HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 96-17 RESOLUTION NO. 96-17
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION WITH THE METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FOR ALLOCATION OF TRANSPORTATION
DEVELOPMENT ACT FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996/97 FOR
PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE PROJECTS
WHEREAS, the Transportation Development Act (TDA) of 1971 provides
for the disbursement of funds from the Local Transportation Fund of
the County of Santa Clara for use by eligible claimants for the
purpose of pedestrian or bicycle improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has
requested applications from the cities in Santa Clara County for
the three-year cycle from 1996 to 1999; and
WHEREAS, funds will be needed for a desired pedestrian walkway
project, detailed in Attachments 2 to 6;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Director of Public Works
is authorized to execute and file project applications pursuant to
the terms of the Transportation Development Act of 1971, as
amended, and pursuant to the applicable rules and regulations
promulgated thereunder, together with all necessary supporting
documents, with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for
allocations of Transportation Development Act funds for fiscal year
1996/97 for pedestrian/bicycle projects.
The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the
Saratoga City Council at a meeting held on the 17th day of April,
1996, by the following vote:
AYES: Council members Burger, Moran, Tucker, Wolfe and Mayor Jacobs
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Mayor
ATTEST:
I~eputy City Clerk
APPLICATION DO~S: TDA ARTICI-F-
BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS
App4ic~ Cit.y of Saratoga . Conm~pe~m John Cherbone
count: Santa Clara ...... Tdeptmoe ( 408 ) 867-3438
N~meof~o~e~: Quito Road ~alkwav ~~ ~D0,000
Bike P~ (a~ O __ 0~) Om~ B~e Fd~ ........ (t~)
B~e ~ (~ HD __ 0e~) p~ W~y X 2 ,~t Gent)
h~~i~n: Sidewalk along west side of Quito Road between Cox Avenue
and Sousa Lane.
En~ P~: ~low', p[~ !~ ~ ~~ ~ app[~ for ~ ~ ~~ ~in~ ~i~ d~f-~y,
~~, ~c~, ~; ~ ~vi& po~ ~ ~mg td ~ of pm~ ~ ~ ~g ~-
~ ~a~ofg~~~pri~~~B~f~~
~~~ Preliminary Engineering, Design and Construction.
TD^ I i ~00,000
ara a i 15,ooo ................
.... t"'
..To,--, ....i .' .........."' i 1
I. Pmjec~ F/~iba~y Gr no, give =ppmxinmm daze ofcomp4etion in commen~.) A. Is the projec~ approved by the governing agent7 (C~/Council or Board of Supervisors)?
B. If = bikeway, does die pro~*ci me~ Cait~ns' nmnc~ory minimum safer. c~ign cr~eri~
(5e~on 7-1000 of the California Highway Design ManuaL)
C, !f a bio/de ~j~:X, ~ it been ~*~l
Of not. piece explain below under
D. Ha~ the ~nv~nenml irapea documentsion been comp~ecL~
(See Tab I, ,%frCs FundAppl~az~n ManuaO Specify daze cornpieced.
Ne~axjve Dedaz~ion
Nc~ice of Exemp~on 'I7~7
F_ Expected completion date of pto~*c~ .I~L,~,O, Lq_~_
1. Right~f-waY purcha~xl
A~eement of all cixies and ¢xhet ager~es involved
Comn~une~ of o~ ne~_ss~ func~
4. Pre|irninm7 d~sign completed
5. Final co~ e~ma~e: F~n~nci~| plan completed
F. P~v~sio~s h~e been made to rn~inmin Ihe facfl i~y by ciaimam X., other
Comrnen~s ~ D. Categorically Exempt. N6tice~.~f ~ Exemption
E. 1. None Required.
4. August 1996.
II. Evaluation Criteria (Answer questions, check u m=ny lines u appty and itsdude any additional infoanation in 'Comments.')
YES NO
A. Doe the project eliminate problem aren. s on ro.,_~ which would provile
relatively safe tr=vel uses? X
1. Bridge or remowal of bazTier __ 4. Subaundardpataorculverts
2. Naffow road segments 5. Higtl tnfF~ valumeand s
~. 'Remov, lofp~king ' ~ O~r pad,vehiCle
Cornmenu: conflicts
Construction of sidewalks where none exists. Proposed siclewalk will
connect existing walkways and will improve safety for pedestrians.
YES NO
B. DoestheprojectpmvideaccesstoorbicydepsrkinginhighusesaivkYce~ X_._ '-
Access Paddng Please
1. ErnFaoyment X Nearby professional off ace complexes.
7. Commercial 'T Webate, E1 Paseo, & ~uZto Shopping Cen
3. Educational + We~ont It.S., Pr ect H.S., Rolling FIll
4. Publictmnsponation interface Blls S._....tops { te ~ Middle Scho
R
$. Governmenui or social servkz centers
6. Cultursl or recreational T Y~. E1 Quito Parlc
7. other .........
NO
C Does the proiect provide [or the improveTent of bicycle/tr=nsit or pedestrisn/uansit X
commute ~ ....
Provicles safe access to Santa Clara Transit,
District Route t~57.
YES NO
D. !. Does the project provide connection to and continuity of Ionget toutes~ (P1eue explain X ....
under comments.)
2. ~sprojectinducLedinac~u~t~rcityf~ci~i~;zsp~an~tcir~u~ati~ndement~fagene~Plan~-X
CIr no, pien.se exp!~in under comments.)
Comments: l. Connects to sidewalks to the N & S on Ouito Road.
2. Project identified in Capital Improvement Plan & Circulation
Element of the General Plan.
~ NO
X
E. Is there demot~zrated local suppoet? '
I. Initiated or supported by community or bicyding organiz:uior~ ..........
2. Initiated by locfl employers or employee 8toups~ __
3. Public hearing held?
4. Lcx:nJ funding (amount: S 15 r O 0 0 )
...... --~
5. Ixx=l planrang or engineering eftam; __ --
Comments:
~.. 4. City to make 10% match.
F. Additionzl materials required (suach or indicate whm Each will be provided to MTC):
1. Proten map
2. Environmental documenL Please note thai the copy of a Nclice of Exemption or Neslztive Declaration which is
sent to MTC must show a ~arnp of receipt for fling by the County Clerk or State Secretary of Resources.
3. Legal counsers opinion that addresaes three points (see TDA Application Document section):
(a) That the claimant is authorized to perform the project for which the fund~ are ckaimecL
(b) That the claimant is eligible to eL%ira under Pub. Util. Cede ~19234.
Co) That there is no legal impediment to the dam applying foe ~uncts or there is no pending or threatened
litiration th~ might aclve:rse~ affect the project or the ability of the claimant to carry out the proiect-
4. Governing-booty resolution apptoving the project and authorizing the submittal of a claim.
Comments: 1. Attached.
2. Categorically Exempt:. Notice of ExemFtion attacheel.
3. To be p~ovicled if actually required.
NOTE: References are to
4 ~O be p~ovicled. .
. FcT:~ruar~ 2(3. 1.992
VICINITY MAP
IARO ROA
l~ tN
C~.
HAM
SAR
c~
7,,
,,, c,'t
(' i 5Pe~i,I
Notice of Exemption' Appendix l
TO: [] Of~ceofPbnn~gandR~ea~h FrOm: ~PubHc Agency) City of Saratoga
1400 Tenth Sn~eL Room 121 Dept. of Public Works
Sacramemo, CA 95814 .....
13777 Fruitval~aA~nue
~ CourtlyClerk Saratoga, CA 95070 ~ ~
Coun[yof RRntn C,]Rra .. ~ ~
lg] North First St- .
San Jose, CA. 95112 G0 ~= _
PmlectTItle: Quito Road Walkway - =~ "
P[oje~Locatlon-Spe~[fic:.. Quito Road (~est side) between Cox A-v. enue~ a Sousa
Lane in the City of Saratoga.
~roie01 ~ooa[!o~ - CRy: Saratoga Projell location - County: Santa Clara
Oesc[iptiono[Pro|ect: Installation of continuous curb, gutter, and sidewalk.
Name of Public Agency Approvlng Project: City of Saratoga
NameofPersoeorAge~yCarrylngOutProje~: Larry I. Perlin, Director of Public Works
Exempt Status: (ctaeck one)
[] Minismrial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 15258);
[] Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269(a));
71 Emergency Projec~ (Scc. 21080(b)(4); 15269(bXc));
~.CategoricalExemplion. Smlctypcandsecdonnumi:gr: Class 1Cc) - Section 15301
[] Smmu~y Ex~np~o~. Smm ~x~ number.
Reasons whyprojectisexempt: Minor alteration of existing public street with no
removal of scenic resources.
Lead Agency John Cherbone ( 408 ) 867-3438 x223
Co ntact Person: Area Codc/Telephonc/Exmnsion:
If filed by applicant: 1. Auach certified document of exemption finding.
2. Has a notice of excmlxion beta filed by the public agency appmving the project? [] Yes [] No
[] Signed by Lead Agency D~:I~Te~ for filing at OPR:
199G MAY 11 1996
[] Signed by Applicant F~ C,'{ .... - TH~QtIGH _ ,, -
!i~ T','~;: $:':~ !;:,!: ~': 'f;~!E C,qSNt~CLERK Revised October 1989
- eT~'.;;-;h"d" .t~,E., COLifii'Y CkERK