HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-21-1983 CITY COUNCIL AGENDAr'
CITY OF SARATOGA
Initial:
AGENDA BILL NO . ,j % Dept. Hd.
DATE: Sept., 9, 1983 (Sept. 21, 1983) C. At
DEPARTMENT: Community Development C. Mgr,
FINAL MAP APPROVAL SDR -1536,
SUBJECT: THOMAS WHITNEY, SOBEY ROAD
Issue Summary
1. The SDR -1536 is ready for final approval
2. All bonds, fees and agreements have been submitted to the City
3. All requirements for City Departments and other agencies have
been met.
Recommendation
Adopt Resolution No. 1536 -02, attached, approving the Final Map of
SDR -1536 and authorize execution of contract for improvement agreement.
Fiscal Impacts
None
Exhibits /Attachments
1. Resolution No. 1536 -02
2. Contract Agreement
3. Copy of Tentative Map
4. Status Report for Building Site Approval
5. Staff Report
Council Action
9/21: Approved on Consent Calendar 5 -0.
RESOLUTION NO. 1536 - 02
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
APPROVING BUILDING SITE OF Thomas Whitney
The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as
follows: _
SECTION 1:
The 0.9573 acre parcel "A" as shown on the Parcel Map prepared
by Hoskins Engineers Inc. and submitted to the City Engineer,
City of Saratoga, be approved as one (1) individual building
site.
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 21stday of September 19 83
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
ITY CLERK
MAYOR
r
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- 1536., Thomas Whitney
(have) (Wa,?WXYdt) been met as approved by the Planning Commission on 4 -13 -83
Listed below are the amounts, dates and City receipt numbers fo-r all required
items:
Offer of Dedication yes
Date
Submitted
9/9/83
Record of Survey or Parcel Map yes
Date
Submitted
Storm Drainage Fee' - Date Submitted
-
Receipt #
-
All Required Improvement Bonds 25,500
Date
Submitted
9/9/83
Receipt #,; -'
All Required Inspection Fees
Date
Submitted
Receipt # ITO-3
Building Site Approval Agreement yes
Date
Signed
7TO 9--
Park and Recreation Fee -
Date
Submitted
-
Receipt# -
It is, therefore, the Community Development Department recommendation that
( ) (Final) Building Site Approval for Thomas Whitney
SDR- 1536 be granted.
If Conditional Building Site Approval is recommended, it shall become un7
conditional upon compliance with the following conditions:
Condition(s)
Reason for-Non-Compliance
nUDC.A � ). bnooK
Director of Community Development
vii! Oi' CII'C1'i+J�,Ct
�'.
APPROVED BY
DATE. L
!A- _..�.:.«�
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: 4/6/83
Commission Meeting: 4/13/83
SUBJECT: SDR -1536, A -852, Thomas Whitney, 14880 Sobey Road
REQUEST: Building Site and Design Review Approval to construct a
second story addition to a single story structure which is a 50% expansion.
OTHER APPROVAL REQUIRED: None
PLANNING DATA:
PARCEL SIZE: 41,903 square feet
ZONING: R -1- 40,000
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential
NOTICE: Notice of this project has been sent to surrounding property
owners, posted on site and advertised in the Saratoga News.
SITE DATA:
SURROUNDING LAND USES: Single famiy residential
SITE SLOPE: 30
SLOPE AT BUILDING SITE: 3%
NATURAL FEATURES & VEGETATION: The site is level in topography and
contains mature Monterey Pines along the rear property line. Scattered
pines are located along northern portion of the front property line, and
and several pines and elms are located in the northeastern portion of
the rear yard.
GRADING REQUIRED: No grading is required
SETBACKS: Front - 38'
HEIGHT: 25.5 feet
Right Side - 94' Left Side - 20' Rear - 74'
Report to the Planning Commission C'
SDR -1536, A -852
SIZE OF STRUCTURE:
4/6/83
Page 2
Existing - 2,024 square feet First Floor Addition
1,570 square feet, Second Floor Addition - 1,770
square feet, Total - 5,364 square feet
FLOOR AREA: This project complies with the standard allowed floor area
of 6,200 square feet.
IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE:
34.8 %, 37% is allowed by ordinance.
COLORS & MATERIALS: Natural stained woodsiding will be utilized for
the exterior and cedar shakes are proposed for the roofing materials.
REFUSE: Good orientation, a large protion of roof area faces south.
LANDSCAPING & LIGHTING: No additional landscaping is proposed with
this project.
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 Satatoga.
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 (Categorical Ememption) was prepared and was filed with the County_
of Santa Clara Recorder's Office relative to the environmental impact
of this project, if approved under this application. Said determination
date: March 8, 1983
The Staff Report recommends approval of the tentative map for SDR -1536
(Exhibit "B" filed March 8, 1983) subject to the following conditions:
I. GENERAL CONDITIONS
Applicant shall comply with.all applicable provision 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 Specific Conditions which are hereby required and set
forth in accord with Section 23.1 of Ordinance No. 60.
Report to the Planning Commission 4/6/83
SDR -1536, A -852 Page 3.
II. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
A. Pay Storm Drainage Fee in effect at the time of obtaining Final
Approval.
B. Submit "Parcel Map" to City for Checking and Recordation
(Pay required Checking & Recordation Fees).. (If Parcel is
shown on exising map of record, submit three (3) to -scale prints).
C. Submit "Irrevocable Offer of Dedication" to Provide for a 30
foot Half- Street on Sobey Road.
D. Improve Sobey Road to City Standards, including the following:
1. Designed Structural Section 20 feet between centerline and
flowline.
2. Asphalt Concrete Berm
E. Construct Storm Drainage System as shown on the "Master Drainage
Plan" and as directed by the City Engineer, as needed to convey
storm runoff to Street, Storm Sewer or Watercourse.
F. Construct turnaround having 32 feet radius or approved equal
Using double seal coat oil and screenings or better on 6 inch
aggregate base within 100 feet of proposed dwelling.
G.. Construct Driveway Approach 16 feet wide at property line flared
to 24 feet at street paving. Use double seal coat oil and
screenings or better on 6 inch Aggregate Base.
H. Construct "Valley Gutter" across driveway or pipe culvert under
driveway as approved by the City Engineer.
I. Provide adequate sight distance and remove obstructions of view
as required at drivewayand access road intersections.
J. Watercourses must be kept fee of obstacles which will change,
retard or prevent flow.
K. Protective Planting required on roadside cuts and fills.
L. Obtain Encroachment Permit from the Department of Community
Development for driveway approaches or pipe crossings of City
Street.
M. Engineered Improvement Plans required for:
1. Street Improvements
2. Storm Drain Construction
N. Pay Plan Check and Inspection Fees as determined from Improvement
Plans.
Report to Planning Commission 4/6/83
SDR -1536, A -852 Page 4
O. Enter into Improvement Agreement for required improvements to
be completed within one (1) year of receiving Final Approval.
P. Post bond to guarantee completion of the required improvements.
III. DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTION SERVICES
A. Geotechnical ,investigation and report by licensed professional
1. Foundation
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.)
IV. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS: SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
Applicant shall, prior to Final Map Approval, submit plans showing
the location and intended use of any existing wells to the
Santa Clara Valley Water District for review and certification.
V. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS: PERMIT 'REVIEW
1. Design Review required on project prior to issuance of
building permits.
FINDINGS:
1. Avoid Unreasonable Interference with.Views & Priva
The second -story addition is not oriented so as to interfere
with the viewshed of neighboring parcels. Staff also noted no
privacy impacts to adjacent neighbors as a result of the second
story addition. The proposed addition is 74' from the property
line which is screened by a dense growth of evergreen pines.
The southern elevation faces the driveway and entrance area of
the adjacent parcels which does not create an adverse impact,
and the northern elevation faces a vacant parcel.
2. Minimize Perception of Excessive Bulk and Compatible Bulk & Height
Staff does not feel the proposed addition will impact the neigh-
borhood in terms of its bulk. The structure has been designed
with a height of 25', 5' below the maximum allowed, which-is an
average height for a two -story structure. The structure will
be finished in natural wood exterior which also tends to reduce
its visual impact.
' S
Report to the Planning Commission
SDR -1536, A -852
4/6/83
Page 5
The proposed addition will be compatible in design with surrounding
structures in the area and with the two story structure diagonally
across Sobey Road from the subject site.
3. Infills: Compatibility, Views, Privacy and Natural Features
Staff noted no impacts to views or privacy of adjacent parcels.
The proposed structure also appears compatible in both bulk and
design with neighboring homes.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve per staff report dated April 6, 1983 and
Exhbits "B & C" subject to the following conditions:
A. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits;
1. Minor modifications to the approved elevations require the
review and approval of the Permit Review Division.
APPROVED
SL /bjc
P.C. Agenda 4/13/83
1 � �
Sharon Lester`
Planner
A=DA BILL NO. J I3
DATE: September 16, 1983
DEPARTMENT:. City Manager
CITY Or SARNPOCA
Initial:
• Dept. Hd.
C. Atty_.�
SUBJECT: Federal Surplus Property Program
Issue Stmmary
C. Mgr.
Local governments are eligible to participate in the Federal Surplus Property
Program. Through this program, cities can acquire a broad vafiety of equip-
ment and supplies deemed surplus by the U.S. Government. Often times,- needed
and usable equipment can be obtained at huge savings over original prices.
With the advent of the Volunteer Emergency Preparedness Program, we expect to
greatly increase our utilization of this program in the acquisition of equipment
for administrative and maintenance purposes, as well as emergency preparedness.
The attached resolution is needed to update our designated representatives who
are authorized to participate.
Recommendation
Adopt the attached resolution.
Fiscal Impacts
Greater utilization and participation in the Federal Surplus Property Program
will result in lower cost of acquisition of needed equipment and supplies.
E:<hibits /Attachments
1. Resolution revising the authorized City representatives for Federal Surplus
Program
Council Action
9/21: Approved Resolution 804.3 on Consent Calendar 5 -0.
`1
•
RESOLUTION NO. 804.3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AUTHORIZING CERTAIN
INDIVIDUALS AS CITY REPRESENTATIVES TO ACQUIRE FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY
FROM THE CALIFORNIA STATE AGENCY FOR SURPLUS PROPERTY
WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga., County of Santa Clara, State of Californis
desires to establish its eligibility for the acquisition of Federal surplus
property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED and hereby ordered by the City Council of the
City of Saratoga that the officials and /or employees whose names, titles and
signatures are listed below shall be and are hereby authorized as our repre-
sentatives to acquire federal surplus property from the California State Agency
for Surplus Property under the Terms and Conditions listed on the reverse side
of this form.
NAME TITLE SIGNATURE
J. Wayne Dernetz City Manager
Robert S. Shook _ Community Dev. Director •
R. Stephen Peterson Finance Director
Leonard Davis Emergency Coordinator
James Appleyard Emergency Coordinator
The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Saratoga City
Council at a regular meeting held on the day of 1983, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
AC c.,,DA BILL No. 51,3
D September 16, 1983
D' AR`IT�NT: City Manager
CITY OF SAR I'OGA
Initial:
Dept. Hd.
C. Atty. _\\.._..
C. Mgr.
�17
------ ---------- ------------ ,.-- - - - - --
SUBJECT: Federal Surplus Property Program
Issue Sunmary
Local governments are eligible to participate in the Federal Surplus Property
Program. Through this p m
rogra, cities can acquire a broad variety of equip-
ment and supplies deemed surplus by the U.S. Government. Often times,- needed
and usable equipment can be obtained at huge savings over original prices.
With the advent of the Volunteer Emergency Preparedness Program, we expect to
greatly increase our utilization of this program in the acquisition of equipment
for administrative and maintenance purposes, as well as.emergency preparedness.
The attached resolution is needed to update our designated representatives who
are authorized to participate.
Recomnendation
Adopt the attached resolution.
•
Fiscal Impacts
Greater utilization and participation in the Federal Surplus Property Program
will result in lower cost of acquisition of needed equipment and supplies.
S:�h ihi is /Attachments
1. Resolution revising the authorized City representatives for Federal Surplus
Program
Council Action
•
t10END1 BILL NO. S, Initial:
Dept. Hd _
DATE: September 13, 1983 (Sept. 21, 1983) C. Attu
D�A7I':vT: Community Development
C. Mgr.
SUBJECT: COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT - ROUTE 85 ALTERNATIVE STUDY
Issue SL =ary
The State is proceeding with the study to analyze the alternative trans-
portation facilities within the West Valley Corridor (Route 85). Local
agencies have agreed to participate in the cost of this study to ensure
participation in the decision- making process relative to the alternatives.
State has provided Cooperative Agreement relative to the study and the
financing.
Recci=endaticn
Authorize Mayor to execute agreement for City.
Fiscal Im=acts
Not to exceed $25,000 without amendment to Coo erative A reement
during'Fiscal 1983 -'84, which has been budgeted). g ($15,000
Exh i bi is /A tt,chrrrs is
1. Cooperative Agreement
2. Staff Report dated September 13, 1983
ccuncil %Ction
9121: Callon /Fanelli moved to approve. Passed.5 =0..
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVING A COOPERATIVE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF
SARATOGA CONCERNING THE ROUTE 85 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga wishes to ensure full local participation in the
decision - making process with respect to the Alternatives Analysis for Route 85;
and
WHEREAS, in order to accomplish this goal the City Council did, on November 3, 1982,
agree to participate in the cost of the Alternatives Analysis up to a maximum of
$25,000; and
WHEREAS, it was understood by all parties that the Department of Transportation of
the State.of.California would prepare an agreement between itself and the various
cities involved specifying the exact terms under which the Alternatives Analysis
would be conducted; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds the aforementioned agreement, which is attached
as Exhibit A, to be satisfactory.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Saratoga
hereby approves the aforementioned agreement and authorizes the Mayor to execute
the same on its behalf.
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 day of
1983, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Mayor
MP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
001
0 V
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
11 /`none
04- SC1 -85 4.1/17.9
04134- 485000
Rte. 87 to Stevens Cr. Blvd.
Transportation Study
Dist. Agmt. No. 4- 0880 -C
Document No. SC1 -43-
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, ENTERED INTO ON 1983,
is between the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through its
Department of Transportation, referred to herein as STATE, and
CITY OF SARATOGA,
a body politic and a municipal
corporation of the State of
California, referred to herein
as CITY.
RECITALS
(1) The then existing California Highway Commission by
resolutions dated October 17, 1956, November 25, 1957, and
September 27, 1961, adopted the location for State Highway Route
85 between Route 101 (Monterey Road) in San Jose and Route 101 in
Mountain View.
(2) Subsequent to said adoptions, STATE constructed
the northerly portion of said.Route 85 between Stevens Creek
Boulevard and Route 101 in Mountain View and also acquired a
substantial portion of the real property which would be required
for construction of the remainder of the facility.
(3) Although transportation development alternatives
for the southerly portion.of the Route 85 corridor easterly of
Route 87 have recently been evaluated, there has been no recent
comprehensive evaluation of possible transportation facility
development in the segment of Route 85 between Route 87 and
Stevens Creek Boulevard.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Lirmgnn
(4) Responsible representatives of Santa Clara County
and various. local and regional governmental agencies likely to be
affected by development of a transportation facility in the Route
85 corridor have expressed the need for a reevaluation of the
choice of transportation mode or modes to be developed in this
segment of the corridor.
(5) STATE is willing to undertake a study and to
prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement /Draft
Environmental Impact Report (DEIS /DEIR) covering transportation
alternatives along the adopted alignment of State Highway Route
85 between Route 87 and Stevens Creek. Boulevard, referred to
hereinafter as "STUDY"
(6) STATE is willing to contribute one -half of the
total cost of STUDY, provided that the various local affected
agencies will collectively contribute the other half of the cost
and will advise.and assist STATE in the conduct of said STUDY.
(7) A Policy Advisory Board composed of locally
elected officials representing affected agencies including CITY
has been formed to advise and assist STATE in the conduct of
STUDY.
(8) A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), also known
as the Project Development Team (PDT), consisting of staff
members from each of the affected agencies, including CITY and
STATE, has also been formed to advise and assist the Policy
JAdvisory Board and STATE in the conduct of STUDY.
-2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
I
24
25
(9) STUDY will be conducted in general conformance
with applicable Federal and State requirements and with a Work
Program developed by the TAC in consultation with the Policy
Advisory Board. The Work Program may be amended or revised from
time to time as necessary to meet changing conditions without
affecting the terms of this agreement.
(10) This agreement sets forth the terms and conditions
under which CITY and STATE will cooperate and jointly participate
in STUDY.
l "_TT- r
STATE AGREES:
(1) To act as Lead Agency by providing the necessary
professional and technical staff services as required for STUDY
and for public displays, meetings and hearings to be conducted by
STATE, and-to bear STATE's share of the expense thereof.
(2) To keep the Policy Advisory Board and the TAC
informed of progress of and significant developments affecting
STUDY.
(3) To bear 50 percent of the total cost of STUDY; but
in no event shall STATE's total obligation for costs under this
agreement exceed the amount of $500,000; provided that STATE may,
at its sole discretion, in writing, authorize a greater amount.
II -3
4rnRn�
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
!i r' MQ^,
(4) Upon completion of the STUDY to furnish CITY with
a final statement of the acutal cost. of STUDY; and to refund to
CITY any amount of CITY's deposits, required in Section II,
Article (3), remaining after actual costs to be borne by CITY
have been deducted.
SECTION II
CITY AGREES:
(1) To cooperate with, advise, assist and participate
with STATE in STUDY including:
(a) Maintaining CITY representation on the
Policy Advisory Board and on the TAC.
r.
(b) Fostering effective community and public.
participation.
(c) Furnishing CITY staff time to provide
information on community desires, local
land use and transportation plans, and
other relevant information readily
accessible to CITY's staff.
(2) To bear 2.25 percent of the total costs of STUDY
(said costs do not include the cost of CITY staff time which may
be expended on STUDY); but in no event shall CITY's total
obligation for said costs under this agreement exceed the amount
of $25,000; provided that CITY may at its sole discretion, in
writing, authorize a greater amount upon request by STATE
pursuant to the provisions of Section III, Article (7) of this
—4—
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
agreement.
(3) To deposit $7,500 with STATE within 25 days of
receipt of billing from STATE, which billing will be forwarded
upon execution of this agreement by STATE. To make a second
deposit of $7,500 during December 1983 within 25 days of receipt
of billing, which billing will be forwarded by STATE on or about
December 1, 1983. To make a final deposit of $7,500 during July
1984 within 25 days of receipt of billing, which billing will be
forwarded by STATE on or about July 1, 1984-
SECTION III
IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
(1) All obligations of STATE under the terms of this y`
agreement are subject to the appropriation of resources by the
Legislature and the allocation of resources by the California
Transportation Commission.
(2) Should any portion of STUDY be financed with
Federal funds or State gas tax funds, all applicable procedures
and policies relating to the use of such funds shall apply
notwithstanding other provisions of this agreement.
(3) STUDY will be conducted in general conformance
with applicable Federal and State requirements and with a Work
Program developed by the TAC in consultation with the Policy
Advisory Board. The Work Program may be modified or amended from!
time to time to meet changing conditions without affecting the
terms of this agreement.
i1.. -0^-
11 -5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23.
24
25
4cn ,9ng
m
(4) The DEIS /DEIR to be prepared as a part of STUDY
shall be prepared in accordance with all applicable Federal and
State laws, rules and procedures.
(5) In the event that the total deposits, including
the STATE's share, exceed the actual final cost of the STUDY, the
excess thereof shall be refunded to the participating agencies ir
the same proportion as their respective deposits. The actual
final cost of STUDY will be determined upon completion of all
work and final accounting of all related charges, and shall be
the sum of the following:
(a) Salary costs computed in accordance with
STATE's standard accounting procedures.
(b) Travel and per diem expenses including
charges for the use by such employee of
State vehicles, if required, in accordance
with rates setup by the State Board of
Control Rules under Title 2, Section 706.
(c) Functional indirect and administrative
overhead costs computed in accordance with
STATE's Accounting Manual Chapter 11, Table
6 -2.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
4cnRn9
(6) In the event that the actual final cost of the
STUDY exceeds twice the total deposits from all participating
agencies by no more than one percent of the estimated total cost
of STUDY, the Cities of Saratoga, Campbell, Cupertino, and the
Town of Los Gatos shall equally bear the said excess. Should the
actual final cost of the STUDY exceed twice the total deposits by
more than one percent of the estimated total cost of STUDY, STATF
and all the participating agencies shall endeavor to agree upon 2
mutually agreeable method of financing.the overrun. For purposez
of this agreement, the estimated.total cost of STUDY is
$1,000,000.
(7) In the event that one or more of the agencies that
have previously indicated a willingness to participate in the
cost of STUDY fail to execute an agreement with STATE, or fail tc
make one or more of the required deposits, it is the intent that
STUDY will be undertaken and completed by the remaining
participating agencies. If the cost of STUDY cannot be reduced
sufficiently to compensate for the loss of expected deposits,
each of the remaining participating agencies may be requested to
increase its pro -rata share to make up for the missing portions
of funding for STUDY. If one or more of the remaining
participating agencies are unable, for any reason, to increase
their deposits if so requested, STATE may, at STATE's option,
cancel STUDY and refund all unexpended deposits to the
participating agencies in proportion to their respective deposits
-7-
A
1 (8) Neither STATE nor any officer or employee thereof
2 shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by
3 reason of anything done or omitted to be done by CITY under or in
connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to
5 CITY under this agreement. It is also agreed that, pursuant to
6 Government Code Section 895.4, CITY shall fully indemnify and
7 hold STATE harmless from any liability imposed for injury (as
8 defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of
9 anything done or omitted to be done by CITY under or in
10 connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to
11 CITY under this agreement.
12
(9) Neither CITY nor any officer or employee thereof,
�3 shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by
14 reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or
15 in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction not
16 delegated to CITY under this agreement. It is also agreed that,
17 pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, STATE shall be fully
18 indemnify and hold CITY harmless from any liability imposed for
19 injury (as defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by
20 reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or
21 in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction not
22 delegated to CITY under this agreement.
23
2 x
25
-8-
4cr)Rn�
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(10) Upon completion of STUDY, ownership and title to
all reports, documents, maps, plans and any other materials
produced or acquired as a part of STUDY will automatically be
vested in the STATE and no further agreement will be necessary to
transfer ownership to the STATE.
(11) This agreement may be altered or amended from time
to time by mutual consent of the parties hereto.
(12) This agreement shall terminate upon completion of
STUDY or on December 31, 1987, whichever is earlier.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF SARATOGA
Department of Transportation
LEO TROMBATORE
Director of Transportation By
By
BUR BURCH C. BA HTOL
Distict Director
11 -9-
Attest:.
or
y trier
r 1
•
Y �
z 3 E
kl[ll�{� �`gsi2al� vy
,3 Qq
o
Il�m�C�
3s
REPORT TO MAYOR AND
CITY COUNCIL
DATE: 9-13-83
COUNCIL MEETING: 9-21-83
SUBJECT' COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT ROUTE 85 ALTERNATIVE STUDY
You have previously approved the participation in the cost of
an alternative study relative to the West Valley Corridor to
the extent of $25,000.
The State has prepared a Cooperative Agreement to implement the
study and the cost sharing.
Review of the agreement reveals the following:
1. State is to be the lead agency making the study and
preparing the Draft EIR /EIS relative to the trans-
portation alternatives.
2. State will contribute one -half of the cost if local
agencies pay the other half (Saratoga share not to
exceed $25,000).
3. Provides for Policy Advisory Board made up of locally
elected officials.
4. Provides for a Technical Advisory Committee made up
of local agency staff members.
S. City to deposit an initial $7500 to State within
25 days of billing, and to make a second deposit of
$7500 in December of 1983 and a final deposit of
$7500 during July of 1984.
6. If the cost of the study exceeds twice the total
deposits from all participating agencies by no
more than to of the estimated total cost of study,
Saratoga, Campbell, Cupertino and Los Gatos shall
equally bear the said excess. If the actual costs
are more than 1%, the State and all participating
Report to Mayor
re Cooperative Agreement
Route 85 Alternative SJudy
September 13, 1983
Page 2
agencies shall endeavor to agree upon a method of
financing the overrun. The estimated total cost is
$1 million.
7. There is provision in paragraph 7 for backup cost
participation should one or more of the agencies
previously agreeing to participate fail to follow
through with such participation.
8. There are mutual hold - harmless clauses provided
between the State and City.
9. There is provision for amending this agreement by
mutual consent.
10. The agreement terminates under its own terms on Decem-
ber 31, 1987.
Rc ert S. S o0
Director of Community Development
RSS:cd
Cl""_ OP
A="DA- BILL NO.
DATE: September 8, 1983 (September 21, 1983)
D�AIrI':vT: Community Development
Initial:
Dept. fki_
4e__
C. Atty.
C. Mgr.
sU3TrCr:A -898, Blue Hills Center, Saratoga - Sunnyvale Rd.; Appeal of Denial of
- -M - - -- Request for Design Review_ of Freestanding Sign; (F.ox and Carskadon)
Issue SL --mary
Applicant requested Design Review Approval of a 24 square foot gold and black
freestanding sign at the Blue Hills Shopping Center. The sign was to be
22'4" in height but the applicant expressed a willingness to lower the sign
(to possibly 20' in conformance with the height restriction of the zoning -
district) and to surround the poles with some sort of wood treatment. A
previous Design Review Approval of the sign program for the center permitted
only off -white and brown colors in the signage with the 27 sq. ft. existing
freestanding sign proposed to remain.
Recc=endaticn
The Planning Commission denied the request for the propose.d yellow and black
sign, expressing concerns about the height, materials and colors -of the sign.
Staff recommended denial of the design review application.
.1
Fiscal Im=acts
N/A
Exhibits /Att_-ch.^r_nts
1. Letter of Appeal
2. Staff Reports for A -898 and A -798
3. Resolution A- 898 -1
4. Planning Commission Minutes dated August 10, 1983
5. Exhibit "B"
6.. Correspondence received on the project
Council Action
9/21: Clevenger /Mallory m ved.to uphold Planning Commission and deny appeal. Passed 5 -0.
RECEIVED
AUG 191983
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
APPEAL APPLICATION
rite Received:
nearing Date:
Fee : () flu--
CITY USE ONLY
Name of
Appellant:
Fox &
Carskadon Realtors.
Address:
12029
Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd.
Telephone:
408- Q96-110O
Name of
Applicant:
Kramer
& Associates, Martin Kramer President.
Project
File No.:
A 898
( reference A 798)
Project
Address:
12029
Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd.
Project
Description:
A Free
Standing Interior Illuminated Sign
Decision Being Appealed: Planning Commission decision of August 10th, 8' .
Grounds for the Appeal (Letter may be attached):
See Attached Letter.
Ap ellant's Sign ture
*Please do not sign this application until it is presented at the
City offices. If you wish specific people to be notified of this
appeal please list them on a separate sheet.
THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF
THE DATE OF THE DECISION.
C4,U,4,. -4-f
C
KRAMER &
ASSOCIATES, INC.
1602 SOUTH PARKER ROAD, DENVER, COLORADO 80231
DIRECT MAIL TO: P.O. BOX 6302, DENVER, COLORADO 80206
408 -295 -5047
4271 Norwalk Dr.
San Jose, Ca. 95129
August 18th, 1983
Office of the City Council
Saratoga, Ca 95070
Gentleman;
RECEIVED
AUG 191983
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Attached is our application for appeal of an adverse decision rendered
against us and our client Fox & Carskadon Realtors, owners of the
property at at 12029 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd, Saratog_o, Ca 95070, by
the Planning Commission at their August 10th, 1983 meeting in a matter
regarding a free standing sign at the above address.
At a Planning Commission_ meeting, November 17th, 1981, Fox a_ Carskadon
was granted Design Review approval for " modifications of an existing
commercial building, and approval of a new sign.
Said sign to be
a. Free Standing
b. Interior Illuminated.
c. Maximum allowable square footage 24.
d. Dade of ii;.etal and plastic.
e. Background colors of off white with 'rown letters.
About June 20th, 1083, an application was submitted to the Planning
Department for such a sign, with one change, Fox & Carskadon requested
permission to use their corporate colors on the sign, ie gold /yellow
background and black letters.
At the planning Commission meeting on August 10th, 1933, not
only wAS the color request rejected, so too was the entire sign
criteria
It is these too decisions we are appealing.
Duplicate notification to be sent to
Martin Kramer; President
KRAMER G ASSOCIATES
Suite 310
4271 Norwalk Dr.
San Jose, Ca 95129
� c
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
Cp" F rf Sasattooga,�(1/
DATE: 8 -OS-83
8-10-83
Commission - -- Commission Meeting:
SUBJECT: A- 898 Emmet Cashin /Robert Dean - Turner
Blue Hills Shopping Center Freestanding Sign
REQUEST: Design Review approval to construct a gold and black
freestanding sign.
OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED: Sign Permit.
PLANNING DATA:
ZONING: C -N Neighborhood
Commercial
SITE DATA:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Commercial P -D (Planned Development)
mixed use
SURROUNDING LAND USES: City of Cupertino commercial to the north;
two shopping centers mixed with residential to the east and south;
single family residential,units on site zoned commercial to the
.west.
PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS:
HISTORY: The applicant received Design Review Approval for a
sign program (A -798, report attached). By this program the
applicant is entitled to 88 square feet of signage, including
a 27 square foot freestanding sign to conform to the following
characteristics:
Letter height:
Letter:
Colors: Background:
Letters:
Illumination:
Materials:
C, i t�. --4,A
911
Serif block
Off -white
Brown
Internal
Metal cabinet,
and letters
plastic background
C C,.
Report to Planning Commission 8/5/83
A -898 Page 2
A sign permit for the present Fox & Carskadon sign on the
building was issued erroneously, since the colors were not
approved with the design review applications.
SIGN HEIGHT: 2214"
SIZE OF STRUCTURE:
+ 24 square feet
COLORS & MATERIALS: Gold background with black Letters on plastic,
with interior fluorescent illumination on existing steel poles.
STAFF ANALYSIS: The original design review approval allowed signs
with off -white backgrounds and brown lettering only. These colors
fit with the earthtone concept prevalent in the City's design
review approvals and would also be compatible with the signs in the
adjacent Saratoga commercial signing.
Additionally, the new freestanding signs that have been approved
for shopping centers have been low monument -type signs (i.e., Oak
Creek, Park Saratoga, Westgate Corners, and the Village Square).
Staff does not feel that the proposed sign meets the following
zoning ordinance objective or General Plan goal:
Section 7.1(c) To promote stable, attractive commercial development
which will afford a pleasant shopping environment and will comple-
ment the essential residential character of the City.
CI.4.0 Strive for aesthetically pleasing views from all roads in
Saratoga.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Deny the proposed application per the Staff
Report dated August .5, 1983.
If the Commission wishes to approve the application staff would
suggest a monument -type sign similar to the adjacent two retail
ares, Oak Creek and Park Saratoga.
If the Commission wishes to approve this application, staff
suggests the following conditions:
1. Height of sign to be no greater than the existing building,
20 feet.
2. The colors be modified to off -white background with brown
lettering.
3. Illumination is to be turned off by 10:00 p.m. Staff shall
review lighting intensity after 30 days.
4. Steel poles to be covered with wooden material.
5. Replace face of existing Fox and Carskadon sign on wall with
appropriately colored sign.
C
Report to Planning Commission
A -898
Approved:
Kathy Kerdus
Planner
P. C. Agenda:
KK;3d
8/5/83
Page 3
y
(i
1111 1 - � F Val ��111
011 q
1111111rsl T-1
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
City of Sarat09 J
*(amended 11/17/81`,
APPROVE BY: =
DATE: 11/12/81
DATE ) Commission Meeting: 11/17/81
SUBJECT A -798 Emmet J. Cashin, Jr. et al, (Blue Hills Shopping
Center) 12029 Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road
REQUEST: Design Review Approval for the modification of the
exterior of an existing commercial building and approval
of a new sign.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
This project is a Class 1 categorical
exemption according to State E.I.R.
Guidelines.
PUBLIC NOTICING: This project does not require a public hearing
under current ordinances.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
Commercial - Planned Development
ZONING: "C -N" (Neighborhood - Commercial)
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
STTF. SIZE:
SITE SLOPE:
2.5 acres +
2%
0
HEIGHT OF STRUCTURE: 20'
City of Cupertino, commercial to the
north; commercial to the east; Calabazas
Creek and mixed commercial /residential to
the south; single - family residential unit
on site zoned commercial to the west.
SETBACKS: Rear: 152' Left side: 93' Right side: 18' Front 62'
STAFF ANALYSIS: The applicant is proposing exterior modifica-
tions to improve the appearance of the existing
main building and a new sign program. No additions to the main
building are being proposed. There is also a detached barber
shop on the site but no modifications are proposed for the
r� "Report to Plannin� ;ok -ssion
A -798
t 11/12/81
Page 2
exterior of that building. There will be some new landscaping
proposed to the rear of the'barber shop. The main building now
contains a retail store, a beauty salon, restaurant and real
estate office as well as some vacant space.
The most significant modification proposed is the addition of a
4' high redwood parapet and facia along the existing eave line
of the building. This will allow roof equipment to be screened.
The existing built -up roof will be replaced.
The parking lot has been repaved and restriped recently. A
total of 57 parking spaces has been provided on the site. Staff
has calculated that 50 parking spaces are required by square
footage of the building assuming the unoccupied spaces are
used for retail uses (excluding restaurants). This leaves seven
parking spaces for employees which may not be sufficient for the
site depending on the nature of the uses in the unoccupied
space (4785 sq. ft.). However, if 200 of the unoccupied space
is used for storage 5 fewer spaces would be required by square
footage since storage area is not included in ordinance parking
calculations. There would then be more parking available for
employees and thus sufficient parking for the site.
However, no loading berths are provided on the site. Section
11.5 of the ordinance requires 1 loading berth for commercial
developments between 5,000 to 12,500 sq. ft. of gross floor
area. The site plan should be modified to create a loading
berth near the main building.
The frontage of the building is about 176' long. One -half square
foot of signage per lineal foot of building frontage is permitted
by ordinance. The main structure is therefore entitled to 88
sq. ft. of signage. The applicant is proposing 91.3 sq. ft. of
new signage plus the 27 sq. ft. encompassed by the existing
freestanding sign. The signage proposed will have to be reduced
to comply with ordinance standards. The sign program proposed
by the applicant will exhibit the following characteristics:
Letter Height: 9"
Letter Style: Serif block
Colors: Background: Off -White
Letters: Brown
Illumination: Internal
Materials: Metal cabinet; plastic background
and letters
Staff has no problem with the sign program proposed as long as
a consistent letter style is used and the signs comply with
ordinance size limitations.
It should be noted that rental trucks and trailers are stored on
site, but not obstructing any parking. Staff would recommend
Re p ort to Plannin L_
.o a_lssion 11/12/81
A-798 A -798 t
Page 3
that these vehicles be removed or screened from view. The
barber shop in site also has a.moving sign which is prohibited
by ordinance and should be removed.
The rear of the building will be painted as well as the front
but Staff would suggest that further detailing be added to the
rear elevation to make the rear as attractive as the front. Wood
slats should be inserted in the chain link fence around the air
conditioning unit to screen it from view.
The southern portion of the site is subject to flooding during
a 100 year flood. This issue will need to be addressed when the
applicant eventually redevelops the site.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve per Staff Report dated November 12,
1981 and Exhibits "B ", "C" and "D" subject
to the following conditions:
1. A revised site plan shall be submitted showing a loading
berth. Said plan shall be reviewed and approved by Staff
prior to issuance of building permits.
2. A revised sign program complying with ordinance size require-
ments shall be submitted for Staff review and approval prior
to issuance of sign permits.
3. The owner shall provide a copy of the approved sign program
to all tenants and will ensure compliance with the sign
program.
4. A consistent letter style shall be used throughout the sign
program.
5. The air conditioning unit to the rear of the main structure
shall be screened by the insertion of wood slats through the
chain link fence surrounding the air conditioning unit.
*
6. The.- mo..ving -sign - attached -to -the - barber -shop -aha €l -be - removed
p -ricer- -to - issuance -o€ - but €drag - permits. (Deleted)
* 7. Rental vehicles stored on site shall be removed within six
months..
COMMENTS:
1. If the Commission wishes to improve the appearance of the
rear of the structure by further detailing, that can be
conditioned at this time. Also, the Commission may determine
that the barber shop should be improved in appearance and can
make that ajc�ondition.
Approved:
Michael Flor Asst. Planner
P. C. Agenda: 11/17/81
MF /clh *as amended at Planning Commission meeting 11/17/81.
IiESIG:i r.�IL,r C
.FIEF M: A -898
RESOLUTION N'0 . A - 8 9 8 -1
CITY OF SARATOGA PLA_MNING Ca- zliSSIm
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ARE, the City of Saratoga Planning Counission has received an application
=.for Design Review Approval of a free - standing sign at the southwest
corner of Prospect Road and Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road
and
'- -hHEZFAS, the applicant 0=1 - (has .:not) met the burden of proof required to
-•-support his said application,
' • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that-after careful consideration of the site
-plan, architectural dzawirgs, landscape plans and other exhibits subrutted,"in cennec-
-- tion with this matter, the application of FOX AND CARSKADON (ENMET CASHIN)
:for Design Review Approval be and the same is hereby C ig&jf $
• ) der -
( wed) subject to
the following conditions:
Per the Staff Report dated August 5, 1983.
''PASSED AD ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Co m. ui ssion, State of
-:.California, this 10th day of _AUQUst 19
8 3• by the
follo,Adng roll call vote: s
AYES: Commissioners Bolger, Crowther, Hlava, McGoldrick, Nellis,
Schaefer and Siegfried
-NOES: None
:.AES7"%T: None
ATTEST:
AL
cr ra17 i' a.`LI111gi= L��;;.ni -lon
. 3 -
Qiain,�rl, a using Lciiu `iss 6n
Planning Commission Page it
Meeting Minutes 8/10/83
UP -537 (cont.)
material today which would mitigate the concern of Condition #1. They explained
that this is a modification to the plans that were previously submitted by the
applicant. The required walkway was discussed, and the location of the asphalt
and turf was explained.
The public hearing was opened at 9:31 p.m.
Roger Evans, of St. Andrews School, explained that the plans were being changed
because they now have the money to upgrade their existing facility. He des-
cribed the uses and the changes being made.
Father Sneary of St. Andrews stated that they did not intend to restrict the
neighborhood children from using the facilities. fie commented that the soft-
ball use would be no more intense than that during the last few years. He
urged the Commission to approve this so that the changes could be completed
before the beginning of school.
Warren Heid, architect, addressed the previous landscape plan and the recent
submittal. The pathway was discussed, and Staff noted that, while the Commis-
sion had not required a specific hard surface type of sidewalk or pathway, they
did require that an area be provided. Staff explained that the landscaping has
now encroached into that area 100% and the sprinkling system has been installed
immediately behind the curb and gutter. Therefore soon there will not be a
suitable walkway there, and any approval should include the provision that the
material be removed. Mr. Heid commented that this material had been planted in
error and it is being removed for 10 feet.
The legal noticing to the neighbors was discussed, and it was clarified that
it only mentioned the asphalt material and did not mention the additional equip-
ment. Discussion followed on the use. It was the consensus that the use appears
to be much more intense with this application and the neighbors across the
street should be notified accordingly.
Bert Toevs, 13120 Via Madronas, urged the Commission to approve this application
and stated that he feels it would be an important addition to that area.
It was directed that this be continued to an adjoined regular meeting on August
16, 1983, and Staff was requested to notify the neighbors of the proposed use
and changes.
DESIGN REVIEW
10. A -898 - Fox and Carskadon Center (formerly Blue Hills Center), Request for
Design Review Approval for a free - standing sign at the southwest
corner of Prospect Road and Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road
Staff explained the proposal, stating that it was not consistent with the sign
program approved for the site or with what has been approved in that area. They
also noted that there is an existing sign within the shopping center that does
not conform with the approved sign program.
Martin Kramer, representing Fox and Carskadon, gave a presentation on the pro-
posed sign and submitted a sample. He indicated that they would like to con-
tinue with the corporate colors. The height of the sign was discussed, along
with the height and colors of other approved signs in shopping centers.
Commissioner Crowther commented that he feels this proposal is not appropriate,
especially since this is the entrance to the City. He moved to deny A -898, per
the Staff Report. Commissioner Hlava seconded the motion, which was carried
unanimously 7 -0.
Chairman Schaefer commented that she feels the vote is unanimous.because the
trend has been to much shorter signs, less commercial and more natural looking.
Commissioner Hlava added that the Commission might be amenable to having the
applicant put their diamond with their lettering as their logo somewhere on a
monument sign, but not on a pole. Commissioner Siegfried suggested a mustard
color with black letters in wood, which would preserve what the applicant is
trying to do and would still be a very attractive sign. The 10 -day appeal
period was noted.
z1
- 4 -
u'
MER
SSOCIATES, INC.
1602 SOUTH PARKER ROAD, DENVER, COLORADO 80231
DIRECT MAIL TO: P.O. BOX 6302, DENVER, COLORADO 80206
408- 296 -5047
4271 Norwalk Dr.
San Jose, Ca 95129
June 25th, 1983
Ms Kathy Kerdus
PLANNER
CITY OF SARATOGA
13777 Fruitvale Ave,
Saratoga, Ca 95070
Dear Kathy;
Re Fox & Carskadon Center/
Blue Hills Center
In the package that I submitted for Design Review of a new sign for
Fox & Carskadon, I enclosed a copy of a letter given me by their
architect, Mr. Warren Heid.
In this letter, dated November 1981, it indicates that some sort of
an agreement has been reached between the City, and Fox & Carskadon
regarding the allowable signage for that free standing sign, ie
27 square feet.
The design I have submitted, totals less than 24 square feet . In
view of this previous agreement, is there any way that we might
hurry along; the approval for the new sign ?
I am sure that both Fox & Carskadon and I would most appreciate any
help that you might be able to extend us.
Mery truly yours.
'Partin J. Kramer
0
y
WARREN B. HEIR AIA
A N D A S S O C I A T E S
A R C H IT E C T S . P L A N N E R S
1 4630 BIG BASIN WAY . P.O. BOX 14 . SARATOGA . CALIFORNIA 95070 . 867 -9365
MODIFICATIONS TO DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION
REMODEL' ING OF BLUE HILL CENTER
SARATO(I.a- SUNNYVALE ROAD, SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA
i! I
Date: November 6, 11981 _
I if
The apllication shall have the following changes and modifications to
meet the requirements of the oridnance.
Parking': One (1)_loading space shall -of added at the rear
the�build-
ing and'parallel with the edge of the pavement at the back edge
of the pavement.
Signs: The total square footage of the signs shall be reduced to 89 sq.
feet from 123 sq.feet since the footage if for the building and
not the site.
The Fox and Carskadon, Realtors sign shall be approved for sign
size and text with the application.
The signsMlfor the south elevation shall be limited to three (3)
'signs of four (4) sq,feet each, The signs other than the Fox
and Carskadon sign shall be two (2) at six (6) sq. feet each
and one (1) at ten (10) sq.feet.
The balance of the square footage shall be for the existing free
standing sign of twenty -seven (27) sq.feet approximately.
If barber pole signs are considered ac moving s Si., t-
.g �
ornamental and traditional to these United • State1
s, it shall be
removed.
Warren B. Heid AIA
Architect for project
4oR -2Q6 -5047
4271 Norwalk Dr.
San Jose, Ca 95129
September 21, 19P3
Ms. petsie Cory
Sceretary to
The City Council
Saratoga, Ca 95070.
Dear Ms Cory;
Qk2ft.9V
S LEAP 2 11983
Ny company, Kramer ?- Associates, of the above address, has been
working with
Fox & Carskadon- Realtors
12029 Saratoga Sunnyvale Rd.
Saragota, Ca 95070
On revisions to a free standing, interior illuminated, plastic and
metal sign now locatied on the property at the above address.
We applied to Design Review, and appeared at the August 10th meeting,
and were denied our application.
We have appealed that decision, and are to appear before the City
Council tonight.
Because of information recently received by our company, we have
learned that it may be possible to request that the city Council
refer our application to a work /study group.
We do make such a request.
Very truly yours,
Yartin J. Kramer
Account Representative.
MJK;eg
The reason for our request for a work /study group rather than
the City Council Presentation.........
The November 191 Planning Commission approval for modifications
of an existing commercial building;, and a. sign program
seemed.........
to leave in tact the existing freestanding
interior illuminated
plastic and metal si,=,n.
Since it is our request to make changes to this sign,
changes there were not specified or detailed in that November 9-1
approval.....
',y'e think it advantageous for all concerned, to work within a
Iud,y group.......
� CITY OF SARATOGA
Initial:
AGENDA BILL NO. Dept. Hd.
DATE: Sept. 12, 1983 (Sept. 21, 1983) C. Atty.
DEPARTMENT: Community Development C. Mgr,
SUBJECT: TRACT 6528, PARKER RANCH, BLACKWELL HOMES, FARR RANCH ROAD.
REVERSION TO ACREAGE
Issue Summary
Blackwell is requesting that contigious lots 10 and 11 (Lots of Tract 6528)
be reverted to acreage as shown on the Parcel Map, so that the owner
can have a suitable building site. All street improvements were
completed under Tract 6528, Parker Ranch.
Recommendation
1. Conduct a Public Hearing on reversion to acreage.
2. Determine the merits of the request.
3. Staff recommends approval of reversion to acreage subject to
the appropriate findings of Section 66499.16 of Subdivision
Map Act. and adoption of Resolution No.
Fiscal Impacts
None
Exhibits /Attachments
1. Resolution No.
2. Proposed Parcel Map
3. Letter of request from applicant
4. Chapter 6, of the Subdivision Map Act relating to reversion to
acreage.
Council Action
9/21: Fanelli/Moyles moved to adopt resolution 2093 as amended, making required findings.
Passed 5 -0.
i
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY.COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SARATOGA REVERTING TO ACREAGE CERTAIN
LOTS IN TRACT 6523, PARKER RANCH UNIT NO. 2,
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF
WHEREAS, Blackwell Homes is the sole owner of Lots Nos.
10 and 11 of Tract 6528, Parker Ranch Units No. 2; and
WHEREAS, Blackwell Homes has requested that said real pro-
perty be reverted to acreage in the manner and form as set forth
hereinafter; and
WHEREAS, on September 21, 1983 the City Council of the City
of Saratoga held a duly noticed public hearing at the request of
Blackwell Homes for said reversion to acreage, and after the closing
of said public hearing, reviewed and considered applicant's request,
staff reports, the parcel maps submitted by Jennings, McDermott &
Heiss, and other evidence presented to the Council at said public
hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga
HEREBY RESOLVES as follows:
1. The City Council makes the following findings:
(a) Dedications of offers of dedication to be vacated
or abandoned by the reversion to acreage are un-
necessary for present or prospective public `
purposes.
(b) All owners of an interest in the real property
being reverted to acreage have consented to said
reversion to acreage.
(c) No lots shown on the final map or parcel map have
been sold within five years from the date such
map was filed for record.
2. Having made the above findings:
(a) Lots 10 and 11 are combined into one lot and
returned to acreage.
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 21st day of September, 1983, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
MAYOR
BLACKWELL HOMES
• P.O. BOX 817 125 EAST BUNNYOAKB AVENUE
• C A M P B E I- L, C A L I F. 95008 PH 378 -5340
'RXQQi ED
AUG I : 1n:s
C0.4LMU��� pEVElppryjEN�.
August 10, 1983
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
RE: Lots 10 - 11
Tract No. 6528
Parker Ranch, Unit No. 2
ATTN: Arjan
Assistant City Engineer
Gentlemen:
We hereby request that the two captioned lots
be reverted to acreage in order to have a
more suitable building site.
If there are any questions please contact me.
Yours truly, 1 I
4�' I'll : J CK R. BLACKWELL
JRB:cs
(c) Retention of any portion of required improvement security or
deposits if necessary to accomplish the purposes of this division of
local ordinance adopted pursuant,thcreto.
66199.18. Reversion shall be effective upon the final map being
filed for record by the county recorder, and thereupon all dedications
and offers of dedication not shown thereon shall be of no further
force of- effect.
66499.19. When a reversion is effective, all fees and deposits shall
be returned and all improvement security released, except those re-
taincd pursuant to Section 66499.17.
66499.20. A tax bond shall not be required in reversion pro-
ceedings.
6649920%?. A city, or county may, by ordinance, authorize a
parcel map to be filed under the provisions of this chapter for
the purpose of reverting to acreage land previously subdivided and
consisting of four or less contiguous parcels under the sanne ownership.
Any ►nap so submitted shall be accon►paniccl by evidence of title and
nonuse or lack of necessity of any streets or casements which are to
be vacated or abandoned. Any streets or casements to be left in c11•ect
after the reversion shall be adequately delineated oil the map. After
approval of the reversion by the governing body or advisory agency
the map shall be delivered to the county recorder. The filing of
the rnap shall constitute legal reversion to acreage of the land af-
fected thereby, and shall also constitute abandonment of all streets
and casenunts not shown on the rnap. The filing of the map shall
--!so constitute a merger of the separate parcels into one parcel for
purposes of this chapter and shall thereafter be shown as such on the
assessment roll subject to the provisions of Section 66445. Except as
provided in subdivision (f) of Section 66.145, on any parcel u►ap used
for reverting acreage, a certificate shall appear signed and acknow-
ledged by all parties having any rec=ord title interest in the land being
reverted, consenting to the preparation and filing of the parcel crap.
[Amended, Chapter 862, Statutes of 1975]
66499.203/. Subdivided lands may be merged and resubdividcd
without reverting to acreage by complying with all the applicable re-
quirerneerts for the subdivision of land as provided by this division and
any local ordinances adopted pursuant thereto. The filing of the final
rnap or parcel map shall constitute legal merging of the separate parcels
into one parcel and the resubdivision of such parcel, and the real prop-
erty shall thereafter be shown with the new lot or parcel boundaries on
the assessment roll. Any unused fees or deposits previously made pur-
suant to this division pertaining to the property shall be credited pro rata
towards any requirements for the same purposes which are applicable
at the time of resubdivision. Any streets or easements to be left in effect
=after the resubdivision shall be adequately delineated on the map. After
approval of the merger and resubdivision by the governing body or
.advisory agency the nral) shall be delivered to the county recorder.
The filing of the map shall constitute legal merger and resubdivision of
the land affected thcrcby, and sh:dl :J,o c•oo,6tutc abandonment of
all streets and easements not sh, �%n 4,.11 flit: ►nap.
[Added, Chapter 234, Statutes of 1977]
ARTICLE 2. EXCLUSIONS
66499.21. The superior court of the county in which a subdivision
is situated may cause all or any portion of the real property included
within the boundaries of the subdivision to be excluded from such
subdivison and the recorded rnap to be altered or vacated, in ac-
cordance with the procedures set forth ill this article.
66499.22. A proceeding for exchrsion shall be initiated by filing
a petition therefor in the olliccs of the county, survgor and count}'
Clerk of the count)' ill which the subdivision or the portion thereof
:•ought to be excluded is situated. Sue11 petition s1r:111 accurately and
distinctly describe the real property sought to be cxc•ludcd by reference
to the recorded map or by ally accurate survey, shall show the names
and addresses of all owners of real property ill the subdivision or
in the portion thereof sought to be excluded as far as the s:crrrc
are known to the petitioners, and shall sct forth the reasons for
the requested exclusion. The petition shall be signed and .verified
by the owners of at least two - thirds of the total area of the real prop-
erty sought to be excluded.
66499.23. The petition steal:' be accompanied by a new mail show-
=ing the boundaries of the subdivision as it appears after the exclusion
Mid alteration, such new map to designate as nu11rbcred or lettered
parcels those portions excluded and show the acreage of each such
parcel. If such neap can be co► rpilcrl from data available, an actual
field survey shall not be required. If such map preens with the ap-
proval of the county surveyor, a certificate b)' all engineer or surveyor
shall not be required.
66499.24. Upon the film, of a petition pur :scant to this article,
any judge of the superior court of the county in which the real prop.
erty is situated shall make an order directing the clerk of the court
'to give notice of the frlinti of the peti(ion. The notice shall he for once a
Week for a period of not less 111.111 live consecutive weeks and shall he
given by publication in sonic newspaper of general circol :rtion within the
county, or if there is no newspaper published 111crciu, by posting in
three of the principal places in the count); provided, that if such real
.properly or any portion thereof is situated within a city, the notice
shall be given by publication i.t sonic newspaper of general circulation
Within the city, or if there is no newspaper published therein, b)' post-
ing in three of the'principal places in the city. Such notice shall con-
tain a statement of the nature of the petition together with a direction
,that any person may file his written objection to the petition at any tin►c
before the expiration of the time of publication or posting. Upon cxpira-
lion of the time of publication or posting, an atlid.16t showing such
publication or posting shall be filed with the clerk of the court.
—62— —63—
1*4•1
CITY OF SARATCGA
Initial:
AGENDA BILL NO. Dept. Hd. "!
DATE: C. Atty.
DEPARTMENT: Administrative Services C. Mgr.
STMJECI': Accessibility Improvements to Government Buildings
Issue Summary
A fund balance of $12,722 in HCDA funds remains to be utilized
for the Removal of Architectural Barriers (accessibility improvements)
to the Elderly and the Handicapped.
Recommendation
Approve Accessibility Improvements to Goverment Buildings Project
as specified in the Description of Work to be Performed and Plan
Set (attached).
Fiscal Impacts
All work to be funded with HCDA Architectural Barrier Removal Program
monies.
Exhibits /Attachments
• Background Report to Mayor and City Council: Accessibility Improve-
ments
• Description of Work to be Performed; and
• Plan Set
Council Action
9/21: Fanelli /Clevenger moved to approve staff recommendation. Passed 4 -1 (Mallory
opposed).
M
o,
13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070
(408) 867-3438
26110151 A N WIN
TO: Mayor and City Council DATE: 8 -29 -83
FROM: Housing & Community. Development Coordinator
SUBJECT: Accessibility Improvements to Government Buildings
Subsequent to completing curb cuts and intersection modifications
at major pedestrian traffic locations citywide, a balance of
$12,722 remains to complete the removal of architectural barriers
at City Offices and the Council Chambers.
Proposed accessibility improvements include the following:
I. City Offices: Modification of the two small.restrooms
in the ommunity Development Department into one access-
ible, unisex restroom facility.
a.) the addition of a stall shower is included within the
Description of Work to be Performed as Alternate No. 1.
II. City Council Chambers /Civic Theatre: Modification of each
lobby restroom to be wheelchair accessible. The addition
of two metal hand railings to the front entry steps, the
installation of three exterior lights on metal posts to the
Southside of the theatre. The installation of sign posts
(2) to indicate wheelchair access points. Removal of
existing aluminum door thresholds at stage right and left
entrances (wheelchair access points) and replacement with
accessible thresholds and weatherization of both doors to
preclude storm water intrusion. Designation of Handicapped
Parking will be completed inhouse.
- CITY OF SARATOGA -
Project:
ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMENTS
TO GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE PERFORMED
PART I: DESCRIPTION
A. Convert two existing restrooms adjacent to Building and Engineering
Departments to one "Unisex" restroom including removal of architectural
barriers, and facilitation of handicapped persons per project drawings,
attached specifications, and the following:
1., Remove existing Men's and Women's restroom doors, two water
closets, metal partitions, lavatories, counters, and common
plumbing /partition wall per drawings.
2. Seal off existing Men's restroom door opening to match
existing wall construction, surfaces, and finishes.
3. Remove ceiling light fixture wall switch only leaving Men's
fixture; connect to wall switch at Women's entry door.
4. Cover walls and ceiling to match after removal of common
plumbing /partition walla
5. Reframe Women's rough door opening and install new door to
match with a net opening min. 32 in. wide, including jambs
and casing. Reinstall existing lockset. Relocate light
switch to opposite side of opening. Include stainless steel
kick plate, "UNISEX RESTROOM" sign, and bumper at new door.
6. Revise rough plumbing and install new floor mounted tank
type water closet - elongated water saver. Cadet 2108.394,
Vitreous China, siphon jet, high bowl, tank, bolt caps,
moltex seat; new wall hung urinal - Washbrook 6501.010,
Vitreous China washout type with wall hanger and "Sloan Royal"
186 flush valve; two new deck mounted lavatories - 3302.015,
Oval Horizon self rimming enameled cast iron with 22.582
combination faucets with pop up waste and lever handles.
Work shall include all angle stops, connections, and related
hardware.
7. Install new self -edged laminated plastic lavatory countertop
with splash to extend to bottom of mirror. Include one
20 amp duplex wall receptacle at countertop area. Include GFI.
8. Toilet partition system shall be Global "The Regal" floor
supported type, metal with baked enamel surfaces in the
dimensions and arrangements shown on the drawings.
9. Any voids in the floor covering shall be patched with the same
material to match color and style as closely as possible as
availability allows. (Full tiles only)
.
C ( >;
PART 1: DESCRIPTION (cont'd.)
10. Patch, spot prime, and paint any holes, voids, cracks, or
exposed new materials. DO NOT paint the entire interior.
Use oil base enamel and match existing color and texture.
11. Accessories shall be type 304 stainless steel or dull
chrome, all welded construction, satin finish on exposed
surfaces, drawn one -piece seamless flanges as follows
unless specified otherwise:
a) Toilet paper holder: reuse existing.
b) Paper towel dispenser: reuse existing
c) Soap dispenser: reuse existing
d) Paper towel receptacle: reuse existing
e) Sanitary napkin dispenser: reuse existing
f) Sanitary napkin disposal: reuse existing
g) Toilet seat cover dispenser: reuse existing
h) Pull_down utility shelf: reuse existing
i) Grab bars: (2) 36 in. x 14 in. diameter,
peened grip, satin ends Bobrick - 5507, with
concealed anchoring system for walls and
toilet compartments partitions.
j) Wall hung mirrors: reuse existing
PART II: DESCRIPTION
A. ALTERNATE NO. 1 as shown in the drawings call for an alternate
location of the urinal and the installation of a stall shower
per the following:
1. Unit shall be constructed of 2 x 4 D.Fir studs @ 16 in.
O.C. to extend from floor to ceiling with headed out door
opening facilitating obscure glass, aluminum framed, single
hung, shower door.
2. Exterior of walls shall be taped, topped, textured, 1/2 in.,
gypsum drywall painted.
3. Interior of stall shall be covered with 4 in. x 4 in. ceramic
tile in mortar on pan and from pan to ceiling (over 1/2 in.
moisture resistant sheetrock backing at walls). Drop stall
ceiling to 7 ft. 6 in. from floor and cover with 1/2 in.
moisture resistant drywall.
4. Include wall mounted "Delta" single valve washerless mixer
with riser, shower head, and all related rough -in.
5. Shower receptor shall be 4 -ply hot mopped on metal including
drain, trap, cover, and related rough -in.
6. Include (1) ceiling mounted recessed, wall switch operated,
waterproof, single bulb, incandescent light fixture at stall.
-2-
li
PART III: DESCRIPTION
A. Revise existing Men's and Women's City Theatre restrooms including
removal of architectural barriers, and facilitation of handicapped
persons per project drawings, attached specifications and the
following:
NOTE: The two restrooms are mirror images except that a urinal
exists in the Men's restroom adjacent to the entry while a water
closet exists adjacent to the entry at the Women's.--Both these
fixtures and the lavatories shall remain as they are unless
otherwise specified in the following:
1. Replace both restroom entry doors per PART I.
2. Shorten walls at partitions adjacent to entries per
drawings and cover /finish to match including paint.
DO NOT paint the entire rooms.
3. Replace (2) water closets (one at each restroom) at handicap
compartments per PART I, utilizing existing plumbing.
4. Toilet partition systems shall be as specified in PART I
and per drawings.
5. Floor work shall be as specified in PART I.
6. Accessories shall be reused as in PART I.
7. Grab bars shall be as specified in PART I (two -bars each
.per handicap compartment).
PART IV: DESCRIPTION
A. Install two sets of metal handrails at front of City Theatre
per the following:
1. Rails shall be triple pipe railing, 1 - 12 in. fabricated
steel, secured by flanges.
2. Rails shall connect to existing columns at front of Theatre
and anchor at post bases on existing concrete slab.
3. Rails shall run the length appropriate to facilitate the
three existing steps.
4. Rails shall be painted with exterior oil base enamel.
NOTE: Contractor shall submit shop drawings for City of Saratoga
approval prior to commencement of work.
-3-
C C
i9soffeWrORT10% 0",
A. EXTERIOR LIGHTING and ACCESS IGNS:
1. Install three (3) exterior lights on metal posts at locations
to be determined by the City. Lights to be high pressure
sodium and connected to existing outdoor lighting circuit.
New lights to match style and appearance of those currently
existing at Civic Center as closely as possible.
2. Install two metal sign posts indicating handicapped access at
both north and south Civic Theatre /Council Chambers stage door
entrances (location of posts to be determined by City).
3. At the above stage front entrances to the building
remove existing aluminum thresholds and replace with
new accessible thresholds as per drawings below.
New thresholds must provide as smooth as possible
wheelchair passage.
Thresh-
old
• Max. total height: i ".
(i)1.A.
• Max. vertical change at
edge "' (i) 1 . B.
• Max. bevel: 45 degrees
(i)1.B.
/41m rn�.
4. To the entrances above, add rubber sweeps to existing
doors (at bottoms) so as to prevent the entry of water.
It should be noted that both entry locations are low
spots and subject to water intrusion during periods
of heavy rain. Take any corrective measures necessary
to preclude water entry.
Li
t. Norte s
r E tJ rrH 5Nowrr �
__\
REVISIONS
Z
I/
T—
L
I �`1
r—
L
r�
G
�1-
Z
Q
Q
0
Date
Scale
Drawn !; L
Job
1) ALL- D� 5. 'ro H.6,vE 32 MII�.
=
N ET : op>gr.11 N
w.
_� .i',. -
3� � �`� F�� --•�7 � (J �..� . G, 1.1..1 PA�� �..t �
HI,:::iH
�
t-
-��'' • `
8� '-1i0" O� LESS
7) PtEn /�,��►�- SI��N SEC, u �n
r E tJ rrH 5Nowrr �
__\
REVISIONS
Z
I/
T—
L
I �`1
r—
L
r�
G
�1-
Z
Q
Q
0
Date
Scale
Drawn !; L
Job
oo
Ll
W.
{ f ti �=
-
- D Y
_ � � � �� �fr w '"}t r +�. � r r y, to ? 'r Y` j. i+. r�y +�+,a•�tiyT,�l,�, ' r.' r+ + 5.a: �` . 1
ry F`...ee.�7. F 3 f-j• .t tt. {-;L & rn i. U .sc 'j K
It
.. r �`S. r4�„ #K•�,►kY F i� 4 it'� U5.y
' Y"� is .,.I.ft�'�1�,• •s� 4.�'=/•ari�Tggi-t'i ti' j � � �tZ /;�!i x`t� �F+r' '
w''J°� }'% k }^►" a�ita74�M. 1. r�k- �� {i�[i -7' --„ ^;'!o •�'. C�• t
.} '�r• f .7 It •F _` A s+�i Yi �. j
.. ��� �, t �•o S c 1 i r4 t V rti
?n'`�i, iA+
�';f v JLr' �L�3c ij \ lti 1 1f'•_. AIN vh
+' , f`.:`• Rio ?r r `"
.50 .V,�, 'rlv li .l`�� -`�� .' -c, ��_`; , r •�'6 t�'urr ��{ �� .. e�.�. . _..
�yw �"' � �'r 'f-1 N.11✓av •�,•.• r i>::�' is 4a,t , 'd •!n,'- -r y
. •t' ,,` `r ��t. ' �� . T- r')�a ArYI ..'if. -, ,..; 'rte � *;.
Y:
f t'
, �� -'�• f�'.'�J it .� y :1,'+.w' c
' r�,rri.e OM MO. oow.•C....�/�irR ..R01R - i- ..
�
Jr.
�.liOTES +,,��: ; � �- tti+"�t,s
�* :i See Section 2 [T24 far,additlonal sanitation standards wC
z ;.N Sanitary facilities that serve buildings, facilities, or
Portions.of:buildings _ or facilities that are required by-:i
these standards to be accessible to the physically hands- ='
;tapped, shall conform to: the following requirements, ex-
¢; eept.as specifically;exempted . in other portions of this`
..b r Code };
,'� EXCEPTION:. Iitexist ngluildings or facilities. when >�{�
enforcing agency.determines that compliance with
pny building standard.urtder this section would create an !??
�'i' pnreasonable hardship, an- exception' to.such standard
:Shall be granted when equivalent facilitation
�q
vided ' ll
fr 4 2 Passageways.ieading ' to sanitary'facilitiesfshall have a • > ' y4
.
.clear access width as'specified.in Chapter 2 -33. All
doorways:leadinq to such sanitary facilities shall have:.
XA A clear unobstructed opening width of 32 inches (812.8mm):
F r xs r 8 A.1eJel'and clear!.area for -a minimum depth of 60 inches
",J1524. m) in the direction of the door swing as measured
at right.angles to the plan of.the door in its closed
{, a�?`positton,:•:and:44.inches (1117.6 mm) where the door ti'.:tt
Swings; away from the level, and clear area.
grab 'bar'and any wall or' other surface adjacent to it
r. l.; shall be free of any sharp or abrasive elements. Edges-
;.F, shalt have a minimum --radius of 1/8: inch (3.175 mm)-. ' -�;�_,
•_. ors 1. -: .,'� .�, >.. .: _ .. -, - 't,.
Y4, Toilet Room Fixtures and kccessories. The requirements '?
of this subsection shall,apply to avatory fixtures, - sT
.vani.ties, 'and built -in lavatories:
A A clear floor space 30 inches (762 mm) by 48 'inches ! 1'
(1219.2 mm) complying with Section 2 -1722, shall
a be provided in front of.a lavatory to allow a for-
approach.% -Such clear ,floor space shall ad-
bin
accessible.route and shall
underneaththe t
r,p ` 'lavatory i
Mirrors shall be mounted with the bottom edge no ' ,t
higher than 40 inches (1016 mm) from the .floor.
G •Where towel "sanitary'napkins, waste receptacles
and other similar dispensing and disposal fixtures :
are provided, at-least one of each type shall be . 'r,
Y "'" j�' located; with all operable parts, including coin
..Slots, within 40 inches (1016 mm). from the finished
:floor s "1 rx � 1 _ .. x: r. • y
Toi let ' tissue dispensers shall beaocated on the wall
within 12 inches (304.8 mm) of the front edge of the
toilet. seat. ,;:.F- :✓_K•,•�..., - _ ;•: - t•, ..
n:r n �
Wherel r,ala are provided, at least one shall have a
lear glpor_spa:ce..30 inches (762 mm) by 48 inches.•
= 5r, Hater closet compartments, shall be equipped with a door .,
has`an.automatic
'.�- •r. :; "�
".,that closing device, and shall have a
.tlear. unobstructed
"
opening width of 32 inches (812.8 mm)
!'i'; •,.<:a•when located at the end and 34 inches' (863.6 mm) when
ocated at the side
with the door.positioned at an angle
�.bef 90 degrees from its - closed position. Except for door
{';,`.,�; }_opening widths and door swings, a clear unobstructed .:
�= �',•_�;� - ;�:=
• (:..access not less. than 44 inches (1117.6 mm) shall be-pro - `.-.
- ;t
f ;
ided to water closet compartments designed for use by
•, � �
Yr
_ l.;Y` the. handicapped and the space immediately in front of a
;
water closet compartment shall be not less than 48 inches
mm) as measured
at right angles to compartment. 2?��
- "'door in its closed position. �,.:,'
,each
'
:6- Grab bars located on side, or one side of the back of ^ ` ''ti
:' .. ;..
-. -•the physically handicapped toilet stall or compartment
:. 41:";L$
�;.' _.Shall be securely attached 33 Inches (838.2 mm) above
" 6;�,�...r'.r and parallel-to the floor. Grab bars at the side shall
v be at least 42 inches
.,
t' ` (1066.8 mm) long with the front
.' :.�..
end positioned 24 inches (609.6 mm) in front of the
.water closet stool and grab bars at the back shall be
not less than 36 inches (914.4 mm) long.
0.
7..The� diameter or• width `of the gripping surfaces of a grab
g
;i:'
<- ,_..bar shall be lh inch (31:75 mm) to 1� inch (38.1 mm)
the shape shall provide an equivalent gripping sur-
oi ' ,.face. If grab bars are mounted adjacent to a wall, the
.� '
'f'•�� � space bptwPp 1 tho wall an,1 ♦,... ,. -.,, �._. -. - +• ••
cz 1
CITY OF SARATOGA
AGENDA BILL NO: 5jq—
DATE: September 14, 1983
DEPARTMENT: Maintenance
SUBJECT: Award of Bid for Tractor Loader
Issue Summary
Initial:
Dept. Head:
City Atty :
City Mgr
The 1982 -83 Capital Improvement Budget included $34,000 for a new tractor loader. This
amount was carried over to the current fiscal year's budget. Staff submitted bid
specifications to agencies in the area who could provide this type of equipment.
Three bids were received from Case Power and Equipment Company, Noble Ford Tractor and
Tractor Equipment Sales. Case Power and Equipment Company submitted the lowest bid
which was $19,600.00. This price includes sales tax and the credit for the trade -in.
We would also receive a $500 cash discount.
Noble Ford Tractor's bid was $20,000.00 and Tractor Equipment Sales' bid was $19,893.46.
Recommendation
Award tractor loader bid to Case Power and Equipment Company in the amount of $19,600.00
Fiscal Impact
Awarding a bid of $19,600 will provide a savings of $14,400 over the amount budgeted
for this equipment.
Exhibits /Attachments
None
Council Action
9/21: Callon /Clevenger moved to award bid according to staff recommendation. Passed 5 -0.
CITY OF SARATOGA
AGENDA BILL NO: ,j %
DATE: September 14, 1983
DEPARTMENT: Maintenance
SUBJECT: Oil Treatment (Reclamite) of Certain City Streets
Issue Summary
Initial:
Dept. Head:
City Atty :
City Mgr
The City received one bid on September 13, 1983 for oil treatment (reclamite) of certain
City streets. The bid received was from Graham Contractors, Inc. of San Jose in the
amount of $56,806.38. The Engineer's estimate for the work was $46,215.36, however, the
Engineer's estimate did not include the cost of clean -up and traffic control necessary for
the project. The cost of these two items is included in Graham Contractors estimate.
Staff inquired with a consultant and other agencies regarding this bid price and found
this bid to be appropriate for this project.
Recommendation
Award the contract for Oil Treatment (Reclamite) of Certain City Streets to Graham
Contractors, Inc. of San Jose in the amount of $56,806.38
Fiscal Impact
This project was approved in the 1983 -84 Capital Improvement Budget utilizing gas tax funds.
Exhibits /Attachments
Council Action
9/21: Mallory /Moyles moved to approve staff reconmendatiof., Passed 5 -0.
CITY OF SARATOGA
Initial:
AGENDA BILL NO: 5„2,1 Dept. Head•
DATE: September 19, 1983 City Atty
DEPARTMENT: Maintenance City Mgr
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
SUBJECT: West Valley College Halloween Road Run
Issue Summary
The City has been contacted by West Valley College for permission to hold a
running race on Saturday, October 29, 1983. The race course begins and
ends at the West Valley College Campus.
Recommendation
Authorize race to be held on October 29th with the stipulation that the
sponsors of the race will provide the City with proof of liability insurance
naming the City as an additional insured, will coordinate reserve officers
if needed at their own expense and will be responsible for clean -up of all
race related debris along the entire race course.
Fiscal Impact
None
Exhibits /Attachments
Race reauest letter
Map of race course
Council Action
10/5: Approved on Consent Calendar 3 -0.
Y
100000 --11\
WEST ALLEY JOINT COMMUI`iTY COLLEGE DISTRICT
September 12, 1983
TO: Dan Trinidad, City of Saratoga
FROM: Bill Campbell
REGARDING: West Valley College Halloween Road Run
DATE: October 201, 1983
TIME: 9:00 A.M.
DISTANCE: 5.5 miles
PLACE: Start and finish at West Valley College (Map enclosed)
ESTIMATED PARTICIPATION: 200 - 300
DIRECTORS: Bill Campbell - Instructor, West Valley College
George Wightman - Profession Footrace Director
Dan Cruz - Assistant Track Coach, West Valley College
COURSE: Map enclosed
This race course has been used in the past without any problems.
1. No intersections need control
2. No vehicle traffic will be stopped
3. No extra sheriff aid is needed
4. Multiple Sclerosis Society Race was run last spring
on this same course without any problems.
QUESTIONS: Bill Campbell Home: 353 -1843
Work: 867 -2200, Ext. 426
/do
Enc1.
West Valley College / 14000 Fruitvale Avenue / Saratoga, California 95070 / (408) 867 -2200
t
The Course-
1 -- - - --
�'FORr