Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-16-1983 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA,i Vol, CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. 7�S D Initial: DATE: March 16, 1983 C. At DEPAI:I'MIIQT: Community Development C. Mgr. SUBJECT': FINAL ACCEPTANCE FOR SDR = .1385, OAK STREET, HARKNESS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- Issue Sun-nary All improvements required of the subject Building Site Approval have been satisfactorily completed. Recommendation Authorize release of the attached described bond. Adopt Resoltuion 36 -B- Fiscal Impacts None Exhibits /Attachments 1. Memo describing bond 2. Resolution No. 36 -B- 204 Council Action 3/16: Approved on Consent Calendar 5 -0. 09UW @0 §&MEUQ)(5'/A 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARA'TOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 TO: City Council DATE: 2/23/83 FROM: Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Final Acceptance for SDR -1385 Location: Oak Street. The one (1) year maintenance period for SDR -1385 has expired and all deficiencies of the improvements have been corrected. Therefore, I recommend the streets.and other public facilities be accepted into the City system. Attached for City Council consideration is Resolu- tion 36B- which accepts the public improvements, easements and rights -of -way. Since the developer has fulfilled his obligation described in the improve- ment contract, I also recommend the improvement securities listed below be released. The following information is included for your information and use: 1. Developer: Richard T. Harkness Address: 72888 Roy Emerson Lane,. Palm Desert, CA. 92260 2. Date of Construction Acceptance: 1/6/82 3. Improvement Security: Type: Investment Certificate Amount: $2500.00 Issuing Co: Wells Fargo Bank Address: Saratoga, CA. Receipt, Bond or Certificate No.: 6501- 008957 -001 4. Miles of Public Street: None 5. Special Remarks: R ert S. Shook r l,, ,J RESOLUTION NO. 36 -B- RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DEDICATION OF STREETS SDR NO. 1385 It appearing that on or about February 23, 1983, the street, storm drain and other improvements as shown on the hereinafter referred to subdivision map and on approved improvement plans therefore were completed and thereafter were maintained by the subdivider for a period of not less than an additional year from date of satisfactory completion. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: That portion of the City's previous resolution rejecting the dedication of certain streets, storm drains and other easements as shown on the following described subdivision map: Map of SDR No. 1385 recorded in Book 454 of Maps, at Page 42 &,43 in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, State of California on November 11 , 19 79 and as set forth in the Clerk's certificate on said map, is hereby rescinded and the previously rejected offers of dedication on said map are hereby accepted, except the following: None and all of the above streets which are accepted under this resolution are hereby declared to be public streets of the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the following described improvement bond or bonds are hereby ordered released: 001 That certain Improvement Bond No. 6501- 008957- dated October 8, 1979, and issued by_ Wells Fargo Bank The above and foregoing. resolution was passed and adopted on the day of , 19 , at a regular meeting of the City Council of Saratoga by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: CITY CLERK MAYOR e W @ 9 0 &U MEU Q) (5'/A 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE . SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 0108) 867 -34:38 TO: City Council DATE: 2/23/83 FROM: Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Final Acceptance for SDR -1385 Location: Oak Street The one (1) year maintenance period for SDR -1385 has expired and all deficiencies of the improvements have been corrected. Therefore, I recommend the streets and other public facilities be accepted into the City system. Attached for City Council consideration is Resolu- tion 36B- which accepts the public improvements, easements and rights -of -way. Since the developer has fulfilled his obligation described in the improve- ment contract, I also recommend the improvement securities listed below be released. The following information is included for your information and use: 1. Developer: Richard T. Harkness Address: 72888 Roy Emerson Lane, Palm Desert, CA. 92260 2. Date of Construction Acceptance: 1/6/82 3. Improvement Security: Type: Investment Certificate Amount: $2500.00 Issuing Co: Wells Fargo Bank Address: Saratoga, CA. Receipt, Bond or Certificate No.: 6501- 008957 -001 4. t4iles of Public Street: None 5. Special Remarks: nn' IV.. RdVert S. Shook AGE2�'DA BILL NO. DATE: March 16, 1983 DEPAi7T.Z24T: Community Development CI'I'f OF si,I;�YiCG N SUBEkM U. ,: FINAL BUILDING SITE APPROVAL FOR SDR -1504 DAVID IRAJ EBRAHIMOUN,CAMINO GRANDE Issue S�^Tmary 1. The SDR -1504 is ready for final approval Initial: AV Dept. Hd. •W7 2. All requirements for City Department and other agencies have been - met. Recc:nrandaticn Adopt resolution 1504 -2 attached, approving the final map of SDR -1504 and authorize execution of Deferred Improvement Agreement. Fiscal Imcacts None Etch ibits /Attachm --nts 1. Copy of Tentative Map approval 2. Resolution No. 1504 -2 3. Location Map 4. Status repor- -t,for Building Site Approval 5. Report to Planning Commission. Ccuncll AC.tjon 3/16: Approved on Consent Calendar 5 -0. a 1 RESOLUTION NO. 1504 -2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVING BUILDING SITE OF DAVID IRAJ EBRAHIMOUN The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: SECTION 1: The 1.179 acre and 1.024 acre parcel shown as parcel A and B on the Final Parcel Map prepared by Frank T. Lewis, Civil Engineer, and submitted to the City of Saratoga, be approved as two (2) individual building sites. The above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly intro- duced and passed by the City Council of Saratoga at a regular meeting held on the 17th day of March 19 83 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: ITY CLERK MAYOR Cis G' �o s S o� �9 \ °s dA1M [R 1614 LAI{CACTLA Re. LOCATiON MAP SD I� 1 504 MEMORANDUM CITY OF SARATOGA TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: Status Report for Building Site Approval• All conditions for Building Site Approval SDR- 1504. David Iraj Ebrahimoun (have) (W9V6 -xA st) been met as approved by the Planning Commission on M,-Ly 26, 1982 Listed below are the amounts, dates and City receipt numbers for all required items: Offer of Dedication yes Record of Survey or Parcel Map yes Storm Drainage Fee' $2200 Date Subm All Required Improvement Bonds N/A All Required Inspection Fees. N/A Building Site Approval Agreement N/A Park and Recreation Fee $2600 Ltted Date Date Date Date Date Submitted Date Submitted 2 -25 -83 Receipt Submitted -- Submitted - -- Si,gned - -- Submitted 2-25-83 2 -25 -83 2 -25 -83 # 02060 Receipt# -- Receipt# --- Receipt #02060 It is, therefore, the Community Development Department recommendation that (Final) Building Site Approval for David Iraj Ebrahimoun SDR- 1504 be granted. If Conditional Building Site Approval is recommended, it shall become un- conditional upon - compliance with the following conditions: Condition(s) , Reason for Non - Compliance xooerr 5. 5noox Director of Community Development �J �- l,:;v CF OTTE REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Exhibit "A" * Amended 5/26/82 DATE: 5/6/82 Commission Meeting: 5/12/82 SUBJECT: SDR -1504, D.I. Ebrahimoun, Tentative Subdivision Approval, E1 Camino Grande at E1 Camino Sende - 2 lots ------------------------------------------------------------- REQUEST: Tentative Subdivision Approval to split a 2.21 acre lot on El Camino Grande. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Negative Declaration, attached. PUBLIC NOTICING: This project has been noticed by mailed notices to surrounding property owners, posting the site and advertising in the newspaper. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING: R -1- 40,000. SURROUNDING LAND USES: SITE SIZE_ SITE SLOPE: Very low density. Single- family residential. 2.21 acres (net). 22.26 %. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is proposing to split an existing 2.21 acre (net) site into two lots. The slope density calculation allows for 1.53 lots which rounds up to 2 lots by ordinance (NS- 60.4). This calculation excludes lands offered for dedication to the City for right of way along El Camino Grande and El Camino Sende. The proposed house site is located at the existing barbeque area with the garage area to the west and the driveway requiring some grading from El Camino Sende as well as the removal of one significant oak tree. The house site will have a view of the residence below although numerous trees act as a buffering screen. 4Y Report to Planning Commission 5/6/82 SDR -1504, D.I. Ebrahimoun Page 2 The neighbors have pointed out to staff that since this application has been received two Ordinance -sized pine trees have been cut down without permits on site along El Camino Sende. Staff is recommending a deferred improvement agreement for the street improvements on this site since both streets are to be preserved as they are per the Coundil direction. Some maps within the City show a right of way through this property to Sperry Lane (at Sobey). However, after site inspection, staff is not recommending these improvements or dedications because of the physical and environmental problems associated with these potential improvements. No major concerns have been expressed by the responsible agencies on this site. PROJECT STATUS: Said project complies with all objectives of the 1974 General Plan, and all requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances of the City of Saratoga. The housing needs of the region have been considered and have been balanced against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. A Negative Declaration was prepared and will be filed with the County of Santa Clara Recorder's Office relative to the environ- mental impact of this project, if approved under this application. Said determination date: 4/6/82. The Staff Report recommends approval of the tentative map for SDR -1504 (Exhibit "B" filed 3/26/82) subject to the following conditions: I. GENERAL CONDITIONS Applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of Ordinance No. 60, including without limitation, the submission of a Record of Survey or parcel map; payment of storm drainage fee and park and recreation fee as established by Ordinance in effect at the time of final approval; submission of engineered improvement plans for any street work; and compliance with applicable Health Department regulations and applicable Flood Control regulations and requirements of the Fire Department. Reference is hereby made to said Ordinance for further particulars. Site approval in no way excuses compliance with Saratoga's Zoning and Building Ordinances, nor with any other Ordinance of the City. In addition thereto, applicant shall comply with the following Specific Conditions which are hereby required and set forth in accord with Section 23.1 of Ordinance No. 60. Report to Planning Commission 5/6/82 SDR -1504, D.I. Ebrahimoun Page 3 II. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT A. Pay Storm Drainage Fee in effect at the time of obtaining Final Approval. B. Sumbit "Parcel Map" to City for Checking and Recordation (Pay required Checking & Recordation Fees). (If Parcel is shown on existing map of record, submit three (3) to- scale prints.) C. Submit "Irrevocable Offer of Dedication" to provide for a 20 foot half - street on El Camino Grande and El Camino Sende. D. Improve E1 Camino Grande and E1 Camino Sende to City Standards, including the following: (D.I.A.) 1. Designed Structural Section 13 feet between centerline and flowline. (D.I.A.) 2. P.C. Concrete curb and gutter (R -36, V -24). (D.I.A.) 3. Underground existing overheat utilities. (D.I.A.) E. Construct Storm Drainage System as shown on the "Master Drainage Plan" and as directed by the Director of Public Works, as needed to convey storm runoff to Street, Storm Sewer or Watercourse. (D.I.A.) F. Construct Driveway Approach 16 ft. wide at property line flared to 24 ft. at street paving. Use double seal coat oil and screenings or better on 6 in. Aggregate Base. G. Construct "Valley Gutter" across driveway or pipe culvert under driveway as approved by the Director of Public Works. H. Provide adequate sight distance and remove obstructions of view as required at driveway and access road inter- sections. I. Watercourses must be kept free of obstacles which will change, retard or prevent flow. J. Obtain Encr.oachment Permit from the Dept. of Public Works for driveway approaches or pipe crossings of City Street. K. Engineered Improvement Plans required for: (D.I.A.) 1. Street Improvements (D.I.A.) L. Pay Plan Check and Inspection Fees as determined from Improvement Plans. (D.I.A.) Report to Planning Commission SDR -1504, D.I. Ebrahimoun D/ e/ Zs/_ , Page 4. M. Enter into "Deferred Improvement Agreement" for the required improvements marked "D.I.A." * N. W3- E3- �a�t%o -6- ride- aid- 1-- Caati -o- Ada-- 1$ - - € €. - mri-rj- tfflafn-- aeee99 Aggr-egat�- -Bay. (Delete) III. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - DIVISION OF INSPECTION SERVICES A. Geotechnical investigation and report by licensed professional o Geology 0 Soils Foundation B. Plans to be reviewed by geotechnical consultant prior to building permit being issued C. Detailed on -site improvement plans showing: o Grading (limits of cuts, fills; slopes, cross - sections, existing and proposed elevations, earthwork quanities) 0 Drainage details (conduit type, slope, outfall, location, etc.) 0 Retaining structures including design by A.I.A. or R.C.E. for walls 3 feet or higher. All existing structures, with notes as to remain or be removed. 0 Erosion control measures 0 Standard information to include titleblock, plot plan using record data, location map, north arrow, sheet nos., owner's name, etc. * D. Comply with requirements of the City Geologist's letter dated May 25, 1982. IV SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 4 A. Sanitary sewers to be provided and fees paid in accordance with requirements of Sanitation District No. 4 as outlined in letter dated April 20, 1982. V SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT A. Sewage disposal to be provided and connected by the developer trunk sewers of the Sanitation to final approval, an adequate distric� o assure completion by sanitary sewers installed to one of the existing District No. 4. Prior bond shall be posted with Df stirs as planned. Report to Planning Commission 5/6/82 SDR -1504, D.I. Ebrahimoun Page 5 B. Domestic water to be provided by San Jose Water Works. C. Existing septic tank to be pumped and backfilled to County Standards. A $400.00 bond to be posted to insure completion of work. VI SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT A. Applicant shall, prior to Final Map Approval, submit plans showing the location and intended use of any exisitng wells to the SCVWD for review and certification. VII SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - PERMIT REVIEW DIVISION A. Design Review Approval required on project prior to issuance of permits. B. Any modifcations to the Site Development Plan shall be subject to approval by the Planning Commission. C. Prior to issuance of building permits individual structures shall be reviewed by the Palnning Department to evaluate the potential for solar accessibility. The developer shall provide, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities on /in the subdivision /building site. VIII COMMENTS A. Tree removal prohibited unless in accord with applicable City Ordinances. Approved: Kathy Ker'dus Associat'( Planner KK /bc P.C. Agenda: 5/12/82 *As amended by Planning Commission 5/26/82 • ;ES C11 OF Initial: AG�D1 BILL NO. Qs CL Dept. f1d. DATE: March 16, 1983 C. Atty. DZ A'7I'.M2,T: Community Development C. Mgr. SU"i.7ECr: A -847, ERNEST & MIGNONA WESTBROOK, 14689 ALOHA�AVENUE --------------------------------- - - - - -- -----------=---------------- - - - - -- Issue Surmsry On March 2, 1983, you held a public hearing on the appeal of the Planning Commission denial of this matter. As a result of that public hearing you determined to deny the appeal. Attached is the resolution to affirm that determination. Recc,=Lendaticn Adopt Resolution No. Fiscal Imoacts None Exh i bi is /A tt--ch^ien is Resolution denying design review for A -847. Ccuncil %ction 3/16: Fanelli /Clevenger mmved to approve Resolution 2045.. Passed 5 -0. L RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF • SARATOGA CONFIRMING A DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, DENYING DESIGN REVIEW FOR A -847 WHEREAS, applicants Ernest and Mignona Westbrook have requested Design Review approval to construct a two story dwelling; and WHEREAS, on January 26, 1983, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on applicants' request for Design Review approval and after said public hearing denied said request; and WHEREAS, applicants have appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council pursuant to Section 17.7 of the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on March 2, 1983, the City Council held a de novo public hearing and after the closing of said public hearing reviewed and considered the applicants' request, staff reports, minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 26, 1983, and other evidence, both written and oral, presented to the Council during said public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council was unable to make the required findings; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga • HEREBY RESOLVES as follows: The applicants' appeal from the Planning Commission is denied and the decision of the Planning Commission is confirmed. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the 16th day of March, 1983, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: CITY CLERK MAYOR • AG IMA BILL NO. Qs Q, Initial: Dept. Fki. DATE: March 16 , 1983 C. Atty. Community Development C. Mgr. SLrzxMCr: A -847, ERNEST � MIGNONA WESTBROOK, 14689 ALOHA AVENUE Issue Su=ary On March 2, 1983, you held a public hearing on the appeal of the Planning Commission denial of this matter. As a result of that public hearing you determined to deny the appeal. Attached is the resolution to affirm that determination. Rec-= endaticn Adopt Resolution No. denying design review for A -847. Fiscal Imnacts None ` E:ch i bi is /A ttach^rn is Resolution Ccuncil ;'_Ction • r CITY OF Se112[Y1UC�A AGENDA BILL NO. 4 a 1 Initial: Dept. Hd. DATE: March 16, 1983 C. At DEPARTMENT: Community Development C. Mgr. SUBJECT: CONSTRUCTION ACCEPTANCE FOR SDR -1452, WILSON, CUNNINGHAM PLACE Issue Summary The public improvements required for the subject Tract or Building Site have been satisfactorily completed. This "Construction Acceptance" will begin the one (1) year maintenance period. Recommendation Grant "Construction Acceptance" to the subject Tract or Building Site. Release Monument Bond - Fiscal Impacts None Exhibits /Attachn�--nts 1. Memo describing development and bond. 2. Memo describing monument bond Council Action 3/16: Callon /Clevenger moved to approve. Passed 4 -0 (Fanelli abstaining). of SAR F �1EMOO RANDUM (99TE oa 0&Ta&UQ)(5& 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 TO: City Council DATE: 2/24/83 FROM: Director of :Community Development - SUBJECT: Construction Acceptance for SDR -1452 Name & Location: WILSON DEVELOPMENT, CUNNINGHAM PLACE Public Improvements required for SDR -1452 have been satisfactorily completed. I, therefore, recommend the City Council accept the improvements for construction only. This "construction acceptance" will begin the one (1) year maintenance period. During that year, the improvement contract, insurance and improvement security will remain in full force. The following information is included for your use: 1. Developer: Wilson Development,. Inc. Address: 14370 Saratoga Avenue Saratoga, CA. 95070 2. Improvement Security: Type: Surety Bond Amount: $45,000.00 Issuing Company: Surety Insurance Company of California Address: Box 2430 La Habra, CA. Receipt, Bond or Certificate No.: 552582 3. Special Remarks: RSS /dsm Robert S. Shook Date: 2/24/83 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES SUBJECT: RELEASE OF MONUMENT BOND, ,SDR- 1452. Monuments in the above tract have been checked and found to be acceptable. It is recommended that Bond No. 552583 , issued by . Surety Insurance Company of California in the amount of $ 500.00 , be released. Developer of the above tract is: Wilson.Develoit, Inc. ROBERT S. SHOOK DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RSS /dsc A=—DA BILL NO. 410 DATE: March 16, 1983 Da'AL Z2,7r: Community Development cfl OF Siuv�iCi�\ Initial: Dept. f1d. SU,JECr: Brandywine /Blauer- Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road Signal C. Atty. C. Mgr. Issue Su- mary Proposed to locate traffic signal on Saratoga - .Sunnyvale Road at either Brandywine or Blauer. Traffic signal warrants are met at Brandywine and would be met at Blauer if median were'clo'sed at Brandywine. Historically - CalTrans has proposed Brandywine but has now changed its position to strongly favor Blauer because 1) use of public funds to essentially serve private facility and 2) limited left turn stacking space. Recc:nr,endaticn Hold public hearing. Determine City position on signal location. f Fiscal Imcacts $60,000 (estimate) if at Brandywine (50o share) \ $40,000'(estimate) if at Blauer.(33 -1 /3o share) Etch i bi t s /A ttach.^rs is 1. Staff Report dated 3 -08 -83 2. 2 -24 -83 CalTrans letter 3. 7 -28 -80 " 4. 1 -04 -79 " 5. 11 -1 -78 " Cc ncil r %ction 3/16: Clevenger /Fanelli moved to approve location at Blauer Drive with provision that entrance at Brandywine remain open and median not closed off. Passed 5 -0. SAAR REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: 3 -08 -83 COUNCIL MEETING: 3-16-83 SUBJECT'- Brandywine / Blauer Signal For several years there has been a concern for locating a traffic signal on Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road in the area of Pierce Road, Brandywine Drive or Blauer Avenue. In 1978 CalTrans made a warrant study at these three intersections and found that Brandy- wine was the only one where sufficient warrants were met and, therefore,proposed that location on a 50% participation by Sara- toga (letter attached). Upon being requested to review the. possibility of the signal being placed at Blauer, CalTrans agreed that if the median were closed.at Brandywine, thereby rerouting traffic to Blauer, the warrants would be met and they would.agree to that location. Note that this involved closing median at Brandywine (letter attached). In 1980 CalTrans made new warrant studies with similar results and recommendations (letter attached). Several.times during the period between 1978 and the present there have been discussions of the location of the signal, with the result that you set a public hearing for the matter at your March 16, 1983 meeting to determine the City's position on the location so Caltrans can proceed with implementation next year_. Since Saratoga is about to make up its mind CalTrans has looked at the matter in ernest and has modified its position and recommenda- tion (see attached letter). For two major reasons they now propose that the signal be located at Blauer rather than Brandywine: 1. Use of public funds to essentially serve a private property, i.e. Argonaut Shopping Center, inasmuch as Brandywine provides no circulation. 2. Insufficient room to provide adequate left turn stacking lane for all three intersections (Pierce, Brandywine, Blauer). Report to City Council RE: Brandywine /Blauer Signal March 8, 1983 Page 2. In addition the report again proposes to close the median at Brandywine. Your Staff has supported the CalTrans proposal these -last several years because.of the warrant studies, while assuming that these newly mentioned constraints had been reviewed and were acceptable. It seems at this time that CalTrans -is telling us that they will not participate in a signal at Brandywine, and if that is true it seems we have little voice in the location of the signal. Robert-S-. Shook Director of Community Development RSS:cd Attachments STATE OF CALIFORNIA — BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P.O. BOX 3366, RINCON ANNEX -s SAN FRANCISCO 94119 (415) 557 -1840 February 24, 1983 04- SC1 -85- 11.9/12.0 04356 - 208711 Mr. Robert S. Shook Director of Public works L't;�CEIWEp City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue FEB 2 51983 Saratoga, CA 95070 �0MN1u;ViTY DEVELOPN1ENT Dear Mr. Shook: Reference is made to Caltrans' previous letters of November 18, 1982 and December 22, 1982 concerning a proposed signal project at the Brandywine Drive /shopping center driveway intersection with Route 85. This letter is also a followup to a recent visit by Messrs. Berner and Morimoto at your office on February 15, 1983. For the past few years, Caltrans has continued to indicate that signals were justified and desirable at Brandywine Drive. This intersection satisfies three of the signal criteria as listed in the State Traffic Manual. It meets two of the volume criteria and the accident criteria. A count made on January 6, 1983, shows an increase in traffic volumes of about 4% per year from an earlier count taken in 1980. A detailed analysis of the turns into the shopping cel at Brandywine could create mity of Pierce Road to the turn storage lane that can on Route 85. count data, particularly the left iter, indicates that a traffic signal a future problem. The close proxi- north limits the length of the left be provided for the shopping center If signals were to be installed at Brandywine, about 250 feet of left ' turn storage would be needed for the shopping center traf- fic. In addition, a minimum of 100 feet of left turn storage would be needed at Pierce Road. An additional minimum transition length of 90 feet would be required between the two back to back left turn storage lanes. Since there are only 290 feet between the two intersections, providing storage for both turning move- ments with back to back left turn storage lanes is not possible. In addition to the physical limitations, another major concern has arisen. By installing a signal at Brandywine, Caltrans would be spending public State funds to install a traffic signal which primarily serves a private shopping center driveway. This could be construed as an improper use of public funds. Further- more, if additional intersections were to be signalized in the future, the more appropriate locations would be at Blauer Drive and at Pierce Road, rather than at Brandywine Drive in combina- tion with another intersection.or intersections. Both Blauer and Pierce serve a network of residential streets and provide access to a greater number of residents. Brandywine, on the other hand, is a cul -de -sac street serving about 25 homes. Mr. Robert S. Shook February 24, 1983 Page 2. Our more detailed analysis indicates that the more appropriate location for a traffic signal would be Blauer Drive. A signal at this location would serve a public street which provides access to a greater number of residents. At this intersection, there is an existing 250 foot left turn storage lane. This lane can be lengthened to satisfy any increased turning demands. Blauer Drive also appears wide enough to accommodate the desira- ble four lanes of traffic. If this intersection were to be signalized, Caltrans would require that the median crossover at Brandywine be closed off. Otherwise the traffic signal justification criteria would not be met at Blauer Drive . However, right tur n only movements from and to Route 85 at both Brandywine and the shopping center driveway would still be allowed. Also, the existing left turn storage lane to Pierce Road could be retained. For the above reasons, I would suggest that the City consider installing signals at Blauer Drive rather than at Brandywine Drive. To assist the City in making a decision, I have enclosed two alternative plans, peak hour flow diagrams and clean copies of the aerial plan. One plan shows signals at Brandywine Drive, with the required driveway modification. This plan also requires the elimination of the left turn storage lane for Pierce Road traffic. The other, preferable plan shows signals at Blauer Drive with a median closure at Brandywine Drive. As indicated verbally, Mr. Ken Berner of my staff will be more than happy to assist you in any manner he can. He will plan on attending the City Council meeting scheduled for March 16, 1983 as you requested. Sincerely yours, BURCH C. BACHTOLD Acting District Director i By���j�yli' ETHLYN AXN HANSEN, Chief Traffic Branch Attachment STATE OF - CALIFORNIA— BUSINESS AND TRA1.1'ATION AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT OF 'TRANSPORTATION P.O. BOX 3366 RINCON ANNEX 'm SAN FRANCISCO 94119 (415) 557 -1840 July 28, 1980 o4- sC1 -85 PM 11.84/12.01 Mr. Bob Shook Director of Public Works 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Dear Bob: As requested by the City Council in late May, 1980, we have recounted the intersections of Blauer Drive, Brandywine Drive and Pierce Road with Route 85 to find out if any changes had taken place affecting traffic signal warrants. The counts at the three intersections were all conducted the same day, Wednesday, June 4th. The results are: Pierce Road: Warrant No. 2, Interruption of Continuous Traffic, is 100% satisfied. Brandywine Drive: Warrant No. 1, Minimum Vehicular Volume; Warrant No. 2, Interruption of Continuous Traffic; and Warrant No. 6, Accident Experience, are 100% satisfied. Blauer Drive: Warrant No. 2, Interruption of Continuous Traffic, is 80% satisfied and Warrant No. 1, Minimum Vehicular Volume, is 80% satisfied. We can recommend State financial participation in the construc- tion of signals at Brandywine Drive, or in the construction of signals at Blauer'Drive if the median opening at Brandywine Drive is closed at the same time. We are enclosing copies of the Traffic Signal Warrant sheets and the Flow Diagrams for each of the three intersections for your information. We will take no further action until we hear from you concerning the desire of the City. Of course, if you need more information or would like to discuss this in more detail, please let us know. Sincerely yours, JOHN WEST District Director By y J. B. WATSON, Chief Traffic Branch C STATE OF CALIFORNIA — BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor '` DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION:; ' s 14 P.O. BOX 3366 RINCON ANNEX SAN FRANCISCO 94119 (415) 557 -1840 ` h".) lKS DcF'I January 4, 1979 'I.. y 0r SARATOGA 04 SC1 -85 PM 11.9 04356- 208711 Mr. Robert S. Shook Director of Public Works City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Shook: Reference is made to the traffic signal studies recently completed at the intersections of Route 85 with Blauer Drive, Brandywine Drive, and Pierce Road, all in the City of Saratoga. We have recalculated the signal warrants at Blauer Drive and by adding the left -turn movements into and out of the shopping center to Blauer Drive, both signal warrants 1 and 2 are 100% satisfied. Please let us know when the agreement has been made with the shopping center to close the median in front of the main entrance, and to permit right turns only in and out. We will then proceed with the preparation of a project report, recommending traffic signal installation at Blauer Drive. Sincerely yours, T. R. LAMMERS District Director' By C. B. McGUIRE Senior Engineer Traffic Branch a r• STATE OF CALIFORNIA — BUSINESS AND THANSPORITATJON AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P.O. BOX X366 RINCON ANNEX SAN FRANCISCO 94119 557 -1840 November 1, 1978 Mr. Robert S. Shook Director of Public Works City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Dear Mr. Shook: C EDMUND G. BROWN JR., �s 71978 PUKIC WORKS DEPT CITY OF SARATO(,,4 04- SCI -85 -PM 11,94 We have completed traffic signal studies at the intersections of Route 85 with Blauer Drive, Brandywine Drive and Pierce Road, all in the City of Saratoga. At both Blauer Drive and Pierce Road signal warrant No. 1 was 800 satisfied and warrant No. 2 was 100% satisfied. however, at Brandywine Drive signal warrants Nos. 1 and 2 were both satisfied 100%. The Brandywine Drive intersection is actually a 4- legged one due to the shopping center driveway. This driveway is the largest contributor to vehicle movements into and out of Route 85 at the three locations studied. We propose to install a 5 -phase traffic signal at Brandywine Drive which should also facilitate the movements into and out of both Blauer Drive and Pierce Road. The State would pay for 50% of the electrical costs and all roadwork and signing costs within the State right of way. The City's cost would be SO% of the electrical work aDd if required, all roadwork costs outside the State's right of way. Also, the City's share of the engineering would be approximately 33% of the City's cost For the electrical work. State's financial share for this project will not be available until the 1980 -31 Fiscal Year, at the earliest. If-this is agreeable to the City, please let us know aiLd we will begin the preparation of a project report_, recommending the provement. Sincerely yours, T. R. LAINVERS District Director C. 13. McGUIRL Senior Engineer, fraffic Branch Cc: Jerry i<ocir, 12355 Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road, Saratoga, CA 95070 C11,1, OF �I AG'r'iMA BILL NO. Initial: Dept. fki_ DATE: March 16, 1983 C. Attl. Community Development C. Mg SLTr:,7ECT: Prospect /Lyle Signal, Cooperative Agreement with San Jose — ------------- ---- --- -------------- - - - - -- ----------=--------------- - - - - -- Issue SL_=ary Saratoga has previously agreed to pay 25% of the actual construction cost for the installation of a Traffic Signal at Prospect Road and Lyle Drive. FAU funds (washed) are to be used for Saratoga's share. San Jose has prepared a cooperative agreement for funding the project. Recc:nrendaticn Approve and authorize execution of agreement. I Fiscal Imcacts Not to exceed $25,000.00 t Etch ibits /Attach^r_nts Agreement Ccuncil Action 11 3/16: Mallory/Fanelli moved to approve agreement and rrove rapidly. Passed 5 -0. d JFB:GDT:jlc 3/7/83 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN JOSE AND THE CITY OF SARATOGA FOR SHARING OF COSTS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AT PROSPECT ROAD AND LYLE DRIVE This AGREEMENT , made and entered this day of , 1983, by and between the City of San Jose, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "San Jose ", and the City of Saratoga, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "Saratoga ". W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, traffic at the intersection of Prospect Road and Lyle Drive is pre- sently without traffic signals; and WHEREAS, warrants for the installation of traffic signals at this intersection are now satisfied; and WHEREAS, San Jose and Saratoga do mutually desire, under this joint powers agreement, to cooperate and jointly participate in the installation of the traffic signal system and lane channelization, all of which shall be hereinafter referred to as "said improvements ", and desire to specify herein the terms and conditions under which said improvements are to be designed, constructed and financed; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions herein con- tained, the parties hereto agree as follows: SECTION I q4M .Tng7 A(,RF7S- 1. To prepare plans and specifications for said improvements, submit the same to Saratoga for review, make corrections requested by Saratoga that San Jose determines to be necessary for purposes of this agreement, and to proceed with advertisement for construction with such plans and specifications only after they have been approved by Saratoga. 2. To cause said improvements to be installed by a construction contractor licensed by the State of California, in conformity with the approved plans and specifi- cations and secured by contractor's payment and performance bonds. San Jose shall furnish the traffic signal controller and cabinet to the contractor. 3. Within thirty (30) days after construction of said improvements and all work incidental thereto, to furnish to Saratoga a detailed statement of actual construction costs to be borne by Saratoga. (1) r SECTION II To pay San Jose for twenty -five (25) percent of the total construction costs of the said improvements. SECTION III IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED: 1. It is contemplated that Federal Aid Urban (FAU) Funds will become available for the construction of the said improvements. Funds to be allocated to Saratoga pursuant to the process to be used in Santa Clara County to implement the FAU Program, said process being approved by San Jose Resolution No. 51296 dated February 13, 1979, and by Saratoga Resolution No. 883 dated November 1, 1978, may be retained by San Jose and credited to Saratoga's share of the costs hereunder. 2. Saratoga's share of construction costs shall not exceed the amount of TWENTY -FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($25,000.00) unless provided for in a subsequent agreement. In the event the total cost of said improvements exceeds ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000.00), San Jose, at its sole discretion, may suspend work on said improvements until such time as Saratoga authorizes sufficient funds to cover Saratoga's share of said excess costs. 3. In the exercise of this joint powers agreement, San Jose shall be the administering agency and as such shall possess all powers common to both San Jose and Saratoga which may be necessary to effectuate the purpose of this agreement, subject only to the manner of exercise of such powers provided herein and the restrictions imposed by law upon San Jose in the exercise of such powers. 4. That neither San Jose, nor any officer or employee thereof_ shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by Saratoga under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to Saratoga under this agreement. It is also understood and agreed that, pur- suant to Government Code Section 895.4, Saratoga shall fully indemnify and hold San Jose harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by Saratoga under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to Saratoga under this agreement. (2) 5. That neither Saratoga nor any officer or employee thereof, shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by San Jose under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to San Jose under this agreement. It is also understood and agreed that, pursuant to Govern- ment Code Section 895.4, San Jose shall fully indemnify and hold Saratoga harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by San Jose under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to San Jose under this agreement. 6. This agreement shall terminate on December 31, 1983, if San Jose has not awarded a contract for construction of said improvements prior to that date. 7. That "construction costs" shall be defined as the sum total of the construction contract price, the cost of any associated supplemental work and the cost of the traffic signal controller and cabinet to be furnished by San Jose. 8. That upon completion and acceptance of said improvements, San Jose shall operate and maintain the said improvements. The costs of such operation and maintenance shall be apportioned between San Jose and Saratoga pursuant to a subsequent agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be executed by their respective officers, duly authorized, the provisions of which agreement are effective as of the date, month and year first hereinabove written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF SAN JOSE, a municipal corporation By Deputy City Attorney Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk City Clerk CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation. By (3) ACMDA BILL NO. ` 1-1 ' DATE: March 16, 1983 DEPARTMENT: City Manager CITY OP SARRIKM SUBJECT: Mosquito Control Program Initial:\ Dept. Hd. C. C. Mgr. Issue Summary Because of budget reductions, the Santa Clara County Health Department is dis- continuing its preventive mosquito abatement program throughout the County. If preventive abatement is to continue, the City will have to assume respon- sibility for treatment of standing water in public rights of way (catch basins). The County Health Department will continue treatment of these facilities for the City, at cost. Recomnendation 1. Approve the attached agreement for Heath Department Mosquito Abatement. 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City. Fiscal Impacts Estimated annual cost at $158.00 from the Storm Drain Fund. Exhibits /Attachments 1. Letter dated 3/2/83 from County Health Department with proposed Agreement. 2. Report from City Manager dated 3/8/83. Council Action 3/16: Fanelli /Clevenger moved to approve agreement. Passed 5 -0. .i. SARA REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE :March 8, 1983 COUNCIL MEETING:March 16, 1983 SUBJECT ' Mosquito Control Program --------------------------------------------------------------------- ,- - - - - -- Summary: Budget reductions have forced the Santa Clara County Health Department to discontinue its long- established program of mosquito control along waterways and,in storm drains throughout the County. Discontinuation of this program will result in higher mosquito concentrations and, along with the nuisance impact, raises the risk of disease transmissions by this vector. Responsibility for treatment and abatement of mosquito infestation along waterways will now be assumed by the Santa Clara County Water District. Responsibility for treatment of catch basins and other standing water falls upon the local jurisdictions wherein the breeding source is located (i.e. the cities and the County for unincor- porated areas). The County Health Department has offered to provide the abatement service, at cost, under contract. Recommendation: That the City Council approve the attached agreement for mosquito control of catch basins for the 1983 season. Fiscal Impact: Based on current survey of need, the cost estimated for this contract is $158.00 per year. Discussion: Unchecked mosquito - breeding will result in major infestations during warm months and, in addition to the nuisance problem, can lead to disease and health related problems. Effective preventive treatment is relatively quite inexpensive compared to the cost of remedial treat- ment once infestations occur. N Mosquito Control Program March 8, 1983 Page two A recent survey by the Health Department revealed that only 36 of 1,061 catch basins in Saratoga retained standing water. The cost estimated for preventative treating of these basins during the breeding season (June through. September) is $158.00 per year, under the proposed contract. The treatment program also could be handled by existing City personnel (who are licensed for the use of pesticides). However, the amount of work needed probably results in a lower overall cost to the City under the contract than for City personnel to perform the work directly. If the amount of work required should increase significantly, the relative cost could be re- examined. J4/Way Dernetz ck County of Santa Clara California March 2, 1983 J. Wayne Dernetz, City Manager City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitdale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 MOSQUITO CONTROL IN CATCH BASINS Health Department 2220 Moorpark Avenue San Jose, California 95128 The enclosed Contractual Agreement for Mosquito Control in the City of Saratoga storm drain catch basin system is based upon a Health Department survey done in the fall of 1982. The survey located catch basins with standing water, which are actual or potential mosquito breeding sources. Of the 1,061 catch basins inspected in the City of Saratoga, 36 contained standing water. A list identifying the locations of those catch basins that will require treatment is enclosed. We will add to or delete from the list as conditions change. If the Agreement is acceptable, we will treat the water retaining catch basins with Altosid Briquets three times during the summer months. The treatment schedule will be approximately as follows: (1) June or July, (2) July or August, (3) August or September. The actual treatment dates will depend upon temperatures and other weather factors. Altosid is an insect growth regulator (label enclosed) which prevents mosquito larvae from developing into adult mosquitoes. This material is virtually non -toxic to humans, and is environmentally safe because it only affects the larval form of certain insects. If you have questions regarding the Agreement or treatment procedures, please contact the program supervisor, Keith Kraft, at (08) 279 -6060. •e a EERNICE GIANSIRACUSA, M.D. D IRE CTOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH SANTA CIARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT BG:KK:ml Encl. An Equal Opportunity Employer A sustained release Mosquito Growth Regulator to prevent adult mosquito emergence. ACTIVE INC,R®If3(T: mahoprene (solaropyl (E E}11imethdrt ll 11-trimemyFZ4- dodecaaienowel' ... (Dry weight Bash) .......... 19% INERT INGREDIENTS ... ............................... 921X 100.0% U.S. Patents 3.904.682 & 3.912815 ALIOSIO is a registered trademark of Zoecon Corporation EPI Reg. No. 2095413 EPA. Est. No. 20954-C2 This product eontdta wafer•, hreretora the weight at nM briquet and percent by woo of active ingreaiam will vary wim hydratldn. The Ingremert 3h orrient a expressed on a dry weight Rasa KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN CAUl10N Minimum Net Contents: 1.50 pounds (681 grams) Contains 100 Briquets Manufactured By Zoecon Corporc on, ralo Alto. California O O Do not apply to known ran haDtal DIRECTIONS FOR USE GENSIAL CLLSSIRCATION III a violation of Federal low to use ma Product in a manner incormsent with the IOpeang. 3T0RAGF AND DISPOSAL - STORAGE Store in a cod Dbce. Do not contaminate water, food or feed by storage or deposer. Do not reuse empty container. DISP0SAL Pesticide that cannot be used $tatlld be disposed of in a lonaftl approrea for pesticides or Durres in a safe place away from warer supplies. Dispose container in an incmeroar or landfill approved for pestici0e conanma, or Duty in a safe ploce. NOTE TO UI Do not remove Ahosid Briquets from car. III except for tmmediats use. Because of the unique made of action of Altosd Briquets, users must be familiar with specof techniques for occurme evaluation of trowmems See Product Appkcmon Bulletin or consult local mosquito abate- mert agency. Elleenva use of Anosid Briquets in Vale subjected to periodic heavy flow of voter requires careful aaention to briquet ploce• met and to tM possible need for retreat- mat. Use of the product in storm dam waste healrilert and Senlig twnas ono simibr systems Stn0Ui0 therefore be errtitM to experienced pesticide oppliedtors :sualt as personnel of Mosquito ADCtemov "VIsmicb and Public Hearth agencies INTRODUCTION: The Aeosid Briquet R a formulation designed to release effective levels of Mosid insect growth regular ear a 30 day permoo under typical envtor. mental conditions. Retease of Altosrd Insect growth repularor is effected by dissolution of the Altosld Briquet. Obstructions. such as deblts vegetarian. and boss Sediment, can cover the briquets ones inhabit normal dispersion of the acne ingredient. Sucn o0srntulora may occur after mgn ronfoe or flow. The product may not be effective in those situations where the briquet can be removed from the site by flushing action. Atosid Briquet prevent #4 erwgence of odua mosquitoes Including Culex, and Cultsena Sop., e.3 well as those of me food. water mosquto Complex (ASI Anopheles, and Psorophom app.) from treated wafer. Treated brae continue to develop normally, la Ire pupal tags veers they dies i N TIME Pl0cement of Anosd oub be made m me begutnng car-seam Under normal d eat treatment every 30 days of me rec0mmenoed interval and rate (see table). Continue freatmed trta,gn me lost brood of the season PIOCe- Verd may be made at arty stage of larva VaM, Rogues ��. su.� S�s� NoB�a63�i5oa development. NOTE This iseci grown regukror tae no effect on mosqutow which have reached me pupal Of oaulf stage pnor to treatment. APPLICATION SITES: A110I Briquets are designed to control mosquitoes in snag bodies of wwor ouch are not known fish hookut. Examples of apDlicmw snes art: storm drams cc= bas s. roaosids Cdcmes, amametal ponds and fountots, cesspools cro septic tanks ware trem- met# and semtng ponds floodea crypts transformer vaults. abandoned swimming pooLt construction and other man mace dexess:on Fix Cppltcatan wes can - nected by a water system. i.e., storm drams or catcn basin ad of the water holding sites in me system snouw be treated to maximize me efficiency of me treatment Program. APPLICATION RATES AND INTERVAM For mosquito control in non- ;v lawn, flow, sfoliaw depressions (up to 2 feet in depth), heat on me boss of surface area plocirtg 1 Nand Briquet per 100 se. R. Fa mosguia coin, in water subject ro fbw or deeper man 2 feet. treat on nre basis of volume. Apply at me two of 1 Allow Briquet Per 10 cu R. (75 gat Of water.) Aadsid Briquets will maintain an effective fbnCentratlOnl throughout 4 Complete volume changes per 30 day treatment interval deeording to ft fdbwing able. ALTOSID BRIQUETS FOR FLOWING WATER WhurM/heanmeht Rme/ROw rx..v.. In the evert of higher now reduce Me meat- more iam prbpolmonatmy using do following flow formula Do not increase Me application rata Row Adjustment Formula Allowable Row' Adjusued Tretmnenf Actual Flow x 30 a Interval (days) '4 volume charges or see above roble. Example: For a 36 .0 ft. catch bosun of Low now (up to 1200 gal. pen 30 days) trial with 4 Allasrd Briquets For higher flow, such as 2400 gal. per 30 days the trea. mart ntavd MOO be reduced to 15 days 0200/2400 it 30.15). WARRANTY AND CONDITIONS OF SALE Zoecon Corporation warrants that the chemical composTion of this product carr forms to me chemical description on the [COOL Zoecon makes no warranty, express or tmOheo. - oncoming the use of this pro- ducl orner mcn C3 indicated on me boll . ..ntsoi III w.mr •a AWiI r,p Res nD/4 VR1Me a (AIII 30 DOW xtvomo.9r boel ware cuff 0.1D c. 11. QS gal) 1 up to 300 gal. 10.20 c. a. 2 up to 600 gal 20-30 nu 8. 3 up to 900 gal 30+0 cu R 4 up to 1200 gal In the evert of higher now reduce Me meat- more iam prbpolmonatmy using do following flow formula Do not increase Me application rata Row Adjustment Formula Allowable Row' Adjusued Tretmnenf Actual Flow x 30 a Interval (days) '4 volume charges or see above roble. Example: For a 36 .0 ft. catch bosun of Low now (up to 1200 gal. pen 30 days) trial with 4 Allasrd Briquets For higher flow, such as 2400 gal. per 30 days the trea. mart ntavd MOO be reduced to 15 days 0200/2400 it 30.15). WARRANTY AND CONDITIONS OF SALE Zoecon Corporation warrants that the chemical composTion of this product carr forms to me chemical description on the [COOL Zoecon makes no warranty, express or tmOheo. - oncoming the use of this pro- ducl orner mcn C3 indicated on me boll . ..ntsoi a, r S y a v F- M � - .. � r FM ml ♦ LL / L� EMS/ffloffl i _ r r L�a�AZ'ION A44 rA i CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT FOR MOSQUITO CONTROL This agreement is by and between the City of Saratoga hereinafter called "Saratoga" and the County of Santa Clara Health Department, hereinafter called "Health Department." PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT The purpose of this agreement is to contract with the Health Department to provide mosquito control in the storm drain catch basins within the City of Saratoga. TERMS OF AGREEMENT This agreement shall become effective when signed by both parties, and shall continue from year to year unless terminated by either party at any time upon sixty (60) days advance written notice to the other party. The normal term of agreement shall be from July 1 through June 30 of the following year, except that during the 1982 -83 fiscal year, the agreement shall commence upon signature of both parties. SERVICES PROVIDED AND RESPONSIBILITY OF HEALTH DE PARENT 1. The Health Department shall survey the storm drain system and shall make a written record of those catch basins wherein water is standing. 2. The Health Department shall apply suitable pesticides to catch basins, wherein water is standing, at appropriate intervals to prevent mosquito production. Pesticides shall be applied in accordance with EPA and State regulations. 3• Health Department personnel providing pesticide application services shall be certified by the State Health Department in the area of mosquito control. 4. The Health Department shall provide suitable vehicles and application equipment. Such equipment shall be properly calibrated in accordance with State Health Department regulations. 5. The Health Department shall respond to all mosquito service requests related to catch basins. - 6. The Health Department shall submit a bill to Saratoga for the total cost incurred for each treatment of the catch basin system. The bill shall indicate the total number of catch basins treated, and shall be itemized to include cost for personnel, vehicles, and pesticides. 7. The Health Department shall fully indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of Saratoga from and on account of injury or damage howsoever occasioned or occurring to any property or person by reason of activities of the Health Department under this agreement. RESPONSIBILITY OF SARATOGA The City of Saratoga shall review each bill submitted and notify the Health Department of discrepancies immediately. In consideration of the above services performed by the Health Department, Saratoga shall pay for such services at the following unit rates: 1. Labor - sixteen dollars ($16.00) per hour. 2. Vehicle cost - five dollars ($5.00) per hour.for the pesticide application vehicle. The unit rate includes the cost of the vehicle and pesticide application equipment. 3. Pesticide: actual cost of pesticides used shall not exceed forty -three cents ($0.43) for each catch basin treated. The total cost payable by Saratoga hereunder for mosquito control in the catch basin system shall not exceed one hundred fifty eight dollars ($158.00) per year. The charges for providing mosquito control are subject to change by the Health Department upon thirty (30) days advance written notice to Saratoga. Such changes shall reflect changes in costs incurred by the Health Department. Payment to the Health Department will be made within thirty (30) days after receipt of invoice. IN ITITNESS WHEREOF, This Agreement has been executed by and on behalf of the parties hereto, this day and year first written above: COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Chairperson, Board of Supervisors ATTEST: Donald M. Rains, Clerk APPROVED FORM: l M- `.: 1464-1.1 r • Co . „! b b CITY OF SARATOGA Date of Execution by Saratoga 4 /C=- A BILL NO. ! 3 DATE: March 16, 1983 CITY OF SARATOGA DEPARTMENT': Administrative Services Initial: Dept. Hd. C. At C. Mgr. SUBJECT: Agreement with West Valley Kiwanis Club to Operate RecyVle Center Issue Summa In October 1978 the City of Saratoga entered into an agreement with West Valley Community College Ecology Club, a non - profit, unincorporated association, Earth Household, to operate the Recycle Center located on Allendale next to the Community Center. In September 1982, the City received notification the Earth Household Club was no longer in operation and West Valley College had no interest in continuing to sponsor the Recycle Center. The West Valley Kiwanis Club approached the City with a proposal to take over operation of the Recycle Center effective April 1, 1983. The agreement attached is a result of those discussions. Recommendation Review agreement and adopt. Fiscal Impacts The City provides water and electricity to the Recycle Center site. No separate meter is on the premises, so there is no way to estimate the actual cost. Other than water and electricity, the City will not incur any costs as a result of adoption of the agreement. Exhibits /Attachments Background memo Agreement Council Action 3/16: Mallory /Clevenger moved to approve agreement. Passed 5 -0. v D n ®�® 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 887 -3438 a tIE�IOR.• NDt1tiI TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Assistant City Manager DATE: March 10, 1983 SUBJECT: Agreement with West Valley Kiwanis to Operate Recycle Center In October of 1978 the City of Saratoga entered into an agreement with West Valley Community College Ecology Club, a non - profit unincorporated association, EARTH HOUSEHOULD, to operate and manage the Recycle Center located on Allendale, next to the Community Center. In September of 1982 the City of Saratoga received notification from West Valley Community College that the EARTH HOUSEHOLD club had not rechartered and was no longer in existence. As a result of the non- existent status of the club, the college indicated concern over the continuing status of the Recycle Center. A meeting was held on October 4, 1982 with representatives from West Valley College administration,City of Saratoga staff, and Recycle Center staff. West Valley College stated their position of no longer having an interest or need to be involved with the Recycle Center. Their original involvement had been through the EARTH HOUSEHOLD club and be- cause the club no longer existed, the College had no continuing need to be an involved party. The College had been performing the bookkeeping function of tracking expenses and receipts for the Recycle Center. West Valley College records indicated the Recycle Center had been able to meet its expenses, but had not been making a substantial profit.. City staff present at the meeting stated the City had not been aware of the changing status of the EARTH HOUSEHOLD club and was not anxious to take over the Recycle Center as a City provided service. All those present at the meeting.expressed an interest in keeping the Recycle Center open as it is providing a needed service to the residents of the West Valley area. W. Recycle Center March 10, 1983 Page two At the conclusion of the meeting, it was suggested the current Recycle Center staff attempt to locate a group of interested citizens to work on putting together a non - profit organization to sponsor the Recycle Center. This option was viewed by those present as the most viable and the least costly option. Tim Hager, staff of the Recycle Center, agreed to pursue the suggested course of action. In January of 1983 the City received a letter from Mr. Norman Van Woerkom, President West Valley Kiwanis, expressing interest on behalf of West Valley Kiwanis in assuming responsibility for the operation of the Recycle Center. The Kiwanis had discussed the possibility with their club member- ship, and support was unanimous. A meeting was held on February 10, 1983 with three representatives of the West Valley Kiwanis and City staff. The previous agreement with the EARTH HOUSEHOLD club was reviewed and new issues were raised which would need to be included in any new agreement. Among items added at the City's request were provisions for liability insurance, workman's compensation coverage, responsibility for bookkeeping, an-. annual report to the City Council on operations, and an inventory of equipment and personal property. Following the meeting, a draft agreement was submitted to the City by Kiwanis. Staff reviewed the document and met with the City Attorney for his comments. A few changes were made following the meeting with the City Attorney and those changes are incorporated into the final agreement. During discussions with Kiwanis representatives, it was clear Kiwanis in- tends to undertake operation and supervision of the Recycle Center with the goal of making the Center profitable. If their goal is achieved, they hope to use some of the proceeds to help support Kiwanis service projects. They are currently involved in working with clubs at Westmont High School and West Valley College, funding scholarships, supporting a shoe and hearing program with the local school district, making charitable contri- butions to other organizations, and working with youth groups throughout our area. In the future, should the Kiwanis operation of the Recycle Center become a profit making.venture, the City would have the option of re- negotiating the lease to provide for possible payment of utilities and /or rent. Staff is pleased the West Valley club has come forth with their proposal to operate the.Recycle Center. Representatives of the Kiwanis have been very cooperative and eager to work out an agreement with the City. Their enthusiasm for undertaking this.---project is evident. Z5 Patri a M. Mullens ck RECYCLE CENTER AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT was made and entered into this 1st day of April, 1983, by and between the CITY OF SARATOGA, a Municipal corporation, hereinafter called "CITY ", and WEST VALLEY KIWANIS CLUB, a non- profit, incorporated association, dba SARATOGA RECYCLE CENTER hereinafter called "KIWANIS ". WHEREAS, CITY presently maintains a Recycle Center located on the Civic Center property at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California, for the purpose inter alia, of collecting, segregating, and reclaiming certain types of domestic and industrial solid waste materials, and KIWANIS is a non - profit, incorporated association and is desirous of operating and overseeing said Recycle Center on the terms and pro- visions as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES HERETO AS FOLLOWS: 1. Engagement and Duties CITY hereby engages KIWANIS, as an independent contractor and not as an agent of employee, to operate said Recycle Center for the period as hereinafter set forth, and KIWANIS hereby accepts said engagement, on the terms and provisions as hereinafter, set forth, the duties of said engagement to include the following: (a) KIWANIS will keep said Recycle Center in operation a minimum of fourteen (14) hours a week, to include the hours -1- r of 1:00 p.m. to 5.:00 p.m. each Wednesday, 9:00 a.m. to 2 :00 p.m. each Saturday and each Sunday, and additional hours and days deemed necessary by KIWANIS. During said operational hours KIWANIS will have no less than one (1) of its members or employees physically on the premises at all times. (b) KIWANIS will designate one of its members as a Recycle Center Coordinator, who shall have the primary responsibility to oversee the operation and maintenance of said Center and will act as liaison between CITY, and.various industries and other suppliers of materials. to the Recycle Center. (c) KIWANIS shall at all times keep the Recycle Center in a neat, orderly, safe and clean condition, in- suring that it is open to the public during the operational hours, and during the time the same is open shall carry on an educational program at said Center in regard to the necessity for, the operational features of, and the ultimate results of such reclaiming and recycling process. (d) KIWANIS agrees to maintain public liability insur- ance in an amount not less. than $500,000 per occurence naming the CITY as additional insured. (e) KIWANIS agrees to provide State Workers Compen- sation, and to maintain and keep in full force and effect coverage for all employees, KIWANIS agrees to hold the -2- CITY harmless for any claims filed by employees or non- employees. (f) KIWANIS agrees to maintain adequate record of cash receipts and disbursements and furnish CITY with an annual accounting as at March 31, of each year. (g) Any major changes from the present scope of operations of the Recycling Center will be submitted to the CITY for approval. (h) During the term of this agreement, CITY will furnish water and electricity to Recycle Center. 2. Compensation and Expenses In consideration of the foregoing, KIWANIS may retain all proceeds on the recycling of all materials at said Center. Any and all costs and expenses of operating said Center will be the sole responsibility of KIWANIS. KIWANIS will utilize, maintain or re- place all tangible property presently existing at the location, as listed in accompanying Exhibit A. All tangible personal property listed in Exhibit A belongs to and is owned by CITY. Any tangible personal property purchased by KIWANIS shall remain the property of KIWANIS and shall be maintained by KIWANIS. Neither KIWANIS nor any member or members thereof shall have any power or authority to incur nor cause to be incurred any costs or expenses, nor any obligation or liability, for or on behalf of CITY in the operation of said Recycle Center. ' -3- 3. Term of Contract The term of this Agreement shall be for the period com- mencing on the 1st day of April, 1983 until the 1st day of April, 1984, at an annual rental of $1.00. KIWANIS shall have the option to renew this Agreement for additional terms to be exercised by written notice to CITY by KIWANIS given at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the immediately prior term. Notwith- standing the foregoing, either party hereto shall have the right to terminate this Agreement at any time prior to the expiration of the term thereof, by giving the other party thirty (30) days prior written notice of such intent to terminate. 4. Status of KIWANIS KIWANIS is not acting hereunder as agent or employee of CITY, but solely as an independent contractor, and CITY shall not under any circumstances be liable to KIWANIS or to any member of KIWANIS, or to any person or persons acting for or on behalf or under KIWANIS, or any other person or persons, for the death or personal injury received or claimed by such person or persons, and KIWANIS agrees to and does hereby indemnify and hold CITY free and harmless from and against any and all such claims, actions, demands, or liabilities therefore. KIWANIS shall have no power or authority to engage or employ any person as an agent or employee of CITY, but only as KIWANIS employee or employees. This agreement is non - assignable by KIWANIS and any purported assignment shall be null IM and void. All supervision of operations under this Agreement by KIWANIS shall be done through one or more members of WEST VALLEY KIWANIS CLUB. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first hereinabove written. ATTEST: City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM -5- CITY OF SARATOGA A Municipal corporation Mayor WEST VALLEY KIWANIS CLUB a non - profit, incorporated association dba SARATOGA RECYCLE CENTER By President Coordinator "EXHIBIT A" SARATOGA RECYCLE CENTER INVENTORY 9 Green Wooden Boxes 4 X 4 %2' 4 Wooden Boxes 4 X 4' 2 Fruit Boxes 4 X 4' 19 Garbage Barrels - 55 gallons each 1 Wooden Step Platform 3 Green Metal Paper Bins - 6 X 44 X 44' 2 Large Oil Tanks - about 75 gallons each 1 Scale - Platform 1,000 pounds 5 Shovels 2 Brooms 2 Rakes 2 Sets of Tools: . 1 Set Large Wrenches 1 Set Small Ratchets 1 Chevrolet 1970 One Ton Truck (not running) 3 Small Filing Cabinets 1 Refrigerator 2 Large Rolling Gates with fence around yard 1 Telephone CITY OF SAPJq`OGA '/ Initial: AGENDA BILL NO. `1/4 Dept. lid. DATE: March 16, 1983 C. Atty. DEPARTMENT: Community Development C. Mgr. SUBJECT: FINAL ACCEPTANCE FOR SDR - 1401, TATE, 15250 SOBEY ROAD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- Issue Summary All improvements required of the subject Building Site Approval have been satisfactorily completed. Recommendation Authorize release of the attached described bond. Adopt Resolution 36 -B- Fiscal Impacts None Exhibits /Attachments 1. Memo describing bond 2. Resolution No. 36 -B- Council Action 3/16: Approved on Consnet Calendar 5 -0. A � •r. 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 ra.:+i...... (408) 867 -3438 TO: City Council . DATE: 2/23/83 FROM: Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Final Acceptance for SDR -1401 Location: Sobey Road The one (1) year maintenance period.for SDR -1401 has expired and all deficiencies of the improvements have been corrected.. Therefore, I recommend the streets and other public facilities be accepted into the City system. Attached for City Council consideration is Resolu- tion 36B- which accepts the public improvements, easements and rights -of -way. Since the developer has fulfilled his obligation described in the improve- ment contract, I also recommend the improvement securities listed below be released. The following information is included for your information and use: 1. Developer: Ronald Tate Address: 15250 Sobey Road, Saratoga 2. Date of Construction Acceptance: 1/20/82 3. Improvement Security: Type: Cash Amount: $7000 Issuing Co: Address: Receipt, Bond or Certificate No.: Receipt No. 01753 4. Miles of Public. Street: None 5. Special Remarks: Rabe r t S .. S1-:ook.