Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-04-1988 City Council Staff ReportsSARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: May 4. 1988 CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: ENGINEERING SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTS RELATING TO THE RECONSTRUCTION OF QUITO ROAD BRIDGES. Recommended Motion: Adopt Resolution No. "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Saratoga authorizing the execution of program supplements relating to the re- construction of Quito Road Bridges." Report Summary: This program supplement is to make available the funds for the Preliminary Engineering Phase of the project. The estimated cost of this phase is $24,000 for each bridge (total estimate is $48,000). Of this estimated cost the federal funds available would be $38,400(80%). The remaining $9,600 will be split 3 ways between the City of Saratoga, City of Monte Sereno and Santa Clara Valley Water District. ,($3,200 each) Fiscal Impacts The cost to the City for the Preliminary Engineering Phase of the project would be $9,600 of which $6,400 would be reimbursed to us by the City of Monte Sereno and Santa Clara Valley Water District. This amount comes from 9140 -905 of the budget. AttarhmPntc! Resolution No. Mntinn And unto. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTS, RELATING TO THE RECONSTRUCTION OF QUITO ROAD BRIDGES WHEREAS, the City of Saratoga entered into a certain agreement with the State of California, Department of Transportation, known as • the "Local Agency -State Agreement For Federal -Aid Projects No. 04- 5332, dated August 17, 1977 ( "the Local -State Agreement "); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program ( "HBRR"), the City applied for and received a commitment from the California Transportation Commission to allocate HBRR funds for participation in the replacement of two bridges on Quito Road which cross San Tomas Creek, identified as Bridge No. 37C -1:11 and Bridge No. 37C -112 ( "the Project"); and WHEREAS, the California Department of Transportation has requested that supplements be executed by the parties to include the Project in the Local -State Agreement, NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Saratoga as follows: 1. That the Mayor and the City Clerk be, and they hereby are, authorized and directed to execute for and on behalf and in the name of the City, that certain document entitled Program Supplement No. 06, relating to the replacement of Bridge No. 37C -112 on Quito Road near Bicknell, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. 2. That the Mayor and the City Clerk be, and they hereby are, authorized and directed to execute for and on behalf and in the name of the City, that certain document entitled Program Supplement No. 07, relating to the replacement of Bridge No. 37C -111 on Quito Road near Austin Way, a true copy of which is attached hereto and Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by reference. 3. That the Mayor and the City Clerk be, and they hereby are, authorized and directed to execute for and on behalf and in the name of the City, such further supplements to the Local -State Agreement and other documents as may be required by the Department of Transportation in connection with its participation in the Project and the disbursement of HBRR funds to the City. -1- Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held on the day of 1988, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor -2- PROG::AM SUPPLEMENT NO. C" pIST,• :,'•= •- SCI- U -•Sar TO PROJECT NO. -0014 (13) LOCAL AGENCY -STATE AGREEMENT 0 4- S. J 2 LA: .. 'FOR FEDERAL -AID PROJECTS NO. DATE: ril. G 19SS This Program Supplement is hereby incorporated into the Local Agency -State Agreement for Fegeral -Aid which was "ehtered into between the LOCAL AGENCY and the STATE on. 8-1/-77 and is subject to all the terms and conditions thereof. This Program Supplement is adopted in accordance with Paragraph 2 of Article li of the aforementioned Master Agreement under authority of Resolution No. approved by the LOCAL AGENCY on (See copy attached). The Local Agency further stipulates that, as a condition to payment of funds obligated to this project, . it. accepts and will comply with the convenants or remarks set forth on the following pages EA U0 /- 01 Qc/Il q PROJECT LOCATION: Quito Rd- -San Thomas Creek-- Br.No. 37C112 TYPE OF WORK: Bridge Replacement LENGTH: 0.1 (MILES) PROJECT CLASSIFICATION OR 'PHASE(S) OF WORK: FYI PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING F-1 RIGHT -OF -WAY (Other) CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING ❑ CONSTRUCTION TOTAL ESTIMATED COST FEDERAL FUNDS _ . MATCHING FUNDS LOCAL: OTHER: OTHER: "OTHER- $24,000 $19,200 $4,800 City of Saratoga STATE OF CALIFORNIA LOCAL AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION By Date By VepU+— District Director of Transportation (Title of Authorized Official) Attest: District 04 Date (Title) ............................... .........,... ............................... .. .. . I.• I hereby Certify upon my personal knowledge that buTgeted funds are available for this encumbrance ............... ....,. ........................................................... ...... ................ Accounting Officer, �� ;�'�` Date•.•$ �y 2pU �n Chapter Statutes Item Fiscal Yr. Program BC Category Fund Source $ ) k� 11:s")- Sy w) ` (y0 j o C 6160 o F.C. - DLSR 16 (REV. 4/87) EXHIBIT Dist.: 047SC1 -0 -Sar Proj . • 4 BRN1-0014 (15`) Page 2 of 2 SPECIAL COVENANTS OR REMARKS 1. All maintenance, involving the physical condition and the operation of the improvements, referred to in Article VI MAINTENANCE of the aforementioned Master Agreement will be performed by the Local Ag.e cy at regular intervals or as required for efficient operation of the completed improvements.. 2. In executing this Program. Supplemental Agreement the Local Agency hereby reaffirms the "Nondiscrimination Assurances" contained in the aforementioned Master Agreement for, 'Federal -Aid Programs. 3. The Local Agency agrees the payment of Federal funds will be limited to the Detail Estimate amounts.a:pproved by the Federal Highway Administration in the Federal -Aid Project Agreement (PR -2), or its modification (P.R -2A), and accepts any increases in Exchange Funds, State Matching Funds, and /or Local Agency Funds as showriaon -the ~Finance•. or' Bid Letter or its modification as prepared by the Division of Local Streets and-Roads. — 4. This Program Supplement will be revised at a later date to include other phases of work. zY,H1BIT B PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. II DIST. (11 - SCI O -Sat' TO PROJECT NO. j'RM- 001414 ) LOCAL AGENCY -STATE AGREEMENT 04_5552 LA: FOR FEDERAL -AID PROJECTS NO. DATE: April () 1988 This Program Supplement is hereby incorporated Into the Local Agency -State Agreement for Federal -Aid which was entered into between the LOCAL AGENCY and the STATE on 8-17-77 and is subject to all the terms and conditions thereof. This Program Supplement is adopted in accordance with Paragraph 2 of Article II of the aforementioned Master Agreement under authority of Resolution No. . approved by the LOCAL AGENCY on (See copy attached). The Local Agency further stipulates that as a condition to payment of funds obligated to this project, it accepts and will comply with the convenants or remarks set forth on the following pages. EA 0`-4- y -) -f /o'w PROJECT LOCATION: Quito Rd--San Thomas Crock- -BrAo. )7C -111 TYPE OF WORK: Bridge Rcp1accmcnt 0.1 LENGTH: (MILES) PROJECT CLASSIFICATION OR PHASE(S) OF WORK: PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING RIGHT -OF -WAY (Other) CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TOTAL ESTIMATED COST FEDERAL FUNDS MATCHING FUNDS LOCAL: OTHER: OTHER: OTHER: $24,000 $19,200 x;4,800 Cit-/ of Saratoga LOCAL AGENCY STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION By Date By ©eputy District Director of Transportation (Title of Authorized )fficial) Attest: District Date (Title) Certlfy .. t o r.this..encumbrance... ,..Ihereby upon my personal. knowledge. that. budgeted•funds.are. available . . .... ................... ............................... ............................. ........... Accounting Officer �,�_ �v Date $.iC� Chapter) J Statutes Item Fiscal Yr. Program BC Category Fund Source $ 13S fo oit) -ST? n.o I F.C. - DLSR 1 a (RFV d /AT zY,H1BIT B Dist.: 04- SCI -O -Sar Proj . # BPj\i -0014 (14) Page 2 of 2 SPECIAL COVENANTS OR REMARKS 1. All maintenance, involving the physical condition and the operation of the improvements, ref erred to in Article VI MAINTENANCE of the aforementioned Master Agreement will be performed by the Local Agency at regular intervals or as required for efficient operation of the completed improvements. 2. In executing this Program Supplemental Agreement the Local Agency hereby reaffirms the "Nondiscrimination Assurances" contained in the aforementioned Master Agreement for Federal -Aid Programs. 3. The Local Agency agrees the payment of Federal funds will be limited to the Detail Estimate amounts approved by the Federal Highway Administration in the Federal -Aid Project Agreement (PR -2), or -its modification (PR -2A), and accepts any increases in-Exchange Funds, State Matching Funds, and /or Local Agency Funds as shownpon the Finance'.or'Bid Letter or its modification as prepared by the Division of Local Streets and Roads. — 4. This Program Supplement will be revised -at a later date to include other phases of work. SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL Q EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. `7 4 AGENDA ITEM 8. MEETING DATE: May 4, 1988 CITY MGR. APPROVAL TV�e ORIGINATING DEPT.: City Attorney SUBJECT: Requirements for Liability Insurance and Indemnification of the City Recommended Motion: Introduction and adoption of ordinance, together with adoption of resolution establishing insurance standards. Report Summary: The proposed ordinance will serve to eliminate from the City Code all specific requirements for providing liability insurance to the City and replace the same with a uniform set of standards, to be adopted by resolution of the City Council. The ordinance will also serve to add a requirement for indemnification and defense of the City in connection with the granting of an approval under the subdivision or zoning regulations. The ordinance is described in more detail in the Memorandum from the City Attorney to the Planning Commission dated April 27, 1988, a copy of which is submitted herewith. With respect to the Council resolution establishing standards and requirements for insurance coverage, the general requirements set forth in Part I are based primarily upon recommendations from the administrators of the ABAG Plan, through which the City presently obtains its liability insurance coverage. The specific requirement set forth in Part II represents types and amounts of coverage suggested by the City Attorney. A rather broad range of discretion has been granted to the City Manager in order to provide some degree of flexibility with respect to the application of the insurance standards to particular cases. For example, the City Manager may require a higher coverage limit if he determines that such higher amount is justified by the nature of the risk. Conversely, the City Manager may accept a lower coverage limit based upon the same considerations. An amount below $1,000,000 may be appropriate in the case of certain special event permits (for which $300,000 of coverage is now required under our existing Code), group use permits for public parks, and encroachment permits which do not involve the creation of any serious hazards. The proposed resolution establishing insurance standards has been submitted to the ABAG Risk Manager for review and comment. We expect to receive his response prior to the next meeting of the City Council, when the ordinance is scheduled for second reading and the accompanying resolution will be adopted. Fiscal Impacts: None. Attachments: (a) Memorandum from City Attorney to Planning Commission dated April 27, 1988. (b) Proposed ordinance. (c) Proposed resolution establishing standards and requirements for insurance coverage. Motion and Vote: PAUL B. SMITH ERIC L. FARASYN LEONARD J..SIEGAL HAROLD S. TOPPEL ROBERT K. BOOTH, JR. STEVEN G. BAIRD NICHOLAS C. FEDE'.L1, JR. HENRY D. CRUZ TO: FROM: RE: DATE: ATKINSON • FA$ASYN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 660 WEST DANA STREET P.O. BOX 279 MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIFORNIA 94042 1415) 967 -69x1 MEMORANDUM Saratoga Planning Commission,, Hal Toppel, City Attorney J. M. ATK.INSON (.1692 -1982) L. M', FARAS -YN (.1915-1979.1 Modification of Code Provisions Concerning Indemnification of the City and Liability Insurance March 4, 1988 This ordinance and the accompanying resolution to be adopted by the City Council are intended to update, modify and expand the. indemnification and liability insurance requirements of the City. Under various sections of the City Code, liability insurance providing coverage for the City must be furnished in the following situations: 1. The construction of improvements upon public property. (a) Examples: Street improvements, utility installations. (b) Providers: Owners, developers, contractors. 2. Use or rental of public property. (a) Examples: Rental of public buildings and public parks, special events involving use or closure of public streets, encroachment permits, installation of utility lines within the public right -of -way. 3. Conduct of activities. (a) Examples: Franchises granted by the City (e.g., garbage collection, taxicabs, cable television), movement of buildings and heavy equipment, truck usage of restricted streets, consultant contracts. (b) Providers: Franchisees, permittees, independent contractors. The terminology and types of coverage now utilized by the insurance industry have changed during recent years. For example, the Saratoga City Code (as most other municipal codes) refers to "public liability insurance" providing separate amounts of coverage for personal injury and property damage and requiring that the City be designated in the policy as a "named insured." From the perspective of the =1- insurance industry, there is no such thing as "public liability insurance" and policies are now being written with a combined single limit of liability as opposed to a distinction between personal injury and property damage. Some policies impose the obligation for payment of the premium upon the "named insured," yet the City obviously does not intend to assume this obligation by its requirement for coverage under the policy. Even the term "personal injury" is inappropriate since the policies define this term as an injury to the personality (such as defamation of character, invasion of privacy or false arrest), and injuries involving death or physical harm are referred to as "bodily injury. "' Basically, the City Code has not kept up with the everchanging practices and types of policies adopted by the insurance industry. In some cases, the Code requires a specific amount of coverage which now appears to be inadequate. The ordinance will change our entire approach to this subject by removing all specific insurance standards from the. Code and substituting a reference to standards established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. The establishment of insurance standards would thus be handled in the same manner as the City establishes its fee schedule. The standards would be reviewed on a regular- basis and updated as may be required by changing practices in the insurance industry or higher risks of loss. The ordinance will also codify our existing practice of requiring liability insurance whenever any construction or grading work is to be performed in connection with a subdivision or building site approval, and will add a similar requirement for any zoning approval. With respect to indemnification, state law now permits the City to require, as a condition for granting subdivision approval, that the subdivider indemnify and defend the City against any action to set aside such approval. Although there is no comparable language in the state planning law governing zoning approvals, it is my feeling that the City may similarly require indemnification and defense as a condition for the granting of such approvals since there is nothing in the state law that expressly prohibits the imposition of such a condition and the precedent for doing so has now been established in the State Map Act. If a subdivision or zoning approval is challenged and the C-ity elects to have the matter defended by a developer, the only obligation on the part of the City is to give prompt notice of the action and to fully cooperate in the defense. On the other hand, the City is not relinquishing the right to defend itself, but if it decides to do so, the City must bear its own attorney's fees and costs. The handling of a defense will be determined on a case by case basis. For example, if a legal action challenges the validity or constitutionality of a City ordinance or the procedures established by the City for processing development applications, we would not be inclined to delegate the defense to a developer who is only interested in preserving a project approval and not the integrity of the ordinances and regulations adopted by ,the City. Even if a defense is delegated, the City would continue to monitor the litigation and would reserve the right to intervene at any time if we determine there is a need to do so. The proposed ordinance will add a new section to both the subdivision and zoning regulations to require defense and indemnification of the City by the applicant: (i) against any action to challenge or set aside an approval, and (ii) against any action arising from the construction activity performed by the applicant, as authorized or required under the project approval. Following the adoption. of the ordinance, the requirements for indemnification and insurance will be added to subdivision and zoning approvals as standard conditions. cc: Saratoga City Council 3 old S. Saratoga City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. 71. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA AMENDING VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO INDEMNIFICATION OF THE CITY AND LIABILITY INSURANCE The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby ordains as follows: SECTION 1: Section 4- 25.190 in Article 4 -25 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: "§4- 25.190 Insurance requirements As a condition for the granting and continuation of a franchise hereunder, the \`N& grantee shall furnish to the City, at his own cost and expense, a policy or policies of liability and other insurance coverage as may be required under the applicable insurance standards of the City, as established 'from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Such policy or policies shall be maintained in full force and effect in accordance with said insurance standards during the entire term of the franchise." SECTION 2: Section 4- 40.050 in Article 4 -40 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: " §4- 40.050 Liability insurance (a) No certificate shall be issued or continued in operation, and no person shall drive or cause or permit 'to be driven or operated, any taxicab in the City, unless and until there is in full force and effect a motor vehicle liability insurance ,vS policy or policies insuring such owner and covering each such taxicab and each driver thereof, and unless and until such owner shall file with the City Clerk a written certificate or certificates of insurance showing that such policy or policies are in full force and effect and that an endorsement has been issued to each such policy or policies therein cited that the same shall not be cancelled and no reduction in the amount of coverage shall be made except upon thirty days, prior written notice to the City. Such policies shall insure the owner and any other person using or responsible for the use of any such taxicab, against loss from the liability imposed on any of them by law for injury to, or death of, any person or damage to property, arising from or growing out of the maintenance, operation or ownership of any taxicab covered by the policy, with coverage limits in such amount as approved by the City Council. (b) In addition to the insurance required under Paragraph (a) of this Section, the taxicab owner shall also furnish to the City, at his own cost and expense, a policy or policies of liability and other insurance coverage as may be required under the applicable insurance standards of the City, as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Such policy or policies shall be maintained in full -1- force and effect in accordance -with said insurance standards during the entire term of the certificate." SECTION 3: Section 7- 05.1.10 in Article 7 -05 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: "S7-05-110 Franchise .agreement for garbage collection service The City Council may by resolution award a franchise to any person the Council believes is qualified and equipped to perform garbage collection service. Such franchise agreement shall require the Garbage Co_ llector to render service to all residential and commercial premises within the City in accordance with the provisions of this Article and in conformity with such regulations as may be adopted G' by the Director with the approval of the City Council. The Garbage. Collector shall be required to furnish a surety bond in the penal sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars, conditioned upon his faithful performance of the franchise agreement, and to maintain in full force and effect, during the entire term of the franchise, liability and other insurance coverage as required under the applicable insurance standards of the City, as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Additional terms of such franchise agreement shall not conflict with any of the provisions of this Article." SECTION 4: Paragraph (g) of Section 9- 40.080 in Article 9 -40 of the City Code is amended to read as - follows: S, "(g) Insurance. No permit shall be issued until the applicant has furnished to V.�. the City, at his own cost and expense, a policy or policies of liability and other j� insurance coverage as may be required under the applicable insurance standards of 0 ��, the City, as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Such �S \G"4 policy or policies shall be maintained in full force and effect in accordance with said e� insurance standards during the entire term of the permit. With the approval of the City Engineer, the applicant may furnish such policy or ;policies on an annual or S continuing basis to cover one or more permits for hauling in the same or different locations." SECTION 5: Section 10- 10.080 in Article 10 -10 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: " §10- 10.080 Insurance As a condition for issuance of a permit, the applicant shall furnish to the City, Q� at the applicant's own cost and expense, a policy or policies of liability and other insurance coverage as may be required under the applicable insurance standards of eJ �S the City, as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Such policy or policies shall be maintained in full force and effect in accordance with said �Q► insurance standards during the entire term of the permit." SECTION 6: Section 107:15.090 in Article 10 -15 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: -2- 1+ "§ 10- 15.090 Miscellaneous requirements (a) Property owners shall be protected from any damage to property and dust nuisance. A water wagon shall be made available on demand of the Maintenance Director. a �J (b) No work shall be deemed completed until final written approval thereof is issued by the Maintenance Director. Jefftd, (c) The permittee shall indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees and volunteers harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising out of or in any manner relating to the excavation, construction or restoration activity conducted by the permittee or any failure by the permittee to comply with any terms or conditions of the permit or any provisions of this Article. (d) As a condition for the isusance and continuation of a permit, the permittee shall furnish to the City, at the permittee's own cost and expense, a policy or policies of liability and other insurance coverage as may be required under the applicable insurance standards of the City, as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Such policy or policies shall be maintained in full force and effect in accordance with said insurance standards for as long as the permit remains issued and outstanding. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Maintenance Director may waive the requirement of a liability insurance policy where the permit is issued to a public agency or public utility corporation. (e) The Maintenance Director shall require the permittee to guaranty that all construction, installation and restoration work performed under the permit shall be free of defects in material or workmanship for a period of one year from the date of final approval by the City." SECTION 7: Section 10- 20.090 in Article 10 -20 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: "��0- 20.090 Indemnification of the City; liability insurance � �W'( (a) No encroachment permit shall be issued until the applicant has executed a written agreement to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees and volunteers harmless from and against V any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising or resulting from the doing or refraining from doing any act permitted by such permit, or the failure to comply with any terms or conditions of such permit, or arising or resulting in any manner from the erection or construction of such encroachment. (b) As a condition for the issuance and continuation of an encroachment permit, the City Engineer may require the applicant to furnish, at the applicant's own cost and expense, a policy of liability insurance providing coverage in accordance with the applicable insurance standards of the City, as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Such insurance coverage shall be maintained in full force and effect in accordance with said insurance standards for as long as the permit remains issued and outstanding." -3- SECTION 8: Paragraph (a) of Section 11- 10.040 in Article 11 -10 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: "(a) In issuing any special permit, the Director may impose any conditions he deems necessary or appropriate to protect the public health, safety or welfare, including, without limitation, any or all of the following: (1) Restrictions on the requested use or uses set forth in the application. (2) Restriction on the hours within which the use or activity may be �( conducted. 45 �N r, S (3) A requirement that the applicant provide, at his own cost and O Qk expense, professional crowd- control monitors, such as sheriffs IV deputies or private licensed patrolmen, in such numbers as the Director reasonably anticipates may be necessary under all the circumstances. (4) A requirement that the applicant furnish to the City, at his own cost and expense, liability insurance .coverage in accordance with the applicable insurance standards of the City, as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council. Such insurance coverage shall be maintained in full force and effect in accordance with said insurance standards for as long as the permit remains issued and outstanding." SECTION 9: A new Section 14- 05.055 is added to Article 14 -05 of the City Code, to read as follows: "514 -0 5.055 Indemnification of the City; liability insurance (a) The approval of any application purs u to a condition that the applicant shall, upon th `V and hold the City and its officers, officials, b volunteers harmless from and against any claim, S aside, void or annul the approval, or any of the taken, done or made prior to such approval, � specified in Section 14- 85.060 of this Chapter. shall give prompt notice to the applicant of an y and shall cooperate fully in the defense thereo f City from participating .in the defense, but in su attorney's fees and costs. ant to this Chapter shall be subject e City's request, defend, indemnify oards, commissions, employees and action or proceeding to attack, set proceedings, acts or determinations which is brought within the time If a defense is requested, the City such claim, action or proceeding, . Nothing herein shall prevent the ch event, the City shall pay its own (b) Whenever an approval granted pursuant to this Chapter authorizes or requires any, construction, installation, alteration or grading work to be performed, whether on public or private property, the applicant shall furnish to the City: (1) A written agreement to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees and volunteers harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or -4- grading work by the applicant or by anyone acting on his behalf; and (2) When required as a condition of the approval, a policy or policies of liability and other insurance coverage in accordance with the applicable insurance standards of the City, as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council." SECTION 10: Subparagraph (a)(4) of Section 14- 40.040 in Article 14 -40 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: 11(4) The indemnity agreement and insurance policy required by Section 14- 05.055 of this Chapter." ° M SECTION 11: Section 14- 45.010 in Article 14 -45 of the City Code is amended to ? read as follows: •Y 1 ".Y 14- 45.010 Application for approval 3 Prior to the expiration of the tentative building site approval or extension thereof pursuant to Section 14- 20.080, the owner shall apply for final building site T p approval by filing with the City Engineer all of the documents listed in Subsections 14- 40.020(a) and 14- 40.040(a) of this Chapter as may be required under the v h 4� conditions of the tentative building site approval. If a final parcel map of the S building site is required, all of the provisions of Article 14 -40 pertaining to the VNU form, content, review, certification, approval and recordation of final maps shall be O applicable thereto.",, SECTION 12: Subparagraph (c)(3) of Section 14= 50.060 in Article 14 -50 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: 11(3) The applicant has furnished to the City the indemnity agreement and insurance policy required by Section 14- 05.055 of this Chapter." SECTION 13: . The title of Article 14 -60 is changed from "Deferred Improvement Agreements" to "Improvement Agreements." SECTION 14: Section 14- 60.010 in Article 14 -60 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: "914- 60.010 Improvement agreement Prior to the commencement of any improvement work, the owner of the subdivision or building site shall enter into a. written agreement with the City, which shall contain the following provisions: (a) That all imp_ rovements will be constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications as previously approved by the City Engineer, and will be -5- satisfactorily completed within one year from the date of final subdivision or building site approval (or such other date as may be specified in the agreement). (b) That the owner shall maintain the improvements in good condition and repair and guaranty the same against any defects in material and workmanship for a period of one year from the date of final approval by the City. (c) That upon any failure by the owner to complete or maintain the improvements or to correct any defects therein, the City may perform any necessary construction, maintenance or corrective work and recover the full cost and expense thereof from the owner. (d) That the owner shall pay to the City the cost of inspecting the improvements. (e) That the owner shall furnish to the City the improvement security required by Section 14- 60.020 of this Article. (f) That the owner shall furnish to the City the indemnity agreement and insurance policy required by Section 14- 05.055 of this Chapter. (g) Such other terms, covenants, conditions or provisions as the City Council, the City Engineer or the Planning Director may deem necessary or appropriate." SECTION 15: Section 14- 60.030 in Article 14 -60 of the City Code is repealed. SECTION 16: A new Section 15- 05.080 is added to Article 15 -05 of the City Code, to read as follows: 11515- 05.080 Indemnification of the City; liability insurance (a) The approval of any application pursuant to this Chapter shall be subject to a condition that the applicant shall, upon the City's request, defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees and S volunteers harmless from and against any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void or annul the approval, or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations V y-0 taken, done or made prior to such approval, which is brought within the time prescribed in Section 15- 90.080 of this Chapter.. If a defense is requested, the City shall give prompt notice to the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, and shall cooperate fully in the defense 'thereof. Nothing herein shall prevent the City from participating in the defense, but in such event, the City shall pay its own attorney's fees and costs. (b) Whenever an approval granted pursuant to this Chapter authorizes or requires any construction, installation, alteration or grading work to be performed, whether on public or private property, the applicant shall furnish to the City: (1) A written agreement to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees and volunteers harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any manner relating to the Qom performance of such construction, installation, alteration or grading work by the applicant or by anyone acting on his behalf; and (2) When required as a condition of the approval, a policy or policies of liability and other insurance coverage in accordance with the applicable insurance standards of the City, as established from time to time by resolution of the City Council." SECTION 17: Section 16- 50.110 in Article 16 -50 of the City Code is amended to read as follows: " §16- 50.110 Indemnification of the City; liability insurance (a) No Class C., D., E or F permit shall be issued until the applicant has executed a written agreement to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its _rN officers, officials, boards, commissions, employees and volunteers harmless from pJ� and against any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising or S resulting from the doing or refraining from doing any act permitted by such permit, 0 �411S or the failure to comply with any terms or conditions of. such permit. (b) As a condition for the issuance and continuation of a Class C, D, E or F permit, the applicant shall furnish to the City, at the applicant's own cost and expense, a policy of liability insurance providing coverage in accordance with the applicable insurance standards of the City, as established from time to time by �l resolution of the City Council. Such insurance coverage shall be maintained in full force and effect in accordance with said insurance standards for as long as the permit remains issued and outstanding." SECTION 18: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby declares that it Would have - passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases may be held invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 19 This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty days after its passage and adoption. The above and foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and after the waiting time required by law,. was thereafter passed and adopted at a regular -7- meeting of the City Council of the City of Saratoga held. on the day of , 1988, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: CITY CLERK MAYOR SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. ! i[ ` AGENDA ITEM 4'D MEETING DATE: May 4, 1988 CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT.: City Attorney /Planning Department SUBJECT: Miscellaneous Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Recommended Motion: Introduction and adoption of ordinance. Report Summary: The proposed ordinance contains a variety of miscellaneous amendments to the zoning regulations, as described in the Memorandum from the City Attorney to the City Council submitted herewith. Following a study session and several public hearings, the original draft of the ordinance was modified by the Planning Commission and a final recommendation for adoption was made at the Commission meeting on April 27, 1988. Fiscal Impacts: Attachments: April 29, 1988. Motion and Vote: None. (a) Memorandum from City Attorney to City Council dated (b) Proposed ordinance. (c) Negative declaration. PAUL B. SMITH ERIC L. FARASYN LEONARD J. SIEGAL HAROLD S. TOPPEL ROBERT K. BOOTH, JR. STEVEN G. BAIRD NICHOLAS C. FEDELI, JR. HENRY D. CRUZ TO: FROM: RE: DATE: ATKINSON • FARASYN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 660 `NEST DANA STREET P.O. BOX 279 MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIFORNIA 94042 (415) 967 -6941 MEMORANDUM Saratoga City Council Hal Toppel, City Attorney Miscellaneous Amendments to Zoning Ordinance April 29, 1988 J. M. ATKINSON (1892 -1982) L. M. FARASYN (1915 -1979) The proposed ordinance contains miscellaneous amendments to the zoning regulations, some of which are listed on the legislative calendar and others which have been initiated by the Planning staff. These amendments are as follows: Section 1: Amendment to Section 15 -06.340 This amendment clarifies the definition of "height," as set forth in Section 15- 06.340, to specify that basements or crawl spaces are excluded from the measurement of height if they are below grade. This amendment was prompted by the discovery that the existing definition was being interpreted to exclude crawl spaces constructed above grade, thereby allowing an overall increase in the height of structures ranging from 1 -1/2 to 2 feet. Section 2: Amendment to Section 15- 19.090 This amendment changes the column heading in Section 15- 19.090 from "site coverage" to "structure coverage." The amendment is purely technical in nature and does not change the substance of the provision. Section 3: Amendment to Section 15- 29.030 This amendment is another technical change for clarification purposes only. The existing language in paragraph (a) of Section 15- 29.030 refers to "a fence exceeding 6 feet in height." This language has now been changed to: "the height otherwise prescribed in this Article as the limit for such fence..." The reason for the change is that a noise mitigation fence exceeding 6 feet in height might be allowed where the height limit for such fence is actually below 6 feet (such as within a front yard, where the normal height limit would be only 3 feet). Section 4: Amendment to Section 15- 29.050 Under the present Code, any form of barbed wire fence is prohibited. After this restriction was adopted, the Planning Commission encountered a situation -1- where barbed wire fencing was legitimately needed for security purposes and was adequately screened from neighboring properties by landscaping. The Commission therefore requested that the ordinance be amended to confer discretionary authority to approve barbed wire fencing in appropriate cases. The proposed ordinance will add language to Section 15- 29.050 authorizing the Planning Commission to approve barbed wire fencing if the Commission finds that such material is necessary for security purposes and appropriate measures are taken to mitigate any adverse impacts. Section 5: Amendment to Section 15- 35.030 This amendment changes various off street parking regulations as contained in Section 15- 35.030. The basic change is the elimination of parking spaces computed according to the number of employees at a particular business or establishment. The Planning staff requested this change on the grounds that the standard is difficult to ascertain and equally difficult to enforce on a regular basis. The reference to employees has not been deleted in those cases where the parking requirements will be determined by the Planning Commission (typically in connection with the issuance of a use permit) or where the number of employees is expected to remain relatively constant. f ollows: The specific paragraphs of this section which have been modified are as (k) Professional and administrative offices - the existing Code contains an alternative requirement of either one space of each 250 square feet of gross floor area or one space for each separate office on the site, whichever is greater. The Commission agreed that the expected number of users often cannot be determined at the time of project approval and a fixed standard based upon square footage was preferable. However, after reviewing the parking ratios for recently approved office projects in the City, the Commissioners agreed upon a standard of one space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area. (1) Medical offices and clinics - the alternative standard of one space for each separate office on the site has been eliminated. (m) Intensive retail service establishments - the reference to employees has been eliminated. However, to compensate for this change, areas used for storage and loading would no longer be excluded from the calculation of gross floor area. (n) Extensive retail service establishments - same as above; the reference to employees has been eliminated and storage and loading . areas would no longer be excluded. (o) Personal service establishments and financial institutions - reference to employees eliminated. (p) Restaurants - reference to employees has been eliminated, but to compensate for this change the areas used for food preparation or storage would no longer be excluded from the calculation of gross floor area. With respect to outdoor dining, instead of calculating the parking requirements on the basis of one space for every 3 seats, as IPA set forth in the existing Code, a quantitative standard of one space for each 75 square feet of dining area will be applied. (q) Warehouses and storage facilities - reference to employees has been eliminated. Section 6: Amendment to Section 15- 50.090 This amendment is intended to address the problem of the 10 -day appeal period on the issuance of a tree removal permit, which prevents the actual removal of a tree even though it may present an immediate hazard. The amendment will add a new paragraph (b) authorizing the Planning Director to issue a permit for removal of a tree before expiration of the appeal period if he determines that such tree constitutes a clear and immediate threat of causing injury to persons or property. It would still be possible for someone to appeal the Planning Director's decision to issue the permit, but the tree will already have been removed by the time such appeal is heard. Nevertheless, if the Commission determines that no legitimate emergency existed and the tree removal permit should not have been issued, the Commission could still require the property owner to mitigate the circumstances by planting a replacement tree (if the Planning Director has not already required the owner to do so as a condition for issuance of the permit). Section 7: Amendment to Section 15- 70.010 This amendment is solely for the purpose of eliminating a reference to the Site Review Committee contained in this section, which was overlooked at the time the ordinance abolishing the Site Review Committee was adopted. Section 8: Amendment to Section 15- 70.060 This amendment reduces the number of standard findings required for the granting of a variance from 5 to 3, as now set forth in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of this section. Paragraphs (a) and (b) adopt the same language with respect to variance findings as contained in Section 65906 of the Government Code. The finding in paragraph (c) concerning the public health, safety and welfare was eliminated from the original draft and restored at the request of the planning Commission. The Commission also desired to preserve the special findings required for variances pertaining to signs and parking, as now set forth in paragraphs (d) and (e), but the language of these findings has been simplified. The original draft of the ordinance conduct of home occupations within accessory from the public expressing fears that commercialization of residential neighborhoods, ordinance. H Q2S. Top Saratoga City Attorney also contained a provision to allow the structures. As a result of comments this provision would lead to the the amendment was deleted from the -3- SAR/ATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. / AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: May 4, 1988 CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: Engineering SUBJECT: RFSOLU.T.ION DESIGNATING THE INTERSECTION OF SO_MMERVILLE DRIVE AND TERRENCE DRIVE AS A YIELD INTERSECTION. Recommended Motion,: Adopt Resolution NO. .MV- Designating the inter-, section of Sommerville Drive and Terrence Dr..-as.a Yield Intersection. Report Summary: Resulting from recruests made by two residents at the -above subject intersection, we conducted a traffic review in order to determine if there was a need for traffic control devices. In the past five years there have been two accidents at this intersection, both being right angle involving west bound sommerville Dr. and south bound Terrence Dr. vehicles. There doe's -,not seem to be a sight distance problem, as the property owner at the north easterly corner does keep the landscaping maintained on a regular basis. In order to properly assign right-of-way, yield signs should be installed on Sommerville Dr. /Ct. 'at its intersection with Terrence Dr::. _ .. The public Safety Commission_ unanimously agreed to support the recommendation to install the -Yield signs. Fiscal Impacts The cost to install the. Yield signs and place-the pavement markings should be approximately. $200.00 and would come from the traffic safety budget (3.033 -3010) Attachments: 1. Resolution No.. MV- 2. Memo from Public Safety Commission 3. .Memo to public Safety Commission 4. Collision Diagram r 5. Letters from residents', Motion and Vote: rry /1 All APR 1 z 1988 PING l;� T y r. 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE, CA.1.,1FORNL, 95070 , (408) £3.67 - :311:38 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Karen Anderson April 1.4 , 1988 Marina Clevenger Joyce Hlava David Moyles To: City Engineer Donald Peterson From: Community Services Director Subject: Stop Sign Request at Somerville Drive and Terrence Drive This is in response to your memorandum of March 1, 1988, . requesting the installation of yield signs on Sommerville Drive and Court at their intersection with Terrence Drive. Apparently, it is not clear to through traffic from Somerville Drive and Court that-they are to yield the right of way to through' traffic on Terrence Drive. In light of the evidence provided to the Public Safety Commission, the Commission unanimously agreed to support your staff recommendation to install the yield signs at the intersection as referenced above. Please contact me if you have any questions. Tod W. Argo jm CC: PSC City Manager oguw go §&ME1TQ)(0& 13777 FRUITVA•LE AVENUE • SAR.ATOCA. CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 887 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Safety-Commission FROM: City Engineer DATE: March 1, 1988 SUBJECT: Stop Sign Request - Somerville Drive and Terrence Drive -------------- -------------------------------------------------- We have received a re.que:st from Tim Hyde of 12290 Terrence Avenue and Julie Tomlin of 19701 Somerville Court, asking that we-consider the installation of a traffic control device such as a stop sign or yield sign at the intersection of Somerville Drive and Terrence Avenue. In the past five (5) years, there have been two (2) accidents at this location,, both right angle involving westbound Somer- ville Drive and southbound Terrence Avenue vehicles. (-see attached collision diagram). 'In the field review it was observed that the intersection has adequate vehicular sight distances on all approaches except for westbound Somerville Drive, when the bushes, shrubbery and /or trees are in need of trimming at the northeasterly corner of said intersection. The property owner at this location does keep the lands.caping'maintained on a regular basis. In order to properly assign right -of -way at this it is recommended that "yield" signs be pl.-aced on Dr. and ome.rville Ct. at their intersection with RobeIrt S. bhook City Engineer intersection,. Somerville Terrence Avenue. CITY 3AR`,4 1� 0' INTERSECTION: TERREAICE 4yEAfzjE AND SOM62VictE OR /(/E �Coyar' PERIOD:_ Fi v. e Ls years FROM: ✓ ' _ W. /, 1983 TO: 1, 1988 PREPARED BY,* Erino.7 (7o�sey DATE: 2 .9.188 SC L E: 25? JTVIV &RWZ c e cr INUMBER OF ACCIDENTS ,PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY INJURY 9A-- Fr►'FApL I-TOTAL ACCIDENTS S'1 2Z 2 0 ('041k) 412718,7- Mon, 1940. . SYMBOLS MOVING VEHICLE ;.):>.BACKING VEHICLE 4 NON - INVOLVED VEHICLE .mm*- - +— PEDESTRIAN r_—, PARKED VEHICLE 13 FIkE'D OBJECT O FATAL ACCIDENT 0 INJURY ACCIDENT %TOMERV14 t E DR, TYPES OF COLLISIONS F+F� REAR ENO —►i.i- HE A O ON —7' SIDESWIPE ?T OUT OF CONTROL / LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE SHOW FOR EACH ACCIDENT 1. TIME OF DAY, DAY19 DATE 2 WEATHER AMC ROAD SURFAC —IF UNUSUAL CONDITION EXISTED b NITER- IF BETWEEN -DUSK .I AND DAWN Tim Hyde 12290 Terrence Ave. Saratoga, CA, 95070 i Mayor Don Peterson r Saratoga City Offices �)o 1377 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, CA, 95070 Dear Mayor Peterson: I have been a resident of Saratoga for about 14 years no W. I have also been living in the same hou.se.for.all of these years. Something has recently come up that, needs.some attention. It concerns the erection of a.stop.sign in the intersection outside of my house. I live on the corner of Terrence Ave. and Sommerville .Ave. During the past two years there have been at least four accidents between cars that have not yielded at this intersection. It is my belief that for the protection of the people and property surrounding this intersection, the addition of a ,stop sign would greatly reduce, if not stop, these unnecessary accidents_ Even a yield sign might prevent these accidents. One major problem is that it is not clear which person approaching the intersection has the right of way. It 'is also very difficult to see cross traff'i.c without actually 'stopping. My questions to you concerning this incident are: 1. 'How much money would it actually take to construct this stop sign? 2_ Was this action already once asked of the City of Saratoga, and if so,. why? 3. What else would I have to do to get this, Proposition acted upon? I hope that for the.protection of the citizens of 'Saratoga, that you will consider this action. I would appreciate your .response to this letter. Sincerely yours, P. Tim Hyde City of, Saratqga City � Hall Saratoga, -CA 95;070 L.4 �L EN OINtER,ING. APrli- RE•: Somerville Dr:. and Terreme I am. a. resident of the city of Saratoga.' and am very concerned a.bout the. fast car traffic, a.CCrident's- an, d safety on h e streets in' .front of 'my home. There have bee ' ni two major aut-bmobiLe accidents in ,front of My house _.n the ).,ast, s,ix months, 9/8/88, and 4/27/87' The-se streets by my house and particularly the intersection are heavily used by children g,,et-t*i,ng to and from school on their bicycl,&s. , I do*. not -want anothe,r acc,id,e:nt to happen which could involve- injury. I am, asking the city t,o review the intersection of Somerville. Dri and -Terrence to sae if any corrections can be 'made to unsure safety for' all the re'sidentz in our neighbarhood �us-ing these streets., Thank 'you for your prorMpt attention to this matter,., Sincerely, Julie. A.., Tomlin.. 19701 Somervill,e Ct. Saratoga, CA 95070 SAtRATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY N0. /44 3 AGENDA ITEM �• MEETING DATE: 5/4./88 CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: Engineering SUBJECT: PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM - RECONSTRUCTION AND OVERLAY OF CERTAIN CITY .STREETS Recommended Motion: Authorize advertising for reconstruction and overlay of certain city streets. Report Summary: Project consists of overlaying several streets with , 2 inch A.C. Streets are listed on the attachment'.. Some _streets will require minor widening to provide a minimum pavement width of 22 feet. La paloma Avenue will be reconstructed. In addition the frontage of Azule Park is being constructed and a small portion of Lomita at Aloha for which we collected a developers bond is included. No trees will be removed. Fiscal Impacts Project estimate is $540,000 - List of streets to be overlayed - Plans are available in the Engineering Division and will be brought to the 5.%4 meeting. Motion and Vote: i( LIST. OF STREETS Name of Street Limit 1. Park Place Saratoga -Los Gatos - Hume Dr. 2. Hume Drive Saratoga -Los Gatos -Glen Una 3. Pepper Lane " 4. Robin Way Hume Drive - Pepper Lane 5. Lark Way if if 6. Belle Court Saratoga -Los Gatos - Glen Una 7. Oak Place Saratoga -Los Gatos - La Paloma 8. Park Place Oak Place - Saratoga Ave. 9. Orchard Drive Oak Place - Saratoga Ave. 10. La Paloma Ave Dead end - Saratoga Ave. 11. Luteria Way La Paloma - Saratoga Ave. 12. E1 Camino Grande Via Colina - E1 Camino Senda 13. Goleta Avenue SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. MEETING DATE: May 4, 1988 ORIGINATING DEPT.: Community Services SUBJECT: Regulation of Massage Establishments AGENDA ITEM 7-0 MGR. APPROVAL ;� Recommended Motion: Introduction and adoption of ordinance amending Section 4- 55.040 concerning exemptions from massage establishment regulations. Report Summary: The City recently added Article 4 -55 to regulate massage establishments and massagists. The ordinance was based upon similar legislation adopted by the County of Santa Clara. Section 4- 55.040 contains a general exemption for any cosmetologist or barber (along with an exemption for any person licensed by the state to practice medicine). The exemptions for cosmetologists and barbers contemplated the incidental massage activity which may be performed during the course of applying cosmetics or giving a haircut. On the other hand, where a cosmetologist or barber offers a massage service as a separate activity for which a separate charge is made, the exemptions should not apply. The purpose of this ordinance is to clarify that the exemption is only available to a cosmetologist or barber who is: (1) licensed by the state under the Business and Professions Code; and (2) is performing a massage within the scope of his license and for which no separate or increased prices are charged. The Community Services Director has already encountered one situation of a licensed cosmetologist in the City who is offering massage as a separate service. An administrative determination was made that such person was required to obtain a massage establishment permit and any employees performing the massage were required to obtain massagist's certificates. The proposed ordinance will serve to codify the administrative interpretation of Section 4- 55.040. Fiscal Impacts: None. Attachments: (a) Proposed ordinance. Motion and Vote: SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. U AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: May 4, 1988 CITY MGR. APPROVAL LV§�P ORIGINATING DEPT.: City Attorney SUBJECT: Vacation of Alleyway Adjacent to Protiva Property Recommended Motion: Adoption of resolution vacating alley. Report Summary: Under state law, an offer of dedication for a public improvement can be cleared from the public record if the offer was made on a subdivision map, was not accepted within 25 years after the map was recorded, ownership of the property has changed, and the property was never used for the purpose dedicated. Based upon this law, Mrs. Protiva has requested an abandonment of the alley which runs adjacent to Lot No. 13. This lot was the subject of an application for building site and design review approval, which was denied by the City Council on appeal. The denial was not based upon any need to preserve the alleyway and the City has basically conceded that such alleyway is not required for any anticipated future public use. The City agreed to voluntarily vacate the alleyway in exchange for the Protiva's voluntarily merging the triangular parcel into Lot 12, which has now been accomplished. Fiscal Impacts: None. Attachments: (a) Proposed resolution. Motion and Vote: SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY N0, 4V AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: 4_29 -RR (5 -4 -88) CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: ENGINEERING DEPT.. SUBJECT: CONSTRUCTION ACCEPTANCE of SDR. 1616 Cox Avenue, Prince of Peace Church Recommended' Motion: Grant Construction Acceptance and release "5.0% of Bond (Assignment Certificate). Report Summary: The work has been satisfactorily completed. This "Construction Acceptance" will begin the one (1) year maintenance period. Fiscal Impacts None. Attachments.: 1. Memo describing bond. Motion and Vote: r , r !� -1ER -BOO F°ZAND�IM C09`�'T o2 O&IR&OD)(5,1A 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 . TO: City Manager DATE: FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Construction Acceptance for SDR 1616 Name & Location: Prince of Peace Church - Cox Avenue --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Public Improvements required for SDR -1616 have been satisfactorily completed.:. I, therefore, recommend the City Council accept the improvements for construction only. . This "construction acceptance" will begin the one ('1) year maintenance period. During that year, the improvement contract, insurance and improvement security will remain in full force. The following information is included for your use: 1.. Developer: Prince of Peace Church. Address:— 12770 Saratoga Avenue Saratoga, Ca. 95070 2. Improvement Security: Type: Assignment Certificat,e ' Amount: $11,000.00 Issuing Company: American Savings '' &'Loan Association ' Address:,,, 55 W. Santa Clara San Jose, Ca. Receipt, Bond or Certificate No.: 3- 138663 -4 3. Special Remarks: Release Bond of $13,000.00. Assignment Certificate. RBS /dsm Rob t :S S. Shook i