Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06-03-1987 City Council staff reports
if EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. j; Z MEETING DATE: 6 87 (5 21 87) CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: Engineering Dept. SUBJECT: Final Building Site Approval for SDR 1537 Cross Missakian, Winn Road (1 Lot) Recommended Motion: Adopt Resolution No. 1537 -02, attached, approving building site approval for SDR 1537, Cross Missakian. Report Summary: 1. SDR 1537 is ready for final approval. 2. All fees have been paid. 3. All requirements for. City and other departments have been met. Fiscal Impacts: None. Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 1537 -02. 2. Report to Planning Commission. 3. Location Map. Motion and Vote: Staff recommendation 5 -0. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 4 3 S RESOLUTION NO. 1537 -02 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVING BUILDING SITE OF Cross Missakian The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: SECTION 1: 1.4 3 Acres Lot shown on Record of Survey, Prepared by Creegan D'Angelo and Submitted to the City Engineer, City of Saratoga, be approved as one individual building site. The above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and passed by the City Council of Saratoga at a regular meeting held on the 3rd day of June 1987 by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Anderson, Clevenger, Myles, Peterson, and Mayor Hlava NOES: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: c(/ CITY CLERK /s/ Joyce Hlava MAYOR REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Kathryn Caldwell, Planner DATE: 5/28/86 KC /dsc APPLICATION NO. LOCATION: SDR -1537; Bonnie Brae Winn Rd. APPLICANT: Cross Mary Missakian APN: 517 -22 -48 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Extension of time to complete conditions of tentative map in order to construct a single family residence. ISSUES: None. Tentative approval was granted on May 11, 1983 and extended for a year on November 14, 1984. All conditions are still applicable. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the request for a one -year extension of time by approving the attached resolution. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution SOR-1537-2 2. Staff report to Planning Commission dated 5/11/83 REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City of Sarat.g APPROVED BY: DATE: rS X INITi, LS: SUBJECT: OgUW ©0 0 Exhibit "A" SDR -1537, Cross Mary Missakian Bonnie Brae Winn Road Tentative Building Site Approval 1 Lot DATE: 5/4/83 Commission Meeting: 5/11/83 REQUEST: Applicants request tentative building site approval in order to construct a residence on Winn Road near Bonnie Brae. Existing kitchen, porch and garage of existing residence are conditioned to be removed. PLANNING DATA: PARCEL SIZE: 1.433+ acres GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Very Low Density ZONING: R -1- 40,000 SITE DATA: SURROUNDING LAND USES: Residential SITE SLOPE: 3.74% NATURAL FEATURES VEGETATION: Several large oaks and firs with some fruit trees, sloping very gently down to Wildcat Creek. PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS: HISTORY: The site previously received site approval and was given similar conditions in September, 1979 (SDR- 1440). At that time, the existing residence was to remain with the kitchen facilities conditioned to be removed. The current applicants also wish to retain the existing older residence on the site. By present policy, they will need to conform to setbacks and the square footage of the Design Review Ordinance 6,200 sq. ft. is the standard set for this zoning district. The garage and porch of the residence are conditioned for removal to com- ply with setbacks. PROJECT STATUS: Said project complies with all obejctives of the 1974 General Plan, and all requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances of the City of Saratoga. Report to Planning Common r SDR -1537, Cross Mary Missakian, Bonnie Brae Winn Rd. c. 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 re- sources. A Categorical Exemption was prepared relative to the environmental impact of this project. Said determination date: 4/14/83. The Staff Report recommends approval of the tentative map for SDR -1537 (Exhibit "B" filed March 24, 1983) 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 5/4/83 Page 2 II. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A. Pay Storm Drainage Fee in effect at the time of obtaining Final Approval (Currently $1,100 /Lot). B. Submit "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 ft. half street on Winn Road. D. Construct Bonnie Brae Lane and Winn Road to 18 ft. wide plus 1 ft. shoulders using double seal coat oil and screenings or better on 6 in. aggregate base from Hill Ave. to westerly boundary of subject site. Slope of access road shall not exceed 122% without adhering to the following: Note: The minimum inside curve radius shall be 42 ft. The minimum vertical clearance above road surface shall be 15 ft. 41 Bridges and other roadway structures shall be designed to sustain 35,000 lbs. dynamic loading. 41 Storm Runoff shall be controlled through the use of culverts and roadside ditches. E. 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. F. Construct "Valley Gutter" across driveway or pipe culvert under driveway as approved by the Director of Community Development. Re ort to Planning n Cornni on P 9 5/4/83 SDR -1537, Cross Mary Missakian, Bonnie Brae Winn Rd. Page 3 G. Watercourses must be kept free of obstacles which will change, retard or prevent flow. H. Engineered Improvement Plans required for: Access Road Construction I. Pay Plan Check and Inspection Fees as determined from Improvement Plans J. Enter into Improvement Agreement for required improvement to be completed within one (1) year of receiving Final Approval. K. Post bond to guarantee completion of the required improvements. III. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS DIVISION OF INSPECTION SERVICES A. Geotechnical investigation and report by licensed professional 1. Soils 2. Foundation prior to Building Permits B. Detailed on -site improvement plans showing: 1. Grading (limits of cuts, fills; slopes, cross sections, existing and proposed elevations, earthwork quantities) 2. Drainage details (conduit type, slope, outfall, location, etc.) 3. Retaining structures including design by A.I.A. or R.C.E. for walls 3 ft. or higher. 4. All existing structures, with notes as to remain or be removed, including underground. 5. Standard information to include titleblock, plot plan using record data, location map, north arrow, sheet nos., owner's name, etc. IV. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS COUNTY SANITATION DIST. NO. 4 A. Sanitary sewers to be provided and fees paid for new residence in accor- dance with requirements of Sanitation Dist. No. 4. V. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS SARATOGA FIRE DISTRICT A. Provide 15 foot clearance over the road or driveway (vertical) to building site. Remove all limbs, wires or other obstacles. VI. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPT. A. Sewage disposal to be provided by sanitary sewers installed and connected by the developer to one of the existing trunk sewers of the Sanitation Dist. No. 4. Prior to final approval, an adequate bond shall be posted with said district to assure completion of sewers as planned. B. Domestic water to be provided by San Jose Water Works. Report to Planning Com on 5/4/83 SDR -1537, Cross Mary Missakian, Bonnie Brae Winn Rd. Page 4. VII. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DIST. A. Applicant shall, prior to Final Map Approval, submit plans showing the location and intended use of any existing wells to the SCVWD for review and certification. VIII. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS PERMIT REVIEW DIVISION A. Design Review Approval required on project prior to issuance of permits. B. Remove existing garage and portion of existing home on side to comply with required setbacks (20' on the side, 50' or 60' in the rear yard). Remove existing kitchen facilities. IX. COMMENTS A. Tree removal prohibited unless in accord with applicable City Ordinances. Approved: KK /dsc P.C. Agenda: 4/25/83 Kathy Kerdus Planner ✓l CYk. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. /02 9 AGENDA ITEM 41) MEETING DATE: June 3, 1987 CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: Engineering SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR TRAFFIC CONTROLL DEVICE AT SURREY LANE AND SARAVIEW DR. Recommended Motion: Deny request for installation of stop or yield signs at this location Report Summary: A driver involved in an accident at this location in October 1986 has suggested that stop or yield signs be installed. Staff review finds that this is the only accident in 10 years at this location and that there is no other reason to support this request. Public Safety Commission has reviewed this matter and is in agree ment with the staff recommendation. Fiscal Impacts: None Attachments: SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL 1. Public Safety Commission report 2. Staff Report 3. Accident Report Motion and Vote: Staff i tecoMmiendation 5YQ TO: City Engineer FROM: Community Services Director 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 "EC4i il'e'® M4Y 18 198/' MEMORANDUM EN GINEERING DE DATE: May 15, 1987 SUBJECT: Your request for a recommendation from the Public Safety Commission concerning the installation of a traffic control device at Surrey Lane and Saraview Drive This is in response to your memorandum dated April 30, 1987, requesting a recommendation from the Public Safety Commission on the installation of a traffic control device at Surrey Lane and Saraview Drive. Your memo indicated that the request was prompted by the involvement of the requestor in an accident at this location on October 30, 1986; specifically, the inter- section of Surrey Lane and Saraview Drive is a "T" intersection with no stop signs or other forms of traffic device present. As you pointed out, such intersections are perfectly legal; the driver approaching the intersection from the street which dead ends at the intersection must yield the right of way to the thru traffic on the crossing street in accordance with the California Vehicle Code. You pointed out that this had been the only accident reported at that location in the past ten years and recommended against the installation of any traffic control device such as a stop sign. After deliberating on the facts you presented in your report and attachments, the Public Safety Commission unanimously agreed with the staff recommendation. The Commission also commended your staff on the thoroughness of the report. Please contact me if you have any questions. jm cc: City Manager Public Safety Commission UMW 04 0 ugCo)21 MEMORANDUM 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 887 -3438 TO: Public Safety Commission DATE: April 30, 1987 FROM: City Engineer SUBJECT: Request for Traffic Control Device of Surrey Lane and Saraview Drive This office has evaluated the intersection of Surrey Lane and Saraview Drive and concludes that no additional traffic control devices are warranted. The request was prompted by the involvement of the requester in an accident at this location on 10/30/86 (copy of accident report is attached. This is the only accident reported at this location in the past 10 years which indicates that this is certainly not a hazardous location. There are no visual obscurements in any direction. There are double yellow centerlines with refelctive markers. The accidents involved two young drivers at mid- afternoon in clear weather under dry conditions. Both drivers reside in the immediate vacinity and were likely to be very familiar with this intersection. Recommend that no additional control device be installed. Robe Shook Cit ngineer RSS /df Attachment etas. cew0/T/0110 *0. moues. 1.s— N w VIBLOOPV err, PUDIC :AL 01111V*ICT SA 124ImGA• Los 6 A r05 4 o (0‘1 S *0. *ILL•• LI: DIUTICV AT COUNTY 11110011719141 �1 331 Q ZO �I NTiC CL.I4P.�► •401. 1V30 COLLISION ON 9 orzaE� Ll. tk�J L4 e0 .*Lew.SV *O. eAV VP/. t 0 30: 8(o IIIJVwY, Ow TOW 0 Vas ?INC (1.511 t4 Away .CiISO NCIC 4-0 sTA•2 N•14•A• waLA•*0 •OS 00•10011 1.0. 9( O NRL0*091 IN00R*AYION 0551 At INTOwSOCTIer wry OAS reO4/rKfe e0 nw•e.*AONS y 0 see l�l.Me •ARTY NA *O (PI0ST. *1001.0. LAST) L♦4V241. MAR., e. E V U L_( CH O*NEw's 150** U Ora DAISIES EN! 0 L CH Ow /V .e X 0T 5CT AMMO, Nova •NO* 0 MM t3t;IL �vtzrr£t{ 4.14... 14- t —ot3 Oraw' A0000re As wwtVaw w s ss /v`–^ wee MO05- 701015 CITY/ /I10 •u*IN5/• 0*015• A_ `..I A Y `5P0smoW 00 VON. i s S ON 01000•A AA miffs r•w 0 or 00 0 eT VON. ewwew's m etres*. *TATO 50 58 010TM0A70 re. eAV V*, (111 92E *Ace W 010a0T5ON o0j T V•1. j /7 (*T *Ofr Ow MNN*O•) SQL L4. *NCO WAIT ZS alev- CLI*7 vo,. vo(s) twass(S) t4- /DIOOOL(*) /cesew(s) scot( G cu), a CEN.a 00.(51 (ti.vTo44 C� C0 ONLY VtM ICLa U50 TV OS T*wV /1OCAV,0N Vsets 2* rtwew RATS *.lees TOTAL 0 0 0 tr� L 07000 PARTY 2 OARO 101011T. 01001.0. LAST) 2kc:i. 4 t- e. 'E'‘: S rcf u Owwaw's NANO U SANS As O*II15■ JA,.. %tc1".) OO/V X f•wOfT AOOMSS /Or• 0*01190 t ta5.C4( out RAY 1 4t (4( 4 0 *I1aw'S AOMO55 A0O As 011.5* MOAN 70/015 a /STA7s/E/0 h trWtw555 0t .T i rG•/r t,�! TON 00 VON I.1 /d Ste OM o*e2 *5 00 �1 e.wecew +L1Leww.w eTI.eS ewtw.'s Ls C5o O.* *VAT. Sz4 Y /R7*:AT0 NO. R of Z3 cap *AC w 0* 0* 6/15 4/Patti/Off WWI*? 0w NNr*AT) Sl2.11.v14W ta4 10500 Llrn 2S sieve CLAM A *5*.. vo(s) 1. l L i w to seseet.leit eee •5 Y _�T t# c I u *0.)* CA IS) v� t,- V" �•A Y J r 1 u =7T/LecAT,ON 9•1111C1.2 /w 1:1. 0 *OOSwATIXrAJOID Ill TOTAL. eTw •A PITY 3 oaten Irmo,. NIOOLt S LAST) owNerrs NAN, 1 1•00 Al o*wew ONIYa* *TRACT AO0*Sws r' root room* owN0 *'S L IMAM AS 001E60 •50515 TAMAA Ct?VIS?MT5 /ZIP Ou51*555 0N05 1211112111V01117.001 1T.O O. VC., ON 0 0 0 o..ICtw 0 DRIVEN 0 OTNtO O VON Ow /v5 LI 2* 01 DO. 0•• •111. sat NAGS 0I.ECT1om 00 00/00005/ (wrest, Os NIO•■••) ••••0 L1r1• .ICY• CL15T VON. V*(*) *ANA(*) /roO.L(ss /coLOo(a) LI NO.(s) STAIN(*) CNP ONLY VSN /CLO USE TTM v5NICLS 000005- 2 *TtwT /LOCATION 0 0 r5*O roeOO *TO 0 N•IOw 0 T 0 0TN5S r a MAYS (.swim. rI ooLo. LAST) '0 NAME 1 AS O01V0s estVO* Nor. 0150155 0M MI 005 '5 51 j 1A ,0* 02055. T0IAN CITY /ITA,5 /ZIA au51m051 0150155 015•0$1T1ON o. VON. 015 0. 0 v 0*,VS0 L._.J VON. 0 *IVOO'• 1.105•55 *010•5* •10700MTE r0. OA• V SEX RACE 0.*•C• 0. OM!AC001I 00 N•ona••) •.550 L•MI, elev- CLIS? yew, •w(s) s•A.e(s) /0008(*) /cOLOa(5) LI *o.(s) (s) CHI. ON1.' *5151 cot USE TV .0 VO0.CL5 DANA *E OMVem, /LOCATION V= 011500 TO r 5010* OTNO• STATE OF CALIFORNIA TRAFFIC COLLISION REPORT CHP 555 —Page 1 (Rev S-8410( 00•5 AAJNesi OATS tot COLLISION re l O oAy •w.e. VIVNI 1:... l mcec fJ •v•s D OSS co. o. c A a- (O' 5 wT PROPERTY DAMAGE •••cRi'new 0. er1+Sw w& Do.5SS wernlse VW, NI IMO VIOlAT10N CHARGED ►w RTr I P•RTY 1 PARTY a PARTY •RIMA•• COLLISION F TOR fuer s uw..w (e) OP twwy7 AT•w•a,) RIONT OF WAY CONTI/ 1 1 II 1 t T7 E OF YNNICLt 1 1 MOVEMENT PRECEDING COLLISION A eewrwels Puwc,rewlws X k A ell cw11 /stn. WAGON Z A vc SSCV10w Y` /pyyyl��� 710 2 1 \V� C CONTw OIS MOT PYweT /Ow/N• Pw•sONeSw call r/*ww/LSR A C CONTROL. esseverw C reve.cv Clt/sceo,tw PNOCR<•IM mAfeNT erwSw .8P•O.UR MIV11Ie• iC D Me commutes." vistRewqr 0 Hem,. ow Paola rove* C SAW et► soAO E P,c •u.haNs► Ter wRsi• r Twues ON TNUCR ,RaC7os G TRR/TNR T•*C7ee W/rsiw D WARMS 'Moot Tuww E Oasts. Lave Yew* sArrt. u Tweet C Oyer.. Thaw OwwS5• TYPE OF COLLISION 0 uwwwew.• A muAeew W5•TNER (NAAR 1 TO it ITErs) net5RIPS N •cueea sus 0 saveloys A C 115A5 awe 1 OTwa* w• N s ow,s•- sye..nn• x CLO50Y D 10e J a .8SN.UN eY VSNICat 1 PASSIM Orrin VINIS ►n C •aINIM E NET ee:55? 11 envy COM/T. 5eu/P*•NT J CNa LANs. O .rewlws F ovtw,U.NSY L. e1 K .Ae*NN rw NS11*an E woe a •YTo /PtOemtAw M census, vsw/Ka aw,s•/M •*A►s•c weer 1510{5.0111•, .8felww, PARRNw m1. e• PNrVATS serve F eTNS.•: N O?N5••: N .t0tsyr *N 0 Weep 0 re.ss LIONTIN• MOTOR VVNICLE INVOLVED WITH A 0A•LNNT A NON- COLLI8IOw 1 1 1 OTNER ASSOCIATED" ACTOR (rmwi 1 TO ITUWS) M OTNa• Tuww/M 0011N- ewer..:._.: Pteem1Aw y, "us. /Re M LA AN 0 (mi eo C OAew- .r11n117 WN7. C eyeing. 50T011 I tWlCtt A vC to C77ee. vgLargwl D OaRw wO newel, LMMT• VIOL D resew V OM 0,1011• ROADWAY tNNNte net/, LnnMTS NOV E saver— PuwcnewlNS• E O 1001 VC 511CT /OM VMLAT10Nt 0 TR*vK/N N'•O*• *A•• r Tnw1N R eysee•t 0 sieves." C VC .11CT10M v/OLA710Ns ROADWAY •VRP•Ct P4 •wlraL: I P��/•11yr�N� Z Jf_ 1 8 so•RIETY -ORV•- ENT SICAL 1 TO MOWS) I A ow. O vc s5CT,ew v 01.ATVOs: woe, I ►Iise Oe:a R: C 85001-15? E M/O tM ONLY w11.811W701 e M ("mime A NAOT O PEN eRMR /N .85 0 sp•, (.01, stay, ave.) J erwuw Oe:Ie7t •wee -uwe11w /MI F rta7ytwy,ell C NO•-se, vs ua ,o.au.• ROADWAY CONDITION• (r•••■ 1 To 1 1TWOS) 0 sire. R so is Ors.- ,10 uswN• TRIAN'S ACTION 14 as,s.IM/Lsa*IM war. 5 1lwee5O.W INIIUeNes• A Notts. Ott. SSTs• X A se .SotsTwsww I 1 .Nevteus C.LLlsww F 1r.Arr.N► w17•Icat• 10085 W•TIw1AL 05 •OAewAY• Ire I5 ewes/WAL5 AT I Ion J UOP•5t%IAN rnr wows a w.AlwrswT My C e•.vuci.os eN .oaew*y• N es.ic?lvt vie. ',sew 14 weir A..L/c•.Le D CON$TAUCV10•- 011PAIN 80011 cwosuws 15 cave /sW•LR -50? C Ay 1NTSssncTloN 1 •LESS. /tATlsua• E NSOUCSO weaoWA• w1OTN 1. UNINVOLYa0 ve5151t Obsess• 0 MO MOT 15 WALK M 0.3.85•: 1 I 1•CCIAl INFORMATION 0 e?tw N 5 1g. weave -1 F ROT 15 .owe a X N wows w ally 0 wwww*T *851515 A NwlAweeus raytg.uls• t1•• 1.VOLV•O• JG •4 CewDITwNS 1 a •511 C ,let /MAlluwt• SNETCN NISCEaLANEOUS ....••••0 1501 AT/ rowT• •w h i W 3 ce a PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OF PARTY HAIR eye', rater? wanner? 1 •'n 's Nara 1.0. cvcutE z 14 Lr.SS( 50. 0*? ?R. 10 9 to *caltwns's wart 100. 0•? ye. y- TRAFFIC COLLISION CODING Z.D (:HP SCS -Pwoe 7 (Rev S-R41 oP1 fl47 •F.rDf.in iR RO.70fR'► NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL COCCI* IMO C. imams .Yt►ltYtMT• e+. COOl1.1e,ol, .T„sw N7� M m.I.m.y ..a�mlar MA 0 3 Et. Tram (.w( 14-v54-n25. .CIC .Yamf. 4 o orr,em. IAD. r--Seg l .Yamm. 141 taw /emwmrA/ m�m1e► s ...1, /Los G Tbs .vro.Tr... Ie• /.mw. 331rQ zo en.Tr.. I.Iwm. t•I/A So' L.,u SA aAve4.w LI V raihr-f-ic Co Lt.CS/64 I 'r'- lac- u..: 1434-I4&6 --re-to o f AuwvAtt- 1440 V a 'Es ADGZ114 ouri f C A 13 A t w 1 TN Ot.e. L.A.-14- e,• E■CH 1. Di 476 Te�w,.v► ro-14, At TrIE taTr2secro4 of- �2Qe q LA(. �R12E a t A. EAslit 'S �Esue' �Tt.t s'Trz6E r wt TM eat (....4.--“c- a,J EA t 2ELrto..1. ..'.e S+-6. tt to t r o4 201,-t ST2EErs t.s Z51-(4 11 ►tiI 12 SELrt a,J 0 F. s. S■ fZ2E ,i' NAQ.*c ItEt 5 i4 #J Oxseo..• oLLE,� y (pJ WITH Fie Se 6- reif i kite..D 4 Ert) A4y wttE2e' 1 S e.414 T. TN-e e.JEA ruEQ (A S •.C n iA l ss t .J"G,i j At►J D /i 4",.) Y i'DE V3 litzr- 11 3)l►�POt��' i� W `1 A4 VAT.- Z o 35E D ?..�rH V 1 D V N Z 14 Tye- IL ili Dim 0p Me 1 ¢sec.r-tp..j 07; w RCLet f cj 'J( goo MODegA Fie, bA •G►e' I 'r E44) ,',VET *2 VW> 'HA102 46E .v e. ,...4 LOC A'"E D 514 HA fZiGS CV EFt 1 I) Ea 7-1 S A (t O i CATEQ I tJ EA c'ruM— >taG(Z ,e. ¢%■EtL. Ye t E q v C1+ ST-A-1-E. q 406. E.13 0p4 r iet La. wt• e t•� 5 LA per, ROX 25O WEST OF T +e tNTe2Sts[. D.V t SAfz,A v l t?u) l..■.l.. G'Uta GN Sp,...) V'E4-1 /l'f E i p_i-r RSb t_l i p,J ?i2EP.k 21 To r i, /3,, e• Let=T ,2 0,....1-T-17 %...)11:5 5 L( E./ ut_t c.t4 "rot.. J ki-te" SHE: 5S4"."4-:a D: vc(.1 Z LA-POOL/D. \IIG I.D 1 5 1462 53 SIAG ?RoCE 'E t) `6w p ilks 1,1/4S se C.'c As Evouc+t A A,2f> Ly- VET+• L'itb O u. 1 ?4 U TZ C v 1.) u c t{ A ?pLi e 0 �N-E' P2 v 4 SK.i bDE h A.o b Cau.•t DL D n.(N'r'U' V'ct4, -z r•m MIAMI 4 A Ir V CCZCr 1 E ,p, wvr•m. NO. DAV .e o S aVImam.'• beam O. DAT TD. Use previous editions until depleted. 'Asa tt NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL �J NARRAttei IUPPL[MtutA Ow. COLLI.tON R Il 0/VIM OP •ISNAL twets.NT r.. l 0 .A. 0 S(, CIT./COYwt7/SVOICIAL ♦W. (Z... were ..Y r..• 4 oTMsR• .t.7wIC7 6ArL;icre 0.1'4 'erru 4 As+4Y Los 6A1-05 wf►OwTtw• Ot.A /.fwT 33 PJA. wur..• V R2ks't.t C.Id/S •(LJ►i14,4J n7- A-F-e IC- l.Ot t.t S t o r.s s. 1t'/E(2.-\1E14 4 '2. t■IN442.. {/:�/kS VI G. Ntfiv 00 oS/4Q/eft 4aA u 4(30. 1.g e1 1J '7717 h r114 !lks .L A,- Sint SGtrJ!JUL S►tD A5 6" lArrs 25 Ec'r'ra,..1 5u c 20 L' 1 4T 1-72 VE14 t Lt.,4 LOST, ..'fop Cor- P(.-m o P. Se-4 PPE-a- [-DO D P 4,n+ L0 ADD S/ VF.N "A-t- -11+19 r o f T 14 (c.2_., S! tis x34.42_ —c{ 8-,- (R) b t pro 1 l L-- `5E L a nl; i4iJ D w /.-5 'T Eft q p ?c s to t1/4 t b e wci_us Dt ti1S \I CA a 1 E ti Z sore o- `'�l+G Syr I �V I 1..t`SI JNCD 0 vJr rM AefooULJ rL. 0- o GIGN i4t Y .S p �IGtJS 1 A J „.r..,,,-. AF 05-1-64 t f..) ,u o, 5- rA-Te ,w.ef- 1" 1 3 Cr-o,-4.. ?XtIt 1. z,vl✓a� IL A,-V) elMea- i A.X..:?N t{S t D/'R,- Ev N L4- C'S W b r 4A t'LK 5 PiCL1S Veil T's l T• D D 'C t,. ,t) PE -t c -401,. r-12: l V Z: Vt ot,.P,*Tep C %al o,.S• it Soo (b). 2 1 b t..6tG C i t E w Al 115124-k N/►'t t N 6, r]Te 256 C•t! ot. is.. I.. 2 EUXA A -oti DA. rea.•1 r �O�L.w,e tits Ave2 e s 2. P- C( re 0 �02 17, Soo (b) GIC A45 C c t,.i✓b -O `IIeL t p X-W e2 V Eu 4. TO. I I H. !t. NAr,.�7 ..0 f CJ�tZ•�E .0�f'4,,�'L i 4t I l r0. OA, c.• 1 0 3 0 J 1. R.Vtf wwrf NO. OA, CMP 65R'In...A�tl nom nw• Us. PreviOuf editions until depleted. •T.0 01 CALI•ORRIA FACTUAL DIAGRAM ll ALL MEASUREMENTS ARE AMROX IPA ATV ANO NOT TO SCALE UNLESS STATED (SCALE 1111111 rT11,11 14111 1111.1111,1111111111[11[111[ 1FT 1T11 1.T111 IT-111I Ill Of•.ICUR L., Nam OM OATS O TA. 4026 P T �rw RCIC Irlr•fR v ri...J..r IRO.CATf MOT* T' GAT, O. 4•• _1 CHP 555 —Page 4 (Rev 6 -841 OPI 042 T 1 1 1[ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 R E `ALA/ 11 111 I.O. 4•• S J 11111 MO. OAT •R., O•VN1156'• “Ar• 1 030 N. r• 11111111 ro. RA. TR. Si 39 4 a L. :r,4:: I 7. owl N)IR RATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL 0 NARRATtVU J.V►►LtMINTAI. l Ogre A COLLlel010 Ru►ORT 0 o71111R: ••T• e/ 00 10101A1.81161••••• ••T NJQ T.. 66, TIME 1 �J NCIC NV I J •••••C.. S.S. Q e AZ- /057-�1- CIT•? OD No rlefe C•teewrrvisVweuL .•emRICT NU •T1N• •I.rN1CT/•e•• L•CATN1e/eV•Ite? A ,o-a.%)- 66 /8 8c l ee wED \dE-t l/c awe L".Olc s "<:;e 4•1 a 0Z4E G. veee.✓.. eS /e OUT eo,pre of T-e &rE 4,i-r-.4 /4l1.(./ c 44. i A4.4T a t I4cc SAE Z ...�r A.�cC. r fp.0 f. e ✓iEc •.Sle /.4.47- Te o.r a cc' 4.400 'co.< E .",o•e• At) c. Q /4e /0, 7 A 4 1•• 7 freEEd T. "✓G 77 4 4:?,4e4ti) /..ss T .4/Q e•e 64 u/ i..0.0,T GIJ.l s./ AGE Cri4 ,.AI .vi 41 •ero.E .l ter'', Aie4 /o .t 73 7.' /00'7 -4 iT ..Z G t bi t t Q ColOt C i�Aecl .v dec. AuE Q "Itvo G e <s' //Av •.Pols ■4�C i.ES TEA It. AI #4 As ..ed.✓I'Gy .e.rn.✓6 b„,Cl..,/6 biif tr AA/ del ./...4,07"" t 2.4 G. i we L Lt/i> E4/ /4 ePsYY4 ••■70 Nd pAeic E IL o� i --,c —8G "44 /✓o r )47' ?ee.Jc 3 .CA/ c .rs fe .t•cE a >Eoe 'A's �.l..v"/E eAtGE ',45Ki•✓6 ,t- occ.T '1 o c a 44.0 iiyAr /.f6 cue', C E,Q #144 ,T C.. 61ei Jree 1.:414 .Z �rra< e. 400"e dcos. 4j. r.N C.� /.»..✓•o 4 all 1T. a' Tio Z Z- E 4 A r dzc s. o e../ TE ,..✓.4t."2A•yo.1/ �...q►7 1..1 ees r6-e 4. 4 0 c7 4 c r 0 eel", .3 EFd "/6 s u bt t.c0 C rE ea TV/ CJe�de -e4 U/ r 1-z- so ✓G .4346 '2 L /C9 0 46 VC e .✓res E•�T 0,c N.:172.1' e d ,4 ad G :a. n. 1.0 WO. Owr ■N. //--/e A •ev1.■e0'1 N•tlf Ye. e•T r.. previous editions until depleted. To the city of Saratoga: APR 8 1981 EN®INEERINC nFrr► In october of 1986 I was involved in an automobile accident on the corner of Surrey Lane and Saraview Drive in Saratoga. I feel this accident could have been prevented if there had been a stop or yeild sign on ".this corner. My accident wasn't a serious one but it could have been if a pedestrian or cyclist was involved. .I feel that the city of Saratoga should look into this problem and remedy the situation with a stop or yeild sign on this corner. Sincerely'; CraliZajet‘ Laura Evulich APR 8 107 lo 6 s--. April 5th 1987 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY U G3 Agenda Item I MEETING DATE: June 3, 1987 City Mgr Approval`W ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: Maintenance SUBJECT: Hakone Donation Recommended Motions Accept donation of $15.00 to Hakone Gardens from Montessori Christian Schools. Report Summary Montessori Christian Schools donated $15.00 to Hakone Gardens in appreciation of their visit and picnic at the gardens on May 7, 1987. Fiscal Impact Attachments Letter of acknowledgement. Motion Vote Staff recomm 5 -0. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL 1 12,o 6t) OBE'Woff 'n' May 20, 1987 Jan Pendergast Montessori Christian Schools 11700 Upland Way Cupertino, CA 95014 Dear Ms. Pendergast, It is my pleasure, on behalf of the City of Saratoga, to acknowledge Montessori School's donation of $15.00 to the Hakone Gardens. We are very proud of the Hakone Japanese Gardens and donations of this nature help to defray the cost involved in maintaining the Garden at its high level of authenticity. Again, let me thank you for your contribution. I hope your group enjoyed the gardens and will return often. Sincerely, Joyce Hlava Mayor 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA. CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Karen Anderson Martha Clevenger Joyce Hlava David Moyles Donald Peterson EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Agenda Item 11P MEETING DATE: June 3, 1987 City Mgr Approval ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: Maintenance SUBJECT: Hakone Donation Recommended Motions Accept donation of $15.00 to Hakone Gardens from Montessori Christian Schools. Report Summary Montessori Christian Schools donated $15.00 to Hakone Gardens in appreciation of their visit and picnic at the gardens on May 7, 1987. Fiscal Impact Attachments Letter of acknowledgement. Motion Vote SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL 1 'EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 1 MEETING DATE: June 3, 1987 ORIGINATING DEPT: Engineering. SUBJECT: Recommended Motion: Fiscal Impacts: None. Attachments: Letter from applicant. Motion and Vote: SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL SDR 1290 Lauren Hulse Request for Extension Approve 30 day extension of tentative site approval. Repoft Summary: Applicant has only recently been the liability insurance required completing the other conditions. weeks but not before the current Staff recommendation 5-0. AGENDA ITEM 4f CITY MGR. APPROVAL able to find a contractor who will provide by the City. He is now in the process of These should be completed in the next two approval runs out. $'3�3S 1'5 7 72 6fie4,a, ��R rasa 0,14 caled a) letk. 4; ez tkr ,1 k m es Y 4 ef4 R d 474.,4 At e 1 -P-P-e4 aAk. fia-/-(1 o wiliAdtale. (IAA- 1464-td Au:A sed an. ad/44,a 3 d,g 4 4d/nie, tilweit, tute-LL (4a ate) A imt,46, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. /p MEETING DATE: June 3, 1987 ORIGINATING DEPT.: Planning SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: CITY MGR. APPROVAL 'Yc) 2:o SUBJECT :Report from Planning Commission regarding alternative uses at school sites. Recommended Motion: That the City Council accept the report dnd".recommendations from. the Planning Commission2 and conduct a public hearing. Report Summary: One of the City Council work items on its FY86 -87 "to do" list is an analysis of alternative uses for vacant or underutilized school sites in Saratoga, and the consideration of possible code amendments to allow for such alternative uses. The Planning Commission reviewed a staff report on this issues on February 17, 1987, and finalized its recommendations to the Council at its April 22, 1987 meeting. Notice of the Planning Commission meetings was sent to all school districts with facilities in Saratoga and to interested members of the public. One letter from the Saratoga Union School District was received and is attached. Fiscal Impacts: None Attachments: 1. Report to Mayor and City Council. 2. Minutes and staff report from 4/22/87 Planning Commission meeting. 3. Letter from Saratoga Union School District. 4. Staff report from 2/17/87 Planning Commission Committee -of- the -Whole meeting. Motion and Vote: Staff recommendation 5-0. UMW 04 ilk' o Gtr REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Alternative Uses for School Sites 1 One of the City Council work items on its FY86 -87 "to do" list is an analysis of alternative uses for vacant or underutilized school sites in Saratoga, and the consideration of possible code amendments to allow for such alternative uses. A staff report on this subject was prepared and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review at a study session on February 17, 1987. The Commission finalized its recommendations to the Council at its April 22, 1987 meeting. Public notice for the Planning Commission meetings was provided to all school districts with facilities in Saratoga, and to property owners adjacent to Hansen School who requested notification whenever the City discusses the disposition of that school. An additional public hearing notice for the March 25, 1987 meeting was published in the Saratoga News. Planning Commission Recommendations Following their discussion on this issue and receiving input from members of the public and school district representatives, the Commission summarized their recommendations to the City Council as follows: 1. The Commission recommends that only uses which are similar to school uses, in terms of hours of operation, traffic, and overall impacts, be permitted at vacant and underutilized schools. 2. The Commission believes that the current conditional uses permitted in the R -1 zoning district already allow the types of uses that could be proposed for school sites, and that no code amendment is necessary in that regard. DATE: 5/5/87 COUNCIL MEETING: 6/3/87 Report to Mayor and City Council Page 2 Re: Alternative Uses for School Sites 3. The Commission believes that applications for alternative uses at school sites may involve significant impacts to neighboring properties and, therefore, recommends that the public hearing process for such use permits be retained. The Commission also recommends that the fee for such applications not be reduced, so that the City can recover its costs for the processing of such applications. 4. The Commission recommends that the City maintain an ongoing dialogue with the school districts regarding potential school closures to ensure that issues of mutual concern, such as maintenance of recreational uses and open space available to the general public, are fully discussed. The Planning Commission acknowledges the concern expressed at the April 22, 1987 hearing that the permitted uses may be too restrictive for a school like Saratoga High School, which is located on a major thoroughfare. The Commission's primary concern is for schools that are completely surrounded by residential use. Y Planning Director Attachments: 1) Minutes from 4/22/87 Planning Commission Meeting 2) Letter from Saratoga Union School District 3) Staff report from 2/17/87 Planning Commission Committee -of- the -Whole Meeting YH /vy /dsc B memocc 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Page 5 APRIL 22, 1987 PUBLIC HEARINGS: 12. School Sites City of Saratoga, consider report and recommendation to the City Council regarding alternative uses for school sites. Continued from March 25, 1987. Planning Director Hsia presented the Memorandum of April 17, 1987. Planner Young recommended that under Item 4 the following be added, to read, "One issue of mutual concern is the maintenance of recreational uses and open spaces available to the general public which may be provided by school sites." The Public Hearing was opened at 8:32 P.M. Ms. Dorothy Diekmann, Los Gatos /Saratoga High School Districts, noted that the defined objectives did not appear to be in line with the Council's goal of keeping Saratoga High School open; on the contrary, these objectives seemed to be a deterrent to the goal. The ability to keep Saratoga High School open would require maximizing income potential. She called attention to the original Memorandum noting that professional administrative and light industrial uses were already present in the area of Saratoga High School; the limitation of uses to educational purposes was restrictive and unprofitable. She asked that professional administrative uses be allowed for this facility. In the view of Commissioner Siegfried, the Commission would not support a policy statement favorable to the uses being proposed. Mr. Dave Burke concurred that professional or light industrial uses for Hanson School would be a problem; he added that the School was poorly maintained. GUCH/TUCKER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:45 P.M. Passed 5 -0. Commissioner Siegfried suggested a change in the draft which would reflect former Mayor Fannelli's proposal, indicating that at the Public Hearing concern was expressed about being too restrictive in the proposed uses of Saratoga High School; he noted that the School was on a main through fare. The greatest concern was for schools which were completely surrounded by residential. SIEGFRIED /CALLANS MOVED TO FORWARD THE DRAFT TO THE CITY COUNCIL, ADDING TO ITEM 4, TO READ, "ONE ISSUE OF MUTUAL CONCERN IS THE MAINTENANCE OF RECREATIONAL USES AND OPEN SPACES AVAILABLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC WHICH MAY BE PROVIDED BY SCHOOL SITES." Passed 5 -0. 13. UP -87 -002 Novakovich, 14251 Fruitvale Ave., request for use permit and design DR -87 -038 review approval of plans to construct a 2,400 sq. ft. accessory structure (barn) in the Agricultural zoning district. Continued from April 8, 1987. Planning Director Hsia updated the Commission on the status of this Application. Commissioner Tucker reported on a second site visit which included the interior of the barn. Chairwoman Harris noted that the barn had already been built in order to clarify the Application under consideration; pictures of the site were presented. She noted a letter received, unsigned, in opposition to the proposed Use Permit. Commissioner Tucker received a phone call in opposition to an approval of this Application. The Public Hearing was opened at 8:50 P.M. Mr. George Novakovich, Applicant, stated that the barn was for equipment storage and farm vehicles; he thought that due to the Williamson Act, a permit was not required. He was agreeable to clean up efforts discussed at the site visit, including removal of some vehicles. Mr. Peter Joachim, 14287 Okanogan Dr., Saratoga, stated residents had agreed that if the Novakovich's would use the barn for the vehicles, they would not object to the Use Permit. He noted that some efforts had been already been made. Chairperson Harris noted for the record that the site visit committee had not driven to the western side. Mr. Joachim recognized that this property was a working farm and had no objection to equipment used on this farm. N C�B'a''T (0) 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Director SUBJECT: Alternative Uses for School Sites (u Hs is Planning Director DATE: April 17, 1987 FOR APRIL 22, 1987 Meeting This item was originally scheduled for Planning Commission review at its March 25, 1987 meeting. It was continued to the April 22, meeting to allow additional time for input and comments from school district representatives. To date only the Saratoga Union School District has submitted comments (attached). Staff would like to add that since the 3/25 meeting we have had input on this issue from former Mayor Fanelli. She brought to staff's attention that some prior discussion on this issue focused on ways that school districts and cities could work together to maintain closed schools as recreation and open space resources. One method is a joint agreement for the construction and maintenance of recreational facilities used by both schools and cities; Ms. Fanelli provided an example (attached) of such an agreement from Redwood City. The Commission may wish to amend recommendation #4 in the draft report to the Council to incorporate comments on this particular issue. The draft report from the Commission's March 25 agenda is again included in this packet. Only minor grammatical changes have been made. Staff recommends the Commission make changes, if appropriate, and forward its report to the City Council. Attachnment: 1) Draft report to City Council 2) Letter from Saratoga Union School District 3) Sample agreement from Redwood City City of Saratoga Planning Commission 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, Ca. 95070 April 15, 1987 Attention: Valerie Young, Associate Planner Dear Ms Young, In response to the Memorandum of March 27, 1987 Consideration of Alternative Uses for School Sites, and in response to the misinfor- mation circulating in the community, the Saratoga Union School District Board of Trustees would like the following information placed on the record. 1. There are no immediate plans to close a school site in the Saratoga Union School District. 2. Neither the City of Saratoga nor the Saratoga Union School District will be served by Code changes which would restrict the types of use for school property. 3. The City has a planning process in place. The community, the City and the District should depend on the Planning Commission pro- cedure which has served well in the past when it has been necessary to sell surplus school sites i.e. Congress Springs, the Aloha property, etc. These transactions automatically fell under the jurisdication of the Planning Commission and any future transactions would also fall under its jurisdiction. In conclusion, the Saratoga Union School District Board of Trustees has no plans to close a school site. We have found the process in place under the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission to be most satisfactory in the past and see no need to change the process. We emphasize that flexibility is to the advantage of all concerned. qtr: -�r �-6 7 Makry Alen Comport, President Saratoga Union School District Board of Trustees Sincerely, MEC /bm SN6T06fl moo SCHOOL DISTRICT 20460 FORREST HILLS DRIVE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3424 Januar THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this thirteenth day of AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND JOINT USE OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AT HOOVER SCHOOL by and between the CITY OF REDWOOD CITY, a municipar" corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "City," and the REDWOOD CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, hereinafter referred to as "District;" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, District is the owner of certain real property currently used for the purposes of operating an elementary school known as the Hoover School; and WHEREAS, District is desirous of affording City the opportunity to upgrade and maintain recreational facilities at Hoover School; and WHEREAS, City requires additional park and recreational facilities in the area of the Hoover School site; and WHEREAS, Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title I of the Government Code (sections 6500 et seq.) authorizes public agencies to enter into agreements for the joint exercise of powers which are common to the parties to the agreement, and Chapter 10 of Part 7 of Division 10 of the Education Code (sections 10900 et seq.) authorizes agreements between public agencies for the purpose of organizing, promoting and conducting programs of community recreation to promote and preserve the health and general welfare of the people of the State; and WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to enter into an agreement for construction'and maintenance of certain community recreation facilities; and WHEREAS, the public interest, convenience and necessity will be served thereby; and WHEREAS, City has heretofore constructed a swimming pool at the Hoover School site for joint use by both City and District, and is willing to construct and maintain additional 1 of 7 recreational facilities at the Hoover School site for the continued benefit of both City and District; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, agreements and conditions contained herein, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: 1. SITE. District agrees to furnish, pursuant to Education Code sections 10900 et seq., without cost to City, a portion of that property known as Hoover School site, for construction and maintenance of those recreational facilities hereinafter described. The furnished site shall be of a size sufficient to accommodate said facilities. The site is more particularly described in "Exhibit A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The survey necessary to determine the actual description of the property subject to this agreement will be done at City's expense. City acknowledges that this agreement confers upon it no ownership rights with respect to the school lands or buildings described herein. 2. FACILITIES. City shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish plans and specifications for and shall construct the following facilities at the site described in Paragraph 1: a. Two (2) full size softball fields. b. Two (2) soccer fields. c. Multi -use athletic /handball court. d. Parking lot. e. Picnic area. f. Toilet facilities. Plans and specifications for the above described facilities shall be subject to written'approval by District prior to commencement of bidding and construction. No facilities will be open to public use until adequate toilet facilities are available. Semi -Final Progress Payment reports, as approved by the City Council, will be attached to this contract and shall be incorporated by reference. 2 of 7 3 of 7 In the future, City may construct other facilities at the site upon prior written approval of District, pursuant to this agreement. City agrees that, upon request of the District, it will construct a fence or other barrier mutually agreed upon between the recreational area provided for herein and the school area. Said construction will be completed within sixty days after the request. 3. USE OF FACILITIES. City and District shall have joint use of the recreational facilities described in Paragraph 2; provided, however, such joint use shall not interfere with the operation of the school.- District shall have exclusive use of the recreational facilities, except for the pool, during school hours. When District has exclusive use of the facilities, District's students shall be supervised by District employees. All recreational uses of the facilities shall be consistent with applicable provisions of the Education Code, as may be amended from time to time. 4. MAINTENANCE. Maintenance, including utility costs and personnel to operate and maintain the site of the facilities described in Paragraph 2, shall at all times be the sole responsibility of City, including during those hours when District has exclusive use of the facilities. Maintenance shall be a level comparable to other City parks. City shall arrange to have separate utility meters installed at the site for the utilities used by the recreational facilities described herein, including the existing swimming pool. Because use of the recreational facilities provided for herein has resulted in the past, and may result in the future, in debris being scattered throughout the entire site, including the school portion, City will remove debris from the entire site, including the school portion, after weekends, holidays, and other periods of heavy usage. Said removal will be accomplished before the next school day following the weekend, holiday, or other time of use. C 5. LIABILITY INSURANCE. Both City and District shall provide public liability insurance in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence against damage, injury or death occurring on or about the facilities. Such insurance may be either by separate policy or by the inclusion of the other party as an additional insured in existing City or District liability policies. Such insurance coverage may be privately underwritten or part of a self insurance program. 6. MUTUAL INDEMNIFICATION. It is agreed that District shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the City, its officers, agents and employees from any and all claims for injuries or damages to persons and /or property which arise out of the terms and conditions of this agreement and which result from the negligent acts or omissions of District, its officers, agents and /or employees in connection with the performance of this agreement. It is further agreed that City shall defend, and hold harmless, and indemnify District, its officers, agents and employees, from any and all claims for injuries and /or to persons and /or property which arise out of the terms and conditions of this agreement and which result from the negligent acts or omissions of the City, its officers, agents and /or employees in connection with the performance of this agreement. In the event of concurrent negligence of District, its officers, agents and /or employees and the City, its officers, agents and /or employees, then the liability for any and all claims for injuries or damages to persons and /or property which arise out of the terms and conditions of this agreement shall be apportioned under the. California theory of comparative negligence as established presently, or as may be hereafter modified. 7. SWIMMING POOL. City and District have heretofore entered into an agreement dated October 7, 1965 under the terms of which City constructed a swimming pool at the Hoover School site for joint use by both City and District. The parties hereto do hereby agree that this agreement shall supersede the former 4 of 7 5 of 7 agreement of October 7, 1965. City shall maintain and operate the swimming pool at its sole expense, it being understood by both parties that District is no longer using the swimming pool in its school programs. Should District decide to use the swimming pool for school purposes in the future, both parties shall, at that time, determine an equitable reimbursement schedule for pool maintenance. 8. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This agreement shall be in full force and effect for thirty (30) years following the date of its execution; provided, however, that the terms hereof may be amended by written agreement of both parties. Upon the expiration of the thirty (30) year initial term hereof, the parties hereto may, at their mutual consent, extend this agreement for joint use for an additional thirty (30) year for the purpose of providing continuing recreational services to the community, and upon such terms as both parties thereto may agree. 9. ASSIGNMENT. City may not sublease any portion of this property or assign to any other person or entity any right or privilege appurtenant hereto without the written consent of District first having been obtained. 10. TERMINATION. (A) The District may, without penalty, terminate this agreement within eighteen (18) months of the commencement hereof, or at any time prior to the written approval by District of any plans and specifications described in Paragraph 2, whichever occurs first. (B) Either party may terminate this agreement by written notice from one party to the other at least ninety (90) days in advance of the termination. (C) If this agreement is terminated by District before the expiration of the thirty (30) year term hereof, District shall reimburse City for the construction cost of the facilities described in Paragraph 2 in an amount equal to 1 /30th of the total construction cost for each year or fraction thereof still remaining in the agreement. After the expiration of the thirty (30) year term of this agreement, District shall be free of its obligation to reimburse City for the construction costs of the facilities described in Paragraph 2. (D) If District terminates this agreement prior to the expiration of fourteen (14) years from the commencement of this agreement, District shall, in addition to the payments described in subparagraph 10(C), reimburse City for the construction cost of the swimming pool described in Paragraph 7, in an amount equal to 1 /30th of the total construction cost for each year or fraction thereof still remaining of the above referenced fourteen (14) year period. District's maximum obligation hereunder is 14 /30th of the pool construction cost. Said obligation will decrease by 1 /30th for each year this agreement is in effect. After the expiration of fourteen (14) years from the' commencement of this agreement, District's obligation to reimburse City for construction costs of the swimming pool shall cease entirely. 10. RECREATION FACILITIES AT TERMINATION. At the end of the thirty year term described in Paragraph 8, or upon earlier termination by the City of Redwood City, the facilities described in Paragraphs 2 and 7, and any additional facilities constructed hereunder, shall be free of District's obligation to pay for any part of them and shall be District's sole property. Said facilities will be delivered in good condition. 6 of 7 the day and year first herein written. ATTEST: By City. Clerk ATTEST: IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have set their hands Clerk of said Board 1/22/82 r CITY OF REDWOOD CITY, A Municipal Corporation REDWOOD CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT By 7 of 7 City Manager Aka ecretary, Board of Trustees MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Staff DATE: February 17, 1987 SUBJECT: Alternative. Uses for School Sites One of the City Council work items adopted for FY 1986 -87 involves an analysis of alternative uses for vacant or underutilized school sites in Saratoga, and the consideration of a possible code amendment to allow for such alternative uses. Staff was directed to perform this analysis and report to the Planning Commission with appropriate recommendations. After study and discussion, the Planning Commission should then forward its report and recommendations to the City Council. PROJECT BACKGROUND Concern about closure of school sites and its impact on open space and recreational resources in Saratoga was raised in the late 1970's. The issue continued to be of concern during the comprehensive General Plan revision which took place during 1981 -1983. To address this concern, the following related policies were adopted as part of the Open Space Element of the General Plan: OS.3.0 Strive to preserve open space and recreational resources provided by other agencies serving the community, when the continuation of that service is in jeopardy. OS.3.1 School sites should also provide open space and recreation resources for the City. OS.3.2 The City shall review proposed interim uses of surplus school sites to determine if the impacts generated by the proposed uses will have significant adverse effects, particularly in terms of noise, traffic, and parking on adjacent residential areas. OS.3.2 If public ownership of school sites is not possible, restrict the use of the property to residential development at a density not higher than the surrounding residential neighborhood and zoning, with the exception of Saratoga School on Oak Street. Being adjacent to multiple residential zoning, said site shall have a use with a minimum impact on the surrounding neighborhood and the evaluation of the use should be determined at such time there is a change in ownership. The following policy was also adopted as part of the Area D (Triangle North) area plan: "Vacated school interim uses shall not create adverse impacts or excessive noise and shall provide adequate off street parking." Memorandum to Planning Commission Alternative Uses for School Sites In addition to the adoption of specific policies relating to school sites, the sites themselves were all (with the exception of El Quito Park School) designated by the General Plan as CFS- Community Facility, School (Open Space Resource); the El Quito Park School property was designated medium density residential (4.35 units /acre). Since the adoption of the General Plan, there has continued to be an interest, on the part of the City and the school districts, in possible uses for closed or underutilized school sites. In 1985, the Planning Department prepared and sent a questionnaire to school districts with facilities in Saratoga. The purpose of the questionnaire was to determine the concerns each district had regarding the use of surplus school sites. The questionnaire and its results are attached as Appendix A. In response to the questionnaire results, school site planning was adopted at the Council policy development retreat as a FY 86 -87 work item. Staff was directed to further study the possibility of expanding the scope of conditional uses at school sites, distinguishing between vacant sites and vacant rooms within schools still operating, and then report to the Planning Commission with appropriate recommendations. INVENTORY OF FACILITIES 2/17/87 Page 2 There are ten (10) public school facilities within the Saratoga City limits (see Table A). This figure does not include West Valley College. All but two of the schools are currently open as public school facilities; Hansen School on Prospect Road is closed, and El Quito Park School at the corner of Bucknall and Paseo Presada is leased to a private interest and is operated as a day care facility. ZONING REGULATIONS All of the school properties are located in the R -1 Single Family Residential District. Although the general purpose of this district is to provide for appropriate locations and standards for single family residential development, it does allow for community facilities needed to compliment residential areas and for institutions, such as nursing homes and day care facilities, which require a residential environment. All of these facilities are considered conditional uses and require the granting of a use permit by the City Planning Commission in order to operate. Those facilities most similar to school site uses are as follows: 1) Community facility A place, structure, area or other facility used for and providing fraternal, social or recreational programs or activities generally open to the public. The term includes parks, swimming pools, recreational courts, community centers, libraries, museums, and golf courses. 2) Institutional facility A place, structure or area operated by a public or private organization or agency, used for and providing educational, residential or health care services to the community at 2 Memorandum to Planning Commission Alternative Uses for School Sites large. The term includes residential developments and health care facilities operating by non profit organizations, and both public and private shcools or colleges. 3) Police and fire stations and other public buildings, structures and .facilities. The 1985 School District Questionnaire asked for suggestions on alternative uses for school sites. Those suggested uses that would qualify as a conditional use under the existing regulations are as follows: 1) rental space to groups for educational purposes 2) child care facilities 3) private schools 4) adult education 5) dance, music and art classes 8) student day -care centers 7) recreational use by youth sport leagues 8) educational conference center 9) community centers 10) develop portion of site with houses and lease remainder as one of the above uses. Those that would not qualify are as follows: 1) private storage space 2) professional and administrative offices 3) light industry, electronics It appears, then, that existing zoning regulations already allow, through the conditional use permit process, the large majority of alternative uses suggested for school sites by the district officials. These uses would also be consistent with the General Plan if they continued to provide or did not interfere with the provision of open space and recreation, and if they did not have significant adverse impacts in terms of noise, traffic, and parking on adjacent residential areas. The zoning code does not distinguish between vacant sites and vacant rooms in existing schools where the use permit process is concerned. STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS School, districts in California are distinct governmental agencies, usually separate from the governments of the cities and counties in which they operate. The California Government Code grants certain autonomy to school districts with respect to the authority a City of County Government can exercise over them. However, school districts must comply with all applicable building and zoning ordinances of the local jurisdiction when the proposed use of the property is for non classroom facilities. In addition, there are strict regulations governing the sale of surplus school sites to allow other public agencies to participate in the purchase of such properties. 2/17/87 Page 3 Memorandum to Planning Commission Alternative Uses for School Sites RECOMMENDATIONS c 2/17/87 Page 4 Because the current zoning regulations already allow a variety of conditional uses in the R -1 district, it is not really'necessary to change the Code. However, the Planning Commission may want to call out the.types of uses they feel are specifically appropriate for school sites and amend the code accordingly. Such an amendment may serve to encourage school districts to pursue alternative uses for their vacant and underutilized sites. The school districts suggested simplifying the permit process for alternative uses by making it an administrative rather than a public hearing item and by reducing the fees for permit processing. While staff can support the idea of reduced fees, it is recommended that a use permit for alternative uses be required, primarily to inform surrounding neighbors of pending changes at school sites and to assess all potential impacts. Name of School Elementary Argonaut Blue Hills El Quito Park Foothill Hansen Marshall Lane Saratoga Jr. High Redwood Sr. High Prospect Saratoga INVENTORY OF SCHOOL FACILITIES Location TABLE A 13200 Shadow Mountain Dr. 12300 DeSanka Ave. Bucknall Paseo Presada Lynde Ave. Prospect Rd. 14111 Marilyn Ave. 14592 Oak St. Fruitvale Ave. 18900 Prospect Rd. 20300 Herriman Ave. 5 R -1- 12,500 R- 1- 10,000 R -1 -10 ,000 R- 1- 12,500 R- 1- 10,000 R-1- 40,000 R- 1- 10,000 R -1- 10,000 R-1-12,500 Zoning Total District Acreage Status 11.5 Open 10.6 Open 12.1 Leased 11.0 Open 8.7 Closed in 1979 10.0 Open 6.1 Open R- 1- 40,000 17.7 Open 35.0 Open 22.0 Open C *APPENDIX A IN AN EFFORT TO DETERMINE THE FUTURE NEEDS OF YOUR SCHOOL DISTRICT IN SARATOGA, PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO RESPOND TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS (USE A SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): NAME OF SCHOOL DISTRICT: NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON RESPONDING: PHONE NUMBER: 1. What uses would benefit the school district if they were permitted on school sites? What changes in existing school facilities would be required to accommodate these uses? 2. If you have had experience with the City's use permit process, what changes would you suggest in that process which would increase your ability to preserve existing school facilites? 3. What are the advantages to the City which would result from allowing alternate uses on school sites? 4. What can the City do to make it practical for the school district to keep its facilities? What are your plans for these facilities? TO ASSIST THE PLANNING STAFF OF THE CITY IN ASSESSING THE RESOURCES AND NEEDS OF YOUR SCHOOL SITES IN SARATOGA, PLEASE FILL OUT THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: 1. Size of school sites: a b. c d. Name of School Size (in acres) PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS FOR EACH OF THE SCHOOL SITES LISTED ABOVE. USE SEPARATE SHEETS IF NECESSARY. 2. Size and use of existing buildings: a. Number of existing buildings: b. Size of each building: c. Current use of each building: 3. Numbers of employees and students: a. Maximum number of people employed: b. Maximum number of students: c. Current number of people employed: d. Current number of students: 4. What are the significant physical features of the site? (i.e., topography, vegetation, geology) 5. What existing parking facilites are available? 6. What open space (acreage) and playground facilites exist on site? IF AVAILABLE, PLEASE ATTACH A SITE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY SHOWING BUILDINGS, PLAYGROUNDS, AND OTHER FACILITIES. IV. What Can the City Do? SCHOOL DISTRICT QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS I. Suggested Alternate Uses for School Sites A. Rent space to groups for educational purposes. (S) B. Private storage space. (S),(LG) C. Low traffic uses limited to available parking: (M),(Cu),(L6) 1. P -A Offices (architects, engineers, artists, etc.) 2. Child care facilities 3. Private schools 4. Adult education S. Dance, music, and art classes D. For open school site: (Cu) 1. On -site student care centers 2. Turf use by youth leagues E. Educational Conference Center (Cu) F. Community Centers (Cu) G. Light industry, electronics (LG) H. Lease to non profit organizations (LG) I. Develop portion of site for houses and lease remainder of school (LG) II. Improvements to Use Permit Process A. Simplify adopt ordinances to allow uses to be approved admin- istratively. (M) B. Eliminate or reduce fees to encourage more community activities that have limited financial resources. (M) C. Should reflect school district needs (including revenues) as well as well as City standards. (Cu) D. Should be easy to understand and follow. (Cu) III. Advantages of Alternate Uses to the City A. Retention of playgrounds and open space. (S),(Cu) B. Money generated by alternate uses vs. sale of school site. (S) C. Better looking neighborhoods through better maintenance of school properties with revenues from alternate uses. (M),(Cu) D. Avoid State penalites for closed schools which force sales of property resulting in loss of open space. (M) E. Meet community needs such as child care. (Cu) F. Taxable activities create revenue for governmental bodies. (Cu) G. Avoid sale of lands to developers which would be inevitable. (Cu) H. Insure school remains in Saratoga regardless of enrollment. (LG) A. Approve sites for other than educational use. (S) B. Encourage uses noted in topic I above; broaden permitted uses. (Cu) C. Create "empathetic" process between City and school districts to bring productive activities to a closed site. (Cu) D. Turf care agreement between City and school districts. (Cu) l k E. Allow schools to lease to uses listed in topic I above. (LG) F. Control traffic by signal at Merriman and Saratoga Sunnyvale. (LG) V. School District Plans for Facilities A. Plans not yet determined. (S) B. Lease sites until too difficult or expensive then sell for "highest and best use Note: (S) Suggestion from Saratoga School District (M) Suggestion from Moreland School District (Cu) Suggestion from Cupertino Union School District (LG) Suggestion from Los Gatos Saratoga Joint Union H. S. District No response or minimal responses were received from Fremont Union High School District and Campbell Union High School District. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: 6 87 (5 28 87) CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: ENGINEERING DEPT. SUBJECT: Award Contract for Concrete Repair for Calendar Year 1987 88 Recommended Motion: Award the contract for Concrete Repair for Calendar Year 1987. Report Summary: The City received six bids on May 27, 1987 for above project. This project was approved in 1987 -1987 budget for Maintenance Department to replace broken concrete curb and gutter and sidewalk. The lowest bid was Hydro Tech Pipe Line, Inc. of San Jose, with total bid of $60,550.00. The Engineer's estimate for this work was $68,800.00 Fiscal Impacts: $60,550.00 for gas tax funds. This project was approved 1986 1987 Budget. Attachments: Bid Summary. Motion and Vote: Staff recoimnendation 5 -0. /6D lbv.e F/0 6 a DATE: 5727 ,19 8..1. TIME: 2, 00 P.M. City of Saratoga Community Development Department IIID SUMMARY1 Sheet 1 of 2 PROJECT Concrete Repair for Calendar Year 1987 and 1988 Engineers Hydro 4 Tech B B Ambo IgJ t price err Description Quantity it price Amount Alnount k e m Aount Unit price Amount Amount -u. R-• ace concrete curbs and 29.0,E 17,400 600.0 03.0 13,800.0 19.25 11,550 21.24 12,744 24.7. 14,850 2 _gutter Construct concrete sidewalk 10,000.0..50 55,000.0 4.90 49,000 5.25 52,400 6.3. 63,500 7.0) 70,000 3 Construct concrete driveway 0.0 7.0 0.0 9.50 6.48 8.2 9.0) TOTAL 68,800.0 60,550 65,144 78,350 87,400 t DATE: 5727 ,19 8..1. TIME: 2, 00 P.M. City of Saratoga Community Development Department IIID SUMMARY1 Sheet 1 of 2 PROJECT Concrete Repair for Calendar Year 1987 and 1988 DATE: 5 -27 ,198,1. TIME: 00 P.M. r-te curbs and Description lace gutter 600.0 '3.0 Construct concrete sidewalk '0,000.0•.50 Construct concrete. driveway 0. 7.0 TOTAL 68,800.0 City of Saratoga Community Development Department BID SUMMARY Engineers Quantity it P Amount 75,000 89,400 An Unit Price 31.0 7.4 8 2 ero Amoun 18,600, 74,500 93,100 Unit Price Sheet 2 of 2 PROJECT Concrete Repair for Calendar Year 1987 and 1988 Amount IPr it Amount