HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2153 RESOLUTION NO. 2153
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
SARATOGA APPROVING STIPULATION FOR SETTLEMENT
RELATING TO TRERLINK ¥S. CITY OF SARATOGA, UNITED
STATES DNTRICT COURT, NORTHERN DISTR~CT
CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. C 83 20268 WAI, AND
AUTHORIZI~NG THE EXECUTION THEREOF
A. Heber N. Teerlink and Erma D. Teerlink ("Teerlinks'9 are plaintiffs
and the City of Saratoga ("City") is defendant in that certain action entitled Teerlink
vs. City of Saratoga, Case No. C 83 20268 WAI, now pending in the United States
District Court, Northern District of California ("the Federal Action").
B. In the Federal Action, Teerlinks request the court to declare Measure
A invalid and to issue an injunction requiring City to process and issue necessary
permits for the development and improvement of Tract 6781 (the "Subject Property"),
including the construction of houses upon the 23 lots shown on the tentative map for
the Subject Property as approved by City on or about March 14, 1979. The Federal
Action also asserts violation of Teerlinks' civil rights and seeks actual damages in an
unspeeified amount for injuries suffered to date of judgment, punitive damages in the
amount of $10,000,000.00 and attorneys' fees and costs.
C. City appeared in the Federal Action and filed a motion to dismiss the
complaint, and said motion is still pending before the court.
D. Teerlinks and City acknowledge that all assertions, allegations and
claims which have been or could have been made by Teerlinks in the Federal Action
are disputed and denied by City as to all issues and in all respects. Without admitting
the validity of any contentions which have, or might have been made by either of
them, Teerlinks and City desire and intend fully and finally to compromise and settle
all such contentions and other matters in controversy between them.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Saratoga as follows:
1. The City Council hereby approves a stipulation for settlement on the
terms and conditions and in the form of the Stipulation for Settlement attached hereto
as Exhibit hA" and incorporated herein by reference. Recitals A through D set forth
above are incorporated herein by reference.
2. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to
execute the Stipulation for Settlement, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A," for
and on behalf of the City of Saratoga, together with any and all other documents
necessary to consummate such Stipulation for Settlement.
3. The Stipulation for Settlement shall be subject to confirmation by the
United States District Court, Northern District of California, on motion by Teerlinks
in the Federal Action.
5/24/84/TOPPEL MUNI
'l'
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Saratoga on the 6th day of June, 1984, by the following vote:
AYES: Councils Callon, Clevenger, Fanelli,.~'and Mayor Moyles
NOES: Councilmember Mallory
ABSENT: None
R
ATTEST:
~EPUrY CITY CLERK
5/24/84/TOPPEL MUNI
-2-
STIPULATION FOR SETTLEMENT
This Stipulation for Settlement ("Agreement"), by and between HEBER N.
TEEEl,INK, ERMA D. TEERLINK ("Teerlinks") and GERARD & LAMBERT, INC., a
California corporation, as sole general partner of Teerlink Ranch, Ltd., a California
limited partnership (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Teerlink/Lambert") and
the CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal corporation ("City") is made with reference to
the following facts:
A. Teerlink/Lambert are the fee owners of approximately 56 acres of
certain reai property designated as Tract No. 6781 (the "Subject Property") located
within the Northwestern Billside area of the City of Saratoga ("Northwestern
Hillside").
B. Teerlinks filed an application with City for approval of a tentative
map for the Subject Property, identified as Application No. SD 1355, and on or about
March '14,· 1979, City approved a tentative map for the Subject Property providing for
23 lots and, as part of such approval, imposing certain conditions to be satisfied by
the applicants prior to recordation of a final map.
C. On April 8, 1980, the citizens of Saratoga passed an initiative
ordinance, commonly known as Measure A, which became effective on April 25, 1980,
and which pertains to the Northwestern Hillside, including the Subject Property and
others.
D. Section 7 of Measure A states in pertinent part:
"Pending final completion of the requirements of Section 3, no zoning
changes, land divisions, subdivisions, building or grading permits for
construction of a new residence, or other land development approvals
of any kind shall be issued in the subject area, nor any applications
accepted therefor; provided, that upon a showing of extreme hardship
and in agreement with the provisions of this initiative, exceptions
may be granted after two noticed public hearings by a 4/5's vote of
the City Council."
Section 3 of Measure A also states in pertinent part:
-1-
'~rhe City of Saratoga shall within one year from the effective date
of this ordinane% or as soon thereafter as feasible, complete a
comprehensive review of all development issues in the subject area
and adopt a Specific Plan for the area pursuant to California
Government Code Sections 65450-65553, incorporating the standards
set forth in Section 4 below, and all policies and regulations required
to implement said Plan."
E. On June 7, 1981, pursuant to and consistent with Measure A and
Sections 65450-65553 of the Government Code, the City' adopted the Northwestern
Hillside Specific Plan {"Specific Plan"), and on April 27, 1982, pursuant to and
consistent with the Specific Plan, City enacted Ordinance N8-3.47 establishing zoning
regulations for the: Northwestern Hillside ("NHR Zoning Regulations"), being the area
covered by Measure A and the Specific Plan. Measure A, the Specific Plan and
Ordinance NS-3.47 reduced the density of development below the number of lots shown
on the tentaPirs map for the Subject Property.
Y. City has contended and still contends that Tract 6781 and SD 1355 are
subject to all provisions of Measure A, the Specific Plan and Ordinance NS-3.47,
including. the density provisions thereof, whereas Teerlink/Lambert have contended
and stilI contend they are entitled to subdivide their property into 23 lots, upon
compliance with all conditions for final map approval and further that they are
entitled to building permits authorizing the construction of a single family residence
upon each of such lots.
G. On September 26, 1983, Teerlinks commenced an action which is
presently pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, entitled T. ee.rlink v.s.:.....C.i.t.y of Saratoga, Case No. C 83 20268 WAI ("Federal
Action"). A motion to dismiss the complaint was filed by City on or about November
30, 1983. By stipulation between Teerlinks and City, Teerlinks have not been required
to respond to the motion to dismiss. The hearing on such motion has been continued
from time to time and no decision has been rendered thereon.
H. The City has denied and continues to deny each and every allegation
of Teerlinks in the Federal Action as to all issues and in all respects.
I. Without admitting the validity of any of the contentions which have,
or might have been made by any of them, the pad'ties to this Agreement desire and
intend fully and finally to compromise and to settle all such contentions and other
-2-
matters in controversy among them.
J. Civil Code Section 1542 provides:
"A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does
not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the
release, which if known by him must have materially affected his
settlement with the debtor."
K. This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding
concerning the subject matter between the parties to this Agreement and supersedes
and replaces all prior negotiations and proposed agreements, written and oral. Each of
the parties hereto acknowledges that no other party, nor the agents nor attorneys of
any other party, has made any promise, representation, or warranty whatsoever,
express or implied, not contained heroin to induce the execution of this Agreement,
and acknowledges that this Agreement has not been executed in reliance upon any
promise, representation, or warranty not contained herein.
L. In addition to the settlement of all matters in controversy with
respect to the Federal Action set forth above, 'the parties hereto desire to settle all
other claims, demands and causes of action which may presently exist between them
whether known, unknown, or suspected, except as they may arise from this Agreement.
M. All of the parties to this Agreement hereby acknowledge that they
have been represented by independent counsel of their own choice throughout all
negotiations which preceded the execution of this Agreement and that they have
executed this Agreement with the consent of, and upon the advice of, their own
counsel.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed as follows:
1. Recitals A through M are incorporated heroin by reference.
2. In consideration of the additional public improvements to be
constructed by Teerlink/Lambert, as described in Paragraph 3 below, and dismissal by
Teerlinks of the Federal Action, with prejudice as to all claims and all defendants, and
subject to compliance by Teerlink/Lambert with the tentative map conditions set forth
in SD ]355, City agrees to grant final map approval for the subdivision of Tract 6781
into 23 lots, in accordance with the tentative map originally approved by City. City
-3-
further agrees to process applications and issue building and grading permits and other
approvals as may be necessary for the construction of a single family dwelling and
accessory uses appurtenant thereto upon each of such lots, conditioned upon prior
design review approval thereof and compliance by Teerlink/Lambert with all
applicable provisions of City's zoning and other ordinances, except for the density and
setback provisions of the NHR Zoning Regulations and the Specific Plan. All
applications filed with City by Teerlink/Lambert for design review approval or building
permit shall be processed by City in due course on a non-discriminatory basis, and City
shall not give preference or priority to any design review or building permit
applications subsequently filed by other parties so as to delay the processing of or
rendering of a decision upon the earlier applications submitted by Teerlink/Lambert.
City further agrees to take such actions as may be required on the part of City,
including condemnation proceedings if necessary, to facilitate the formation of the
water district or other installation of water service to the Subject Property in lieu
thereof..
3. From and after the effective date of this Agreement, neither City
nor Teerlinks shall prosecute the Federal Action, nor shall Teerlinks or
Teerlink/Lambert commence any new action concerning the subject matter of the
Federal Action and this Agreement. Within ten (1O) days after the effective date of
this Agreement, Teerlinks shall file a conditional dismissal of the Federal Action as to
all claims and all defendants, with the understanding that Teerlinks may, within three
(3) years from the date hereof, restore such action in the event City fails to perform
any material provision of this Agreement. If the Federal Action is restored, City's
motion to dismiss shall first be submitted by Teerlinks and City to the court for a
ruling thereon and the parties shall not submit any other matter to the court for its
ruling prior to submission and ruling on City's motion to dismiss. Immediately upon
City granting final map approval for SD t355, Teerlinks shall file an unconditional
dismissal of the Federal Action, with prejudice, as to all claims and all defendants; if,
for any reason, Teerlinks fail to do so, then the Federal ACtion shall be deemed to
have been unconditionally dismissed, with prejudice, as to all claims and all
defendants, as of the date on which final map approval was granted.
4. In addition to any and all other requirements to be satisfied by
Teerlink/Lambert for final map approval as contained in SD 1355, Teerlink/Lambert
hereby agree to reconstruct, at their own expense and at no expense to City, the
public bridge and related public improvements at the Pierce Road crossing of Quarry
Creek, commonly known and hereafter referred to as the "South Bridge." All
construction on the South Bridge shall be performed in a good and workmanlike
manner, in accordance with plans and specifications prepared by Teerlink/Lambert and
approved by City prior to issuance of any building, grading or other permits for the
South Bridge. Such plans and specifications shall be based upon the preliminary design
and recommendations of Jennings -McDermott - I-Ieiss, Inc., and Riley Associates,
dated February 15, 1984, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made a
part hereof. In the event additional public rights of way must be acquired in order for
Teerlink/Lambert to recontruet the South Bridge, City shall take such action as may
be necessary to acquire the same and Teerlink/Lambert shall promptly reimburse City
for any acquisition costs. If Teerlinks and Teerlink/Lambert have satisfied all other
conditions for final map approval except the reconstruction of the South Bridge,
Teerlink/Lambert may enter into a Deferred Improvement-Agreement with City
providing for the reconstruction and completion of the South Bridge within a period of
one (1) year from the date of such agreement, with performance thereunder being
secured by a corporate surety bond, irrevocable letter of credit or other security in
form and amount satisfactory to City. The Deferred Improvement Agreement
referred to herein shall be executed prior to final map approval. All construction on
the South Bridge shall be guaranteed by Teerlink/Lambert against defects in material
or workmanship for a period of one (1) year after the date of completion and
acceptance by City.
5. As a further consideration for City's approval of said final map,
Teerlink/Lambert hereby agree that, in the event City enacts an ordinance for
imposition of a Development Impact Fee to be payable at the time building permits
are issued for the construction of new dwelling units within the NHR District, each of
the lots in Tract 6781 shall be subject to such fee; provided, however, that
Teerlink/Lambert shall be given prior notice of any such proposed ordinance and shall
be afforded an opportunity to be heard and to comment upon or challenge the
reasonableness of the Development Impact Fee to be imposed. City hereby agrees
that the Development Impact Fee will be charged on a uniform basis with respect to
all lots or parcels to which it applies.
6. Teerlinks and Teerlink/Lambert hereby stipulate that with respect to
the matters contained in this Agreement, Measure A is a valid and enforceable
-5-
initiative approved by the citizens of the City of Saratoga and that the Specific Plan
and the NHR Zoning Regulations are valid and enforceable. This stipulation shall be of
no force or effect in the event of City's breach of this Agreement.
7. Teerlink/Lambert and City shall each bear his, her or its own
attorney's fees and costs incurred in connection with the prosecution or defense of the
Federal Action and the negotiation and preparation of this Stipulation for Settlement.
8. Conditioned upon full performance of this Agreement by all parties:
(a) Teerlink/Lambert, on behalf of themselves and their resl~ective
agents, representatives, attorneys, employees, successors and
assigns, do hereby' release City, the former and present
members of the City Council, their officials, officers, agents,
representatives, employees and attorneys, from any and all
claims, demands and/or causes of action which may exist
between them, whether known, unknown, or suspected, and
Teerlink/Lambert hereby waive the provisions of Civil Code
Section 1542 set forth in Recital J above. -The release of
unknown claims contained in this Paragraph 8(a) is a separate
consideration for the release contained in Paragraph 8(b) hereof
and Teerlink/Lambert would not have executed this Agreement
or agreed to this Paragraph 8(a) but for the release contained in
Paragraph 8(b).
(b) City, on behalf of itself and its officials, officers, agents,
representatives, employees and attorneys, does hereby release
Teerlink/Lambert from all claims, demands and/or causes of
action which may exist between them, whether known or
unknown or suspected and City hereby waives the provisions of
Civil Code Section 1542 set forth in Recital J above. The
release' of unknown claims contained in this Paragraph 8(b) is a
separate consideration for the release contained in Paragraph
8(a) hereof and City would not have executed this Agreement or
agreed to this Paragraph 8(b) but for the release contained in
Paragraph 8(a).
-6-
9. This Agreement may be amended by an instrument in writing
referring hereto, signed by Teerlink/Lambert and City. Such amendment must
specifically state that it is an amendment to th~s Agreement. This Agreement may
not be amended orally or otherwise than as set forth in this Paragraph 9.
10. Teerlink/Lambert shall have no r/ght to assign all or any part of their
rights or obligations under this Agreement without prior written approval of City.
11. Teerlink/Lambert hereby represent and warrant to City that they
collectively hold the entire legal and equitable ownership interest in the Subject
Property, with full power and authority to enter into this Agreement, and that no
other party has any right, title or interest in the Subject Property or the right to
develop the same pursuant to SD 1355 and this Agreement.
12. This Agreement is entered into for the benefit of the parties hereto
and shall be for the benefit of, and be binding upon, the parties hereto, their heirs,
successors and assigns. Other than the parties hereto and their heirs, successors and
assigns, and the attorneys now of record in the Federal Action, no third person shall be
entitled, directly or indirectly, to base any claim or have any right arising from or
related to this Agreement.
13. If it becomes necessary to enforce any of the terms of this
Agreement or to declare rights hereunder, the prevailing party may be entitled to
reasonable attorneys' fees and other costs of litigation in addition to any other relief
to which he, she or it shall be entitled.
14. The effective date of this Agreement shal] be the date upon which it
is last signed by all parties and approved as to form by their attorneys. It may be
signed in one or more counterparts and, when all parties have signed the original or a
counterpart, such counterparts together shall constitute one original document. When
so signed, this Agreement shall be filed with the court in the Federal Action as a
Stipulation for Settlement, and shall be implemented as ordered by the Court.
IN WITNESS WHEREOf~, the parties have executed this Stipulation for
Settlement on the dates set forth below.
"RILEY ASSOCIATES- ~ ,L ENGINEERS -,o. 'Z"t
125 E. Sunnyoaks - Suite 113 ,~HEETftO. OF // /~,,,.
·
CAMPBELL,CA 95008 CALCULATED 8'f ' J~[ IL DATE
Z
(408) 3747700
CHECKED 8Y .... DATE
,..
,9007'//
SCALE
JOB
RILEY ASSOCIATES - CIVIL ENGINEERS
125 E. Sunnyoaks - Suite 113 S~EET
CAMPBELL. CA 95~8
(408) 374-7700
SCALE[,,-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ...........................
, . ~ :
k, · ......................................
.. , ~ ...........
:
...... : ............ 2' ~'~" ~ ............................................
: ...... : -~- -
~ev· ._ ,~. ~ ~ ....
::
;
,
........ ~ ~ :
125 E. Sunnyoaks - Suite 1 ]3 SHEET NO OF
(408) 37~7700
Joe
RILEY ASSOCIATES · CIVIL ENGINEERS
·
125 E. Sunnyoaks- Suite 113 SHEET
CAMPBELL, CA 95008 C,LCULATED
(408) 374-7700
SCALE
g7aucTu~4t C~ u.4 7' O--;
~ ~ ~"'~ '~, ,~ ~') ~.zr ~, (~ ,'~
........... = X .......
RILEY ASSOCIATES- C~ ,.. ENGINEERS Jo. * ~ x
, 125 E. Sunnyoaks- Suite 113 SHES, NO j~. ';~--- OF /
CAMPSEU.. CA 95008 C~L=~A~E= SY. O.,E ...~ / F / ~ %
(40s) 374-7700
SCALE
................................................ ",_.,,~ ..................
..................................... 29 ......... ~ .....
............................................................................................ L
.................... ~. .........................................................
JOB
RILEY ASSOCIATES - CIVIL ENGINEERS "?
· ; OF
125 E, Sunnyoaks - Suite 113 SHEET NO. }_, ~',
CAMPBELL, CA 95008 C,LCULATE0 BY *"' O,,E 'Z-//~'/~* ~'
(408) 374'7700
SCALE
FD ~C I/- '
-~- ~- ·
~ , ' . -.=;? .... :
f?~--, %~, ................................................:.-: .....
,2,~". Ll,~'yt~ZF -- :3~2'~~''/O-5'~ ..Z')
3~'.¢c~
9
""',r
........... .- - .......... ,- ..........
DEc)/-- F~A~t S ,'~ -
h '- ?o ' ,. ~,. .....~ ~ = Izo~,, ~oyt -~~, ~ 20
........... 2
JOB .....
RILEY ASSOCIATES - CIVIL ENGINEERS
125 E. Sunnyoaks - Suite ] 13 S.EE~
CAMPBELL. CA 95008
(4~) 374-7700
CHECKED BY DATE
1365 VANDER WAY SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95112 (408) 297-6969
February 7, 1984
F73s/$4
3ennings-McDermott-Heiss, Inc.
925 Regent Street, Suite 100
San Jose, California 95110
Attention: Mr. Bill Heiss
Subject: Proposal for Geotechnical Services
Pierce Road/Quarry I~oad Bridge Improvement
Saratoga, California
Gentlemen:
As requested, we are submitting this proposal to provide engineering
services related to the proposed improvement of a bridge structure
located on Pierce Road near the Quarry Road intersection ~n Saratoga,
California. The most likely prospect is that the bridge will be widened
on the doustrsam side in a man~er that will produce the flare with the
wider opening on the downhill side of the roadway. It will involve
relocating a I~wer pole on the upstream, right abutment, and the
construction of new foundations, bridge wing-walls, support spans,
decking and ~uard rails.
We envision four separate phases of work, as follows:
Phase I - Feasibili~ Investi~a.ti,on
Perform research of geologic literature and field
geologic/engineering reconnaissance. Prom these studies develop a
detailed plan for geologic and geotechnical investigation related to
the project.
Phase II - Field Investigation
Perform the field investigation using field engineers and geologists,
exploration by means of drill holes to a sufficient depth to
determine subsurface foundation soil and rock characteristics,
laboratory testing, engineering analysis and preparation of an
engineering report of cur findings, conclusions and recommendations.
Phase III- Nsi~/P~an Review
Assist designers in preparing plans for the bridge widening project,
review plans and specifications, as appropriate, to determine the
extent to which they follow our geotechnical recommendations.
February 7, 1984
Yi':m/84
Phase IV - Construction Inspection
Observe and advise during initial clearing, foundation excavation,
and the construction of bridge foundations. Inspect placement of
steel and concrete dud prepare concrete cylinders for testing.
Observe and test structure backfill placement and compaction and
provide a final report of our observation, inspection and testing.
This work will be performed on a schedule yet to be determined.
Generally, the Phase I preliminary work would require one to two weeks;
Phase II, the field investigation would require about four weeks; Phase
III would require about one week; and Phase IV would be scheduled for
timely inspections to be performed during the actual construction
operations and therefore would be tied closely to the construction
timetable.
We propose to calculate our fees for these services on a 'time and
materials" basis in accordance with the attached Schedule of Charges.
Our preliminaU estimate of fees for the activities described herein are
as follows:
Phase I - Preliminary Investigation I~ ,000.00
Phase II - Field Investigation ,000.00
Phase III- Design/Plan Review ~ 800.00
Phase IV - Construction Inspection .. ,000.00
Total ,800. O0
To acknowlege your acceptance of this proposal, please sign and return
one copy of the enclosed Agreement for Professional Services. Please
contact the undersigned or Dennis Eccles if you have any questions
regarding the proposed scope of work or any other contents of this
proposal or the attached Agreement form.
Yours sincerely,
TERRATECH, INC.
Kenneth L. Meleen
KLM/taa
Enclosures (2)
co: Accounting