~W~ m-u ~v~mu ~L-l/ Exhibi~ A - ,.~' Community Development · ' 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 cIT~ OF (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 CUPER TINO July 26, 1999 Henry & Nancy Adelman 10334 El Prado Way gA Cupertino, CA 95014 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Adelm~: Last Friday, we discussed two aspects for the Chieh application relative to presentations made at the Planning Commission and City Council hearings. You stated that the presentations were m~sleadi~g in two instances: 1. The Planning Commission was unaware of the discrepancy in the drawings for the east and west elevations relative to the 1st story roof over the family room and living room. You stated that the Commission might have responded differently had they been aware of the deviation in the elevations. 2. You were under the impression that the 1' 10" reduction in building height would be measured from the existing 'as built" condition rather than the 25' height depicted on the original plan set reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 10th. I told you that I did not agree with your position and asked you to review the videotapes. COmment re~zardin~ the elevation drawings of the "lower roof' Three elevations describe the roof height of the 1st story roof design. The west and north elevations place the roof ridge, at about the same height as the eave line of the upper floor roof. The east facing elevation incorrectly places the ridgeline lower than the eave line. Obviously, the west facing elevation, is the most critiC, al since it faces your property. The discrepancy was not directly discussed during the June 14th meeting. There was an indirect reference to the roof height during a discussion of the extension of the chimney height. The project architect briefly mentioned that the increase in the roof height caused the increase in the chimney height. I believe that the Commission was not aware of your concern about the height of the lower roof and thus focused its attention on the massing and privacy issues regarding the second floor construction. You did raise the issue at the July 19th City Council bearing. Your representative described the deviation and asked the City Council to require that the roof be lowered. Later in the meeting, the project sponsor confu'med that the ,/,est (and by default, the north) elevations were correct and the east was in. correctly drawn. The City Council chose not to approve your request to lower the roof. After the City Council hearing, the project architect corrected the construction drawings used to re-issue the permit. Comments re.~ardin.~ the hei.~ht of the 2nd story roof I am surprised by your position that the 1' 10" reduction in height should be measured from the existing construction. During my June 14a presentation, I presented a comparison drawing of the west facing elevation, which featured a hand drawn line to illustrate the height of the existing construction. The purpose was to compare the existing construction with the original May 10th plan set. I explained that the reduction from the original 25' high roof to a 23' 2" height was accomplished by the reduction in the floor to ceiling wall heights and the change in roof design and spans. When you review the June 14th videotape, you will see and hear Chairman Doyle request that the architect explain the change in height. The architect reiterated my earlier comments by explaining that the reduction was attributable to the change in wall height and the new roof design. During commission discussion following close of the hearing, Commissioner Steve'ns commented that he wished that the roof could be lowered further by using a clipped ceiling approach or by using a lower roof pitch. As you may recall the project architect discussed the problems associated with both ideas. Eventually, Commissioner Stevens stated that he would not pursue a further reduction. I believe that Commissioner Stevens knew that the floor to ceiling wall heights of the lower floor and upper floor were 8 feet and that the only way to lower the roof further was the two ideas that he expressed. Thus there is no practical way to lower the height of the present roof ridge beyond the reduction resulting from the change in roof span because the floor to ceiling heights are already at 8 feet, which is a reduction in heights from the original plan set. During the July 19th City Council presentation, I mentioned that the reduction in height was being achieved by the reduced floor to ceiling heights and the proposed floor plan changes resulting in a reduced span. I also mentioned that the "composite drawings" were shown to explain the relative differences between the gable and hip roof designs. The primary reduction in mass is achieved by the receding roof design at the building ends rather that the reduction in ridge height. Once again, please review the June 14th Planning Commission and July 19th City Council tapes. I hope that you will see my sincere attempt W explain the differences between the reduction in height from the existing construction condition and the original plan set. Please do not hesitate to call me to discussthis matter further. Sincerely, Robert S. Cowan, Director of Community Development RSC/ylk ¢: Chuck K. ilian, City Attorney f/phnnin~/mhc/cheih case · " " Exhibit B -I Declaration of Charles T. Kilian I, Charles T. Kilian, declare: 1) I am an attorney licensed to practice law before all courts of the State of California and am the City Attorney for the City of Cupertino. 2) In early April of 1999, I was contacted by attorney Kevin P. Cody, who informed me that he represented Mr. and Mrs. Henry Adelman, neighbors of property located at 10333 Degas Court, owned by Mr. and Mrs. Erch- Kong Chieh, who were seeking to remodel their existing duplex by adding .~. second story. 3) Mr. Cody informed me that the Adelmans were contesting the application for design review which would be considered by the City's planning commission on May 10, 1999. 4) Unfortunately, prior to the Chieh's submission of their application for design review, the City's planning department inadvertently issued a building permit for the remodel without a design review. The proposed second story was, thus, partially constructed before the error was discovered. 5) On or about April 22, 1999, I attended a private meeting with the City -.- planning staff, the Adelmans, Mr. Cody, and the Chiehs, (who attended PC/DIR/A without legal counsel). The purpose of the meeting was to discuss settlement of the various issues r~ised by the application and/or to answer questions concerning the planning commission's hearing with respect to the Chieh's application.. 6) The private meeting lasted over two hours and the conversation ranged from proposed alternatives and mitigation measures suggested by staff and the Adelmans to the procedure which would be utilized by the planning commission in. conducting the hearing. At that time, I commented that unlike most hearings of this nature, the design review for the Chieh's remodel proposal involved a consideration by the planning commission of the deSign plans for a structure which had been partially completed. I further indicated that it may be difficult for some planning commissioners to ignore the fact of the existing structure and, therefore, it was important that the planning commission be advised to consider the application on its own merits and without regard to the existing stmcture. ?) At the planning commission meeting of May 10, 1999, both the chair of the planning commission and I specifically advised the commission to consider the Chieh's proposal as if it were a new application and upon the assumption that construction had not started (attached hereto is a copy of the relevant minutes of the planning commission). PC/DIR/A 8) The planning commission approx~ed the application with several important modifications which required the Chiehs to remove a portion of the existing partially completed structure. 9) Upon appeal to the City Council, each Councilmember had before him or her a copy of the planning commission minutes which reflect the advice given to the planning commission, regarding the Chieh's application. 10) At no time did I ever render advice to the Council or to the planning commission which was inconsistent with the advice given as described in Paragraphs'/and 9 above. I declare the foregoing under penalty of perjury, and, if called as a witness I can competently testify thereto. ~~ PC/DII~JA May 10 Planning Commission Minu Planning Commission lVlinums 2 May,I 0, 1090 MOTION: 'Com. Kwok moved to postpone Application 2-6PA-98, 28-EA-95 to the" Sune 28, 1999' Planning Commission meeting SECOND: Com. Con- ABSENT: Com. Doyle ., · VOTE: Passed 4-0-0 ORAL COMMUNICATION: None CONSENT CALENDAR: None ARCHITECTURA.L AND SITE APPROVAL 2. Application No.: :- 4-ASA-99 Applicant: Erh-Kong & Ding-Wei Chieh Location: ° 10333 Degas Court Architectural and Site approval to allow the construction of a 9'/4 square foot second story addition to an .. ?::,. existing one-story duplex. ..?".7 .l~lanning Cornmi.~$ion dec,ion.final unle~.~ appealed Staff presentation: The video presentation reviewed the application for approval, of a 974 square root addition to an existing duplex, which has already been partially constrUcted, as the city inadvertently issued a building permit without having undergone architectural and site approval review. The building permit has been suspended until the Planning Commission makes a decision on the application. Staff has met with thc applicant and two property owners located to the west of the Chieh's parcel which will be negatively affected by the second story addition~ however, the applicint and the other property owners have been unable to reach a satisfactory agreement. The applicant plans to incorporate the privacy protection elements from the R-1 ordinance, and also prepared two optional plans to show ways to prevent the neighbors from being able to look onto each other's property, as outlined in the attached staff report. Staff recommends approval of the application provided the applicant incorporates privacy control mechanisms from both Option A and Option 13 into the project. A decision will be considered final unless an appeal is filed within 14 calendar days. Chair Harris noted that the application will be approached based on the assumption that construction has not started. However, staff does not recommend that the Planning Commission take the position that a tw6 story building can be rejected, unless the applicant fails to comply with ordinance requirements and cannot demonstrate feasible mitigation measures. Mr. Charles Kilian, City Attorney, concurred that the application should be gonsldered n< it' it were a new apolication in the hence that there would he mn h,~iltllng on the property,. He said he felt it was ~'lTc:hitectutal and site revie~v, which allows second stories in this zone subject to the guidelines with respect to privacy and mass intrusion that may be found. It does not provide for a carte blanche denial of thc second story° which is covered under the single family residential; therefore what is presented is a determination of whether the staff recommendations are adequate to protect the privacy and are otherwise reasonable. Mr. Robert Cowan, Community Development Director, said that it was a unique situation that warranted additional review. Referring to a conceptual map of the neighborhoo, d, he illustrated the location of two other two story duplexes and the location of the applicant's property showinl~ the relationship to thc ~ adjoining, properties. He said that the General Plan, general duplex ordinance and precedent and findings -" for approval o'.f an architectural site approval needed to/be considered in reaching a deci-,iion on thc application. Mr. Cowan reviewed the background of the item, the R2 zoning regulations, compliance with R.2 developmeqt standards, and compliance with RI design m{d privacy standards, as summarized in thc Exhibit C "I 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, CA 950[4 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-333'3 Community Development Department SUMMARY AGENDA NO. AGENDA DATE July 19, ! 999 APPLICATION SUMMARY: APPEAL of an Architectural & Site Approval, File No. 4-ASA- 99, to allow a first and second story addition to an existing one-story duplex located at 10333 Degas Court. ~;~.';~. ~. x~" BACKGROUND: There are two different appellants in this matter: 1) Erh-Kong & Ding Wci Chieh, the ASA applicants, who have appealed the Commission decision in order to 6xpeditc the decision-making process (Exhibit A), and 2) Henry and Nancy Adeiman, 10334 El Prado Way, represented by the law offices of Owen Byrd, who have appealed the decision based on assertions that the Planning Commission erred in making the findings required to support the ._ approval (Exhibits B & C). The Planning Commission reviewed this item at its hearings on May i 0'h and June 14'". Copies of the previous staff repons are attached (Exhibits D & E). Project Information APPLICATION NO.(S): 4-ASA-99 it.'.. APPLICANT: Erh-Kong & Ding-Wei Chieh LOCATION: 10333 Degas Court General Plan Designation: Medium Low Density Residential 5-10 DU per acre Zoning Designation: Residential Duplex R2-4.25 (4,250 sq.ff, land area/dwelling unit) Environmental Clearance: Categorical Exemption under Section 15301, Class i(e)(I) CEQA Ouidelines .. Lot Area Net: 9,235 sq. ft. Lot Area Gross: -9,873 sq. fL (with flag, not half stree0 Existing Lot Coverage: 36.2% Corrected Proposed Lot Coverage: 37.2% Existing FAR: 36.2% Corrected Proposed FAR: 47.2% (previously 47. 6%) Building Height: 23' 2" (previously 25feeO Corrected Existing Building Area: 3,348 sq.ff. (previously 3,340 sq.fi.) Corrected Proposed Building Area, 1" Floor Unit A Kitchen Bump-out 25.32 sq.ff. 2 Unit A Bay Windows (floor area): 28 sq.ft. Unit A EnU'y Fill-in: 21.38 sq.ff. Unit B Dining Area Exvansion: 20 sq.ff. Total Proposed 1" Floor Area: 94.7 sq.ft. Revised Proposed Building Area, 2'a Floor*: 921 sq.ff. (previously 9.54 sq:ft.) Corrected Total Building Area: 4,364 sq. ft. (previously 4,397.vq../t) , *Note: Using the new floor area definition, the stairwell square footage was counted tbr the first and second stories DISCUSSION: Stafflssues: Staff erroneously issued a building permit for an addition to this duplex without Architectural and Site Approval (ASA) in February 1999. When mitigating design changes to the duplex could not be mediated by staff between the affected parties and the applicant, staff issued a stop work order on construction in late April 1999. When the applicants submitted an ASA application, staff initially recommended a set oD'R-I style', privacy protection measures which included: 1) privacy landscaping per the R-I plant list. 2) obscure glass windows and 3) an architectural planter box to block the line of sight from the applicant's master bedroom to the neighbor's rear yard. This recommendation was rejected by the Planning Commission in favor of more restrictive measures to protect privacy (,%e Planning Commission Issues). Applicant Issues: The applicant, Mr. Chieh, stated the objectives of his ASA application were to: 1) provide an addition of two bedrooms, 1 bath and 1 family room to accommodate his 2 children and out-of-the-area in-laws; 2) minimize disturbance of unit B where the Chiehs are currently and the other set of in-laws reside); 3) control construction costs by using some of the former layout and structures; and 4) maintain the integrity of the duplex. The applicant discussed the various design alternatives suggested by the neighbors and explained why each of them did not meet their needs. The first alternative was a one-story addition in the courtyard which would net only about 300 square feet because of building coverage restrictions and awkward arrangement of rooms. The second alternative would consolidate unit A & B into a single unit and build the second unit above the garage and the old unit B. This alternative did not work tbr the Chiehs because the in-laws that would be living in unit B are elderly and not in good health which would make it difficult to climb the stair~ daily. The third alternative would move the in- laws to the existing unit A and build a larger dwelling out of unit B over the garage and a portion of unit B. This alternative was also rejected by the Chiehs based on Commission direction to limit the size of the second story square footage base on the first story unit. Neighbor Issues: One neighbor, the Adelmans, who reside on El Prado Way, have prepared a more detailed appeal letter dated July 14, 1999 (Exhibit C) through ~eir attorney Owen Byrd. The letter states why the ASA findings cannot be made and thus the reasons why their appeal should be granted. Staff has prepared comments on each assertion made in the Adelman appeal letter. lA.Thc project at the proposed location will bc detrimental or injurious to property in thc vicinity because ora substantial loss of privacy to surrounding neighbors, loss of direct and indirect natural li~,ht to neighbors and to heat pool, imposition of artificial light at night, and unbuffcred noise from the second story addition. Staff Comments: Privacy design features have been required in the project to an even greater extent than required in the R-I zoning district. Measures include privacy landscaping: windows with high window sills, obscured glass, minimum sized openings and~or fixed or reverse awning ~i!.;~ window types and rearrangement of floor plan. There will be some blockage of direct sunlight to neighbors caused by the privacy iand~'caping. not the building. The building height will be reduced to a little more than 2$ feet-OOJbet is allowed in an R-2 zoning district). The perceived building height to the Adelmar~v will he actually 19feet since the project site is 4feet lower than the western neighbors. 'The same ._. privacy landscaping that blocks some direct sunlight will block the artificial night light thc, neighbors are concerned about. Staff is not sure what type of potential second-story noises thc, neighbor finds objectionable. Solar heating of the pool is not an issue. The effective height of the proposed building is ! O./i.,et. which is setback 20+feet from the property line and 25+feet from the pool and would not cast shadows on the pool. The privacy landscaping may cast some morning shadows on Ihe pool hut the pool is more effectively heated by noontime and afternoon sunlight which is not a project issue since it is located to the east of these neighbors. ! IA1. Reversing the second-floor bedroom and bathroom will not mitigate the privacy impacts because there will still be a bathroom window. Staff Comments: Staff does not agree with the appellant's argument regarding the loss o./' privacy. Flipping the floor plan to put the master bedroom on the east side and the bathroom and walk-in closet on the west side toward the neighbors is a major improvement in ~teighbor privacy because you ~ubstitute a larger bedroom window for a smaller bathroom window which is required to have a sill height of 5 '6" per Condition #2 of Planning Commission Re.volution #5049. The tallest member of the Chieh household is $ 'I1 ". The required window sill height i.v 6 inches taller than required in the R-I ordinance. lA2. The proposed landscaping will not mitigate the privacy impacts because landscaping near the fence is in a wire clearance easement and must be pruned to a 1 S-foot height which reduces its screeninlz value. Staff Comments: The Planning Commission did not require the applicant to move the privac'y landscaping closer to the duplex because that area was 4feet lower than the adjacent properties and it would take longer for the vegetation to grow to an adequate height to a. ffbrd any screening effect. The appellants have also misread the PG&E wire clearance easement, which limits buildings and structures, not vegetation, to no more than 15feet in the easement area. While it may not be desirable to have 15+feet tall vegetation in the easement area. it is not prohibited. There are numerous examples of trees in the neighborhood, on the applicant ~' property and on the appellant's property which are more than 15+ feet tall and in the wire clearance easement area. In situations involving low voltage lines like these and mature vegetation, P.G & E. ~' policy is to prune, rather than, remove trees. lA3. The project will cause a reduction in the Adelman's property value of at least 10% which is detrimental and injurious. Staff.Comments: Staff are not realtors or appraisers and are not qualified to ewduale .vpecific' decreases or increases in value. We know however that many factors, including general economic conditions, affect housing values and that realtors/appraisers during the R-! zoning amendment hearings made just the opposite argument that the lack of ability to add a second story to a dwelling (square footage) will also decrease property values. lB. The project proposes an abrupt change in building scale and will result in an abrupt transition in height and bulk between new and existing buildings. Staff Comments: In staff's opinion, a new two-story duplex in a neighborhood of mostly one- and some two-story duplexes is not "an abrupt change in building scale ". The proposed building height of 23 '2" to the ridge of the roof is modest considering the maximum height in t- the R-2 zoning district is 30feet and the lower grade difference to the easterly neighbors o. f 4 ':'"' feet. Contrary to the appellant's opinion, staff believes the hipped roof makes a significant difference in the mass of the structure which is a function of its height, length and width. Typically, a partial flag lot situation, such as the applicant's lot, makes it di~i¢'ult to relate the design to so many affected lots (6 in this case), but staff feels the applicant has done a superior job in mitigating privacy effects and mass. The multitude of affected lots is however not unique in this R-2 subdivision;for example, the adjacent property, 10322 Degas Court, abuts 5 duplexes and 10311 Lockwood Drive abuts 5 duplex properties as well. The appellants have misinterpreted staff comments with respect to the inapplicability finding 2a to the project (Exhibit F). Staff asserts that,4S,4 finding 2a (CML' ,~eaion ! 9.134. 080) which states: "Abrupt changes in building scale should be avoided. A gradual transition related to height and bulk should be achieved between new and existing buildings. "does not apply to this particular project because it is based on General Plan Policy 2-25, stratelCy #5 (Exhibit F) which states: "Generally, abrupt changes in building scale should be avoided. ,4 more gradual transition between buildings of one and two stories and low-rise to mid-rise buildings..~'hould be 4 .... achieved using three-story and four-story buildings at the edge of the project site." This ASA finding was meant to apply to development situations where there were high-rise buildings proposed next to one- and two.story buildings not a situation where a two-story building is proposed next to a one-story building. ICl, 1C2, & 1C3. The location and height of the walls will not harmonize with adjacent development because the project does not comply with the new R-I development standards. Staff Comments: B would be difficult to "harmonize" the second story walls with adjacent development since all of the abutting duplexes are one-story in height. Recognizing this, the Planning Commission directe, d the applicant to use the R-I 'development standard~' c~' a guide in modifying the design of the duplex even though the property is zoned R-2. In addition, the Commission directed that the applicant to use a more restrictive formula./hr 2nd story square footage to Ist story square footage. The net effect is a 2nd story to Ist story square.fi~otage ratio of 21. I% in lieu of the R-I maximum of 3,5%. The comparisons are summarized in Table 2 of the June 14th staff report. In most other aspects the approved duplex design meets or excee&' the R-I standards except for: 1) second story side setbacks 06.'58'vs. 4-5 ') and 2) maximum one- story height without second-story-type setback (I 4.,5' vs. 12" (former standard was' 1.5 ')). Contrary to appellant's statement, the approved duplex meets the R-I standard of having -50% of the perimeter second story wall offset a minimum of 4 feet from the first story wall plane. 1 C4. The three existing second-story duplexes in the neighborhood have greater second-story setbacks, fewer moms, less square footage and are located on comer lots which is further evidence that the project will not harmonize with adjacent development. Staff Comments: Staff did not have time to research completely the -,'izes and room counts of Ibc other 2-story duplexes at 22861 Medina Lane, 10303 Degas' Court and 227-553 Voss Avenue. The duplexes on Medina Lane and Degas Court appear smaller than the project but the one on I/oss Avenue is definitely larger. Records show a 4,809 square foot, two-story duplex with a 5-5% · .< F.A.R. For the sake of comparison the appealed Degas Ct. duplex ia' proposed at 4.364 square ..: feet with a 47.2% F.A.R. The garage square footages do not appear to be in the appellant ~' duplex comparisons. ID. Lightinl~ will spill-over and impact adjoining property owners. Staff Comments: As previously stated, privacy landscaping that inhibits views into surrounding properties will also act to alleviate nighttime light intrusion. 1E. The desitin of this new project in an existinl~ residential neighborhood will not I~rotect residents from noise, traffic, light and visually intrusive effects. Staff Comments: The duplex addition is for an extended family which includes both sets of in- laws. Light and visual effects have already been addressed in previous comments. ,Vtaff is still unsure what additional noise the appellant finds offensive. The garage is not being expanded, so staff is unsure what significant amount of new traffic will be generated. II. & IV. If the findings can not be made for this project, then this project must be denied. Thc illegal partial construction to date should not influence the Council to approve the project. Staff Comments: In reference to the June 14th 3taff report, the City Attorney advised the Commission that a second story on the property cannot be denied carte blanche unless the Commission were to make findings that the applicant could not mitigate privacy and design issues. The City Attorney emphasized that the primary objective of the Architectural and Site Approval process is to evaluate design related mitigation measures' such as greater building setbacks, wing walls, window shutters and non-transparent glass. Planning Commission Issues The Planning Commission majority concluded that the applicant met the Commission's direction given at its meeting of May 10~' and approved the ASA application on a 3-1-I vote (Doyle dissenting and Harris absent). Commissioner Doyle, who was not present at the May I 0'~' meeting, stated that he hoped the neighborhood could work things out. He stated that the second ,e. :. story should be rendered invisible as much as possible. He stated more work needed to be done ~i~'~~. :,..and could not support the present proposal. RECOMMENDATION: - Staff recommends that the appeals be denied and that the appwval of application no. 4-ASA-99 be supported. Enclosures: Planning Commission Resolution No. $049 Approved Plans Exhibit A: Chieh appeal letter Exhibt B: Adelman (Owen Byrd) appeal letter Exhibit C: Revised Adelman (Owen Byrd) appeal letter Exhibit D: Planning Commission staff report dated May 10, 1999 Exhibit E: Planning Commission staff report dated June 14, 1999 Exhibit F: ASA finding and General Plan Policy on "Abrupt Changes in Scale" · ... ;-. Composite Plan (Original submittal ~d recommended plan set) Planning Commission meeting minutes for May l0~ and June 14'b, 1999 Neighbor Petition Reviewed by: Approved by: Robert S. Cowan - Director of Community Development City Manager (}:planning/pdreport/cc/ccchieh 6 Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 C]'I~ OF FAX (408) 777-3333 CUPEI iNO Community Developme,~l Departmcnl SUMMARY Agenda No. / '~ Agenda Date: November 1, 1999 Application No.(s): 8-U-99, 21-EA-99 Applicant: HOK Architects (Symantec) Property Owner: Sates/Regis Group Location: 20330 Tone Avenue Project Data: Existing building .area: 140,000 sq. ft. Proposed Addition: 1750 sq. ft. Total Building Area: 141,750 sq. ft. Bldg. Height: 15' (addition) General Plan Designation: Retail, Corem, Office and Residential (City Center Planning Area) Environmental Assessment: Negative Declaration recommended Project Consistency with General Plan: Yes Zoning: Yes PROJECT SUMMARY: Appeal of a use permit to construct a 1750 square foot learning center tbr Symantec Corporation. The building is one story and is designed to accommodate from 90 to 100 seats .located in a semi- circular auditorium. BACKGROUND: Mayor Wally Dean filed the appeal of the Planning Commission approval of this project (see enclosed letter). Symantec Corporation elected not to occupy its newly constructed building on DeAnza Boulevard. The company purchased two existing buildings in City Center known as City Center ! and II. The attached exhibits describe the location of the two buildings. Since Symantec's main corporate functions will be held in the two buildings, the applicant is seeking permission to modify the buildings to include activities that would have been included in the new De Anz~.t Boulevard building. Symantec wants to convert 6,000 square feet of office space into a cati~tcria and to build the proposed learning center on the south side of the complex. (Reti:r to exhibit sheet A 1 ) The attached exhibit labeled "site images" contains photographs which describe the site and surrounding environment. DISCUSSION: There are three fundamental issues involving the subject application: I. The additional expansion of office building space in City Center 2. Aesthetic considerations involving the site planning and architecture. 3. Use of facility by public and non-profit entities. Building Expansion: The City Center planning area is built out in terms of allocated office space. Additional hotel, commercial retail, and residential construction can occur within the City Center. Since the proposed learning center represents a physical expansion of an office building, the discussion centers on the issue of amenity space. Amenity space is non-traffic generating building area in excess of that allowed by the general plan floor area ratios and special bonus space allocations, it allows some flexibility to building owners to create space that enhances the working experience of employees and/or the community at large. Please refer to exhibit A, which contains background information regarding amenity space. In Mhy of 1998, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution refining the concept o1' amenity space. Refer to Exhibit A, which contains the Planning Commission's resolution. When the matter went to City Council, Council asked staffto convene a task three consisting o1' representatives from the Council, Commission and the business community. The task Ibree met on June I 1, 1998. The general conclusion of the meeting was to utilize the commission's approach of specifically listing activities that best represent the intent of the amenity space policy. The members of the group suggested some additional uses beyond those adopted by the Commission. The next step in the process was for the City staffto prepare a revised development intensity manual that would include among other things a proposed re-dra['t o~' the amenity space policy. The City's contract long range planner is currently re-draffing the entire intensity manual including this section. Staff'anticipates that it will be heard by the Planning Commission in November. In the interim, it is suggested that review of the subject application be based upon a blend of existing rules and the commission's 1998 resolution. The applicant's intent is to convert approximately 6,000 square fi~et o[' employee generated space into a cafeteria and expand the building by virtue ora 1750 square Ibot "learning center." On the surface, the proposal seems to be fairly straightforward. While some may define the learning center as amenity space, the applicant does not intend to classify the learning center as amenity space in the context of the subject application. The aforementioned Commission resolution 4914 mentions that previously designated amenity space in buildings may be relocated as long as the square footage does not increase. The recommended policy does not specifically address a situation where internal space is reconfigured to amenity space and new external space is added. This situation is common. When a building is sold to new uses, the building(s) are often re-configured to meet the particular needs of the new user. In this instance, Symantec is seeking permission to re-configure the space to meets its needs by virtue of a cafeteria and the new learning center. All participants in the discussion of amenity space agree that a cafeteria is amenity space. In Symantec's case, 2 employee generated building space will be decreased by 6,000 square t~et. Therelbre. from a traffic perspective the site could accommodate the proposed 1750 square lbot learning center. Another way of looking at this conversion is to assume that Symantec Corporation elected to convert existing interior space to a learning center, then build a new cafeteria on the south end of the building. This approach represents a much clearer example o f expand ing b u il d i n g area v ia amenity space. The recently approved 141,000 square foot Symantec office building on DeAnza Boulevard represents a situation that is very similar to the issue at hand. The Symantec office building is an L-shaped building. A cafeteria was added in the rear courtyard. The cafeteria space which is depicted on the attached sheet' labeled "Symantec site plan intbrmational diagram" was not included in the allowed 141,000 square feet. The initial rationale for the amenity space policy pertained to traffic generation and has since been expanded to involve building mass. The general plan establishes building limits based upon traffic generation. The issue of architecture and building mass is addressed by other elements of the general plan that pertain to setback ratios, height ratios and other constraints involving physical development. In that sense, the concept of physically expanding the proposed office building to include the learning center does not violate the general build-out principals by virtue of the amenity space policy. The issue of aesthetics is discussed in the next section of this report. SITE AND ARCHITECHURAL DISCUSSION: Mayor Wally Dean's appeal is based on the building shape. The attached exhibits do a thorough job of identifying the existing setting and the proposed construction. The exhibit identified as "site images" provides color photographs, which describe the site in detail. The project sponsor's initial solution was to utilize design and materials that distinguish the proposed structure from the existing building. At the environmemal review committee meeting, there was discussion about the project aesthetics, primarily in terms of the suggestion given to the applicant to explore architecture that blends rather than contrasts with the existing building architecture. While the fundamental shape that was initially proposed remains, the revised plan utilizes materials that exist in the present building. The staff architectural advisor also commented on the need to blend the architectural form and materials. The colored perspective rendering depicts the proposed development. The drawing illustrates ' furniture and lighting panels behind the windows which highlight the transparent nature ol' the glazing. The applicant proposes to use spandrel glass to mimic the glazing in the existing tbur- story building and to control lighting and sound in the auditorium. The city's architectural advisor agrees with staffthat the spandrel glass will not read as vision glass, particularly at night when building lighting shines through the glass. The advisor would rather use th;: solid material that exists on the existing building rather than spandrel glass. Staff suggests that the applicant's architect be asked to describe the net effect of the opaque-spandrel glass versus vision glass both in terms of the operation of the learning center and the external appearance. Staff suggests that the vision glass would make the building more transparent, which would make the building less massive. The proposed building will be located in close proximity to the existing fbuntain. Mayor Dean, in his role as Environmental Review Committee Chairperson, asked the applicant to address the existing fountain in terms of design symmetry and function. However, the City's architectural advisor and the Planning Commission addressed this issue and confirmed their support o1' the fountain level as proposed. The building is approximately 15 feet high measured to the top of the thce. This height is lower than most single story, single family residences. The section drawing on Sheet A-5 describes the height and scale of the development as compared to a human figure. You will note that the colored exhibit describes full-grown trees. The applicant will install 36" box trees paralleling the semi-cimle building. The initial p!anting will be approximately i 2-15' tall or roughly as high as the tOp of the parapet of the building. The proposal infills part of the rear facing plaza of building two and to a certain extent, increases the potential for additional activity from training center participants taking breaks. Although the colored rendering depicts the site as being active, in reality activity in the plaza area will be limited to a few people. The major entrance to the building is in the front open courtyard at the north end of building two and not the rear doors that exit to the patio near the learning center. Those doors are card-keyed controlled. In staff's judgment this activity would have minimal impacts on the Classic Communities residential development across Torre Avenue to the southeast. The proposal does not generate a need for new parking because its use is intended ibr existing employees who currently park in the adjoining parking garages. Based upon the applicants stated use, there should not be a detrimental aflbct in terms o1' activity to the residential neighborhood. The placement of the one-story building in the tbreground o1' the adjoining four story buildings reflects the "sand pile" architectural approach advocated by the general plan to soften the appearance of high buildings. PUBLIC ACCESS: The Commission required that the applicant extend the use of the Learning Center to the Community. The enclosed letter, based on a similar Apple Computer agreement, was incorporated as a condition of approval. Planning Commission: The Planning Commission supported the request subject to public access to the Learning Center, and to the glass being "vision" glass. Public: There were no public comments. 4 RECOMMENDATION: Environmental Consideration: Negative Declaration recommended. The Planning Commission recommends approval. Enclosures: Appeal letter Planning Commission Resolution 5070 Planning Commission minutes of September 13 and 27, 1999 Exhibit A - Amenity Space Exhibit Symantec cafeteria drawing for the DeAnza Boulevard property Applicant's letter regarding community use of Learning Center, Apple Computer letter regarding same Negative Declaration Initial Study Plan Set S bmitted By: ~~ ,~ ~. oved y: Robert S. Cowan D~lg~i'o~, City Manager Director of Community Development g/planning/c¢/ccgu99 City Hall, 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 777-3212 ~fl' FAX: (408) 777-3366 Cupertino OFFICE'OF'rHE'M'A'YOI~ -- Kimberly Smith City Clerk 10300 Torte Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 Re: Appeal of 8-U-99, HOK Architects (for Symantec Corporation) Dear Ms. Smith: I wish to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission regarding application No. 8-U-99 and 21- EA-99, filed by HOK Architects. I am appealing this decision because I believe that the shape of the proposed addition does not work with the existing building and fountain. Sincerely, , 8-U-99 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 5070 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A 1,750 SQ. FT. ADDTION (LEARNING CENTER) AT AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit, as described in Section II. of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: 1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this rifle. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Use Permit is hereby approved; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No.$-U-99 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of September 27 1999, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. Resolution No. 5070 8-U-99 September 27, 1999 Page-2 SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: 8-U-99 Applicant: HOK Architects Location: 20330 Torre Avenue (For Symantec Corp.) SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1: APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is granted based upon Exhibit labeled "Symantec CC2, Proposed Learning Center', Sheets A0 through A5 dated 6/3/99 and L-1 dated 7/1/99, except that the awning leading to the main entrance may be removed. 2. LEARNING CENTER .. The 1750 square foot "Learning Center" is conditionally approved contingent upon the reconstruction of approximately 6,000 square'feet of office space to cafeteria space as depicted on Sheet Al. The Learning Center shall be available for public or non-profit uses as described in the Symantec letter of September 20, 1999. 3. GLAZING The Learning Center shall use "vision" glass similar in color to the existing buildings. 4. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 2. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Surface flow across public sidewalks may be allowed in the R-l, R-2 and R-3 zones unless storm drain facilities are deemed Resolution No. 5070 8-U-99 September 27, 1999 Page-3 necessary by the City Engineer. Development in all other zoning districts shall be served by on site storm drainage facilities connected to the City storm drainage system. If City storm drains are not available, drainage facilities shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 3. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. 4. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits. a. Cheeldng & Inspection Fees: $ 5% of Improvement Cost or $1,975.00 min b. Development Maintenance Deposit: $3,000.00 c. Storm Drainage Fee: $480.00/aere d. Power Cost: N/A e. Map Checking Fees: N/A f. Park Fees: N/A g. Reimbursement fee: To be determined from reimbursement agreement The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 5. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. 6. DEDICATION OF WATERLINE The developer shall execute a quitclaim deed for underground water rights to City of Cupertino and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water Company for water service to the subject development. Resolution No. 5070 8-U-99 September 27, 1999 Page-4 CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEE .RING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV. of this Resolmion conform to generally accepted engineering practices. Bert Viskovich, City Engineer PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27* day of September, 1999, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll eaU'vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Kwok, Stevens and Chairman Doyle NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Harris ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/ Robert S. Cowan /s/ David Doyle Robert S. Cowan David Doyle, Chairman Director of Community Development Cupertino Planning Commission g:/pdreporffres/res8u99 Planning Commission Minutes ? September 13.1909 -- MOTION: Com. Harr-~oved to approve Application 3-TM-99, accordina lo the model (' resolution, inclu~l~ the amendment to Condition 3 Ibr tree replacement SECOND: Com. Corr NOES: Com. Kwok ~ ' VOTE: Passed ~.~-0 10. Application No.(s): 8-U-99, 21-EA-99 Applicant: HOK Architects Location; 20330 Torre Avenue (for Symantec Corporation) Use permit to construct a 1,750 sq. ft. addition (Learning Center) at an existing office building Planning Commission decision final unless, appealed Continued from Planning Commission meeting of dugust 9. 1999 Staff presentation: The video presentation reviewed the application to construct a 1.750 square foot learning center for Symantec Corporation. Two issues for discussion include the additional · expan, sion of the office building space in City Center and aesthetic considerations iqvolving the site planning and architecture. Staff recommends approval of the application subject to thc drafted conditions of approval. A decision to approve or deny the application will be coqsidered fiqal, and not forwarded to City Council unless appealed within 14 calendar days. Mr. Robert Cowan, Community Development Director, referred to the site plan, aqd catbtcria plaq drawing and discussed the proposed expansion, as outlined in the attached stall' report. Mr. Rich Dowd, HOK Architects, discussed the proposed changes and the qe~.xl lbr additioqal · .. square footage over and above what has been previously approved. He addressed thc Iocatio,~ el' the fountain issue and reported that they felt the current location was the most suitable, taking into consideration the tree replacement and the form-of the auditorium. He added that it maintained adequate opening between the fountain and the existing building to allow a clear path imo the back entry of the building. Mr. Dawd explained that they would prefer to deal with the elimination el' the canopy from the original proposal as a separate issue at a later date, in order to allow ample time to study all entries and come up with a similar design that would work tbr all co,~ditioqs. I added they concurred with staff in terms of not going with spandrel glass in f~avor or vision glass. Mr. Jeff Birdwell, Sales/Regis Group, discussed whether Symantec would be willing to ,hake the learning center facility available to the public or non-profit groups. He said that it had been discussed internally and it was their position to ask that the Planning Commission not condilioq the applicant to provide that space as available for the public. However, Symantec wot, Id in reality consider and be open to the idea on a case-by-case basis to make thc facility available responsible non-profit groups or the city of Cupertino. He stated for the record that the coqtact would be the senior vice president John Sorci at Symantec. In response to Com. Corr's question about the availability of restrooms tbr outside groups, Mr. Birdwell said that those details would have to be worked out. and that restrooms were inside training area. He noted that Symantec currently maintained 24 hour security. He said that parkiqg was available in the parking structure for City Center ! and !! beneath the apartments. Relative to the learning center being conditioned to public use, Mr. Birdwell explained that il was '. .... . unprecedented for a private company to create a facility for themselves and have a condition placed upon them to require public access. He noted that certain corporations otter such a service, Pla,ming Commission Minutes ~ September 13. IOt)O but he was not familiar with the conditio,~ bei,g imposed by a public body or mtmicip:dity o,] (" private property owner. He reiterated that Symantec was prepared iii good faith, o,~ a case-by-case basis, to make it available, but he did not feel it was appropriate from a land use :md conditioning standpoint to do that. Com. Harris pointed out that the facility was located in a part of the city designed to serve bofll il~c private and public interests; and that Symantec was requesting a 2 to I FAR which was unprecedented in the city. Mr. Birdwell said that the building would be ADA compliant if accessible tO the public. Chair Doyle opened the meeting for public input; there was no one present who wished to speak. Com. Corr said that relative to looking at the amenity space location, lie considered thai thc proposed new piece of the structure would not be considered as an ame,fity, but would bo an addition to the building; but the cafeteria would be considered amenity space because il' it wa.s community use, (although he did not support a condition stating they had to do that), a,d wot, Id generate traffic, even though it is considered community traffic. He said in terms of the a,nesfity space, he would look at the cafeteria space, and this would be new space: after which lie cot, Id support the concept of the project. Com. Harris said that it is conditioned in the proposal to convert the 6,000 square tbet tocafeteria which will be amenity space to allow it. She said there is a need to provide space for cosnmtmity use and felt a condition should be included for usage for a minimum of tbur times per year by :. .. non-profit groups or city use. Mr. Cowan said there were no formal requirements included in Hewlett-Packard or Apple agreements; however, the ability of the city to request the use of the space existed. Lalter in meeting, following research, Mr. Cowan clarified that the basic conditio,~s of approwd Ibr Apple did not include public access, but a letter agreement existed regarding; I think Ihere was anolhcr separate agreement Com. Stevens said he supported the addition; and stated that it was unique and would blend iii with the city. Corns. Kwok and Corr said they supported the addition. Coin. Harris said she supported the addition if it was tied to public access, for use approximately 4 times per year by non-profit groups or the city. Without the condition for public use, she said she w°uld not support the application. Com. Doyle said he was opposed to the addition based on prior experiei~ce a.,~d movement of amenity space. He said they have attempted for some time to put bou,daries amenity space; however, have not adopted any. There was consensus that the design of the addition was appropriate, as well as the land, cape screening. Com. Harris said that the architect's opinion on the location of the fountain should be reviewed. and he should be present to explain his justification. Later in the meeting, she said that she w:~.~ opposed to leaving the fountain as is. Com. Corr said that the architect should be more specific about his opinion of the fountain location. He said he was not opposed to its location. Com. Kwok "-' said that the location of the fountain was suitable, and later said he also waqted to hear ll~e '-~. architect's opinion. Com. Stevens said he wanted clarification on what the arehitecl waqlcd /./.:.-/z.,. Planning Commission ~linutes '~ Scplc,llbcr 13. I t)~)¢) .-- relative to the fountain, but lie was not opposed to its Iocatio, . Chair Doyle said lh~tl hc I~:11 Iht fountain should be moved to reflect the contour, aqd that it should be balauced. Mr. Dawd said that lie met with Larry Canno~ relative to all the issues, including thc Ii, catkin the fountain. He discussed the rationale for the location oi~ the fountain and answered questions. Ms. Wordell said that the architect's concern about the fountain was that it was in an awkward position, and a pedestrian using the courtyard would need to walk around the lbuntain iii t~rdcr have access to the outside entrance. Relative to a condition calling for public access, Com. Stevens said that he did not 1'c¢1 it was necessary to have a condition require public access. Com. Kwok coqcurred that a conditk~n was not necessary; however, said he agreed as long as Symantec was receptive to qo,l-prot~t and city use four times per year. Com. Corr said that he concurred also that it need not be a condition set forth, but hoped that Symantec would follow through on their promise to allow non-prot~t grot, p.~ and city use of the learning center. Com. Harris said that she would not approve without a Written condition, and that it should move with the land, as Symantec could be out or' thc buildi,lg tomorrow; as they never moved in the DeAnza Boulevard building. She reiten~tcd that il' it is ntlt a condition, it is not a commitment. Com. Harris said that it would not be considered amenity space, and the only reason she would approve it is they are converting three times that much id' existing bi, tiding that is not amenity space that is currently used space to what is agreed is amenity which is the cafeteria for existing employees. She said she t~:lt having classroom available to the public 4 times a year is worth the tradeoff. Chair Doyle said that they sh:mld have some level of' commitment from Symantec or at least the building owner that this will hc some public good. As a result of Mr. Cowan's research, Com. Harris read the contents of a letter I'rom C;len I~arber ~1' Apple to the city, which agreed to an organizational commitment to have the I~,lcilities t~l' thc amphitheater and central courtyard as well ns auditorium available tt~ the public I'~r cvcnt.~ sponsored by the city 2 or 3 times a year, and for public events sponsored by the city man.'~gcr during non-working hours In response to Com. Con's question if the applicant would consider entering into a similar agreement, Mr. Birdwell said that he felt confident that Mr. Somi or' Syn~aqtec w~)t, ld .,;ign similar letter, and would likely broaden it to say not just city sponsored events, butbonal~dc ,~t~u- profit groups as well. He offered his personal commitment to have a letter I'rom Syma,ltcc delivered to the city within two weeks. He requested a copy of the letter t'rom Apple u.~ a sotsrcc of reference. MOTION: Com. Harris moved to continue Application 8-U-99 and 21-EA-~9 to thc September 27, 1999 Planning Commission meeting SECOND: Com. Stevens Chair Doyle summarized that the Planning Commission was voting to continue the application pending receipt of a letter from the applicant stating their proposed intentions Ibr public access. and the summary from the architect that he has reviewed the changes and any input lie submits. Mr. Birdwell expressed his concern about asking Mr. Sorci for a letter in the same spirit il' thc public hearing was left open. He said that it'the public hearing was left open, the possibility exists that any number of issues might be raised, and they could find themselves in u p~sitk~,~ ~1' Planning Commission ~vlinutes IO .";cptcmbcr 13, continuing; as they have already released their working dmwi,~gs for the pro. jcct with (" complete co,~struction by December 31st. NOES: Com. Corr and Chair Doyle VOTE: Passed 3-2-0 Planning Commission Minutes z September 27, 1999 - 7. Application No.(s): 9-£XC-99, 24-£A-99 (. Applicant:.,, Brian O'CJrady Location: ~ 10645 Cordova,Road (Lot B) Hillside Exception to ~ anew 3,133 squar~ foot residence on an existing lot. Planning Commission ~cision finai unless appealed Continued from 9, 1999 Request continuance Commission meeting of September 13, 1999 MOTION: Com. $, 6 sad 7 to the October 11, 1999 Plannin~ SECOND: Com. S~'vms VOTE: Passed 4-0-0 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: CONSENT CALENDAR: 2. Application No.: Applicant. Location: 20830 Stevens Arc:hite~tural r,~i~'w to place a mural on tho nozth extn-ior wall of an ~xisting food market. Planning Commission decision final unless appealed SECOND: Com. Corr ABSENT: Com. Harris VOTE: Passed 4-0-0 lt~n 3 was r~noved from thc Cons~t Calendar for discussion.~ 3. Application No.(s): g-U-99, 2 I-EA-99 Applicant: HOK Architects Location: 20330 Torm Av~aue (for Symantec Corporation) Us~ Permit to construct a 1,7S0 sq. ~ addition (Lesmin$ Center) to en ~xistin$ office bmqdins. Planning Commmion decision.final unless appealed Continued from Plan~ing Commission meeting of September 15, 1999 MOTION: Com. Corr moved to spprove th~ Nesative Dee_larafion on Application 12-EA-99 of the Cons~ SECOND: Con~ -' ABSENT: Com, Hmis , VOTE: Passed 4-0-0 Planning Commission M~nm~ 3 September 27, 1999 MOTION: Com. Con' to approve Application 8-U-99 of the Comet Cal~nd~ SECOND: Com. St~ve~ ABSENT: Com. Hzr~ VOTE: P~.~d 4-0..0 PUBUC HEARING 4. 16-U-98, 43-EA-98 Adzi~ Properti~ 10216 Pnsadeam Avonu~ Uae Perm~ to -- exisi~S hon~ and ~ four single-family residences ) ~,500 squar~ feet) on a 12,480 square foot (neQ lot. Planning Commission appealed Continued meaning of A#gu~t ~, 1 on August 9~, the item was continued to allow staff to work with the appli~mt on the il~n. ~ report~ on th~ truant sim visits to th~ Monta Vista area and the Sunnyvale ~ rw, ommead~ ~ the application be continned to a future meeting to allow r~wi~w for a de~.~on ~o be rendered. lvlr. Bob Schwenke, r~p~e.~t~g applicant, answered qu~tions ~lating to the proposed The o,~nnding issues we~ smnmmizeai: should the future densily of th~ nrea be; (2) What is th~ ~ of tl~ n~qghborhood to be (at least on~ manifestation is tl~ Monta Vista guidelines; (3) What are the community what option~ are availabl~ for children to play; (4) FAR of the dev~lopm~tt vs. thos~ it (fourpltutes, du~t buildings); (5) Parking relafion~ip; (6) Setbacks; (7) FAR; md ($) Whether' use e~isting zoning ~teria as a mod~l. Mr. Jung s,~,~ized staff dis~us~om, which the approl~ density for ~ th~ appropriat~ look for the area; d~ould the Monta Vista be e0aznd~ to a large~ area ~till ~lled Monta Vista; idea6~iea6o- of public park ~ lo~ation; setbac~ in th~ neighborhood; tim FAR for the mighboshood; parking used. Mr. Jung clarified that lhe lot was Iocal~d in an ,pmalr. d arm, and if it was to bo red. eloped, it would need to be annexed. Stevem said that he felt the density was aPl~Optinte, n'o~_'~ _that' '~ ~o did not Com. any~i-._ in I~-tween a ~xnglo, af..~ and sin~l, family typo situatio~ 14o ~d Mom Vista redoveloped md dono in a continuous manner, it looks .~i~ctive and nx, but without overall standards a variety of units, such as fomplzxes and singlo family housing w~uld result in one area. Com. Stwms said that h~ felt it was Cupmtino's obligation in setting Ul~ a city, to con~Oea' beilal.g parks. Ilo said that 15 foot s~tba~'-~ ~ mom appmp, ia~ than ~O~o0t ~ of the ~ high dmsity; ami the FAg of tim -ei~borhood should be · " tc~uh~,,nts, Com. Stevens said he felt 3, or 2 covemt and on~ optional wero ar,'p,rop, ha~ for th~ lq-Ih EXHIBIT A - City of Cupertino Memo To: Amenity Space Subcommittee From: Robert Cowan Date: June 11, 1998 Re: Background information regarding Amenity Space INTRODUCTION: · r....,- The Cupa'tino City Council created a committee comprised of members fi'om the Planning Commission, City Council, and representatives of the business community to discuss the City's policy relative to the discounting of "amenity space" ii'om the calculation of allowed building area on parcels of land within the city. The objective of the subcommittee is to forward a recommendation to the Planning Comm~on for their consideration and thence to _ the City Council for final adoption. BACKGROUND - WHAT IS AMENITY SPACE?: Beginning in the early 1970's, the City has regulated the intensity of land use commensurate with the traffic carrying capacity of the road system. The City uses computer modeling to determine the traffic capacity based upon existing and future wad impwvements and land use. Once the City determines how much growth can be absorbed, growth is distributed to individual parcels of land based upon a floor area ratio (FAR.) basis. For example; land designated for office was assigned a floor area ratio of .37 while IL~D office and industrial areas were assigned a 33 floor area ratio. The floor area ratio is derived by dividing tom[ building area by the area of the building site. For example; the owner of a 10,000 square fbot parcel assigned a .33 percent ratio could build 3,333 square feet of total space on the parcel. Over time as land values increased in Cupertino, the development of tilt up manufactur/ng and assembly space transitioned to "Class A" office development which included greater amenities for employees. Developers and manafacturers asked the City to allow the amenity space in addition to that which was allowed by the assigned floor area ratio. Previous City Councils ~md Plam~ Commissions agreed with this concept and eventually adopted thc policy highlighted belo~r. "Amenity" space may be excluded from calculation of gross floor area under TiPS or FAR regulations if it meets the chamctedsfic~ described below. Actual allowance of amenity space exclusion, if any, are made at the time of development · Page I ! review. The developer must demonstrate a significant advantage to the community in allowing the exclusion, based upon but not linaited to, the following criteria: a). The exempted space does not generate additional employees. b). The exempted floor space, is not necessary for the building to function; i.e., exterior or interior decks or balconies, mechanical space for equipment normally placed on rooi~ops. e). The exempted space results in a more attractive environment for people within the building, or provides space for facilities which can be used or accessed by the general public for such purposes as display of artwork or b2storical materials. How has the amenity soaee policy been interpreted over time? Because the policy is relatively broad, the application of the amenity space policy has flexible to accommodate a number of unique situations. Exhibit A describes some of the applications that have been approved since 1982. The decisions that began in the early 80's and continued forward were made by commissions and councils with different philosophies. Theretbre, it.is quite undet'standable that given the broad criteria for the granting of amenity space, the amenity reduction differs from case to case over the last fifteen years. For example; in 1982, Hewlett-Packard was granted an amenity reduction for an anechoic chamber (Testing lab). The current Plsnning Commission views an anechoic chamber as building space which supports a normA! business activity and therefore should not be excluded in the calculation of chargeable space regulated by the FAR requirement. The current Planning Commission membership has also determined that spaces that would have met the test of extrao~ amenity space in the early 1970's are common place in new { '..:. buildings. For example; br~,ak rooms, libraries and the entire space in extraordinary lobby areas should not be discounl~xi because those areas'are normally included in new buildings. In ! 'effect the "amenity bar" has been raised. It is no longer necessary to discount space that is normally provided to at~..ct employees and to make'positive architecture statements. The Commission's cunm~t position regarding amenity space is contained in Resolution No. '. 4914 adopted April 27, 1998 (copy attached). As stated previously, the Commission's desire to tighten the definition prompted the City Council to convene the workshop with business Questions which should be answered prior to providing a recommendation to the Plsnnlng Commission and City CounciL 1. Is it necessar~ to ¢ontinui~'to utilize the ameniO2 space policy? Why not just allow building owners to add x percentage (say 5%) to their FAR allocation 'tbr amenity space activity and elimlnste government micromanagement of how the space is to be used and where it is to be located? While this provides flexibility, it will not guarantee that the extraordinary percentage space allowed to each parcel will be used for amenity calculations. Therefore, traditional growth beyond the carrying capacity of the highway could occur. The City Council recently removed the "1" and 2~ fief' provisions of the general plan which would have allowed business owners to increase allowed building area if "traffic demand management" progra~ were iz~ituted. (Vanpooling, mandatory flex time, etc.) The Planning Commission and City Council will not support a blank percent increase of FAR to address the need to simplify the amenity space issue. The City will most likely continue to control tra:~c via controlling building space and thus must create regulations which differentiate between space that does not generate additional employees versus space tlmt ~es. Ironically the City, like most cities, regulates buildin~ space as a means to control traffic .,;:....,.. growth. Controlllng the number of emrfloyees is a more direct means to control traffic growth v:.~' but is laden with difficulties. The City has rejected employee counts because it requires periodic inspections of private businesses. 2. Is it better to retain the existing policy of providing performance criteria for defining amenity space or should the Planning Commission's current proposal to use a specific fi. vt qf ..... approved types of space be used? The Planning Commission's proposed list provides certain consistency. Sunnyvale and Palo 3. Can the amenity space assignment in a given building be changed to a new location wilhin the same building or another building within the same building complex controlled by lhe same management? · (i ' ' The City typically assigns the amenity space.when a new building is built. Obviously as time '"" progresses, the operation of the company may change and/or the property may be sold or leased to another company that may have an entirely different operation. Therefore, some business leaders have asked the Planning Commission to develop a means to allow changes in amenity space assi?ment without having to go back through a public review process. The Commission's recommended policy (resolution 4914) would allow amenity SlX-ce to be shifted within the existing building. However, the Planning Commission would approve the shill From staff's perspective, the shifting of amenity space in the building or building complex under one ownership and one parcel should be allowed. Staff can approve the shi'ff if the use policy is clear. 4. Can amenity space be designated in'existing buildings? Both Honeywell/Measu~ and Apple Computer received approval to designate existing square footage as amenity space, which is different from other amenity space approvals which were for new conslxucfion. Ho. neywell/Measurex designated existing classroom square · Page3 /~/~ footage as amenity space, which then "freed up'.' square footage for new comtruction. Apple Computer designated existing lobbies and break rooms as amenity space so that an existing amenity space (a library) could be convened to office use. The Planning Commission was concerned that designating existing square footage as amenity space isn't compatible with the rationale of providing an incentive for companies to create amenity space. Therefore, the Commission's recommended amenity space policy does not accommodate designation of existing square footage to amenity space. On the other hand, staff pointed out that existing space which is not officially designated as amenity space but is functioning as suck, could conven to office use, thus generating more employees in the building. If it were designated amenity space, that conversion could be prevented. SUlVIlVIARY Please review the materials and be prepared to provide comments and direction. The goal is to reach a consensus in one session. Enclosures: Exhibit A planning Commission Resolution No. 4914 Planning Commission Staffrepon dated 4/27/98 C~plannin~/misc/amenity~ · Page 4 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Tone Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 4914 (Minute Order) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPEKTINO RECOMMENDING APPKOVAL OF A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY MANUAL REGARDING AMENITY SPACE The Development Intensity Manual shall be modified to delete the existing section on amenity space, and the following section shall be inserted: Amenity space may be excluded f~om the calculation of floor area if it does not generate additional ' employees, is an architectural feature not necessa~ for the building to function, and does not generate additional traffic. ~..~-..,,. Designated amenity space in existing buildings may be relocated as long as the square footage does not increase. Spaces not counted as floor area are: · recreational facilities such as: gyms, showerg, locker rooms · cafeterias · atriums or lightriums, which are unheated and unoc. cupied (not lobbies) · child care facilities · architectural design features not utilized for occupancy or storage, i.e., walkways, balconies, mechanical space for equipment normally found on rooftops. · bicycle support facilities PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of April, 1998, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Austin, Harris, Mahoney, Stevens NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Doyle ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: -- S. Cowan Do~a A~ Chairwoman Director of Community Development Cupertino Pla~nirt§ Commission G:planninE/pdmpo~ms/ram~ity I: XrllDlt R App ,,. vals Amenit, .', pace Square Footage Total Application Amenity Space Applicant Address No. Sq. Ft. ' Space Description Sq. Ft. Tandem Computers 18880 Homestead Rd. 4-ASA-96 619 Expanded lobby and enclosure of building "notch" for stairwell. Sobrato Development 19310 Pruneridge Ave. 5-U-96 5,079 Cafeteria: 3,661 2 Break Rooms: 1,343 Nursing Room: 75 Hewlett Packard 18880 Homestead Rd. 4-ASA-97 10,377 Break Rooms: 2,620 Showers: 472 Non-Code Required Vertical Circulation: 3,744 Lobby; 1,150 Nursing Room: 166 Pedestrian Link: 2,225 Hewiett Packard Se corner of Homestead & 14-U-82 169,196 Mezzanines: 80,000 Wolfe Enclosed -Walkways: 15,610 Cafeterias: 44,279 Process Equip. Basement: 10,535 Anechoic Chamber: 3,472 Recreation: 15,300 Sobrato Development NE comer of De Anza Blvd. & 1-U-84 3,000 Atrium/Lobby '3,000 Madani Honeywell/Measurex One Results Way 2-ASA-98 36,701 Links: 1,345 Covered Patio, Awning, Deck, Break Area: 11,113 Lobby: 935 Shower/Sauna: 765 HVAC: 800 Fitness Center: 1339 Crawl Space: 2000 Cafeteria/Classroom/Locker Room (Bldg. 9): 18,404 Apple Gateway 1 Infinite. Loop 11-U-90 60,612 "Commons" Building is all amenity space 53,000 Atrium 7,612 \. ~,4 glmiscell/amenityspace EXISTING AMENITY SPACE POLICY "Amenity" space may be excluded from calculation of gross floor area under TIPS or FAR regulations if it meets the characteristics described below. Actual allowance of amenity space exclusions, if any, are made at the time of development review. The developer must demonstrate a si~t, nificant advantage to the community in allowing the exclusion, based upon, but not limited to, the following criteria: a) The exempted space does not generate additional employees b) The exempted floor space is not necessary for the building to function; i.e., exterior or interior decks or balconies, mechanical space for equipment normally placed on rooftops. c) The exempted space results in a more attractive environment for people within the building, or provides space for facilities which can be used or accessed by the general public for such purposes as display of artwork or historical materials. PLANNING COMMISSION AMENITY SPACE POLICY Amenity space may be excluded from the calculation of floor area if it does not generate additional employees, is an architectural feature not necessary for the building to function, and does not generate additional traffic. .. Designated amenity space in existing buildings may be relocated as long as the square footage does not increase. Spaces not counted as floor area are: · recreational facilities such as: gyms, showers, locker rooms · cafeterias · atriums or lightriums, which are unheated and unoccupied (not lobbies) · child care facilities · architectural design features not utilized for occupancy or storage, i.e., walkways, balconies, mechanical space for equipment normally found on rooftops. · bicycle support facilities CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torte Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application No.: Modification of the Development Intensity. Manual regarding amenity space Agenda Date: April 27, 1998 BACKGROUND: Kecent applications before the Planning Commission have raised issues regarding the definition of amenity space. The Honcyw¢ll/Measurex project involved a redefinition or' space previously counted toward amenities, and the Apple Computer project raised ,,~..,..~. further questions, in that the request did not involve new construction, but was the trading ~-~- of amenity spaces withir~ existing buildings. The exclusion of .amenity space from floor area is long-standing, as indicated by the table of previous amenity space approvals (Exhibit A). The reasons for providing incentives for amenity space are for employee benefits, community benefits, and aesthetics. The Development Intensity Manual defines amenity space: "Amenity" space may be excluded from calculation of gross floor area under TIPS or FAR regulations if it meets the characteristics described below. Actual allowance of amenity space exclusions, if any, are made at the time of development review. The developer must demonstrate a significant advantage to the community in allowing the exclusion, based upon,, but not limited to. thc. following criteria: {..?.. a) The exempted space does not generate additional employees ~" · b) The exempted floor space is not necessary for the building to function, i.e., exterior or interior decks or balconies, mechanical space for equ!pment normally p!a. ced on rooftops. c) The exempted space results in a more attractive environment for people within the building, or provides space for facilities which can be used or accessed by the general public for such purposes as display of artwork or historical materials. Staff contacted several other cities in Santa Clara County regarding their, approaches to amenity space. Only Palo Alto and Sunnyvale reported accommodations tbr amenity space. The Palo Alto Municipal Code allows for the gross floor area to exclude the additions of floor area used solely for on-site employee amenities, upon the determination that such additions will facilitate the reduction of'employee vehicle use. and which may include, but not be limited to, recreational facilities, credit unions, cafeterias and day care centers. (They also exclude resource conservation areas, such as trash compactors and areas designed for hazardous materials storage facilities, handicapped access and seismic upgrades.) 17-vi Therefore, all existing space optionh should be considered. Obviously. option 4. amenity space for new development should be considered, too. Omions of tv~es of desi-onated amenitv space: Options for types of ameni~ space include: · Criteria (current approach) · Criteria plus examples · Examples only (not limited to the examples, Palo Alto model) · Specific types (Surm.vvale model) Staff' believes the types of amenity space should be more clearly defined, since they have varied from application to application. The most helpful approach is similar to Surmyvale's, which is a specific list. This list would be in lieu of the general criteria cm'rently used in the Development Intensim. lVlanual, although staff recommends .', ~.=.,., general purpose statement in conjunction with the list. Staff' recommends that the Development Intensity. Manual be modified by deleting the current description of'ameni~ space and substituting the following statement: Amenity. space shall not be counted in office/industrial floor area. so that extraordinary. benefits are provided to employees, that community, benefits and aesthetic benefits are provided, and intensification resulting in additional automobile trips is avoided. Designation of amenity space in existing buildi~ngs as well as new construction m.~y be approved in conjunction with an application for discretionary approval. Spaces not counted as floor ama are: Employee benefits: Cafeteria Nursing .room Day care center Showers Fitness/recreation center Bicycle support facilities Community benefits: Auditorium if available for public use Aesthetic benefits: Lobbies or atriums (50%) Enclosed pedestrian links or mezzanines used solely as walkways Mechanical space for equipment normally placed on rooftops Pl:m,in~ Commission Minutes 9 March 9, 1998 ~ :) Chair Austin summ"X~ized the issues: tree plan; architecture of building; comer orientation; articulation or' the towe~nd thickness; trash enclosure; and outdoor passive area. C~m. Harris said that ~he x a~,~ l~avor of keeping the oak tree and approving the project; the rcm:dning Planning Commissi.o_n,,.~Ls~o. ncurred. Relative to the roof color, MS. Wordell s,u,~gested amendin,., the condition to sta_t_e.".t..h~_.~_h_e, roof color be muted to the satisfaction of staff. Com. Harris suggested t,o include that "the e.~rior lighting and trash enclosures and roof color to be reviexved by staff.' ~ ENV IRON MENTAL DETERMINATION:- Neg'ati. ve Declaration TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE.~ IVlarch 16, 1998 MOTION: Com. Mahoney moved to grant the Negau~e,.Declaration on Application 5-F.A-98 SECOND: Com. Harris ~ . VOTE: P~ssed ' 5-0-0 · ~.c:~'~ MOTION: Com. Mahoney moved to approve Application 3-U-98~..cording to the model resolution, with changes that the required parking could ~'e~educed to 152 so that the oak tree could be saved; and that the roof material.needs i'axbe reviewed by staff' for color, exterior lighting and trash enclosures be added as~ condition and reviewed by ~affas well. SECOND: Com. Harris VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 Ch:dr Austin declared a recess from 8:35 p.m. to 8:50 p.m. 7. Application No.: 1 I-U-90(M) Applicant: Apple Computer Location: 4 Infinite Loop ,;' -' Use Permit modification to convert 11,261 square foot of amenity space to office space in exchange for ! 1,261 square feet of undesignated amenity space in existing buildings. ENVIRON,.lvIENTAL DE'rE-Ra'vliNATION: Categorically exempt PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION FINAL UNLESS APPEALED Staff presentation: Ms. Wordell referred to the second floor site plan and reviewed the request to convert 11,261 square feet of' amenity space to office space and in mm to convert some office space into amenity space. She reviewed the background of the item as outlined in the attached staff report. She clarified that the meaning of amenity space was that the area does not generate additional employees; it is not necessary for the building to function; and it results in a more · '~ttractive environment tbr people. She said that staff.feels that the areas totaling 11,378 sq. ft. are acceptable as substitute am.e.nity spaces. Relative to the conference center counting as amenity space, Com. Harris said that they should look at tht: application or' conversion in light of all of the space that they have, and clear space :tirc:sdy designated amenity space that is not considered amenity space now. She reiterated that thc property needs to be looked at and hosv it conforms to what is being done elsewhere. Com. I)lamfing Commission lVlinutca !1 March 9, 1998 .,. Folloxving a brief' discussion, there was a consensus to continue the application to allow time to review the concept et' amenity space. ~ MOTION: Com. Doyle moved to continue Application I I-U-90 (M) to April 27, 1998 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow time to review amenity space as an item SECOND: Com. Harris VOTE: Passed 5-0-0 NEW BUSINES~N~ 8. Set a Public H~ing date for pre-zoning of the Rancho Rinconada area MOTION: Com. moved to set a public hearing date for April 22, 1998 for pre-zoning o Ir the area SECOND: Com. VOTE: Passed S-O-O REPORT OF THI~ PLANNTNG Com. Mahoney reported on his at the recent Mayor's breakfast. Chair Austin reported on her attendance at the recent ~g Beach convention with Ms. Wordell and Mr. · ~' Cowan. Com. Harris expressed concern the sign guidelines in San Jose that is in the Cupertino area. She suggested ~g between the staff of Cupertino and the staff · * ut' San Jose relative to the standards and of the standards. REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR EVELOPMENT: None DISCUSSION OF NEWSPAPER CLIPPIlq'GS: None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting ndjourned at 9:40 p.m. to ~ special Planning Commission ~.': ~:i' meeting on March 18, 1998 at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Recording Secretary · -Ipproved as pre.vented: ib'/~trch 23, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes -~ April 27, ! 998 lVlr. Paul Reid, Reid Associates, explained the varlet/es of trees to be planted. He clarified the narrative of the video, stating that they were not looking to plant trees that were lower; but trees that could have the branching trimmed up so that people could see under them. He referred to the landscape plan and illustrated the areas to be removed, those to be planted, and the areas that would remain. Ivlr. Reid also illustrated the modifications to be made to the parking stalls. Chair Austin opened the meeting for public input; there was no one present who wished to speak. MOTION: Com. Harris moved to approve Application 4-ASA-98 according to the model resolution SECOND: Com. Mahoney NOES: Corns. Doyle and Stevens VOTE: Passed 3-2-0 Com. Doyle said that he felt.there was not a systematic approach to what was being done, and he felt they should try to save the area towards the front of the street, the green buffer, which he said was the appeal point. He said that the trees close to the building .provide a canopy over the sidewalk; and the ones in the middle of the parking lot should probably be removed. He illustrated an area where it would be pleasant to sit under the trees in the shade, and presently only concrete exists there. Com. Stevens said that the n~w parking design for traffic flow is an excellent idea. He said the parking problem was not in the front, but in the back; when the restaurant is active there is no parking available during ltmch. He said he agreed that the traffic pattern should be modified, but did not feel the problem was being solved.· He also added that he liked the trees. PUBLIC FFE~ARING Staff recommends that Item ? be reviewed before Item 2, because a Planning Commission decision with respect to Item 7 will affect the decision on Public Hearing Item No. 2. Item 7 will clarify the definition and criteria for what is known as amenity space in the City of Cupertino, ...... because no consistent definition exists at the moment. Chair Austin moved the agenda to Item 7. NEW BUSINESS · .7., "... Modification of the D~velopm~n't It~t~nsi~'~t~nt~l re~n~ding n~riity' sp~ce · TENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: May 4, 1998 Staff oresentation: Ms. Giddy Wordell, City Planner, said that both the Apple and Honeywell- Measurex projects raised issues about what to count as amenity space, which prompted the Planning Commission's desire to agendize it. She said that staff has not been consistent about what is counted from project to project, and the Apple application raised the issue of existing space vs. new space; at what time should amenity space be counted; could it be applied to existing space or some combination of existing or new; and what kind of space should it be? Staff' is recommending that existing space be counted, because they feel that existing space can be reconfigured, and by designating existing space as amenity sp. ace, it makes it impossible without Planning Commission Minutes 4 April 27, i 998 coming back to the Planning Commission for that space to be intensified. She said that reconfiguration was One of the reasons for the Apple tradeoff of changing amenity space in one area for amenity space in another. She said staff felt that the existing space and new space should be eligible. Ms. Wordell said that staff also recommends that there be a specific list of amenity spaces to consider. Ms. Wordell referred to the model resolution for the suggested spaces in categories of employee benefits, community benefits, and aesthetic benefits. In response to Com. Mahoney's question about community benefir~ for the auditorium, Ms. Wordell said that although it was not specified, a suggested usage could be 12 times per year. She said that 13 other jurisdictions of similar sizes were compared; two accommodated amenity space and removed it from the floor area ratio; and of those two, Sunnyvale allowed lobbies and atriums as a deduction, lvh-. Cowan said that he was not certain if all cities required FAR; development intensities is based on parking requirements. Ms. Wordell said that the FAR was . related to trips and still is with the (.~eneral Plan. She said that the issue has come up before, wherein the concept of controlling bulk and massing with the Use Permit was discussed; even if the FAR increases because of, amenity space, there is still the ability to look at the building and :,,'-;~;'.c say whether it is suitable or not. Chair Austin opened the meeting for public input; there was no one present who wished to speak. Com. Doyle said that by making the threshold for declaring amenity space fairly low, it involved other types of criteria, making it a complex issue. If it was changed back to the original intent, .-- that of making it a fairly restricted type of definition, and one with a single use, it simplifies the question and makes it clear to the development community what amenity space is, and what the city is trying to foster or create. Com. Mahoney questioned if that was the original definition, and said that the floor area issue was not currently a driver of the size and mass; it was done for trips in the General Plan. He said there have been major discussions about number of employees per square foot as a measure of traffic, and the concept was to allow additions as long as they did not generate traffic. He said that amenity space was non-lraffic space, which is why fimess centers, cafeterias, and daycare centers are clearly counted traffic. He added that if it did not cause traffic, it was suitable. Com. Doyle said that if the piece of space is a single use that can never be converted, it is likely that the traffic will not be impacted; and if in the future it is redeveloped and something else is allocated't'~ the new amenity space, it effectively creates more traffic. Com. Mahoney disagreed, stiting not if traded off one for one. He said he felt it was appropriate to move thin~s around if it is a one-to-one tradeoff. Com. Harris said she agreed with Com. Doyle, when the building is developed, what is considered is the whole building, the whole project, the mass and the trips, and specific areas are defined as amenity space. Later it is appropriate if they want to convert an amenity space to a different amenity space. He said that he supported turning a cafeteria into a library, daycar~ center, or fitness center onl:~ the space is defined as amenity space. What was not acceptable was taking an amenity sPace for which a deduction from the floor area ratios was given to build a larger building, and converting it into office use. He said it was inappropriate to then go down the corridors searching for nooks and crannies that could have originally been called amenity Planning Commission Minutes .s April 27, 199g space; then all the existing amenity, space should be defined at the outset and a conversion should / be permitted, but it should be at the space it was originally allocated. Discussion continued about the conversion of ~menity space. Com. Doyle said that a clear definition of amenity space was needed. He proposed that amenity space be defined as public viewable and public usable. He said the key point was to make the definition restrictive and try to make certain the space has some public benefit. Com. Harris pointed out that the city philosophy on development has changed since the original concept of amenity space in the General Plan, and it was appropriate to look at the definition of amenity space and make it more specific. She said she felt everyone would a~ee with the section of the General Plan that says the exempted floor space is not necessary for the building to function specifically; exterior, interior decks or balconies, mechanical places for equipment normally placed on a rooftops. She said the areas that have to be more specifically defined are the ones where there is a diffe~nce of opinion; do they want auditoriums, lobbies, cafeterias? It needs to be'identified what category they fall into and do they want that category? She reiterated that it is presently too vague, and needs to be more sp~:ific. Com. M~honey said that at the very l~ast, spaces that do reduce some traf~c, such as a da.vcare center, c~feteria, whether used by the public or not, or of overall general benefit to the community, should be continued. He said he was not supportive of making it more restrictive, noting that the design drives the overall size of what it looks like. He said he was not concerned with the extra square feet as long as the design comes through. Relative to the auditorium usage, he said he would want to assure that it was really booked for the public use; and lobbies and atriums for aesthetic benefit would remain. Com. Harris said that if there is a floor area ratio program for the buildings, it should not be manipulated. Every building has a lobby, public space, and he said he felt they should not be extra credit .She said she was supportive of a cafeteria, but less in favor of a daycare center as one was recently approved on Stelling Road. She said she was more supportive of excluding ..:.. atriums, lobbies, and auditoriums than of the cafeterias. Com. Harris said that a decision needed [. to be made about defining what the exclusions are, not by name, but by type. Com. Doyle said that the criteria for atrium space had to be defined, if it reduced traffic, then it is a form of"amenity space. He said there is amenity space that may have some public benefit A survey of communities revealed none of the communities were doing this. Com. Harris said that it is a way to manipulate FAR to give people more space on the site, and Cupertino is moving away from that, which is why a change is needed. Com. Stevens said that he looked at amenity space as the difference in this community between the heavy industry ~fthe 20s and the current .industry that is college and university based. There is a different kind of people with different n~is. He said he saw three different definitions stated for amenity space. He said that he agreed on cafeteria; break room possible; nursing rooms possible; showers possible; lobby, if it must be included it should be on a percentage because that is a business activity; and he said that pedestrian links have no applicability. He said neutral on mezzanines; fitness centers, definitely; classrooms, portions because classrooms can be used for business; basement, unless it is a wine cellar it should not be considered at all. He said that he Planning Commission Minutes s April 27, 1998 "-- agreed that a clear definition was needed, and consistency was needed regardless of the company. Com. Stevens said that he saw diversity, not consistency. Chair Austin summarized staff's recommendation as set forth on Page 7-3 of the staff report. A lengthy discussion ensued relative to what is to be considered amenity, space. Using the Sunnyvale list of floor areas, a poll was taken: 1. recreational facilities - 4:1 2. cafeterias - 4:1 3. hazardous materials storage - 3:2 4. atriums or lightriums - 4:1 :5. auditoriums - 3:2 6. child care facilities - 4:1 7. architectura/design features not utilized for occupancy/storage - 3 !2 8. bicycle support facilities - 3:2 ~i,. MOTION: Com. Doyle moved to propose modification of Development Intensity Manual and definition of amenity space to include child care facilities and bicycle support facilities The motion died for lack of a second. MOTION: Com. Doyle restated the motion to propose modification of the Development Intensity Manual recording the definition of amenity space to include child care facilities and bicycle facilities only. SECOND: Com. Stevens NOES: Corns. Harris, Mahoney, Austin VOTE; Failed 2-3-0 MOTION: Com. Mahoney moved to amend the amenity space to include the change in .,.... definition to include space that does not generate employees, space that has the "-' :' impact of reducing traffic and significant architectural features, including recreational facilities such as gym, showers, locker rooms, cafeterias, attituns or lightriums, child care facilities, bicycle support facilities, architectural design, .... features not utilized for occupancy or storage. SECOND: Com. Hanis NOES: Com. Doyle VOTE: Passed 4-1-0 Chair Austin,moved the agenda back to Item 2. 2. Application No.(s): 1 l-U-90(lv0 Applicant: Apple Computer Location: . - 4 Infinite Loop Use permit modification to convert II,261 square feet of amenity space to office space in exchange for I I~6 ! square feet of undesignated amenity space in existing buildings. Symantec cafeteria drawing for the De A, nza Boulevard property ."~"&l~. ~,' "~='"' J '1 II · . _~--_-----_r}~.-.-: ..~,, ,, .'~.. .... · ~ >~ /--I×I ~----- -~,? -i'. ',..? .. ~i? .:Z.¢~ ............:. ~a,,' / ~ - ~.. ". I_ J .'i.t',~ 7 ",!,,~. ,.~ ' o.,.~ -'- ..-- ~ . - ~--'w_..,.-.~...,.',,.-'~'.',,'~.' . ,/- I - '.:~ ',.' . ,-- , .._~_. ,~ ~~" ~.,:...~,,~X,-.-:- ,'- '_~ ~ ^ --.~.."., "'.'"'~ N,.X. ,. // .., '1 GROUNO Iq. OOR PLAN - PROPOSED N~IIBION8 ~'~4',e' I~ ANZA BLVD. ~QUTH MINOR MODIFICATION SUBMITTAL - 7'/21/97 SYMANTEC CC5 OFFICE BUILDING CAFETERIA ADDITION - SOUTH ELEVATION 1/16"=1'-o" /7~-' 0g/23,/gg 1¢:3T FAX 650 $70 ~33 SA.q, ES REGIS GR0~ ~03/0~ September 20, 1999 Mr. David Do.Vie Chirpe~on. Phnning 10300 Torte Avenue Cul~ntn., CA 95014-:3255 P-,F.,: Syman~ City Centn. 2 ::B~ildin~ Le,~m;,~ Ceatst' Dc~ lvh'. Doyle: On behalf of Symm~c Co~,~,ation, I would like to cd~r to makc syllable ~o ~ commun~/in our ~ Cen~ 2 building. We ofl~' ~o make ~hc Leamius Cm~cr available appro~"t~dely six ~imes a year for public or non. profit uses sponsored by 'die Ci~. h is oLu' proposa] lh~ al~ use of'~.ese flc~ie~ must be public even~ sponsored by d~e Office or,he Ci~ M-u,qpr, durk~ non*wofkins hm~rs. We propose ."-', that any other conditions ofu~ b agreed upon batw~n thc Cupctth~ Ci~ Manager and SyolallMc's Vjcc PreildsI3l: 0~" Worldv/~18 Lo~ib'li~ ..el l~acflilieS. (~et'tliillly, w~ freed to assure that our on*f~oins businus is not ~ -,,4 that our sccurky and confi,4~t;slity are pmperJy We extend this offer for the duration of Symanmc's occupancy. IrSymantec is not the sole occupant ofth~ CC2 BuildinL community use may not be possible in the same ~'-.bi,~,~ Fur~rmorc, ~ letter Js subjcc~ ~ ~he Lcar-~n~ Center's approvals and design :.". as proposed and discussed a~ the Sepl~nber 13,1999 We ~ 'dg! ~ assists die ~ ~ssion in suppor'd~ our project. Sinccrdy, President of W~idwide Logistics and Facilities Ab cc: Don Brown srmmeec Corporaeu '-% Bob Cown m City Council Members City of Cupemno Subject: Proposed Apple R&D Campus - Community Use of Public Spaces Dear Council Members: .. On behalf of Apple Computer, I would like to ~,ke :his opportunity to thank the Council Members for your efforts and input to help us achieve a planned development proposal to the City that we uuly believe we are prolx~ing a project that will allow us to have real roots in thc community and ~/..;...:..-. to improve our community involvement. ~' To that end, we submit this letter to set forth Apple's offer to the community to use the "Public Amenities Spaces" which ,,integral part of, planned Apple R&D Campus. We think that the R&D Campus will be an important asset for Apple, as well as for the overall Cupertino communi:y. Certainly, we need to assure that our ongoing business is not interrupted, and that our Apple stands firmly behind this offer to the community. We understand the importance of this point from the p~, N:~.ctive of the Council We extend this offer for the life of Apple's occu~.an¢~,. Naturally, if Apple is not the sole occupant of the project, community use may not be poss,ble m the same way The f .s.~llties that we wish to mnke available to the community centre, courtyard as well .a.s the auditorinm. We offer to make the amphitheater available .two or tin~., ume~ a year.for pubi,¢ events spomom~ by the City. We are willing to make the auditomm avmlable for pubh¢ uses sp~...~ by t~. City ..on a more frequent basis. It is our lmmposal that .any use of. th.ese Apple f?:, lht?s mus_t be publs~ .e?nts, sponsored by.the Office of the City Mannser, ounng nonwo~sng hOUrS, we peu~je mat any further ¢ondstions of use be.aixeed {.t i.~ .our !nt.ention to.n~.ke .ay. ailable mat ,~pp~e ss nm an ,so~ate,m island, but tamer an We hope that this offer nsslsts the Council Menmb~ in swp~in~ our Sincerely. ~! ' r/ /-- Glenn N. Berber Rcnl F_~tnte. Cons~ofl and ..~" ~ · .~ , _ ...........~"~,.~,-.~:..-..-~ -:.-.--.,,,~-.?.~ ........ :~,~,~'~.~,~. ~...~: ........... CITY OF CUPERTINO NEGATIVE DECLARATION September 27, 1999 As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino on May'27, 1973, and amended on March 4, 1974, January 17, 1977, May 1, 1978, and July 7, 1980, the following described project was granted a Negative Declaration by the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino on September 27, 1999. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION 21-EA-99 ;' ..., Application No.: '8-U~99 Applicant: HOK Architects Location: 20330 Torte Avenue (For Symantec Corporation) DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST Use Permit to construct a 1,750 sq. fa addition (Leamin,' g Center) at an existing office building. .:-, FINDINGS OF DECISIONMAKING BODY : The Pinning Commission granted a Negative Declaration since tl~ l~roject is consistent with the General Plan and there are no significant environmental impacts. Robert Cowan Director of Community Development CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY CLERK This is to certify that the above Negative Declaration was filed in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Cupertino on City Clerk Environmental Setting · i'.!i.';." PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Site Area (ac.) ~ Building Coverage % Exist. Building_s.f. Proposed Bldg. s.f. Zone G.P. Designation Assessor's Parcel No. ~- (' .. If Residential, Units/Gross Acre [~ ~ Total# Rental/Own Bdrms' Total s.f. Price Unit Type Unit Type Type Unit Type Unit Type Applicable Special Area Plans: (Check) ~ Monta Vista Design Guidelines ~ S. De Anza Conceptual f"---] N. De Anza Conceptual f--"] S. Sm-Sunny Conceptual ..-. '? [-'-"[ Stevens Crk Blvd. Conceptual ~ Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & L'scape If Non-Residential, Building Area|~0D s.f. FAR ~' Max. Employees/Shift Parking Required .~yi"-~"/",- Parking Provided ~ ~T'~:~ Project Site is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area YES _'~_ NO .4,) GENERAL PLAN SOURCES D) OUTSIDE AG~ICIES !) Cupertino General Plan, Land Usc Element 23) Count,/Planning Department 2) Cupertino Gennal Plan, Public Safety Element 24) Adjacent City's Plannin8 Depmment 3) Cupertino C~n~al Plan, Housing Element 2~) Count,/ Ikpa, t~,c~tal ofEnvironmcntal Hcalth 4) Cupertino Ganeral Plan, Transportation Elm~nt 26) Midpeninsula R~onal Open Spac~ Disuict 5) Cupertino C.~neral Plan, Envhonn~ntal R~anun:~s 27) County Parks and Recreation Deparm~nt 6) Cul~"nino ~ Plan, Api~"ndix A- H'disi~ lk'vclopn~nt 28) Cupertino Sanitw/Disuict 7) CUl~"rtino General Plan, Land Usc Map 29) Fremont Union Hi~h School District 8) Nois~ Eien~nt An~ndment 30) Cup~ulino Union School District 9) City Ridgelin~ Policy 31) Pacific Gas and El~cuic 10) Cupertino Genial Plan Constraint ~ 32) Santa Clara Cotmty Fir~ Depamn~nt 33) County Sheriff B) CUPERTINO SOURCE DOCUMENTS 35) Count,/T,~spo, mion A~ency 11) Tr~ Pres~'ation ordinanc~ 77g 36) Santa Clar~ Val!cy Warn' District 12) city ~ Photosraphy t, tsps 13) "Cui~nino Chronicle" (California ~ Caner, 1976) 14) C~oio~ical Repert (sim specifio) E) OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMENTS 15) Paddn$ Ordinances 1277 37) BAAQMD Smv~ ofCunt, s,ninant Excesses 16) Zonins Map 38) FEIMA Flood Ma~ Flood Laps 17) Zoning Code~p~ific Plan ~ 39) USDA, '~oiis of Sant~ Osr~ County"' 18) City Noiss Ordinan~ 40) County ~us Wast~ Mana~nant Plan 41) County Hnita~ lt~ota~s lnvunto~/ C) CITY AGENCIES 42) Santt Clara Vaik. y Warn' District Fu~! 19) Cup~ino Community Ik. vclopn~nt IX-pC ' ~ Sit,. 20) Cupertino Public Works lk'pt. 43) CalEPA Haz~dous Wast~ and Substances 21) Cul~nino Parks & Recreation l~t Sim List .--- ~) Cupertino wa~r Utility 44) Pmj~t Plan S~/Applkation Mamtals 46} F.~ with ProJ~:t ofsimilar s 47) ABAG Projmiuns ~rks l) Complete all information requested on ' 4) When explainin$ any yes response, label ~ the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE your answer clearly (Example '"N - 3 BLANK SPACES ONLY WI~,N A Historical") Please try to respond concisely, SPECIFIC ITEM IS NOT and place as many explanatory responses as APPLICABI.~. possible on each page. 2) Consult the Initial Study Source List; use b') Upon completing the checklist, sign and the materials listed therein to complete, the date the Preparer's Affidavit. checklist information in Categories A through O. 6) Please attach the following materials before submitting the Initial Study to the You are encouraged to cite other relevant City. sources; if such sources are used, job in their - l~oj~ Flan set of Les~tive Document (i) copy title(s) in the "Source" column next to the s~plicsbl,) · -- question to which they relate. IH= SURE YOUR INITL~,L STUI)Y (.' '. i~ 3) If you check any of the "YES" response to any questions, you must attach a sheet I.~COMI'LETE M~,TERI.&LS MAY explaining the potential impact and suggest [Og. USE PROCESSING DELAYS mitigation if needed. IMPACT YES WILL THE PROJECT... ~ot $isnificant Significant '.umulntive SOURCE Significant (Mitigation (No NO ihoposed) Mitigation A) ~ USE GENERAL ELAN 1) l~quim a change ~om thg land use ~ 1,7,8 General Plan? 3) Requke n change of an adopted $1~C~flc plan or otl~ adopted policy 4) llmult in substantial chan$~ in the' ~:~.:,nt land us, of th, sito or that of ta~ 0 0 0 0 7.12 ~.~o~ns p~o~.~.? · conflpratJon of an ~stablishcd B) GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARD 1) B~ located in an ar~a which has :~l~ntJa] for major g~O'O.'C hazard? ~ 0 '0 0 0 2.14 2) B~ I~___t~d_ on or adjacent to a 4) Be located in ~n a~a of soil shrink/swell, soil c~ep or severn 2.S,10 erosions)? 5) Cause substantial emslon or O O O 'O · oispiac~n~nt, compaction or ov~cove~ng of soil eltl~r on-sit~ or otf- 7) Cau~ substantial chan~ in topography or in, around surface ~ 0 0 0 feature? 10.39 B) Involve construction of- buildint. road or septic systmn on, slope of lO~ ~ 0 0 0 0 6.12.39 or ~.atm'? IMPACT YES "rILL TI-IE PROJECT... Not Sisnificant Significant Cumulative SOURCE Significant (Mitigation (No NO Pro0oscd) Mitigation ~) Subsnncie.y effect eny cx~tinl pub~ or ~Y~ ~e~on ~1~, ~ im~n~on~ ~ on ~il wi~ ~ ~nfi~id ~ 0 0 0 0 6.9 2) ~ult in a ~fic field ~in~ I~d ~in 30 ~ ofa ~qc s~e 36~9.42 3) ~ul~ in ~ion oFa ~ ~n 4~uhmfidly ~S~ s~ or ~dmr q~i~. or ~ p~lic ~r 20D6~7 0 0 O0 ~i~ ~w~ ~llun~u (e.L h~~ nd ~ ~m v~icle ~ n~m ~ ~ci~ ~m ~inl ~n~n~, m~ ~ ~idi~ ~m minin~ o~om)? ~:]:~ ~ I~d in ~ m of w~r supply ~ ~ ~u~ i~l~ion o[~cl~ w~ or ~ w~ m~ ~ ~n~ ~llu~ ~m ~, ind~ or ~1~ ~qW~ · ~D~ pe~it ~r 20 ~ D~AG~ FLOOD~G 1) h~ su~fidl~ wi~ ~d 20~6 2) Su~ly ~ ~ d~ ~ or flow or q~ of~- ~ ~ ~ ei~r ~ d~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 20j6.42 p~ ~ ~tof~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 20~6 4) ~1~ a ~ ~ ~! ~Wd~~mm ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 36.42 d~ ~ I~. ~ or flow ofiu I) Si~ifi~y ~ct ~ wil~i~, ~ d~i~ or nm~ oFf.ns s~i~ or by h~ins ~ ~ci~ or ~ ~n~ mi~on or 2) Su~d,ly,duco ~ ~i~ ~ ~ for f~h. ni~s or pl~? ~ 0 ~ ~ ,.10 / IMPACT YES ," WILL THE PROJECT... Sot Significant Sisnificant Cumulative SOURCE (,. Significant (Mitigation (~o ~%TO Proposed) Mitigation Proposed) source or nestin~ plac~ for · rare or 5. 10 endangered species of plant or animal? 4} lnvolw cutting, r~mova] of Io the site or inln~duced? G) TRANSPORTATION 1) Camc an incr~.as~ in Uaffic which is substan~iM in r~lation to the existing Inffic load and capacity of th~ stre~ ~ O O ["-] O 4, 203~ s)~tom? 2) Cause an)' publi, or prival~ s~rc~t Servi~ DTintme~°n to fon~tion Imlow L~vel of ~ O O [--'] O 4.20 3) lncr~nsu tra~c hazards to 4) Advm~ly af~ct access m conune~cla] ~stablishments. public buildinp, schools, padis or oiler 5) Cause ~ rcduction in public - project site? ..~ · mu4dn$ facilities, or ensunder demand for ~ .. ~ parking space? 7) Inhibit us~ of'alternative modes of' IT) HOUSING 1) Reduce the supply of MYordoble homin$ |n the community, or I~sult in th, '~ O O ['-] D 3.,6 . 4isplacement ofpmons f~om their i i ..- :sent home? · 2) lnc~ue the cos~ ofhousin$ in the 3, 16 art. a, or substantially change th~ v.ety ~C~ O O O D of'housins types found in th~ 3) Creaf~ asubstantial demand for new '~ O O ["-] Q 3. 16.47 housin~ 1 ) blvolw the application, use, ~ O O ['--1 O 32.40.42,43 disposal or nunuFac~ur~ of pol~mtidly hazardous mamfials? ,~ O O ['--] [--] 32,43 2) lnvoiv~ risk of explosion orother fonm of uncontrolled mleasu of 3) Involve the removal or continued ~ O O D I--I 33.42.43 use of any exlstinL or installation of any n~w undet~ound chemical or fuel : ~ora~ tank? 5) Employ teehunlo~, which could adversely affect public safet~ in the ~ O O D O 40,43 · v~nt ora breakdown? WILL THE PROJECT... SOURCE Not Significant Significant Cumulativ= Signific,~r (Mitigation (No · NO Proposed) Miti~ntion / Pm~scd) ~.~.-. 6) ~vide b~eding gmun~ for J) AIR QUALITY 2) ¥iolm an>, ambicn[ air quality ~xisting or proje~ed air quality violation, or ~xpos~ semitiw r~ptors to substantial ~on~ntra~iom of Pollutants? lC} NOISE 1) In~as~ substantially thc ambient nois~ ~nvironmmt of the projc:t vicinity ~ O O O O 8.18 during ~oo.m~tion of tim project?. 2) Result in sustained increase in vicinity ~llowin~ consl~Ctlon of tl~o 3) Result in sustained noise lewis ~i~'~ Noi~ O~linan~? 2) Creat= an aest]~cally off=nsive 3) Visually intrude upon an a~a of ~isiblo ~ont th~ ~a]loy floor?. hilisid~s from t~sid~ntial ar~s or public I0, 21, 24, 41 lands? 6) Adversely zt~ct the erchit~'uu'd busin=ss dislflct? i.17,19 7) Produ~ gl. from artificial lighting sourm upon adja~nt proporti~s !,!6 or I~blic roadways? M) g~iERGY , .. .. of=...,,, ,.,, Bf O O E] 0 quantiti~ of fossil fuels or non- nmewable ~ sore? 2) Remow re. ration ptovidin~ ~isttn[ or ~ buildin~ 3) $isntt~cantly reduce solar ~.coss ~o ' an MJnc~nt bulldinlt, public I~cmition ~' 0 0 0 0 Il.19 ,.:.':'~ ARCHAEOLOGICAL iT ¢/ ~ IMPACT ~'' ~ Y'F~S WILL THE PROJECT... ~ot Significant Si~inificam Cumulativ~ SOURCE Significant (Miti~Jon (No NO Pr•posed) Vliti~ation 2) Affect ndv~ts~iy a proi~:tty ofhistori~ .~ I, 10.41 or culturai si~nificence to thc community,~-~ 0 D 0 cxcept as part ora scientific study? O) PUBLIC SERVICES AND . qum~titi~? 2) Induce substsntial srowth, or alter ~ O D D ~! !. 46,47 the loc~ion, distribution, or densiL~ of tho human popul~ion of'm 3) C~use subsUntisl impL~t upon, or incruse the need for:. · '.~:', ~) F'~ ~t~ction Swim? ~, [] [] [] [] 19.22 ¢) Pubtic Schools? ~ [] [] [] [] 29.30 d) Parb/R.-*crutiofl Facilities? ~' [] [] [] [] S, 17, 1.9, 21 e) Maintenance of Public Facilities? ,~ [] [] [] [] 19,20,21 4) Cans~ substantial impact upon existinf utilities or infrastructure in the following catch,•ties: b) Natural Oes? ~.0 ~[.~ ~ ~ )1 d> Sew~,Q treatment and disposal? ~ [] [] [] [] 20,28 0) S.,.,w.-,.,...,.mena '--' o.... fo,..o,., public focil~ which causes that hcility '~ I~ff~IDATORY FIiNDINGS OF $IG1NIFICA~CE ~,~. ~ · -, .. ~o Be Completed by. ~ ~E PRO~C~... NO 1. Have the potential to substantially de~rade the quality of the environment, to substantially diminish the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; to cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustainable levels; to threaten or eliminate a plant or animal community; to reduce the number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal; to eliminate important examples oftbe major periods of California's history or prehistory? 2. Have the potential to achieve short term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long term environmental goals? 3. Have environmental impacts which are individually limited, but are cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable: means that the incremental effects of an individual project ere substantive when viewed in conjunction with the effects of. past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects) 4. Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings, either directly or indirectly? I hereby certify that the information provided in this lnigal Study is true end correct m the best of my knowledge and belief; I certify that I have used proper diligence in responding accurately to all que~ons herein, and have consulted appropriate source references when necessary to ensure full end complete disclosure of relevant environmental dem. hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause delay or discontinuance of related project review procedures, end hereby a~ree to hold har~ies/~ the City of Cupertino, its~taff and authorized agents, from the consequences of such delay or discontinuan/C,,~.///,' / ~ ~' / ,~- // Preperer's Si~na~/~////~/~~/ .- · ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION - ".."~ ".i..'..", .: ' ..' '"' (To be Completed by' City Staff) IMPACT AREAS: [] Land Use/General Plan [] Geologic/Seismic Hazard [] Resources/Parks [] Housing [] Sewage/Water Quality [] Drainage/Flooding [] Flora & Fauna [] Transportation [] Historical/Archaeological [] Health & Safety [] Air Quality [] Noise [] Public Services/Utilities [] Energy I-1 Aesthetics STAFF EVALUATION On tha basis of this Initial Study, the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Finds: Sdeet One .. l'hat the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and recommends that a NEGATIVE DECLARATION be granted. That although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, no significant effect will occur because mitigation measures are included in the project. ERC recommends that a NEGATIVE DECLARATION I I be slanted. That the proposed MAY have a significant effect on the environment and recommends that an ~,i ~qVIRONMENTAL/'~ .I'ACT REPORT be prepared. Staff Evaluator ~ ~ ERC Chairperson g/planning/intstdyd.doe ...... 10300 Torre ^ venue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 of FAX (408) 777-3333 ~.-.Jl.~.pe~o C'ommunity Development Departrnenl SUMMARY Agenda No. t/ ~ Agenda Date: November l, 1999 SUBJECT: File No. 7-Z-99 (30-EA-99) City-Initiated Prezoning to Pre-RI-! 0 (Single-lhmily Residential Prezoning) of the Stelling Road right-of-way from north of Greenleaf Drive to Hazelbrook Drive (Garden Gate) BACKGROUND: City Staffhad been working with County Staffto enable Cupertino to have the option of taking advantage of a new annexation law which allows cities to annex unincorporated pockets o1' 75 acres or less without the requirement to consider annexation protests. AB i 555 signed into law in early October 1999 applies to all Cupertino area pockets, except Garden Gate, which is greater than 75 acres in size. By prezoning and annexing the unincorporated segment of the Stelling Road right-of-away, stafl' believed Garden Gate could be divided into two islands which would quality tbr the new law. One challenge was that the division of Garden Gate had to be completed betbre January I, 2000 to qualify for the new annexation law. The public hearing noticing, which went to all Garden Gate property owners, did not explain thc future annexation implications, so staff disclosed the annexation motive to all residents who called the City about the prezoning hearing DISCUSSION: Neighbor Issues: Four neighbors spoke against the prezoning and potential annexation. They said that if the annexation implications of this project were explained in the legal noticing, there would be more people at the hearing opposing the project. Planning Commission Issues: The Commission hearing was held on October 25"'. Ali of thc commissioners felt the legal noticing should have fully informed the residents of the wider annexation implications of the prezoning. Commissioner Harris felt the state law was being manipulated in a way that was not intended. Commissioner Kwok wanted to continue the hearing after more complete noticing was delivered. Staff informed Commissioner. Kwok that thc project could not be completed by the 1/1/2000 deadline if it was continued. The Commission then reco. mmended approval of the Negative Declaration and denial of the prezoning on a 4-0-I vote (Doyle absent). Stafflssues: On October 26, 1999, the day after the Commission hearing, the LAFCO Cotmty Counsel informed the City Attorney that the proposed annexation ot'a portion o1' Steiling Roud, designated Stelling Road 99-12, was not permissible. Because of an untbrseen quirk in State law, the City could not annex a public street without including some abutting private property. Since this annexation cannot be initiated, there is no reason to continue with the prezoning project. Staff therefore recommends that the City Council remove the prezoning project, file no. 7-Z-99 from the agenda. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends denial of the prezoning project, file no. 7-Z-99, in accordance with the model, resolution. Staff recommends that the prezoning project be removed from the agenda due to the inability to complete an annexation of the street. Enclosures: Model Resolution of Denial Planning Commission Staff Report dated 10/25/99 Reviewed By: App~~t~~/y ~ Do~Bro~n~'c ;y Manager Robert S. Cowan, Director of Community Development G:planning/pdreport/ccstelling I 7-Z-99 .--. CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Tot're Avenue Cupertino~ California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 5078 (Denial) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING DENIAL TO PREZONE APPROXIMATELY 1,000 FEET OF STELLING ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM NORTH OF GREENLEAF DRIVE TO HAZELBROOK DRIVE TO PRE-RI-10, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PREZONING SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a prezoning of ~ii~i~ property, as described on this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on the subject application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission fmds that the subject prezoning: a) Has wider annexation implications for Garden Gate; b) That the public noticing for the prezoning hearing did not explain these annexation implications; c) That the lack of noticed information on the potential annexation implications was deemed by the Commission to be inadequate; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for change of zone is hereby recommended for denial; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application No. 7-Z-99 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of October 25, 1999, are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. Resolution No. 5078 (Denial) 7-Z-99 October 25, 1999 Page -2- SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No: 7-Z-99 Applicant: City of Cupertino Location: Stelling Road ROW from north of C.n'eerdeaf Drive to Hazelbrook Drive SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Plat map (Exhibit A) and legal description (Exhibit B). PASSED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of October, 1999, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Corr, Kwok, Stevens and Vice-Chair Harris NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Doyle ATTEST: APPROVED: /s/Robert S. Cowan /s/Andrea Harris Robert S. Cowan Andrea Harris, Vice-Chairperson Director of Community Development Planning Commission g:planning/pdr~poWms/r7z99 ZONING PLAT MAP ir. xhibit A ~" .... FOR FILE NO. 7-Z-99 PREZONING FOR PORTION OF STELLING. ROAD V LOT I :REEIILEAF DRIVE PRE-ZOHE PP, E RI-IQ ..... CUP£RTINO CITY LIMITS PRE-ZONING LIMITS "" .. · ~..-.~./.:: ,.. HAEEROO~KiV[ " EXH]:B I' B Prezoning For Portion Of Stelling Road All of that certain property situated in Santa Clara County, State of Califomia described as follows: BEGZNNtNG at the Southwest comer of the parcel annexed to the City of Cupertino entitled ~Stelling 2", said point also being the Northwest comer of Lot 1 of Tract No. 783 as recorded in Book 30 of Maps at pages 30 through 33, Santa Clara County records and also lying on the Easterly line of Stelling Road as shown on the Map for said Tract No. 783; Thence, along said Eastedy line of Stelling Road South, 1007.21 feet to a point on the City Umits of Cupertino as defined by the annexation entitled ~N. Stelling ~.~ Road 98-03"; thence, along the Northerly line of said annexation, West 60 feet to -.,,. the Westerly line of Stelling Road; thence leaving said Northerly line of said annexation and along the Westerly line of Stelling Road, North 1007.06 feet to a point on the Westerly pmlongat~d line of the northerly line of the aforementioned Lot. t of Tract No. 783; thence along said pmlongated line N 89° 51' 20" E 60 feet to the point of BEGZNNZNG, Containing 1.39 acre more or less. CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: 7-Z-99 (30-EA-99) Agenda Date: October 25, 1999 Applicant: City of Cupertino Property Owner: County of Santa Clara Property Location: Stelling Road right-of-way from north of Greenleaf Drive to Hazelbrook Drive (Garden Gate) Residential Project Data: General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (!-5 dwellings/gross acre) Existing Zoning Designation: County RI-10 Proposed City Zoning Designation: Pre- RI-10 Parcel Size: 1.39 acres 'f;~ Project Consistency with: General Plan X Zoning N/A '~ Environmental Assessment: Negative Declaration Application Summary: Prezone an existing street right-of-way to Pre-Rl-! 0 which is single-family residential prezoning with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square t~et. BACKGROUND: This is a City-initiated application for prezoning of an unincorporated segment o1' Stelling Road in unincorporated Garden Gate. The City is undertaking this action because all property must be prezoned before it cnn be annex to a city. The City Cupertino is considering annexing this segment of right-of-way, which would link the northern and southern lengths of Stelling Road, which are already under City jurisdiction (Exhibit A-l). This segment includes one signalized intersection nt Greenleal' Drive and Stelling Road. ~..:, .!: Because the prezoning has ramnifications beyond the street, the Planning Commission directed that staff notify all Garden Gate property owners. Notices were mailed to all unincorporated Garden Gate property owners and all city property owners within 300 Ibet of the project. DISCUSSION: Prezoning: Prezoning of streets should reflect the zoning of the abutting properties. For example, in Rancho Rinconada, all neighborhood streets were prezoned similarly as the abutting residential properties. In Garden Gate, all previously annexed properties have been prezoned "RI-10," which is single-family residential zoning with a mi n imum lot size of 10,000 square feet for subdivision purposes. The zoning is consistent with the City's General Plan land use designations for Garden Gate. The County also uses this · ~ zonirig designation for Garden Gate, although the specific development standards dillbr from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Annexation: About 1 V, years ago the City adopted an annexation strategy lbr the County pockets of Monta Vista, Garden Gat6 and Rancho Rinconada after numerous neighborhood meetings involving residents; county and city staffs. Rancho Rinconada was made a first priority and that area was annexed to the City on March 15, 1999. The City Council established as a 1999-2000 year goal the annexation of Garden Gate. Santa Clara County has also been proactively working to thcilitate annexation of the pockets to their respective cities (Exhibit B-l). The Board of Supervisors recently committed additional resources and added new staffto expand its Urban Pocket Program to other cities and encourage them to follow Cupertino's examp!e. AB 1555. This prezoning project and potential subsequent annexation is being undertaken to take advantage ora recent state law. AB 1555 (Longville), signed by Governor Davis in October 1999, streamlines the process of annexing unincorporated islands within cities by re-establishing the exemption from the annexation protest process for a 7-year period starting January 1, 2000 (Exhibit C-i). ~..i .~' {~" In the mid- to late-70s, the state passed a similar annexation law which allowed cities to annex small county islands without the requirement to consider the protests o1' property- owners (known at the time as the MORI3A law). Cupertino used it effi:ctively to annex numerous small county islands. The new law once again eliminates the protest provisions from the annexation process for unincorporated islands of 75 acres or less. All of county islands in the Cupertino area qualify for this new law, except Garden Gate which is about 112 acres. Prezoning and annexing Stelling Road splits Garden Gate i. nto two islands which would qualify each part tbr the new annexation legislation. However, all of the City actions on Stelling Road, prezoning and annexation, must be completed before January 1, 2000 for the legislation to apply. City staffhas already determined the schedule of necessary City actions and finds the timeframe achieveable. Opinion of the State Attorney General The Commission may recall that the City conducted two laborious elections on the extension of city taxes and an annexation protest process over a year's time belbre it annexed R~ncho Rinconada. It appears that this will not be necessary with future annexations of other county pockets. A recent legal opinion by State Attorney General Bill Lockyer (No. 99-602 dated 10/6/99) concluded that voter and landowner approval was not needed to extend City taxes and fees to annexed lands. According to the City Attorney, however, the opinion creates some confusion by not addressing the new annexation law, AB 1555. It appears that some forum for vote or protest will still be necessary to comply with the legal opinion, although staff believes the annexation will be greatly simplified by eliminating multiple elections. 2 City-Incurred Costs of Stellin,~ Road,qnnexation A future annexation of Stelling Road involves about 1,000 lineal feet of right-ol'-way and one traffic light. There are no revenues in ~nnexing a street. The estimated annual cost in current dollars of annexing just the right-of-way without any future private property annexations in Garden Gate is $25,000 - $30,000. In 1997 the City conducted a cost/revenue analysis of annexing all three pockets: Ra.~cho Rinconada, Garden Gate and Monta Vista, and determined there was a relatively minor annual cost of $32,000 (Exhibit C- 1). Calls from Garden Gate Residents Staff answered numerous calls from Garden Gate residents regarding the prezoning project and elaborated on the annexation implications. The response has been either neutral or positive toward the annexation. RECOMMENDATION: The prezoning and subsequent annexation of Stelling Road would quality, Garden Gate for the provisions under AB 1555. While recent state actions to streamline the annexation process tend to reduce resident/property owner choice in the matter, it is also clear that the County is aggressively reducing it~ role in providing urban-type services to County pocket residents. Staff is committed to providing information and opportunities for input for Cupertino pocket residents before any wholesale annexation project is proposed. Staff therefore recommends: 1. A negative declaration (file no. 30-EA-99) on the project. 2. A recommendation of approval of the prezoning, file no. 7-Z-99, in accorda,~ce with the model resolution. Enclosures: Model Resolution Initial Study, ERC Recommendation Exhibit A-I: Location Map Exhibit B-I: Working Draft of Unincorporated Urban Pockets Background Report dated 10/20/99 Exhibit C-I: Cost/Revenue Analysis of Annexing 3 Cupertino Pockets Prepared by: Colin Jung, Associate Planner Approved by: Robert S. Cowan, Director of Community Development ~..'~ c...-- g:phmnin~/pdreporr/pc/pc7z99 7-Z-99 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino~ California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO PREZONE APPROXIMATELY 1,000 FEET OF STELLING ROAD RIGHT'OF-WAY FROM NORTH OF GREENLEAF DRIVE TO HAZELBROOK DRIVE TO PRE-RI-10, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PREZONING SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application Ibr a prezoning of property, as described on this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on thc subject application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the subject prezoning meets the tbllowing rcquiremcnls: a) That the prezoning is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino, b) That the property involved is adequate in size and shape to contbrm to the new prezoning designation. c) That the new prezoning encourages the most appropriate use of land as compared to the majority of other parcels in this same district. d) That the proposed prezoning is otherwise not detrimental to the health, satbty, peace, morals and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of subject parcels. ('i.: e) That the prezoning promotes the orderly development of the city. · :' f) That the prezoning facilitates the implementation of a new state annexation law that streamlines the annexation process. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for change of zone is hereby recommended for approval; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution am based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application No. 7-Z-99 as set tbrth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of October 25, 1999, are incorporated by reference as though fully forth herein. Resolution No. 7-Z-99 October 25.1999 Page -2- SECTION II: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No: 7-Z-99 Applicant: City of Cupertino Location: Stelling Road ROW from north of Greenleaf Drive to Haze lbrook Drive SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEI)T. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Plat map (Exhibit A) and legal description (Exhibit B). PASSED AND ADOPTED. this 25th day of October, 1999, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: A~ES: COMMISSIONERS: "- NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Robert S. Cowan David Doyle, Chairman Director of Community Development Planning Commission ~:plannin~/pdteport/r~s/r7z99 ZONING PLAT MAP Exhibit A FOR FILE NO. 7-Z-99 ?. PREZONING FOR PORTION OF STELLING ROAD '.' I'RE-IOHE PRE RI-lO :r~-.- ..... CUPERTINO CITY LIMITS ' PRE-ZONING LIMITS ~0~ ~" :- ;f~ ~.' . .. L:I.IF~R TINO HAZELBROOIE-DRIY£ EXHZBTF. B Prezoning For Portion Of Stelling Road All of that certain property situated in Santa Clara Counb/, S. tate of California described as follows: BEG]:NN]:NG at the Southwest comer of the parcel annexed to the Ob/of Cupertino entitled "Stelling 2~, said point also being the Northwes~ comer of Lot 1 of Tract No. 783 as recorded in Book 30 of Naps at pages 30 through 33, 'Santa Clara County records and also lying on the Easterly line of Stalling Road as shown on the Nap for said Tract No. 783; Thence, along said Easterly line of Stelling Road South, 1007.21 feet to a point on the Ob/Umits of Cupertino as defined by the annexation entrded ~N. Stalling ,.:..... Road 98-03"; thence, along the Northerly line of said annexation, West 60 feet to -.~.,.~ ~-.'--'" the Westerly line of Stelling Road; thence leaving said Northerly line of said annexation and along the Westerly line of Stalling Road, North 1007.06 feet to a point on the Westerly pmlongated line of the northerly line of the aforementioned LotZ of Tract No. 783; thence along said pmlongatad line N 89° .- 51' 20" E 60 feet to the point of BEG:~NN:~NG. Containing 1.39 acre more or less. CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE September 22, 1999 As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure, adopted by the City Council of the City of Cupertino on May 27; 1983, as amended, the following described project was reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Cupertino on September 22, 1999, at which time the Committee found that the project does not have a significant impact on the environment and; therefore, is recommending to the decision making body that a Negative Declaration be prepared. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION Application No.: 7-Z-99 00-EA-99) Applicant: City of Cupertino Location: Stelling Road right-of-way from north of Greenleaf Drive to Hazeibrook Drive (Garden Gate). DISCRETIONARY ACTION REQUEST Prezoning of fight-of-way to Pre RI-10. FINDINGS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMH'I'EE (-..] The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Negative Declaration finding that the project is consistent with the General Plan and has no significant environmental impacts. Robert S. Cowan Director of Community Development ~/ore~0~a99 CITY OF CUbER.TI'NO ! 0300 Torm ^vcnu~ Depmem of Comm~i~ ~velop~t C~nino. Ca 95014 408-777-3308 SInE Use. Only Enviromen~l Se~ing PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Site Area (a~.~[/, ~3'~ 7 Building Coverage AJ]~ % Exist. Building_s.f. Proposed Bldg.~%~/~s.f. Design~ion ' Zone F~ G.P. Assessor'sParcelNo.~//~_- . If l~sid~ntini, Units/Gross Acr~ Tota~ Rental/Own Bdrms Total s.f. Price Unit Type Unit Type Unit #3 Unit Type Unit #$ Applicabl~ Special Are~ Plans: (Check) I'---! Monta Vim Iksisn. G.u. idelines I---I ["'--I N. I~ Anzn Conc~tual f--'l .~. 8ant-Stmny Conc~ptuni I'"-'1 Stevens Crk Blvd. Conc~tual I--"1 Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & L'scape If Non-Residential, Building Area ~ FAR Max. Employees/Shift Parking Required N Parking Provided }4ID Project Sim is Within Cupi~rtino Urban Service Area YES X NO [/.~/~ A) GENERAL PLAN SOURCES D) OUTSIDE AGF. NCIXS !) Copcrtino General Plan, Land Use Element 23) County Planning Department 2) Cupeflino General Plan, Public Safety Element 24) Adjacent City's Planning Dcpartmunt 3) Cupertino General Plan, Housing Element 2S) County Depamncntal ofEnvironmcntai H~nith 4) Cupeflino (3enLTai Plm% Tin,ssp~mtlon Elenmnr 26) Midpcninanl& lteginnd Open Space DLstrict 5) Cupertino General Plan, Environmental Ruourcu 27) County Parks and Recreotion Department 6) Cupertino CJeneral Plan, Appendix A- Hillsick Development 28) Cupertino Sanitary District 7) Cupertino General Plan, Land Use ~ 29) F~-munt Union High School District 8) Noise Elun~.nt Anzndment 30) CO~ Union School District 9) City Ridfeline Policy 3 l) Pacific Cms and Elecuic 10) Cupertino General Plan Consu~int Mops 32) Santo Clsra County Fn~ Dcpar~nt 33) County Shn~ 34) CALTRA~S B) CUPERTINO SOURC~- DOCUMENT~ 35) Coumy Transportation Agency i l) Tree Preservstion ordinan~ 77! 36) bata Clara Vslley Wsmr Oisutct t2) City Aefisl i~tngrsphy Maps 13) "Cupertino Chronicle' (CalifomJs H'mmry Center, 1976) .~..?,.,. 14) Oeolosical ltep~t (sils specific) L*) OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMEZqT$ IS) Puking 16) Zoning Map 3~) FI~MA lqnod 17) Zonin~ Codr~Spneific Pin De~m,~ 39) USDA,'Soib of'Santo Clara County" 18) City Noise Ordinance 40) Coun~ Hanrdous Was~ ~t Pin 4 I) Conoty Hefiuge ttesomnes Inventory C) ~ AGENCIES 42) Sm Clam Yallcy Waist Disu~ct Fuel 19) Cupertino Community D~lopu~t DepC ~ Sim 20) Cupeflino Pubfio Works lk'pC · 43) Call,PA P,~,dous Wse~ ami Submnces 21) Cupmino ~ a ltecreaton Depmment Si'- 22) Cupertino Wa~r Utilit~ 44) Pro]ec~ Plan Set/Applic~ion Materials 4S) Field 46') F. xpertuncs with Project ofsJndlar s 47) ABAO Projections 1) Complete al/information reques~d on 4) When explaining any yes response, label .,...,.- the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE your answer clearly (Example "lq - 3 BLANK SPACES ONLY WvI~.N A Historical") Please try to respond concisely, SPECIFIC ITEM IS NOT and place as many explanatory responses as APPLICABLE. possible on each page. 2) Consult the Initial Study Source List; use 5') Upon completing the checklist, sign and the materials listed therein to complete, the date the Preparer's Affidavit. checklist information in Categories A throughO. 6) Please attach the following materials before submitting the Initial Study to the You are encounged to c.i~.other relevant City. sources; if such sources are used, job in their - Project Pan s~t ofLqbhtive Uocument (1) cop~ . Loca~bu map with sim ckady ms~af (whun title(s) in the "Source" colunm next to the sppticsble) question to which thoy relam. :3) If you check an)' of the "YES" respons~ k,ql !1~%1 i'I~'FAL IS CO~I ['L[~TI,~ - to any questions, you must attach a sheet ! explaininS the potential impact .and suggest [ mitigation if needed. //..-/' IMPACT YES WILL THE PROJECT... ~o~ Signilk~nt si~.~ :und-4ve SOURCE S~eni~ OaMWion 0qo , NO ~ M~ A) ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~=0,~',~'~ ~ O O O O "." ,~, 4) ~t~~~ffin~ ' ~~o,=~,,~ ~ 0 D O O ,.,~,, ....B) GEOLOGIOSEISMIC HAZARD ':" l) Be Iocmd in an area which has 2) ,,,,o.,,..,,~.,,.f..,,, ~ D 123 C! I-I~.,, Zone? 2 4) B~ Ioc~ in m, mmiofsoi! -' :.) Cmn submntid dis~ption, ev~v~-~f or,oil ~Htbet on-sim or off- si~ mad. s~fl. sysmu un a slope of ,0~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~,i2,~9 !) Incma~ the mdsdns removal rate, or .130 result in ~e removal oft nafurai resource [~J 0 0 0 0 ~ commm:Jd purpneu Ondudinl items · ' ~d~ m mdc, Mud, {rav~l, ~ minerals ..~ top. soil)? .-: .. aoa ,~,'-w~bl~ ~ ~om~? '"' '" (el-,, [ o~ o moils) lo non4idculunl n~y pH~ q~c~ll~m{ land? near u'~ WiJilam~on Ac[ o~ any ~ Spacc /~-, IMPACT YES WILL THE PROJECT... ~ot $1~ific-nt $i~nificam Cumuhtiv~ SOURCE Si~ifl~t (Miti~on ~O NO Proposed) ~d) ~ioul~ ~s? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7.23 public or ~v~ ~c~on ~ili~, p~ ~ldli~ p~o, public ~i ci~ in implomcn~n? D) S~WAG~A~R QUAL~ 2) ~it in · ~o field ~ins . I~ ~h ~0 ~t of~ d~qo swale 36~9,42 ~op~ 'v 4~u~d~ly ~ s~ or ~ly, i~hs ~ ~ iimi=d m ~idi~ ~ mhinf op~iom)? · ~Bo I~d in n ~8 ofwmr supply wm~ ~ infil~on of ~clai~d ~or~ ~n~d ~lluum ~m ~ in~d or ~1~ ~viti~ ~u~ s NPD~ ~it ~ E) D~AG~ ~D~G 1) h~ m~tioqy wi~ ~d 2o~6 ~ ~ ~ or ~ of~ ~ ~ ~ or ~v~ ~ffor ~ ~ ~ I~o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~l~in mfl~ or ~ ~0~ ~D FA~A di~i~ or n~ of=~ng s~i~ or by in~uci~ ~ ~i~. by ~ mi~ or ~ i IMPACT YES ACILL THE PROJECT... ut si~,ifl¢~,t sisnmc.~t :~m-i~i,c SOURCE Siinificant ~id~on ~o NO ~d) .Mifl~fion ~d) ~u= or ~dnl pl~ ~r a ~ or ' ~s~d s~iu of pl~t or mired? 4) Involve ~uin& ~movg of s.,~ ..e ~, ~. indi~w ~ ~ D ~ ~ 11.12.41 ~ ~e si~ ot i~u~d? G) TRANSPORTATION 1) Cause afl inc~-sse in ~AfTlc which is substantial in mladon to the existing tra~o ,ond and capacity of tl~ st~t [] 'D D O D 4.20,.15 System? 2) ~use any publJo or private steer intersection to f~nction below Level of 4.20 3) increue Ulffie hmmrds to · ~ 4) Adver~ly ttY~ct access to commercial establishmenu, public E] E] 1-1 l-1 ,.,0 pedes~an oriented acdviw areas? S) ~m~ a reduction in public .~oj~ ~i~? 6) lncruse dcmmd upon existh8 drkin$ fiicilidcs, or crispier demmd for ~ I--] 0 l--] 0 15.16 new psrlcinf spac~? 7) Inhibit use of alternative modes of trunsportation to priv~e ~utomobile ~ ~ D ~ O S. 19. 343, H) HOUSING 1) I&*duce the supply ofk'Yorchbl~ ho.ins in the commuait,/, or result in the ~7] [--[ [--1 [--1 O ), 16 .. 41splieanent ofper~ons ~rom their .... Z) lncreue fJu corn ofhousin, in the ~ [--J ~] ~--] [~ 3. 16 fres. or submntidly duns~ the vsrieW of honsing tYlm ~ound in the Gommunity? bombs? WILL THE PROJECT... SOURCE Not Si$0ificant Significant Cumulativ~ Sisnificant (Mitiaation (No NO Proposed) MitiSation / ~roposed) 6) Provid~ breedin~ ~rounds for mosquitos or other discas, v,ctors? ~ 0 0 0 0 2, J) Am QUALITY I) Cre. a~ objectionable odors? [~ 0 0 0 0 40.4~ ' · 2) Violate any ambient air quality ,~,. ...~bu. ,.b,.,,.,,, ,o ., ~ O O .O Fl. ,.,,.,2 ~xisting or projccted air quality violation, or ~xpose s~mitivc receptors to substantial ~oncentrations of pollutants? 1) lnm'e,a~ substantially th~ ambient noba environment oF the ,rojact vicinity ~urtnS ~ons~'u~tion of the pmject~ -ambient nobe l~vels in ti~ project 1~ O O O O 8,18 vicinity following construction of the project 3) lt~utt in sustained noise ~.=~,~,o,,o..~=~ ® O O O lei '." and duration limRs ~onmin~d in th~ Ci~'s Nois~ Ordinance? L) AF, STHL'FICS t) Be at varian~ with applicable 2) Cs~.at~ an a~sth=tically off'ensivc sit~ open to public view7 ~ O O O O 1,17 3) V*mudly intrud~ upon an area of visible I~om th~ valley flood . ';dllsM~ ~m tmi~afl,.~ mu ~ public I O. '~ I. 24. 4 I lands? · -.=~' 6) Advmety sff~ct the architectural T) Produ. glare from anifidal E O O O Ii~htin~ som~s upon adjm~nt properti~ !.16 or publi~ roadways? id) KNF..RGY quantM~s of ~sil t~ls or non- 2} Rmnow v~ntation ptovidin~ ' smnnmrslmd~.wind.4t~aksto. ~] ...O O O O ll,19 existin[ or p~ building? 3} 91[nifl~antl¥ t~lu~ solar a~ess to -.~.~,~,~.b,,.~. ~ O O O O '"" N) HISTORICAI~ AR~_'~-I~I~OLOGI~L t) Bc Io~ in an m~a ofpotentM archaeololicai or palcontolosicai ~ O O O O 10,42 IMPACT WILL' THE PROJECT... ~o~ sis. m~ s~gnmu., C.mula,., SOURCE Significant (Mifiption (No NO Proposed) Mifiption Proposed) Affect miveu~ly a propcm/ofhismric !, 10,41 O) PUBLIC SERVICES AND LITILFFIES 1) Produc~ solid wasU: in substantial tho location, distribution, or densiL~ of Ih~ hunum population ofm men? 3) Came subsmti81 impm upon, or ~.{~¥: a) Fi~ Promction Services? J~ 0 0 0 0 19,32 b) Police Services? ~ [] . [] 0 0 33 d) Pmk:s/Recr~ttion Facilities7 ~ [] [] [--] [] $. 17, 19.2! 4) Cause substmthl Jmp~c upon existing utilities or infrasuucture in the following c~gories: S) CJaanm denund ~)r use of my publi~: hcUil~ which cmls~ [hll~ f'~cil,~ ,J~ 0 0 0 0 19.20.22.2~.3 I eo ruch o~ exceed its MANDATORY FhNDINGS OF SIGNIFICA~NCE .(To Be Completed by City StafO IfTLL THE PRO.FECT... YES NO 1. Have the potential to substantially deL, Fade the quality of the environment, to ~ [-~ substantially diminish the habitat ora fish or wildlife species; to cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustainable levels; to threaten or eliminate a plant or animal community; to reduce the number of or restrict the range ora rare or endangered plant or animal; to eliminate important examples of the major periods of California's history or prehistory? 2. Have th~ potential to achieve short term environmental goals to th~ disadvantage of long term environmental goals? I I ~$. Hav~ environmental impac~ which ~ indlvid~lly limited, but ~'~ ~uhtivaly co~idemble? ~'Cumuhfivaly comid~able: me,ms that the incremen~l effe,~ of en individual proje~ ~re ~h~'~five when viewed in conjun~ien with the effects of p,,,t project, other ~rr~t projecv% nd probable future projects) 4.Have eoviroamental effects which will cause substantial lutverse impacts on human beings, either directly or inclirectiy? (....]I hereby certify that the information provided in this Initial Study is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and · ".likelier; I certify that I have used proper diligence in responding accur~ely to ali questions heroin, and have consulted appropriate source roferences when necenary to ensure full and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause delay or discontinuance of related project review procedures, and hereby a~ee to hold harmless the City of Cupertino, its staffand authorized agent~ fi'om the consequences of such delay or discontinuance. Print Preparer's Name ~ ~% ~. · / ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION · :':"." ' ' · "' '(TO be Complete~! by City StafO IMPACT AREAS: [] Land Use/General Plan I-] Geologic/Seismic 14n?.~d [] Resources/Parks [] Housing [] Sewage/Water Quality [] Drainage/Flooding [] Flora & Fauna [] Transportation [] Historical/Archaeological [] Health & Safety [] Air Quality [] Noise ,~. Public Services/Utilities [] Energy [] Aesthetics STAFF EVALUATION ..... On the basis of this Initial Study, the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Finds: ~elect One That the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and recommends that a NEGATIVE DECLARATION be granted. I I That although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, no significant effect will occur because mitigation measures are included in the project. ERC recommends that a NEGATIVE DECLARATION be granted. That the proposed MAY have a significant effect on the environment and recommends that an ~'~ ~" Staff Evaluator ERC Chai/person f/planninlantstdy4.doe '~- o ._ ~ ~~ . m ~m m.mm m . . ~~ - :.. ;.'~ I ~'' _ ~,_ '~ ..'' .. '' ''-' ",.', ''; .... . ....... ': .... Exhibit C?'. :'-.'-,' cl' Satlt.n Clara ~¥i:..- ',,-'nfal Resources Agency I~) 2~3-~54 FAX 27~7 October 21, 1999 To: Colin Jung, Associate Planner . ;.' .. .City of Cupertino From: Don Weden, Project Manager Santa Clara County Urban Pockets Program _ RE: STATUS OF COUNTY'S URBAN POCKETS PROGRAM ( In a recent phone conversation, you asked for an update concerning the County's Urban Pockets Program, which was created to facilitate annexation of the remaining unincorporated urban pockets within city urban service areas. We are currently preparing a background report containing information about urban pockets in Santa Clara County and efforts to facilitate their annexation into their ('..'"';respective cities. This report is still in working draft form and may undergo changes prior to official publication. But in the hope that it may still be of use to you I am forwarding You a copy of the unfinished draft. If you have any comments or suggestions regarding how we can improve the final document, please let me know. Bi~arcl of ,4,., .,.,vi,~ors: Donald F t';r~.~.. C,.,.," · ~-,Cl',;.t;o'' .- County of Santb Clara Planning Office October 20, 1999 UNINCORPORATED URBAN POCKETS IN SANTA CLARA COUNTY A Background Report [working draft - subject to revision] Contents What is an *Unincorporated Urban Pocket'? ............................. ~ .......... 2 The Origins of Urban Pockets .................................................................. 2' Urban Development Policies and Urban Pockets ................................ 3 -*"* Progress Toward Annexation of Pockets ............................................... 3 Problems Caused by Pockets .................................................................. 4 The County's Urban Pockets Program ................................................... 6 AB 1555: A New Tool for Annexing Pockets ........................................ 7 Accelerating Pocket Annexation Efforts ................................................. 8 Working draft- Subject to Revision WHAT IS AN "UNINCORPORATED, URBA'N pOCKET?" What Is a "Pocket"? For purposes ofthis report, an 'unincorporated urban pocket" is defined as one or more privately-owned unincorporated parcels of land located within a city urban service area (USA). It may be either completely or substantially surrounded by incorporated lands, i.e. lands already annexed to a city. Unincorporated pockets are sometimes also referred to as unincorporated 'islands.' Despite the fact that they are completely or substantially surrounded by a city, they remain under the land use authority of the County, which is responsible for providing them with basic urban services. THE ORIGINS OF URBAN POCKETS How Were Pockets Created? Most of the unincorporated pockets in Santa Clare County are a product of urban development policies and practices that existed in the county back in the 1950s and 1960s. At that time, before the urban areas of our North Valley cities had grown together as they are today, there were still substantial areas of unincorporated agricultural land separating them. During the 50s and 60s, most of our cities competed actively with one another to annex and develop as much land as they could. This competition was sometimes referred to as the "annexation wars.' At the time the cities were competing to annex lands, most of the current state laws goveming annexations did not exist. As a result, the pattems of annexation that resulted were often based more on opportunity than on rational planning, orderly urban development, and efficient provision of urban services. If, for example, a property owner a half mile or so out of town wanted to be annexed and the intervening property owners did not, cities would sometimes annex the road leading out to the willing property owner, and bypass the closer in lands through which the road passed. As a result, by the late 1960s, the incorporated areas map of Santa Clare County looked like a piece of Swiss cheese, with unincorporated urban pockets scattered throughout the northem Santa Clare Valley from San Jose to Palo Alto. (It existed to a lesser extent in the South County around Morgan Hill and Gilroy where rapid urban development was just beginning). Some of these passed over unincorporated lands were developed 'in the county', i.e. under the County's zoning and development regulations. Until the late 1960s, the County functioned much like a city in approving urban development. Sanitation districts provided sewer service to urban development approved in unincorporated areas. Consequently, there was little incentive for urban subdivisions approved by'the County to annex to the adjacent or surrounding city. Working draft - Subject to Revision URBAN DEVELOPMENT POLICIES AND URBAN POCKETS Urban Development Policy Ended Era of Pocket Creation The era of urban pocket creation in Santa Clara County essentially came to an end back in the eady 1970s, when the fifteen cities, the County, and the Santa Clara County Local Agency Formation CommissiOn (LAFCO) mutually agreed to a set of basic urban development policies to guide the county's future growth and development. These policies, which have been the cornerstone for city/County cooperation regarding land use issues for the past 30 years, are intended to provide for more orderly urban development and more efficient provision of urban services. Among the most basic principles of these urban development policies are the following: 1. Plahning for, approving, and providing urban services to future urban development was made the responsibility of the cities. The cities agreed to guide their future urban development through the use of explicitly defined ~rban service areas', within which they were willing and able to provide urban services efficiently. These urban service area (USA) boundaries areSubject to review and approval by the LAFCO. 2. The County was no longer to be in 'the urban development business' in competition with the cities, i.e. the County agreed that it would no longer approve new urban development in unincorporated areas outside cities' urban service areas. 3. Within cities' urban service areas, the unincorporated urban pockets are eventually to be annexed into their surrounding cities. Based on this understanding that the · pockets will be annexed into their surrounding cities, the County's General Plan requires 'that new development or major redevelopment of lands within urban pockets be consistent with the general plan of the surrounding city. "'" PROGRESS TOWARD ANNEXATION OF POCKETS Steady Progress Toward Annexing U~oan Pockets Over the past 30 years, since these basic urban development policies were adopted, the cities have made steady progress toward annexing unincorporated urban pockets. In the early 1980s particularly, under special state legislation that subsequently expired, the cities made great strides in annexing many of the pockets. Since that time, because state law made annexing inhabited urban pockets more difficult, they have primarily focused on annexing individual parcels or clusters of parcels within pockets as they were proposed for development or major redevelopment (at which time the County normally requires them to annex to the surrounding city). Relatively few efforts have been made in recent years to annex the larger, developed pockets. Nonetheless, little by little, the number of unincorporated parcels within the cities' urban service areas has been steadily decreasing, particularly within the city of San Jose. Working draft - Subject to Revision Pockets Remaining Today: A Widely Scarf.' ered "City" of 40,000 People A recent inventory of the remaining urban pockets conducted by the County Planning Office indicates that there are currently only around 40,000 people (less than 3% of the county's total population) living in the remaining urban unincorporated pockets in Santa Clare County. This is roughly the equivalent of a city the size of Gilroy. However, unlike the city of Gilroy, which is located in one compact location, the remaining unincorporated pockets are scattered widely throughout the county all the way from Los Ntos to Gilroy. The population of urban unincorporated pockets in Santa Clara County is now less than the population living in rural unincorporated areas of the county. Most Pockets Contain Fewer than 20 Parcels In all, there are about 125 separate pockets, ranging in size from as few as one parcel to as many as 5,700 parcels. The vast majority (70%) of the remaining pockets contain fewer than 20 parcels each - nowhere near enough parcels to provide for economies of scale in the delivery of urban services. Most Unincorporated Parcels are in Larger Pockets While small pockets constitute the great majority of all pockets, they contain a relatively small percentage of the remaining unincorporated parcels. The 23 pockets with 100 or more parcels contain the overwhelming majority (93%) of all unincorporated urban - parcels. PROBLEMS. CAUSED BY POCKETS A Variety of Problems The continued existence of the relatively few remaining pockets in Santa Clare County contributes to a number of problems, including: -... · Inefficient service delivery ('";' :' · Less responsive local government · Disenfranchisement of pockets residents fr°m decisions that most affect their neighborhoods · Lower levels of services provided to pockets residents · Distraction of County and city leaders from dealing with important citywide and countywide issues Some of these problems affect primarily pockets residents, but others affect all residents and taxpayers throughout the county. Efficient Delivery of Urban Services b Impossible Given the widely dispersed location of these pockets, it is virtually impossible for the County to provide them efficiently with basic urban services. .... Faced with this situation, the County generally adapts by providing fewer neighborhood- serving programs and lower levels of urban services to pockets residents than are received by residents of the city neighborhoods that surround them. Working draft - Subject to Revision For example, the County usually performs street sweeping for neighborhood streets in unincorporated pockets only once a year, whereas most cities do it at least once a month. " For the County to increase its service delivery levels and neighborhood serving programs to match those of the cities would be vastly more expensive, an extremely inefficient use of public tax dollars, and ultimately unnecessary once the pockets are annexed into cities. Providing Responsive Govemment is Difficult In addition to receiving fewer and lower levels of urban services, pockets residents often must deal with less responsive govemment, especially if they live in fragmented pockets where city and county parcels are interspersed. Residents of pockets with checkerboard pattems of alternating city and county parcels often have difficulty getting their neighborhood's problems addressed because neither the County nor the city is entirely responsible for being responsive to their concerns, nor has the authority by itself to solve their problem. As a consequence, neighborhood problems often go unattended, or require more costly inter-jurisdictionai solutions that typically involve twice as many staff to resolve as they would if the neighborhood were entirely in the city. . Disenfranchtsed from City Decisions Increasingly, the most significant decisions affecting the quality of life within urban pockets are those related to development of nearby lands in the city that surrounds them. However, since residents of unincorporated pockets are unable to vote in city elections, their voices are likely to have less impact on city council land use decisions than those of city residents. So long as their neighborhood remains unincorporated, pockets residents have essentially disenfranchised themselves from participating effectively in city elections and other city decisions that most impact the quality of life in their neighborhood. Lower Services, Same Pdce By remaining unincorporated, residents of urban pockets are virtually guaranteeing that ~.~.. ~;... they will receive fewer neighborhood serving programs and lower levels of urban services than they could get from the cities. Ironically, although they are receiving fewer services, they are often still paying taxes and fees to the County that are not much different from what they would pay if they were in the city. Imi:x3cls of Pockets on City Residents The continued existence of these scattered, unincorporated urban pockets affects not just the residents of these pockets but also, in various ways, all residents living within incorporated areas throughout the county. First, it is important to remember that a portion of the taxes paid by city residents goes to the County. Consequently, if the tax dollars paid by urban residents are being used to provide urban services to small, scattered urban pockets that cannot possibly be served efficiently by the County, city residents' tax dollars are not being used as efficiently as they otherwise could be. · ' Second, a portior] of city residents' taxes paid to the County are used to support activities that would be unnecessary if the pockets were annexed into cities. This includes, for example, activity by the County Registrar of Voters to maintain records and Working draft- Subject to Revision delineate voting precinct boundaries that distinguish between residents of the city and the unincorporated pockets, who are not. eligible to vote in city elections. For another example, it involves the need for the County to negotiate with private service providers separate garbage collection contracts for the pockets, which wouldn't be necessary if they were annexed. Third, urban pockets detract from the time that County Supervisors, who are elected to serve all the residents of the county, have to spend on issues of countywide importance. Because the pockets exist, Board members and/or their staffs must spend time in responding to calls from pockets residents concerning potholes, traffic, and graffiti in their neighborhoods - issues more appropriately and efficiently addressed by cities. This is time not available to be spent addressing law and justice, and health and human services issues - which are the basic issues county government exists to address - and other regional issues, such as transportation, that affect all county residents. Fourth, the existence of unincorporated pockets within cities' urban service areas makes necessary a number of inter-jurisdictional referral and coordination activities relating to development activities and other matters within pockets that take city staff and decision makers' time away from the immediate business of serving city residents. THE COUNTY'S URBAN POCKETS PROGRAM -- Estc~blishmenf of County Uti:mn Pockets Program Approximately two years ago, the County Planning Office established its Urban Pockets . Program. The primary purpose of this program is to work with residents of unincorporated pockets and city staff to facilitate annexation of the pockets into their surrounding cities. The Board of Supervisors recently approved the creation of two additional planners within the Planning Office to help expedite the process of annexing urban pockets into cities. Fcicilit~ling Annexcdion ~:'ii.'i" ' The primary service provided by the Urban Pockets Program is that of facilitation of annexation. Essentially, this involves managing public outreach processes that enable the pockets residents and the city to explore the possibility of annexation. Typically, this is done through community meetings, newsletters, and publications containing information about the potential impacts of annexation on community services, taxes and fees, development standards, and other topics of concem to pockets residents. It is also done indirectly through the publication of materials, such as this report, to help draw attention to pocket annexation issues and document progress toward their annexation. Accomplishments The most noteworthy accomplishment of the Urban Pockets Program to date has been its work with City of Cupertino staff and pockets residents that resulted in the successful _ annexation of the Rancho Rinconada area and its 4,000 residents into Cupertino. That annexation was completed earlier this year and was celebrated at a 'City Information Fair" held by the city to welcome Rancho Rinconada residents into the city. Working draft - Subject to Revision Current Projects The County Planning Office is currently work. lng formally or informally with several cities within Santa Clara County, it is anticipated that additional requests for assistance with pocket annexations will be received after the Urban Pockets Inventory currently being prepared is completed and distributed to the cities for their review. Facilitating Annexation can be Labor Intensive The work involved in conducting successful pocket annexation projects can be quite labor intensive. Depending upon specific circumstances, it can require eubstantial effort to: · Schedule, publicize and conduct community meetings · . Prepare for and attend community forums sponsored by neighborhood organizations · Prepare informational materials concerning the potential impacts of annexation on levels of services received, taxes and fees, development standards, etc. · Respond to a large number of varied public inquiries · Coordinate city and County staff efforts Although annexation projects for larger urban pockets can be somewhat labor intensive, over the long term they probably require far less effort than the cumulative, ongoing efforts required for cities to conduct piecemeal, one-pamel-at-a-time annexations as. development occurs. In addition, annexation of the pockets will save both the cities and the County the time and expense required to carry out inter-jurisdictional coordination activities to address development proposal referrals and other issues involving pockets. One of the advantages of the County's current Urban Pockets Program is that it enables the cities to temporarily augment their staff resoumes to conduct annexation projects. County involvement in joint annexation projects undertaken to date has substantially reduced the amount of city staff time that would otherwise have been required for the cities to carry out such projects on their own. AB 1555: A NEW TOOL FOR ANNEXING POCKETS New State Law Facilitates Annexation of Smaller Pockets In recognition of the many ways in which urban pockets make cities and counties throughout Califomia less efficient and less responsive, the California State Legislature recently passed Assembly Bill 1555 which will make it easier for cities tO annex pockets smaller than 75 acres. AB 1555 was signed by the Governor and will take effect on January 1, 2000. Essentially, AB 1555 allows cities to annex pockets smaller than 75 acres without elections, regardless of the level of opposition to annexation within the pocket proposed for annexation. The Legislature has, in essence, concluded that the needs of the larger community for more efficient and responsive government outweigh the desires of the relatively few 7 Working draft- Subject to Revision people living within these small, inefficient-to-service pockets to maintain their status as unincorporated islands. The Legislature's action also, indirectly, rec(~gnizes that requiring cities to bear the expense of conducting annexation elections involving so few voters would be another example of the inefficiencies and unnecessary expenses that the existence of unincorporated urban pockets place upon cities and counties. ACCELERATING POCKET ANNEXATION EFFORTS The combination of the passage of Assembly Bill 1555 and the augmentation of staffing for the County's Urban Pockets Program provide excellent opportunities for the cities and the County to work cooperatively, along with urban pockets residents, to facilitate annexation of the relatively few remaining pockets into their respective cities. Although these annexation efforts may not always be fully supported by pockets residents, they are nonetheless the right thing to do for the broader public good. The ,.. challenges facing Santa Clara County and its fifteen cities as they approach the 21st ~ century are too important to allow the ongoing distraction that dealing with the few remaining unincorporated urban pockets entails. It is time to accelerate efforts to annex the remaining unincorporated pockets: · To eliminate an ongoing obstacle to more efficient and responsive local ._ govemment · To improve the quality of urban services received by urban pockets residents · To end the disenfranchisement of urban pockets residents from the political life of the cities that surround them and whose decisions impact their daily lives much more than the decisions of the County · To complete the implementation of the fundamental urban development policies regarding lands within city urban service areas that the fifteen cities, the County, and the Local Agency Formation Commission agreed to almost 30 years ago File: *Pockets Status Rept 2 - Womb38 £XHIBIT ¢ - ! Urban Pockets Annexation Estimates ' 10-20-97 Garden Monta Rancho Gate Vista Rinconada Total Impact on City Revenues . Utili .ty mx - PG&E 10314 6.998 43 ..3 !$ 61,027 .Utility. tax - Phone 4.821 3,149 · 19,492 27,462 Franchise Fee - Garbage 7.976 5.210 Franchise Fee - Water 2.464 1,449 8,966 12,879 Franchise Fee - PG&E 8,928 5,832 ~ 36,096 $0,856 Franchise Fee - TCI 900 630 MotorVehi¢le 40,400 · 28~80: 169,680 238.360 Gu Tax Subventioa : :30,441 ' 21.308, 127,851 Prope~y. tax 15.700 Total Est4wutc. d Revenue Impact on City. Expenditures Law Enl%rcement 63~$9 · 44,492 Code F=uforcemeat (Officer and car) 10,000 ': 7,000 Public Works Strut Trees , 9,600 Strut Sweeping ': 1,620! 0 i 6,4801 8,100 Leal'Pick up Storm Street Lights 3.360 Cut;os. Gutter's & Sidev~neq Strut ~i-w-n-ce ; 18,460 Total Es~namd Expenditwes S131.699t S51,492' SS41.~09' S724,7001 : · Per Santo Clara County. ShetiffDeparan~at I Per Public Works Depa~u,,a~t. Moan Vista sU~"~s ar~ already annexed to Ci~ so ~h~'~/s no new tight-of-way costs. Ur. ban Pockets Annexation Estimates 10-20-97 Garden Monta R~ncho Gate Vistn Rinconnda Total Revenue Assumptions: 1. No new sales tax - pu/'cl~se patterns/n phce 2. Number of Households 372 243 1504. 3. ProperS' Tax: Total assessed value 71.363 ~.222~. 40.2~2.g42 215,880.298. · x -1% tax tare 713,632. 402,528 2.158.803: x Cupertino's sl~re @ 2.2% S15,700' S8,856 S47.494: 4. Ut/l/ty Tax- PG&E: Avg zat~ of $1,200' I-R-I * 2.4% 10,714. 6,998 43.315: S. Ut/I/ty Tax- Phone' :,,~;.~. Avg tare of $540' HH * 2.4% 4,821, 3;149 19,492, One can ram of $14.~*12'HH'12% $?,~76; $$_~10 7. Warn. Franch/sc · Avg m~ of $276 * 8% incr '" 2%f~ * HH S1.449 Avs n,t~ ofS276 * 20% incr* 2%fc~ * ~ S2.¢64~ : 8. PG&E Franchise: i : -- ArS r~t~ of St,~00* n~ * 2% , ss,o~s; s5,~2. 336.096t : 9,=~otor 'Vehicle S40.40/pop * population projection S40.400t S2B,.280= 3169.6801 :' l 0.Po~tlation ~ro. jcction 1.000~ '700. 4.200! t !.TCI Fraxcbise 5%'60%'S$0'~2op S900' S650' S3.780i .* exceBanne:u, non of urbnn uockeu ' '; City Hall 10300 Torte Avenue ~. Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 (408) 777-3354 ~':itv o1' FAX (408) 777-3333 Cupertino PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summary AGENDA ITEM Ic] AGENDA DATE November 1, 1999 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Ordinances Amending Chapter 11.34 oftbe Cupertino Municipal Code: Section 11.34.020, Roadway Design Features, Administrative Authority; Section 11.34.010, Road Bump-Definition; and Section 11.34.030, Establishment of Warrants for the Installation and Maintenance of Road Bumps BACKGROUND Chapter 11.34 of the Municipal Code entitled "Roadway Design Features" was adopted by the City Council on November 2, 198. Staff recently reviewed this chapter due to current developments in traffic calming. The Institute of Traffic Engineers sets a guideline of a distance of 150 feet from an intersection of curve in the roadway as a tolerance in install a road bump. Our current distance is 200 feet. The difference of 50 feet. could allow for more flexibility in the installation of road bumps on local neighborhood and collector streets. Therefore, an amendment in the visible distance of 150 feet is recommended. In addition, the shape of the road bump should be re-defined to change the current profile description from circular to parabolic. A warrant of acceptable local and collector speed of installation of a road bump is not covered in the present criteria. The City of Sunnyvale uses 85% approach speed of 32 miles per hour as a guideline. A conversation with the Sheriff's Department indicated traffic citations are typical for speeds over the 10 mile per hour range, depending on conditions. Therefore, a reasonable 85% approach speed for installation of a road bump is 32 miles per hour or over. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the first readings of Ordinance Nos. [~, [g.$~, and B J. Vis ,o ic - .. I~irector of P~blic Works City Manager ORDINANCE NO. 1837 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING CHAPTER 11.34 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ROADWAY DESIGN FEATURES, SECTION 11.34.010 RELATING TO ROAD BUMP-DEFI~TION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN that Section 11.34.010 be amended to delete the following: Section 11.34. 010 Road Bump - Definition. A bump is a vertical rise in the surface of the pavement of three to three and one-half inches at its midpoint. Thc profile is generally circular and twelve feet in length. There is no vertical displacement start to finish of the road bump. The shape is consistent for the full width of the pavement except for the last two feet at each end. The ends will be tapered so that they are flush with the roadway at the edge of the pavement or at the tip of a gutter. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN that Section 11.34.020 be amended to include the following: Section 11.34. 010 Road Bump - Definition. A bump is a vertical rise in the surface of the pavement of three to three and one-quarter inches at its midpoint. The profile is generally parabolic and twelve feet in length. There is no vertical displacement start to finish of the road bump. The shape is consistent for the full width of the pavement except for the last one foot at each end. The ends will be tapered so that they are flush with the roadway at the edge of the pavement or at the tip of a gutter. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this l' day of November, 1999 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City of Cupertino this day of ,1999 by the following vote: Vote Council Members AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino ORDINANCE NO. 183 8 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING CHAPTER 11.34 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ROADWAY DESIGN FEATURES, SECTION 11.34.020 RELATING TO ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN that Section 11.34.020 be amended to delete the following: Section 11.34. 020 Administrative authority There are conferred upon the City Manager those powers and duties necessary for the adroinisWafion of this chapter. In addition, there is also conferred upon the City Manger the authority and power to designate such officers and employees of the City, and of other cooperating public agencies, such as the Sheriff's Department, as may be required to assist him in carrying out the intent and purpose of this chapter. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN that Section 11.34.020 be amended to include the following: -- Section 11.34. 020 Administrative authority There are conferred upon the City Manager those powers and duties necessary for the otimini.stration of this chapter. In addition, there is also conferred upon the City Manger the authority and power to designate such officers and employees of the City, and of other cooperating public agencies, such as the Sheriff's Department and Fire Department, as may be required to assist him in carrying out the intent and purpose of this chapter. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1'~ day of November, 1999 and ENAC~ at'a regular meeting of the City of Cupertino this day of ,1999 by the following vote: Vote Council Members AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino I?>-t ORDINANCE NO. 1839 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING CHAPTER 11.34 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ROADWAY DESIGN FEATURES, SECTION 11.34.030 RELATING TO ESTABLISHMENT OF WARRANTS FOR THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF ROAD BUMPS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN that Section 11.34.030 be amended to delete the following: Section 11.34. 030 Warrants for the installation and maintenance of road bumps. A. The street is a neighborhood residential street as defined by the California Vehicle Code or by City Council actions. J. The road bump is visible for a distance of two hundred feet. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN that Section 11.34.020 be amended to include the following: Section 11.34. 030 Warrants for the installation and maintenance of road bumps. A. The (local or collector) street is a neighborhood residential street as defined by the California Vehicle Code or by City Council actions. J. The road bump is visible for a distance of one huudred-f'lfty feet. K. The result of a traffic and engineering survey must indicate a minimum 85% approach speed of 32 miles per hour. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this l't day of Nov .ember, 1999 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City of Cupertino this day of ,1999 by the following vote: Vote Council Members AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino City Hall 10300 Torte Avenue ._ Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 (408) 777=3354 City of FAX (408) 777-3333 Cupertino PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summary AGENDA ITEM ~,2 o AGENDA DATE November 1, 1999 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Ordinance establishing a "No Parking 2AM - 5AM" zone on the East Side of Mary Avenue from Stevens Creek Boulevard to Lubec Street, establishing a "No Parking 2AM - 5AM" zone on the West Side of Mary Avenue from Stevens Creek Boulevard to Lubec Street and extending diagonal parking area° BACKGROUND Recently, Mary Avenue was resurfaced and a new striping plan was implemented. This particular striping plan allows street parking on the east side of Mary Avenue to a point 410 feet south of Lubec Street. This plan also took in consideration the parking requirements for the Senior Center future expansion and the street in front of the Service Center where staff and volunteer parking is in demand. The new ordinance establishes a "No Parking 2AM - 5AM" zone on the east side of Mary Avenue from 340 feet north of Stevens Creek Boulevard to a point of 440 south of Lubec Street. Additionally, a "No Parking 2AM - 5AM" zone on the west side of Mary Avenue from 500 feet north of Stevens Creek Boulevard to a point 770 north of Lubec Street was also established. Diagonal parking was extended to include the area in front of the Service Center. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends tha{ the City Council conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. ~ S~ / Ap7/,~e~., f~l~ission: D .rector o.~ Public Works City Manager Printed on Recycled Paper ORDINANCE NO. 1840 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING CHAPTER 11.24.150 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING PROHIBITION, CI-IAFI~R 11.24.160 RELATING TO PARKING PROHIBITION DURING CERTAIN HOURS ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF MARY AVENUE, AND CHAPTER 11.24.1 g0 RELATING TO DIAGONAL PARKING ON THE WEST SIDE OF MARY AVENUE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN as follows: Chapter 11.24, Section 11.24.150 be amended to delete the following: Street Sides of Street Portion Mary Avenue East and North Between Stevens Creek Boulevard and Homestead Road Chapter 11.24, Section 11.24.160 be amended to delete the following: Street Hours Sides of Street Portion Exceptions Mary Avenue 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. South Between a point None 500 feet northerly of Stevens Creek Boulevard and a point 1,700 feet sou& of Lubec Street. Mary Avenue 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. West Between a point None 1,700 feet south Lubec Street and 400 feet north of Lubec Street. Chapter 11.24, Section 11.24.180 be amended to delete the following: Street Portion Mary Avenue Between a point 500 feet northerly of Stevens Creek Boulevard and a point 1,700 feet southerly of Lubee Street Chapter 11.24, Section 11.~4.150 be amended to inelade the following: Street Sides of Street Portion Mary Avenue East Between Stevens Creek Boulevard and a point 340 feet Northerly Mary Avenue East Between a point 440 feet south Lubec Street and Homestead Road Ordinance lg40 Page 2 Chapter 11.24, Section 11.24.160 be amended to include the following: Street Hours Sides of Street Portion Exceptions Mary Avenue 2 a.m. to S a.m. East Between a point None 340 feet north of Stevens Creek Boulevard and a point 440 south of Lubec Street Mary Avenue 2 a.m. to 5 a.m. West Between a point None 500 feet north of Stevens Creek Boulevard and a point 770 feet north Lubec Street Chapter 11.24, Section 11.24.180 be mended to include the following: Street Portion Mary Avenue West side between a point 500 feet north of Stevens Creek Boulevard to a point 380 south of Lubec Street Mary Avenue West side between a point 430 feet north of Lubec Street and a point 340 feet northerly INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1st day of November, 1999 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City of Cupertino this day of ·1999 by the following vote: Vote Council Members AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: A'ITEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino City Hall 10300 Torrc Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014=3255 (408) 777-3354 ()1' FAX (408) 777-3333 Cupe -tino PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Summary AGENDA ITEM ~ / AGENDA DATE November 1, 1999 SUBJECT AND ISSUE Installation of Stop Signs at Bahl, Kendle, and Carta Blanca Streets at Ainsworth Drive BACKGROUND It has recently come to the attention of the Transportation Division of the need to assign right-of-way at Bahl, Kendle, and Carta Blanca Streets with Aiusworth Drive near Stevens Creek Elementary School. Bahl, Kendle, and Carta Blanca Streets have a steep downhill grade, which end at a "T" intersection at Ainsworth Drive. The grades of these streets have caused a significant number of motorists to improperly yield to right-of-way vehicles already on Ainsworth Drive, creating a need for control. In addition, in 1997, the Cupertino Union School District adjusted the boundary areas between Lincoln Elementary School a~d Stevens Creek Elementary School. This change resulted in an increase in student attendance at Stevens Creek Elementary School. Chapter 8, Section 22450Co) of the california v6hicle Code states, "Notwiths;anding any other provision of law, a local authority may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution providing for the placement of a stop sign at any location on a highway under its jurisdiction where a stop sign would enhance traffic safety." It is advisable to install stop signs on Bahl, Kendle, ~d Carta Blanca Streets at Ainsworth Drive due to the downhill street grade and an increase in the student attendance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. ~ l/lrector of~Public Works City Manager ORDINANCE NO. 1841 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING CHAPTER 11.20.020 OF THE CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ESTABLISHMENT OF VEHICULAR STOP AND SECTION 11.20.030, ALL DIRECTIONAL VEHICULAR STOP REQUIRED AT CERTAIN INTERSECTIONS TO INCLUDE BAHL STREET AT THE INTERSECTION OF AINSWORTH DRIVE, KENDLE STREET AT THE INTERSECTION OF AINSWORTH DRIVE AND CARTA BLANCA STREET AT THE INTERSECTION OF AINSWORTH DRIVE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN that Section 11.20.020 be amended to include the following: Section 11.20.020 Vehicular Stop Required at Certain Intersections. App.'oaching Street At Any Entrance Required to Stop Thereof With Bahl Street Ainsworth Drive Kendle Street Ainsworth Drive Carta Blanca Street Ainsworth Dr/vt INTRODUCED at a regular meet/nE of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1st day of November, 1999 and ENACTED at a regular meeting of the City of Cupertino this day of ,1999 by the following vote: Vote Council Members AYES: NOES: ABS~J~IT: ABSTAIN: ATIEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor, City of Cupertino