The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-01-1987 City Council Staff ReportsSARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO.' 1 MEETING DATE: 7/1/87 ORIGINATING DEPT: Engineering 6 ?a 3� AGENDA ITEM CITY MGR: APPROVAL p SUBJECT: Request for 4 -Way Stop Signs at Blauer Drive and Regan Lane Recommended Motion: Deny request for installation of 4 -way stop signs at Blauer Drive and Regan Lane. Report Summary: In April we received a request for all way stop signs at the Blauer /Regan inter- section from Karen Anderson. Staff review resulted in the finding that warrants were not met, and that there had only been one accident at this location in 15 years. It was not subject to correction by stop signs. Staff recommends against the installation. Public''Safety Commission supports this recommendation. Fiscal Impacts: None. Attachments:. 1. Public Safety,Commission minutes. 2. Staff Report. Motion and Vote: Staff recomendation 5 -0, but .staff will consider reconfiguration of intersection. I iEcr-, V ELi �Alq JON •. CITY Qq 0&%Z '�A 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA. CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867-3438 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Karen Anderson Martha Clevenger Joyce Hlava David Moyles Donald Peterson June 15, 1987 To: City Engineer From: Community Services Director Subject: Request for 4 -way Stop Signs at Blauer Drive and Regan Lane In response to your memorandum of May 18, 1987, concerning the above referenced subject, the Public Safety Commission reviewed your report at their June 8, 1987, meeting. The Public Safety Commission supported your recommendation based on the fact that the intersection did not meet accepted standards for the establishment of a 4 -way stop intersection. However, the Public Safety Commission recommended that you explore other alternative ways to improve safety at the intersection. A copy of the minutes from the meeting is attached. A Todd W. Argow jm Attachment PSC MINUTES - JUNE 8, 1987 Page 5 Since 1985, accidents have decreased from 388 to a projected 297 in calendar year 1987. Since 1983, fatalities have steadily decreased as well. ' In 1983 there were 5, in 1984 there were 4, in 1985 there were 3, in 1986 there were 2, and there were no fatalities so far in Saratoga in 1987. Injury accidents have decreased from 130 in 1986 to a Drojected 96 in 1987 (a decrease of 26 %). The Sheriff's Office was estimating that the City would net $84,640 as a result of the DUI program. This was based on 230 arrests occurring in Saratoga times the average fine of $460 times the 80% of the revenue the City retains. The Sheriff's Office indicated that May DUI arrest statistics were not available in time for the Commission's meeting. NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH Com. Borah reported that he attended one neighborhood watch startup meeting for the Saratoga Woods area. He felt that the meeting was very poorly attended; only 8 people showed up and 2 of them were under 7 years old. Com. Borah indicated that he would have his preliminary report ready for the Commission at their July meeting to discuss further. The DrinciDal focus-of this report would be how to keep neighborhood watch programs going. PUBLIC SCHOOLS REPORT Com. Newby indicated that she had attended the Anti Drug Community Awareness Symposium at the end of May as authorized by the City. She felt the seminar was very worthwhile, and would be reporting the results of the meeting to the appropriate agencies within the-City during the month. FIRE SERVICES REPORT Both fire agencies (Central and Saratoga) sent 1 engine each to help fight the Pebble Beach blaze. It was the sincere hoDe that Pebble Beach would not be needed to reciprocate with Saratoga over the summer. 4 -WAY STOP AT BLAUER AND REGAN The Commission reviewed a report from the City Engineer and a request from Councilwoman Anderson concerning the establishment of a 4 -way stop at the intersection of Blauer and Regan Lane. After some discussion, the following motion wa,s made: MOTION: It was moved by Com. O'Rorke, with a second from Com. Borah, that -the .PSC supports the recommendation of the City Engineer that a 4 -way stop not be established at the intersection of Blauer and Regan due to the fact that the evidence presented does not meet the standards justifying a 4 -way stop intersection. Motion passed by unanimous vote. ' PSC MINUTES - JUNE 8, 1987 Page 6 The Commission also made another motion: MOTION: It was moved by Com. Newby, with a second from Com. Swanson, that the PSC recommends the City Engineer explore 'alternatives to improve safety conditions at this intersection. Motion passed by unanimous vote. CSO MAY ACTIVITY REPORT Mr. Argow presented the Commission with the May CSO activity report. He pointed out that over 54% of all CSO time was spent on code enforcement related activities compared to only 30% being spent on law enforcement related activities. This figure represented one of the highest expenditures of CSO time on code enforcement related activities during a single month since the program had been established in 1984. Mr. Argow emphasized that the CSOs were spending an increasingly greater amount of time on code enforcement related activities in - response to Council direction. PUBLIC SAFETY APPRECIATION PICNIC The. Commission agreed that they should plan for about 150 attendees at the PSC appreciation picnic on June 13. The Commission spent a considerable amount of time discussing the details concerning the final arrangements for the picnic. Having no further business, the Commission adjourned its meeting at 10:20 p.m. PREPARED BY: Todd W.^ Arg'E5w Community Services Director jm I LUN •G� 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Safety Commission DATE: May 18, 1987 FROM: City Engineer SUBJECT: Request for 4 -Way Stop Signs at Blauer Drive and Regan Lane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As'a result of the request from Karen Anderson, to put a 4 -way stop at the above subject intersection, we have put together the following background and warrant discussion along with appropriate diagrams and -data sheets. The intersection of Blauer Drive.and Regan Lane is located in an older, established, residential neighborhood, immediately easterly of, and adjacent to the•Argonaut Shopping Center and is bounded by Saratoga - Sunnyvale Road to the west and.Cox Avenue on the north. Presently this intersection is controlled by stop signs on both legs.of Regan-Lane (which were installed in.1964- MV -4). Both Blauer Drive and Regan Lane are zoned for 25 MPH and do not require a speed zone survey:to be enforced. (CVC- 40802(b) - local street). Discussion of the warrants for a 4 -way stop as they apply to the inter- section of Blauer Drive and Regan Lane are as follows: 1. Traffic signals are not warranted at this location, therefore, the installation of a 4 -way stop as an interim measure is not warranted. 2. There has been one accident at this intersection in the last 15;� years. On August 25, 108 @ 12:45 PM, a 7 year old boy was riding his bicycle . northbound on Megan Lane, on the wrong side.of the road, approaching Blauer Drive was struck by a vehicle traveling eastbound on Blauer Drive turning right onto southbound Regan Lane. With no accident history of the type susceptible of correction by a 4 -way stop installa- tion, the same is not warranted. 3. The total vehicular volume entering the intersection averages 340 vehicles per hour for the busiest 8 hours of an.average day. Since the minimum volume for this requirement is 500 vehicles per hour, this warrant is not met. 4. The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the minor street (Regan Lane) does not average at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, and does not delay said minor street vehicular traffice of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour: ro r p C C Page 2 May 18, 1987 5. The speed of the vehicles approaching Blauer from both directions of Regan Lane is-0 MPH since these approaches are controlled by stop'signs. The 85th percentile speed.for vehicles traveling both east and west on Blauer Drive is 30.3 MPH, with the 50th percentile @ 27.0 MPH and the ten mile per hour pace is 22 MPH to 32 MPH with 92.5% traveling within the pace. In••conclusion, the installation of a four -way stop at the intersection of�:Blauer Drive and Regan Lane is not warranted. The existing stop signs on Regan Lane should remain in place and at full effect, as they are serving the purpose of right -of -way assignment and are a useful safety measure at this intersection. R _Shook City.Engineer RSS /df Attachments � : '� S ' +^ � , tit .; . ��x �,., »•�, p _ • � � ��5t�� yr .t% A 2 2 1981 � MNMAINQ bgpT: • 5 ,% � ' L } r. C. �t��tl�'�`Skc�,� �.�L °'e'�25,a.,a4yrZ °"^��„1� L�1` � _r �.r.%s �_, - -t:,1. .�, t�+..�ti k•�i�- .i';.��+'s.' ;a . r, .. .. 1 .. < ��,. . m - .L�,.�v.;,,.+��, �""'�+�`1 � T ��`{K.S•�'+ir �uFii�sy`= ,. ; w'r M� +. is., RECAX-LAAW 5CA I 6 .! r CITY OF S_ARATOGA 4-WAY STOP WARRANT SHEET INTERSECTION; DATE: �7v /�ruer L/ri WITH let7aj L�%%� Description of Warrant Warranted Unwarranted Where traffic signals are warranted and urgently needed, the four-way-stop is an interim measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while arrange- ments are being made for the signal'in- stallation. 'An accident problem, as indicated by five (S) or more reported accidents of a type susceptible of correction by a four -way stop installation in a 12- month period. MINIMUM VOLUMES 1. The total vehicular volume entering the intersection from all approaches must average at least 500 vehicles -per hour for any 8 hours of an aver- age day. 2. The combined vehicular and pedestrian volume from the minor street must aver- age at least 200 units per hour for the same 8 hours, with an average de- lay to minor street vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the maximum hour. 3. I,fi en the critical (85 %) approach speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 M.P.N., the minimum vehicular volume warrant is 70% of #2 requirements. GENERAL A. The "FOUR -WAY STOP" installation,where legal, has been found useful as a safety measure at some locations. It should not ordinarily be used where the volume of traffic on the intersecting roads is very unequal. B. The above summary of warrants for the installation of a four -way stop was ex- cepted from the Manual on "Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways ". DISCUSSION OF WARRANT: /`t- d-rfur- w ffw ne X s ho f Gv�zrr��n��Q,te �� fersec�ioz,� Sop Sc grls Oyl &,J,k Yt Zyj, pra dcde' ZZd 56,4A R CITY OF SARATOC COLLISION DIAGRAM INTERSECTION: �L L�Fj� i�ll/� AND f7EC•41V L -41Y� PERIOD: 15 year`s - 5 0)11 SFROM: 10n.1.197_3 TO:_ Presew�4 SI14/ ,8: PREPARED BY: _ E �ors-e y DATE: S /4 NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS DPROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY INJURY R FATAL 1 TOTAL ACCIDENTS SYMBOLS i — NOVINO VEHICLE .i- }})BACKING VEHICLE 4 -- NON-INVOLVED VEHICLE .a*- —PEDESTRIAN Q PARKED VEHICLE r] FIXED OBJECT FATAL ACCIDENT 0 INJURY ACCIDENT TYPES OF COLLISIONS ---+*- REAR ENO —P4. HEAD ON f7C SIDESWIPE OUT OF CONTROL LEFT TURN RIGHT ANGLE SHOW FOR EACH ACCIDENT I. TIME OF DAY, DAYS DATE 2 WEATHER AND ROAD SURFA- -IF UNUSUAL CONDITION EXISTED 3 NITS IF BETWEEN DUSK AND DAWN. T/ M E FRoN! . To CI T S' OF S�RATOGA Y04 U "E COUNT I/V TER SEC 7-10 IV Bc At/ Ea Da.l RE6AN .W loon - / /00 148 99 1100 - /ZOO 1 Z OO - 1300 156 104 /40o -- I55-oo 193 146 15 - (6op Z44 196 1600 -1700 1700 -I Boo Z z3 ZZZ Z03 ZO3 1800 -19co 1 41 1 6 9 ro7-,4L s 49 1 1�2Z0 AoT= '0717 /,378 7-07-,4L,5 Z47 264- Z60 339 4�0 4 Z(S 4ZS" 310• 2J7 1 1 D�SCUSS�OnI ; %%e A-)�l vo16e"7itf war,,- per fe h°''Lr 0 � %h is `iocrr avera e �a r 6 ?0 3L-) SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. 13 AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: 7/1/87 CITY MGR. APPROVAL ORIGINATING DEPT: Engineering SUBJECT: Request for Mirror at the Bend in Stoneridge Drive Recommended Motion: Approve request only if the applicant accepts responsibility for maintenance and holds the City harmless from any claims resulting from such an installation.. Report Summary: Saratoga Oaks - Homeowners Association requested.the installation of a convex mirror to allow certain residents to view oncoming traffic. Staff review resulted in concern about maintaining proper adjustment. Encroach- ment permit was conditional on applicant holding the City harmless.. Homeowners Association considers that requirement too severe and has requested that it be waived .. - Public Safety Commission supports the staff finding and position on this matter. • Fiscal Impacts: None. . Attachments: 1. Public Safety Commission minutes. 2. Staff Report including correspondence and proposed encroachment permit. Motion and Vote: Staff recommendation 5 =0. F T MC.z�wlED 4 `' JUN 17 19K o n n 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Karen Anderson Martha Clevenger Joyce Hlava David Moyles Donald Peterson June 15, 1987 To: City Engineer From: Community Services Director Subject: Request for Mirror at Bend in Roadway on Stoneridge Drive This is in response to your memorandum dated May 28, 1987, concerning the above referenced subject. The Public Safety Commission supported your recommendation against the installation of a mirror on Stoneridge Drive unless the homeowners association which would be installing the mirror agreed to accept full responsibility for the mirror and hold the City harmless. However, the Commission also recommended that you analyze that portion of the roadway to determine if any additional modifications in the interest of public safety should be made. A copy of the minutes from the June 8, 1987, meeting is attached. jm Attachment t PSC MINUTES - JUNE 8, 1987 Page 2 Commissioner Mulford suggested that a Datrol unit dedicated to Bohlman Road would probably make more sense on Friday since there would not be outsi'der-s using the street to view fireworks displays. Captain Thomas indicated the cost to the City for both the extra patrol on Friday and the checkpoint on Saturday would be $17.28 an hour. If the extra patrol on Friday and the checkpoint on Saturday were to be established between the hours of 5 p.m. to 11 p.m., the total cost to the City for this activity would be $207.36. In light of the extreme fire hazard resulting from extraordinarily dry conditions in the area, together with the low cost of the added enforcement, the Commission felt that the extra Sheriff's patrols would be apprODriate on both Friday and Saturday in the interest of public safety. Toward that objective, the following motion was made: MOTION: It was moved by Com. Newby, with a second from Com. Borah . that the PSC recommends to the City Council the addition of a reserve officer to patrol Bohlman Road between the hours of 5 p.m. and 11 p.m. on Friday, July 3rd, and the addition of a reserve officer to establish a checkpOint at the beginning of Bohlman Road between the hours of 5 D.M. and 11 p.m. on Saturday, July 4th, due to the extreme fire hazards present in the area, and that the checkpoint on July 4th be authorized to restrict traffic as had previously been done in the past two years. Motion passed by unanimous vote. STONRIDGE DRIVE MIRROR The PSC reviewed a report issued by the City Engineer responding to a request for a mirror at the bend in the street on Stronridge Drive. The Saratoga Oaks Homeowners Association had applied to the City for an encroachment permit to install the mirror, and had protested a clause in the application for the permit which stated they must hold the City harmless for any liability relative to.the mirror. The Commission reviewed a letter from the homeowners association dated March 31, 1987, stating why they felt the mirror -would be justified from a public safety standpoint, and why the association did not feel it should agree to hold the City harmless. The Commission also reviewed a letter from the City Manager to the homeowners association dated May 22, 1987, indicating that the hold harmless clause was a requirement for all encroachments within the City's right -of -way, and that the City would conduct an evaluation of the necessity of a mirror from the City's Derspective. Other correspondence the Commission reviewed was a letter from the City Engineer to the homeowners association dated February 26, 1987, and a letter from the homeowners association to the City dated January 13, 1987. The Commission also reviewed a map of the homeowners association which clearly indicated how Stoneridge Drive circled the housing development from Bank Mill Road on the east side down to Springer Avenue on-'the south side. PSC MINUTES JUNE 8, 1987 Page 3 Mr. Grey gave a presentation to the Commission supporting the homeowners association position that the mirror would be of general _public benefit, and therefore the association should not be held liable for any injuries resulting from the mirror's installation. A primary concern with regards to this mirror was the liability which could result if the mirror were to fall out of adjustment, and deceive a motorist into thinking there was no traffic coming around the corner when in fact there was. Com. Mulford indicated he had inspected the site personally, to determine for himself the merit of the proposal, and whether or not it was justified from a City persDective. Com. Mulford pointed out that in the association's January 13, 1987, correspondence to the City, the property management company had specifically indicated the mirror would give residents who reside at 14690, 14688, and 14686 Stoneridge a view of oncoming traffic on Stoneridge. Subsequent correspondence, on the other hand, took the position that the mirror would be -of general Dublic benefit. The Commission Chairman felt that the mirror would be Of principal value to the residents identified in the January 13 correspondence to a greater degree than it would be of general public benefit to the City. After some discussion, the Commission made the following motion: MOTION: It was moved by Com. Long, with a second from Com. Borah that the Saratoga PSC supports the City Engineer's recommendation against the installation of the mirror on Stoneridge unless the Assoc.iation accepts full responsibility for the mirror and holds the City harmless. Motion passed by unanimous vote. The Commission made a'second motion: MOTION: It was moved by Com. Swanson, with a second from Com. Borah, that the PSC recommends that the City Engineer be directed to analyze the bend on Stoneridge Drive to determine if any additional modifications to the roadway should be made by the City to make it safer, exclusive of the mirror alternative proposed by the homeowners association. Motion passed by unanimous vote. PARKING IN FRONT OF POST OFFICE ON SARATOGA AVENUE Mr. Argow indicated that the City had received a call only a couple of hours before the PSC meeting began requesting that this item be trailed to the July meeting because a Mr. White, who apparently is a property owner with an interest in the proposal, could not be present at the June Commission meeting and wanted to a ° ° a0z 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE . SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 MEMORANDUM TO: Public Safety Commission DATE: May 28, 1987 FROM: City Engineer SUBJECT: Request for mirror at the bend in Stoneridge Drive The Saratoga Oaks Homeowners Association, through its property management firm, requested that a convex mirror be placed, at their expense, at the right angle bend in Stoneridge Drive. The purpose _ was.to allow the residents at 14690, 14688 and 14686 Stoneridge Drive to view the oncoming traffic on Stoneridge. We consider such an installation to be a potential hazard primarily because of the liability exposure to the City if this mirror should be out.of adjustment. If an accident should occur during that period the City would no doubt be brought into any lawsuit which might be filed. Therefore, it was staff's feeling that the way to handle this request was to require that the applicant hold the City harmless from any claims resulting from such installation and that they be responsible for main- tenance. The attached Encroachment Permit was'drafted by the City Attorney. It contains the above described provisions. This permit was forwarded to the Association in February for their review and approval. By letter dated March 31, 1986 the Association has expressed its unwillingness to accept the conditions. It is their position that the mirror will be of general benefit to the traffic on Stoneridge and therefore the City should not impose such an onerous condition. .There is no accident history at this location to warrant considera- tion of such an installation and for the reasons.stated above, staff recommends against this installation unless the Association accepts full responsibility. In fact, it is our opinion that only the residents referred in the original request will benefit from such an installation. bert Shook City Engineer cc: Harry Peacock Attachments - March 31, 1987 Association Letter. - February 26, 1987 Transmittal of Encroachment Permit. - Encroachment Permit. - January 13, 1987 request for installation of mirror. APR SARATOGA OAKS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. March 31, 1987 City Council City of-Saratoga t 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Re: Saratoga Oaks _ Homeowners Association Gentlemen: The Board of Directors of the Saratoga Oaks Homeowners Association has received and considered the proposed encroachment permit relating to the Association's request for permission to install a convex mirror within the public right -of -way of Stoneridge Drive. The Board is of the opinion that the condition imposed by the city in the permit which requires the Association to hold the city harmless from all claims is harsh and unjustified. It is the opinion of the Board that the installation of the mirror as proposed is for the benefit of the general public using Stoneridge Drive, and is not solely for the benefit of residents who live on that public street. Moreover, it is the belief of the Board that. the installation, when accomplished, will provide greater safety•for the users of the street and will decrease the risk of accident and injury to the users. As you undoubtedly know, the view of those using this roadway as they approach the turn where the mirror is proposed to be installed is greatly restricted by the manner in which the street is laid out and because of the.existing structures located at the turn. It is the feeling of the Board that the City of Saratoga is under considerable risk for allowing the condition to exist, and the proposed installation would reduce the risk of liability rather than add to it, as the hold harmless clause of the permit would imply. L �GA 1:1777 FRUI'I•VALE : %V1•,NLIE • SA1iA'I'OGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 t-lt no iiti7 :3 1(iti -COUNCIL MEMBEILS: Karen Anderson February 26, 1987 Martha Clevenger Joyce H lava David Moy/es Donald Peterson Sandro Benassi Community Management Services, Inc. 1585 The Alameda San Jose, Ca. 95126 Re: Request from Saratoga Oaks Homeowners Association to install a convex mirror on.Stoneridge Drive Dear Mr. Benassi: Attached is a draft copy of the encroachment permit form, to allow the above referenced installation. If this meets with the Homeowners Association, please advise us so that arrangements can be made for the proper executions and the recording thereof. Should there by any questions or comments on this matter please contact Erman Dorsey of this department. ery truly yours, obert . Sh o City Engineer Attachment Recording requested by: CITY OF SARATOGA After recordation return to: -City of Saratoga Planning Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 ENCROACHMENT PERMIT C WHEREAS, SARATOGA OAKS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ( "Owner ") is the owner of the common areas within the Saratoga Oaks Condominium project located in the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof; WHEREAS., Owner has applied to the City of Saratoga ( "City ") for- an encroachment permit to install a convex mirror within a portion of the City's public right -of -way for Stoneridge Drive; and WHEREAS, City is willing to grant the requested encroachment permit, subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, NOW, THEREFORE, City does hereby grant to Owner an encroachment permit to construct the improvement hereinabove described within a portion of the public right -of -way, in accordance with the plans and drawings submitted by Owner to City in connection with the application for such permit, subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. This permit constitutes a revocable license and no property or vested rights of any kind are granted to Owner. If all or any portion of the right -of -way is needed by City for any public purpose, City may revoke this permit in whole or in part upon written notice to Owner, in which event, Owner shall remove the improvement within the public right -of -way as specified by City and restore the public right -of -way to its original condition within ninety (90) days after receipt of said notice. All removal costs shall be paid by Owner. 2. In consideration for City's issuance of this permit, Owner does hereby agree to indemnify and hold City, its officers, officials, agents. employees, boards, commissions and consultants free and harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, damages; liabilities, costs or expenses (including the expense of defending any action brought against City or any of its officers, officials, agents, employees, boards, commissions or consultants), arising out of or relating to loss; injury or damages suffered by Owner or by any other person as a result of said improvement being constructed within a portion of the public right- of-.way, or as a result of any failure of said improvement to operate in the manner intended by Owner. 3. City shall have no responsibility for the maintenance or repair of any improvement installed by Owner pursuant to this permit. -1- 4. This permit shall run with the land and the terms and conditions hereof shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, personal - representatives, successors and assigns of Owner. CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation Dated: By City Engineer ATTEST: - GRACE E.- CORY Deputy City Clerk Government Code § 40814 .ACCEPTANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT The undersigned Owner hereby accepts the foregoing encroachment permit and agrees to comply with all of -the terms and conditions set forth therein. Dated: -2- C COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. January 13, 1987 s i 046n�► t8 14 1188/ ML ,....City of Saratoga - Attn: Robert S. Shook City Engineer 13777 Fruitvale Saratoga, CA 95070 Re: Saratoga Oaks - -� Mirror Request CcvlVe,x . Dear Mr. Shook: The Sarato a Oaks Homeowners Association is requesting permission to install a� =a`%a mirror on Stoneridge as marked on the enclosed map. The purpose is to give the residents who reside at 14690, 14688, and 14686 Stoneridge a view of oncoming traffic up Stoneridge. Please review the request. We already have placed a steel post on the property and will be happy to meet with you on the site for an analysis of the situation. Sincerely, COMMUNITY NT SERVICES, INC. Sandro Benassi, Property Manager for SARATOGA OAKS HOMEOWNERS ASSN. SB: jc cc: Board of Directors 1585 The Alameda • San Jose, CA 95126 • (408) 292 -9606 SMAXIAILL RD. L%nes o { ..• Siyh � Z.�; I , X .,q l31-7 , 4. Aa Bf 9i /y .� of 7sy u rifr• rt ro./m. 11 V »t 9i1 t BI fig dJ t) dSf4/ If B99i /p 69-Y Bf 7i /.. ff7i/. Bfff� oL 9i/ lu . � YL7i /y O iL 9i /i. FL9t� 6C7i/ s LL 76/� 'S• K ` O ZfL 9i /¢ n9 +/y OV 7L90./ CL � LL f•i /y f-� Lt fi /„ - 6L9i� 64 fi/y I)t od'fi � •> l t'97'i /� �o I. 487i/rJJ i 0 a III C67i 687i/ ii/ oC7i .." t. / b _ W l .. .. -a67 i/p Q' y a .s /a, 7616/es _ atio u-� 36 "Con vex Mirror mounfed J -ai 5' -'eef hiqh on siee/ ` post, in back of`cur�h, prepsA� - CON&Rt55 SPr�_WGs RD. 1 L 2 i F u i o77y •i ~!� / ! Y 497i/r r79'i /yi f99i /.r E i � Y . ;l7i /si S79i /A i77t /w fffi/ T7 Y. U 979i /yj Lf7i /y f7fi /.o B77i tf7tY B99i /p 69-Y Bf 7i /.. ff7i/. Bfff� oL 9i/ lu . � YL7i /y O iL 9i /i. FL9t� 6C7i/ s LL 76/� 'S• K ` O ZfL 9i /¢ n9 +/y OV 7L90./ CL � LL f•i /y f-� Lt fi /„ - 6L9i� 64 fi/y I)t od'fi � •> l t'97'i /� �o I. 487i/rJJ i 0 a III C67i 687i/ ii/ oC7i .." t. / b _ W l .. .. -a67 i/p Q' y a .s /a, 7616/es _ atio u-� 36 "Con vex Mirror mounfed J -ai 5' -'eef hiqh on siee/ ` post, in back of`cur�h, prepsA� - CON&Rt55 SPr�_WGs RD. 1 L 2 i F u i Ior ^+,QR 1007 SARATOGA OAKS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. /4,� A3 C March 31, 1987 City Council City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Re: Saratoga Oaks Homeowners Association Gentlemen: The Board of Directors of the Saratoga Oaks Homeowners Association has received and considered the proposed encroachment permit relating to the Association's request for permission to install a convex mirror within the public right -of -way of Stoneridge Drive. The Board is of the opinion that the condition imposed by the city in the permit which requires the Association to hold the city harmless from all claims is harsh and unjustified. It is the opinion of the Board that the installation of the mirror as proposed is for the benefit of the general public using Stoneridge Drive, and is not solely for the benefit of residents who live on that public street. Moreover, it is the belief of the Board that the installation, when accomplished, will provide greater safety for the users of the street and will decrease the risk of accident and injury to the users. As you undoubtedly know, the view of those using this roadway as they approach the turn where the mirror is proposed to be installed is greatly restricted by the manner in which the street is laid out and because of the existing structures located at the turn. It is the feeling of the Board that the City of Saratoga is under considerable risk for allowing the condition to exist, and the proposed installation would reduce the risk of liability rather than add to it, as the hold harmless clause of the permit would imply. 1585 The Alameda, San Jose, California 95126 A City of Saratoga March 31, 1987 Page 2 Undoubtedly you are aware of the fact that on numerous instances, governmental agencies having jurisdiction of streets have been held liable in damages under the Tort Claims Act for permitting dangerous conditions of public property to exist when such conditions created a reasonably foreseeable risk of injury. The Board is of the opinion that the condition at the location herein referred to is in truth a dangerous condition of public property. If the city in fact had no prior knowledge of this condition, this communication should be sufficient to put the city on notice thereof. The Association is willing to assume the cost of making the installation in the interest of reducing the risk for all persons concerned, but it feels that it is unfair of the city to ask the Association to assume all risk, particularly when the installation should substantially meliorate the existing condition. Your further consideration and response is solicited. LG:sd cc: Board of Directors Very truly yours, SARATOGA OAKS HOM ERS ASSOCIATION Lee Grey, P side i .• C 92 0&M&1XQ)0& 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE . SARATOGA. CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Karen Anderson Martha Clevenger February 26, 1987 Joyce Hlava David Moyles Donald Peterson Sandro Benassi Community Management Services, Inc. 1585 The Alameda San Jose, Ca. 95126 Re: Request from Saratoga Oaks Homeowners Association to install a convex mirror on Stoneridge Drive Dear Mr. Benassi: . Attached is a draft copy of the encroachment permit form, to allow the above referenced installation. If this meets with the Homeowners Association, please advise us so that arrangements can be made for the proper executions and the recording thereof. Should there by any questions or comments on this matter please contact Erman Dorsey of this department. d obery truly yours, ert Sh o City Engineer Attachment FEB 1917 1981 C.M.S. INCS yl 4 Recording requested by: CITY OF SARATOGA After recordation return to: City of Saratoga Planning Department 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WHEREAS, SARATOGA OAKS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ( "Owner ") is the owner of the - common areas within the Saratoga Oaks Condominium project located in the City of Saratoga, County of Santa Clara, State of California, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof; WHEREAS. Owner has applied to the City of Saratoga ( "City ") for an encroachment permit to install a convex mirror within a portion of the City's public right -of -way for Stoneridge Drive; and WHEREAS, City is willing to grant the requested encroachment permit, subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, NOW, THEREFORE, City does hereby grant to Owner an encroachment permit to construct the improvement hereinabove described within a portion of the public right -of -way, in accordance with the plans and drawings submitted by Owner to City in connection with the application for such permit; subject to the following terms and conditions: I. 'This permit constitutes a revocable license and no property or vested rights of any kind are granted to Owner. If all or any portion of the right -of -way is needed by City for any public purpose, City may revoke this permit in whole or in part upon written notice to Owner, in which event, Owner shall remove the improvement within the public right -of -way as specified by City and restore the public right -of -way to its original condition within ninety (90) days after receipt of said notice. All removal costs shall be paid by Owner. 2. In consideration for City's issuance of this permit, Owner does hereby agree to indemnify and hold City, its officers, officials, agents. employees, boards; commissions and consultants free and harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, causes of action, damages; liabilities, costs or expenses (including the expense of defending any action brought against City or any of its officers,* officials, agents, employees, boards, commissions or consultants), arising out of or relating to loss, injury or damages suffered by Owner or by any other person as a result of said improvement being constructed within a portion of the public right -of -way; or as a result of any failure of said improvement to operate in the manner intended by Owner. 3. City shall have no responsibility for the maintenance or repair of any improvement installed by Owner pursuant to this permit. -1- 4. This permit shall run with the land and the terms and conditions hereof shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, personal representatives, successors and assigns of Owner. Dated: ATTEST: GRACE E. CORY Deputy City Clerk Government Code S 40814 CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation a City Engineer ACCEPTANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERWUT The undersigned Owner hereby accepts the foregoing encroachment permit and agrees to comply with all of the terms and conditions set forth therein. Dated: -2- `N J[ STATE OF CALIFORNIA 1 ss. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) On this day of 1987. before me, the undersigned Notary Public. personally appeared ( ) personally known to me ( ) proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. -3- Notary Public for California 10 1'* sigh i I EXA(l. Bfla � \ / ccL -7 T C '- L " I V " "7 L c C7 1 pos&, M hack- areas A cz� . C- E:i i ---- --I CP4&kUSS Spta -WGS 9-o'