Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-19-1986 City Council Agenda packet5 AGENDA BILL NO. /dc DATE: 2/25/86 (3/19/86) DEPT.: Community Development CITY MGR. APPROVAL Release of Bonds for Perry, West SUBJECT: 21781 Via Regina Summary: Fiscal Impacts: None Exhibits /Attachments: Recommended Action: Council Action 1. Memo 2. Memo 3/5: Approved. Perry West has provided bonds for the demolition of his house and garage located at 21781 Regina. The above work has been completed. Our recommendation is to release the bonds. Release bonds CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA ITEM 4,e), MEMORANDUM TO: City Council DATE: 2/25/86 FROM: Director of :Community Development SUBJECT: Construction Acceptance for 21781 Via Regina RSS /dsm Name Location: Perry West, 21781 Via Regina Public Improvements required for 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: Sam Espeseth Address: 2. Improvement Security: Type: Amount: Issuing Company: Wells Fargo Bank Address: Receipt, Bond or Certificate No.: 6501- 012504 -000 3. Special Remarks: MUT (DO IP 0 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 21791 Via Regina Investment Certificate 1,000.00 Robert S. Shook J E O RANDUM OgUT cDe 0 kk 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 ��s3 (408) 867 -3438 TO: City Council DATE: 2/25/86 FROM: Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Construction Acceptance for 21781 Via Regina Name Location: Perry West, 21781 Via Regina Public Improvements required for 21781 Via Regina 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: Address: Sam Espeseth 21791 Via Regina Saratoga, CA 2. Improvement Security: Type: Investment Certificate 3. Special Remarks: RSS /dsm Amount: Issuing Company: Wells Fargo Bank Address: $4,000.00 Receipt, Bond or Certificate No.: 6501- 012504 -001 Robert S. Shook '1 CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA BILL NO. j O C1-1 DATE: March :.19, 1986 DEPT.: City Manager SUBJECT: Recommendation to add ICMA Retirement Corporation to City's Deferred Compensation Plan Suamary As part of the retirement benefits for all regular employees, the City contributes a monthly amount to a Deferred Compensation Fund and these funds are placed in investment vehicles through the service of a Plan Administrator. Based upon a survey of the marketplace and analysis of the plans available for participants in deferred compensation, the City's Deferred Compensation Advisory Committee has concluded that the ICMA (International City Management Association) sponsored Retirement Corporation should be added as an additional Plan Administrator. In this way the City's program will be considerably strengthened, employees will have more flexibility in investments and greater access to well managed and high performing funds with excellent service from the Administrator. We do not anticipate that any significant additional amount of staff time will be required in administering the expanded program. Fiscal Impacts: None. Exhibits /Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 2. Background Memo AGENDA ITEM Recommended Action: The City's Deferred Compensation Advisory Committee is recommending that Council adopt Resolution adding ICMA Retirement Corporation as a Deferred Compensation Plan Administrator to the City's established program, while continuing with the current agreement with National Plan Coordinators. Council Action ADopted resolution. SUBJECT: C 04 0 IP oC guos REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL MEETING: 3 Recommendation to add ICMA Retirement Corporation to City's Deferred Compensation Plan DATE: 2 -27 -86 The City has:had a deferred compensation (457) program as a part of the employees retirement benefits since 1978 when this type of plan first became available for public agencies. Based on a formula developed at that time to replace Security benefits, a percentage of payroll (currently $62.60 per month per full time employee) is contributed to the employee's designated investment option. Additionally, employees have the opportunity to defer a portion of their salary, to the maximum total allowed by the IRS. These funds are available to employees only upon retirement, termination, or extreme financial hardship, at which time the money becomes taxable income. National Plan Coordinators (NPC) has been the City's Plan Administrator since the beginning of the program. There has been a great deal of growth and change in the field since 1978, and the City's Deferred Compensation Advisory Committee has been investigating other types of plans and holding discussions with plan administrators over a period of several years to determine if our current program provides optimum benefits to the City and the participants. The ICMA Retirement Corporation administers deferred compensation plans for more public employers than any other plan administrator. Los Gatos, Cupertino, Campbell, San Jose, Sunnyvale and Palo Alto are among local cities offering the RC program. It is nationwide, non profit, and an independent corporation which has shown excellent investment performance over the years. The plan also offers participants a great deal of flexibility and individual service through the regional office. The Committee is recommending retention of NPC while adding RC in order to allow those employees who wish to remain in NPC programs at this time the opportunity to do so. NPC Report to Mayor and City Council offers insurance options, both fixed and variable accounts, which are not available through the RC plan. Employees will have the, opportunity Of transferring accounts to the new plan, staying with their current investments, or utilizing -.a combination of the .two. Orientation and enrollment sessions will be held to inform all employees of the change and to enroll them in the new programs. c a 7 0JY Carolyn King v Administrative Assistant CK;jt 2 -27 -86 Page 2 AGENDA BILL NO. V 30 DATE: March 19, 1986 DEPT.: City Manager SUBJECT: Sunmary Last fall the City Council reestablished the position of Planning Director and the new Director joined the City of Saratoga on February 26. Previously the Planning Division had been part of the Community Development Department under the direction of the Community Development Director /City Engineer. It is now appropriate to adopt a new job descrip- tion and retitle the Community Development Department Head position to City Engineer. The City Engineer will continue to administer the full range of programs providing for engineering and building inspection services. Fiscal Impacts: None Exhibits /Attachments: Resolution No. 85 -9.67 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution N Council Action Adopted. Establi of Position of City Engineer 85 -9.67 CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA ITEM 41 February, 1986 CITY ENGINEER DEFINITION Under administrative direction of the City Manager, to plan, organize, direct and coordinate the full range of programs providing for engineering and building inspection services; and do related work as required. EXAMPLES OF DUTIES Assumes full administrative responsibility for all department operations. These include: the City's capital improvement program; general engineering services, including construction inspection, traffic engineering and surveying; and building inspection. Plans and provides for the implementation and management of all department programs consistent with community needs, City policy, and legal requirements; provides technical information to interested persons and groups; prepares reports and recommendations for the City Manager, City Council; Planning Commission, etc. Evaluates programs and develops means for improving systems, methods and personnel utilization and performance. As appropriate, institutes such improvements or recommends their adoption. Maintains close liaison with other City departments, community representatives, contractors, developers and appropriate personnel of other public jurisdictions. Represents the City on inter agency committees and in other cooperative programs. Establishes and administers department policies, rules and procedures; prepares and administers the department's operating and capital improvement budgets. Acts as the Building Official. DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS Education: Equivalent to graduation from an accredited college or university in civil engineering. Experience: Eight years of increasingly responsible professional engineering experience, including at least four years in a supervisory or administrative capacity. Experience with a local government agency is highly desirable. Certification: Possession of a valid certificate of registration as a Civil Engineer in the State of California Knowledge and ability: A thorough knowledge of civil engineering principles and techniques; a working knowledge of building inspection principles, practices and regulations; a thorough knowledge of administrative principles, methods and trends, including personnel and budget administration; knowledge of applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations, a thorough knowledge of applicable City policy; and the ability to effectively administer all operations of the department. AGENDA BILL NO. /0 3 oZ DATE: 3 -19 -86 DEPT.: City Manager CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA ITEM g CITY MGR. APPROVAL SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Proposed City Council Salaries and Benefits Summary: Council requested the attached data during the February 19, 1986, discussion of proposed salaries and reimbursement policies. Included is: 1. Summary of City health and welfare benefits provided to Management Staff 2. Statement of Reimbursement Policy Councilmember Expenses 3. Survey of comparable Council Salaries and Benefits Fiscal Impacts: The maxiMum allowed under State law for salary and health and welfare benefits package is $580 per person per month or $34,800 annually. Exhibits /Attachments: Staff Report Recommended Action: Review attached information and conduct public hearing. Council Action Directed staff to prepare ordinance on monthly allowance and resolution on reimbursement. OZIFT ©2 0 MEMORANDUM 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 TO: Mayor and City Council Members DATE: 3 -10 -86 FROM: Carolyn King, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Employee Benefit Data, Expense Policy Statement, and Area Council Salaries At your February 19, 1986, meeting Council directed staff to prepare some additional information for discussion during the March 19 public hearing on Council salaries and expenses. Accordingly, the following are attached: 1. Summary of health and welfare benefits provided to the City's Management staff. The Government Code provides for eligibility for these benefits to be extended to City Councilmembers as long as the same benefits are available to employees. Benefits provided to the non management staff total approximately $70 less per month, and do not include additional life insurance. Rates for City health insurance plans are in effect until October 1, 1986. 2. Written Statement of Policy for reimbursement of Councilmember Expenses. This is provided for your consideration. 3. Salaries and Benefits Available to Councilmembers in Santa Clara County General Law Cities with Population of 35,000 or less. Also included in this array is Cupertino (population 38,080) and the Charter city of Gilroy. This information is provided for comparison purposes. a olyn KL Pg J CITY OF SARATOGA EMPLOYEE HEALTH AND WELFARE BENEFITS (In effect as of March 1, 1986) 1 Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) City pays 11.8610 of payroll plus 7% employee contribution 2. Management Employees Insurance Allocation City allocates $280 /month to cover the following insurance premiums (up to $320 /month for employee who covers dependents on health insurance). All rates below are monthly premium costs. A. Medical /hospitalization of two plans Kaiser single 1 73.18 two 145.36 three+ 182.66 ABAG Benefits Trust Option: I Option II (Indemnity) (Preferred Provider) $102.25 278.55 B. Life and accidental death dismemberment insurance $15,000 $11.77 2x annual salary .29/1000 (i.e. salary $40,000 $23.20) optional dependent life .60 85.00 170.00 230.00 C Dental (self- insured plan) $30.00 guarantees up to $180 of claims per -6 month period for employee claims,. dependent claims and excess employee claims to $750 paid as.. funds allow 3. LONG TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE City pays for insurance up to 2.3 of monthly salary to $2,000 maximum (1.85% of payroll) a 4. EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM City pays for 7 visits per year for professional counseling for employee and 7 visits per year for dependents ($50 per visit) CITY COUNCIL EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY March, 1986 1. All actual reasonable costs for lodging, meals and travel out of the metropolitan area shall be reimbursed for attendance at meetings and conferences. This applies only to Councilmembers who are attending as the designated representative of the City Council of the City of Saratoga, or who have obtained the express permission of the Council to attend such meeting or conference. 2. Incidental expenses occured in attendance at meetings and functions in the local area are not eligible for reimbursement. Table below shows array of salaries, employee benefits and reimbursements available to Councilmembers in Santa Clara County cities in the same population category as Saratoga. Also included is Cupertino (population 38,080). Expense City Salary Benefits Reimbursement Campbell Cupertino Los Altos Los Altos Hills none Los Gatos $300 /mo. fully paid medical dental (including dependents) $20,000 life insurance eligible to join PERS travel meeting expenses $400 /mo. eligible to join PERS travel meeting and PERS health insur- expenses ance plan or $180 /mo. allotment to purchase own insurance $35.50/mo. dental insurance Gilroy $200 /mo. Council medical insurance travel meeting $400 /mo. Mayor $217 /mo. expenses $150 /mo. none travel meeting expenses none $150 /mo. expenses $150 /mo. $50 /mo. car allowance meeting expenses Monte Sereno none none travel meeting expenses Morgan Hill $300 /mo. none travel meeting expenses AGENDA BILL NO. O 3'-' DATE: 3/10/86 (3/19/86) DEPT.: Engineering CITY OF SARATOGA SUBJECT: FINAL BUILDING SITE APPROVAL. FOR SDR- 1613, PAUL AVENUE, PLATONOFF.(1 lot) AGENDA ITEM CITY MGR. APPROV Sunmary: 1. SDR -1613 is ready for Final Approval. 2. All bonds and agreements have been submitted to the City. 3. Requirements for City and other agencies have been met. Fiscal Impacts: None Exhibits /Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 1613 -02 2. Report to Planning Commission 3. Location Map Recormended Action: Adopt Resolution No.. 1613 -02 attached, approving Final Map for SDR -1613. Authorize execution of Building Site Agreement. Council Action Approved. SECTION 1: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: RESOLUTION NO. 1613 -02 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA APPROVING BUILDING SITE OF GERMAN L. PLATONOFF The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: The 7,500.0 square foot parcel shown as Lot 47 on Mary Springer Tract Map No. 2 recorded in Book K, page 33, and submitted to the City Engineer, City of Saratoga, be approved as one (1) individual building site. The above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly intro- duced and passed by the City Council of Saratoga at a regular meeting held on the day of 19 by the following vote: CITY CLERK MAYOR City of Saratoga APPROVED BY REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION APN: 503 -27 -42 APPLICATION NO. LOCATION: SDR -1613, A -1128; 14301 Paul Avenue APPLICANT: German Leff Platonoff OWNER: Same ACTION REQUESTED: Tentative Building Site Approval and .Design Review Approval to construct a new two story single family residence. OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED: Final Building Site Approval, Building Permits. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Categorically Exempt ZONING: R- 1- 10,000 GENERAL_ PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential Medium Density (M -10) EXISTING LAND USE: Residential SURROUNDING LAND USES: Residential PARCEL SIZE: 7,500 sq.. ft. NATURAL FEATURES VEGETATION: The site is relatively level. A tree is located in the rear portion of the site. SLOPE AT BUILDING SITE: Level GRADING REQUIRED: Minimal grading is required PROPOSED SETBACKS: Front: 30 Ft. Rear: 59 Ft. Left Side: 7.5 Ft. Right Side: 6 Ft. HEIGHT: 24.5 Ft. IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE: About 45% (including existing structure concrete pad) SIZE OF STRUCTURE: 1st Floor(including garage): Second Floor: TOTAL: Existing Structure: Total On -Site Sq. Footage: *Revised: Date: Commission Meeting: 1,825 sq. ft. 1,104 sq. ft. 2,929 sq. ft. 455 sq, ft. 3,384 sq. ft. DATE: j 0 INITiALS: 10/23/85 10/14/85 10/23/85 Report to Planning Commission SDR 1613,.A -1128, Platonoff, Paul Avenue MATERIALS COLORS PROPOSED: Exterior: Off -White Stucco Roof: Wood Shakes 10/14/85 Page 2 PROJECT STATUS: Said, project complies with all objectives of the General Plan, and all requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances of the City of Saratoga. The housing needs of the region have been considered and have been balanced against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. The Staff Report recommends approval of the tentative map for SDR -1613 (Exhibit "B" filed 2/19/85) subject to the following conditions: I. GENERAL CONDITIONS Applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of Ordinance No. 60, including without limitation, the submission of a Record of Survey or- parcel map; payment of storm drainage fee and park and recreation fee as established by Ordinance in effect at the time of final approval; submission of engineered improvement plans for any street work.; and compliance with applicable Health Department regu- lations and applicable Flood Control regulations and requirements of the Fire Department. Reference is hereby made to said Ordinance for further particulars. Site approval in no way excuses compliance with Saratoga's Zoning and Building Ordinances, nor with any other Ordinance of the City. In addition thereto, applicant shall comply with the following Specific Conditions which are hereby required and set forth in accord with Section 23.1 of Ordinance No. 60. II. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A. Submit "Parcel Map" to City for checking and recordation (Pay required checking recordation fees). (If parcel is shown on existing map of record, submit three (3) to -scale prints). B. Pay Storm Drainage Fee in effect at the time of obtaining Final Approval. C. Construct Standard Driveway Approaches. D. Provide adequate sight distance and remove obstructions of. view as required at driveway and access road intersections. E. Watercourses must be kept free of obstacles which will change, retard or prevent flow. F. Obtain Encroachment Permit from the Dept. of Community Development for driveway approaches. Report to Planning Commission SDR -1613, A 1128, Platonoff, Paul Ave. 10/14/85 Page 3 III. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS DIVISION OF INSPECTION SERVICES A. Geotechnical investigation and report by licensed professional. 1. Soils 2. Foundation Investigation /Design B. Detailed on -site improvement plans showing: 1. Drainage details (conduit type, slope, outfall, location, etc.) 2. All existing structures, with notes as to remain or be removed. 3. Standard information to include titleblock, plot plan using record data, location map, north arrow, sheet nos., owner's name, etc. IV. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 4 A. The existing residence is connected to sewer. B. Applicant to submit connection permit fees to County Sanitation District No. 4 in accordance with letter dated 9/23/85 prior to issuance of permits. U. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS SARATOGA FIRE DISTRICT A. Construct driveway 14 feet minimum width, plus one foot shoulders using double seal coat oil and screening or better on 6 inch aggregate base from public street or access road to proposed dwelling. VI. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT A. A sanitary sewer connection will be required. B. Domestic water to be provided by San Jose Water Works. VII. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT A. Applicant shall, prior to Final Map Approval, submit plans showing the location and intended use of any existing wells to the SCVWD for review, certification, and registration. VIII. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS PLANNING DIVISION A. Design Review Approval required an project prior to issuance of permits. Report to Planning Commission SOR -1613, A -1128, Pl.atonoff, Paul Ave. 10/14/85 Page 4 B. Tree removal prohibited unless in accord with applicable City Ordinances. C. Prior to issuance of building permits, individual structures shall be reviewed by the Planning Division to evaluate the potential for solar accessibility. The developer shall provide, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities on /in the subdivision /building site. D. The existing structure shall be removed prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. E. Because the lot is substandard, the total on -site square footage shall not exceed 2,929 sq. ft. ANALYSIS CONCERNS Report to Planning Commission SDR- 1613, A -1128, Platonoff, Paul Ave. A -1128 DESIGN REVIEW An existing residence is currently located on the site. The plans indicate that the structure is to remain. The structure does not comply with the required setbacks. When the applicant submitted the application, Staff indicated that a Use Permit will be required for the structure located in the required rear yard setback. The applicant indicated that he was not certain that the structure would be kept. No application has been submitted to legalize the structure. The site is substandard in width and size. The proposed structure complies with setback, height and impervious coverage requirements. The proposed 'residence is below the 3,500 s. ft. Design Review floor. area standard in the R- 1- 10,000 zoning district. However, the site is 7,500 sq. ft. The standard setforth in the Design Review Ordinance allows a .35 ratio of square footage to site area (3,500 10,000). The proposed residence is is a .39 (2,929 7,500). If the existing structure is to remain, the total on -site square footage would be 3,384 sq. ft. or a .45 ratio. In order to maintain the standard ratio of square footage to lot size, the total on -site square footage should be reduced to 2,625 sq. ft. The adjacent property to the north is at a slightly lower elevation than the subject site. Solar panels are located on the roof of the adjacent residence. Staff has reviewed a solar study submitted by the applicant. The lower edge of the solar panel is 10.5 ft. in height. Staff's calculations indicate that the shadow from the proposed structure will fall across the lower edge of the panel. Staff recommends a reduction in height of the proposed residence to minimize potential impacts. In addition, the proposed residence will be tall in comparison with the existing residence. A reduction in height will make the proposed residence more compatible with the existing structure. The property to the south is at a slightly higher elevation. The adjacent residence is set back far from the street. No privacy impacts are anticipated because the two -story portion of the proposed residence will be located to the front of the structure. Two -story residences are located within 500 ft. of the site. A second story addition is currently under construction to the east of the site across Paul Avenue. As shown on the left side elevation, the chimney appears to be very large and should be reduced if possible. FINDINGS 1. Unreasonable Interference with Views or Privacy 10/14/85 Page 5 The two -story residence will not unreasonably interfere with views because of the location of the structure on the site. The proposed Report to Planning Commission 10/14/85 SDR -1613, A -1128, Platonoff, Paul Ave. Page 6 residence will not interfere with privacy because of the location of the two -story portion to the front of the structure and the location and number of proposed windows. 2. Preservation of the Natural Landscape The natural landscape is being preserved in that no ordinance size tree will be removed and the required grading is minimal. 3. Perception of Excessive Bulk With the condition to reduce the square footage; the ratio of square footage to site area wiHH compty with the Besign Review standard for the zoning district.- The two -story portion of the residence is located in the front of the structure and is offset'on the left side which serves to minimize the perception of bulk. 4. Compatible Bulk and Height With the condition that the square footage and height be reduced; the residence is compatible in terms of bulk and height with structures located within 500 ft. of the site and in the same zoning district. Design techniques are being used to minimize the perceived bulk. The residence will not impact the light, air or solar access' adjacent residences. 5. Grading and Erosion Control Standards Current Saratoga grading and erosion control standards will incorporated into the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the residence per the Staff Report dated 10/15/85, Exhibits "B" and "C" subject to the following conditions: 1. Final Building Site Approval is required prior to issuance of a building permit. Total on site square footage shall not exceed 2,929 sq. ft. 3.* The existing structure shall be removed prior to issuance of certifi- cate of occupancy. 4.* The height of the residence shall not exceed 24.5 ft. measured in accordance with Section 14.8. APPROVED: P.C. Agenda: 10/23/85 LH /dsc Lucille Hise Planner A►Te FF 0 sD g ,,3,A-n3 CITY OF SARATOGA� AGENDA BILL NO. 0 3 5 AGENDA ITEM DATE: 3/10/86 (3/19/86) DEPT.: City Engineer SUBJECT: TRACT #6508 SARATOGA- SUNNYVALE ROAD KIRKMONT DRIVE RELEASE OF BOND Summary: The developer, Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation, entered into a 5 -year agreement to underground overhead 12 KV lines and install traffic signals at Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road and Kirkmont Drive if certain circumstances came about, i.e. all 12 KV lines on Saratoga Sunnyvale Road were undergrounded and the signal became warranted. Neither of the things happened and the 5 -year time expired on September 3, 1985. Therefore, the agreement has run its course and the bond securing that agreement should be released. CITY MGR. APPROVAL Fiscal Impacts: Saratoga will have to participate in signal installation if it ever becomes warranted at this location. Saratoga's Rule 20A funds will have to be used to underground the 12 KV lines in the future. Exhibits /Attachments: 1. Staff Report 2. Addenda to Improvement Agreement, Tract 6508 Recommended Action: Release bond United Pacific Insurance Company, Bond #U07 -28 -78 Council Action Approved.. Og 'VW ©2 0 LiV REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: TRACT #6508, SARATOGA SUNNYVALE ROAD KIRKMONT DRIVE RELEASE OF BOND RSS:cd Robert S. Shook City Engineer DATE: 3 -10 -86 COUNCIL MEETING: 3 -19 -86 Under an Addenda to Improvement Agreement the developer provided a five -year bond for 1) undergrounding 12 KV overhead lines and 2) 50% of cost of a traffic control system at Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and Kirkmont Drive. Item 1, the underground conversion, would have been triggered by the commencement of a project of undergrounding all 12 KV lines along Saratoga Sunnyvale Road within the City's limits. Item 2, the traffic control system, would have been triggered by the intersection meeting warrants sufficient to establish the need. Both of those triggering mechanisms had to come about within five years of the date of construction acceptance of the rest of the subdivision improvements. That date was September 3, 1980 and the critical date, therefore, was September 3, 1985. Neither of the triggering mechanisms was in place at that time and the developer is now requesting release of the bond securing the Addenda to Improvement Agreement. It is appropriate to release Saratoga Foothills Development Corporation's United Pacific Insurance Company bond #U07 -28 -78 ($130,000). ADDENDA TO IMPROVEMENT AGREEME (TRACT #6508) Reference is made to that certain Improvement Agreement between the CITY OF SARATOGA, a Municipal corporation, therein and hereinafter called CITY, and SARATOGA FOOTFHILLS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, therein and hereinafter collectively called SUBDIVIDER, which Improvement Agreement is dated the 17 day of January 197 9 and which is in reference to certain improvements to be furnished and in- stalled by SUBDIVIDER in and contiguous to Tract #6508. Additional provisions and modifications are hereby made to said Improvement Agreement: A. Included amongst the conditions of tentative map approval, and more specifically by Condition II(K) is the requirement that SUBDIVIDER contribute 50% of the cost of the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and Kirkmont Drive; and the further requirement, under Condition III(D) that the existing overhead utilities consisting of 12 KV electrical lines are to be undergroundecl by SUBDIVIDER in the event that within the time limits, as hereafter set forth, City determines that all 12 KV lines along Saratoga Sunnyvale Road, within City's limits, are to be under grounded. It is the intention of this Addenda to defer these particular improvements beyond the standard one (1) year period of time, and to defer them for a period of five (5) years from the date of completion of the remainder of the other offsite improvements by SUBDIVIDER under the terms of the Improvement Agreement. B. SUBDIVIDER shall have the obligation to pay to or on behalf of CITY not to exceed 50% of the installation costs of an automatic traffic control signal at the intersection of Saratoga Sunnyvale Road and Kirkmont Drive, Saratoga, California, said obligation to continue for a period of five (5) years from and after the date that SUBDIVIDER completed all of the remaining improvements under the Improvement Agreement hereinabove- referenced by this Addenda. Said obligation shall be bonded in accord with Subparagraph (D) hereof. C. In the event that within five (5) years from and after the date on which the remainder of SUBDIVIDER'S .improvements have been completed in accord with the terms of the Improvement Agreement, City or a Utility District should commence a project of undergrounding all 12 KV lines along Saratoga Sunnyvale Road within City's limits, then SUBDIVIDER will contribute the sum of $100,000.00 (or actual cost, whichever is the lesser) towards such project, to be applied against the cost of undergrounding the existing 12 KV lines presently located on the system of poles along SUBDIVIDER'S frontage on Saratoga Sunnyvale Road. D. In addition to the improvement bonds heretofore required to be furnished and filed with CITY in accord with Paragraph 2 of said Improvement Agreement, which bond and bonds relate to improvements other than the within- referred -to traffic control signal and utility undergrounding, and as a condition precedent to the recordation and to the release of the final map and as a condition precedent to re- cordation thereof, SUBDIVIDER shall furnish to CITY and file with the City Clerk a crood and sufficient cash or surety bond or bonds in the CITY's standard form, in the amount of $30,000.00 as to SUB DIVIDER's obligation to pay one -half of the cost of the installation of the traffic control signal, and in the amount of $100,000.00 in re- lation to SUBDIVIDER's obligation to contribute to the cost of under grounding the 12 KV electrical system, each of said bonds securing the faithful performance by SUBDIVIDER of the particular obligation hereinabove- referred to. E. SUBDIVIDER's obligation to contribute 50% of the cost of the aforesaid signal installation shall be due and payable at such time as the contract has been let for the installation of said signal, and the Director of Public Works notifies SUBDIVIDER in writing of the cost of the same, and SUBDIVIDER's 50% share thereof, so long as said notification occurs within the five (5) year period herein above- referenced. F. This Agreement shall constitute an Addenda to the hereinabove, referred -to Improvement Agreement, and except as modified herein, said Improvement Agreement shall be and remain in full force and effect. Dated this 17th day of January By -2- 1979. CITY OF SARATOGA, a Municipal corporation MAYOR CITY LPDMENT COMPANY SUBDIVIDER AGENDA BILL NO. /0 1' DATE: 3/5/86 (3/19/86) DEPT.: Engineering SUBJECT: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF PORTION. OF WORK. OF OVERLAY CERTAIN CITY STREETS 1985 Sumary On August 21, 1985, the City Council awarded the contract of Over- lay Certain City Streets 1985 to Raisch Company. This contract consists of overlay certain city streets and chip seal certain city streets. The Raisch Company has completed the overlay work. The chip seal work will be done in the spring of 1986 because of temperature requirement. Due to cold weather, the chip seal pro- ject was delayed till spring. The overlay work has been completed satisfactorily; therefore, it is our recommendation that the City Council accept the overlay work for the maintenance period. Fiscal Impacts: None Exhibits /Attachments: List of streets CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA ITEM e-/.,0 Recommended Action: The City Council. accept portion of overlay work for maintenance period. Council Action Approved. NAME OF STREET Bucknall Road Bucknall Road Cox Avenue Paseo Presada Paseo Presada Paseo Presada Kevin Street' Carrick Avenue Carrick Avenue Berwisk Street McCulloch Avenue McDole Street Mellowood Drive Saratoga Creek Dr. Saratoga Creek Dr. Saratoga Creek Dr. Saratoga Creek Dr. Saratoga Creek Dr. Saratoga Creek Dr. Saratoga Glen Place Saratoga Glen Place Saratoga Glen Court Northhampton Drive Northhampton Drive Northhampton Court Howen Drive Howen .Drive Loma Rio Drive Seagraves Way Canyon View Drive OVERLAY CERTAIN CITY STREETS LIST OF STREETS 11" Overlay with Fabric Mat Paseo Presada Paseo Presada Paseo Olivos Quito Road Cox Avenue Paseo Pueblo Paseo Tierra Dundee Ave. McCoy Ave. Dundee Avenue Dundee Avenue Afton Avenue McCullock Avenue McCoy Avenue McCoy Avenue Berwick Street Martha Avenue Dundee Avenue. Woodside Woodside Westview Kosich Westview Cyril Cyril Raleigh Raleigh Hargrave Hargrave Saratoga Glen Saratoga Glen Cox Avenue Saratoga Creek Dr. Saratoga Glen Court Saratoga Glen Ct. Saratoga Avenue Saratoga Glen Place End Titus Avenue Northhampton Court Northhampton Court Miller Avenue Northhampton Drive End Old Tree Saratoga Vista Drive Saratoga Vista Drive Braemar Seagraves Jerries Saratoga Avenue Loma Rio Elva Avenue Elvira Street 1 LIMIT Quito Road Paseo Presada Paseo Pueblo Paseo Tierra Bucknall Road Martha Ave. Saratoga Hills Road Michaels Drive Braemar Drive Elvira Street Elvira Street Fifth Street Howen Drive OVERLAY CERTAIN CITY.STREETS LIST OF STREETS Reid Lane Pontiac Canyon View Drive Dorsey Way Howen Drive Treetop 11" OVERLAY ONLY (See sheet 1) Reid Lane Canyon View Drive Canyon View Drive .End Big Basin Way End Old Tree Way End 2 AGENDA BILL NO. /037 DATE: 2/20/86 3- 19 -86) DEPT.: Community Development CITY MGR. APPROVAL Construction Acceptance on Tract 7580 SUBJECT: Verde Vista, Pinn Bros. Suamary: The public improvements required for the subject tract have been satisfactorily completed. This "construction acceptance" will begin the (1) year maintenance period. Fiscal Impacts: None Exhibits /Attachments: 1. Memo 5/7 Approved. CITY OF SARATOGA Recommended Action: Grant "construction acceptance" AGENDA ITEM 41:76;°' Council Action 3/19: City.:Engineer removed from Consent Calendar because conditions not completely met. MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager FROM: Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Construction Acceptance for Tract 7580, Verde Vista Name Location: Pinn Bros., Verde Vista Public Improvements required for Tract 7580 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: Pinn Bros. Address: 2470 S. Winchester Blvd. Campbell, CA 95008 2. Improvement Security: Type: Labor and Materials Amount: $75,000.00 10M4 'X 12 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 (408) 867 -3438 RSS /dsm Issuing Company: The Ohio Casualty Address: 100 S. Ellsworth Ave., P.O. Box 5812 3. Special Remarks: San Mateo, CA 94401 Receipt, Bond or Certificate No.: 2- 395 -279 Robert S. Shook DATE: February 20,1986 AGENDA BILL NO. 0 DATE: 3/7/86 (3/19/86) DEPT.: City Engineer SUBJECT:. VILLAGE PARKING. DISTRICT #3 APPRAISAL PROPOSALS Summary: Requests for proposals resulted in five proposals to perform appraisal services in the Saratoga Village area, commonly referred to as Village Parking District #3, ranging from $2500 to $7500. Fiscal Impacts: $3500 appraisal fees Exhibits /Attachments: 1. Staff Report 2. Proposals CITY OF SARATOGA AGENDA ITEM CITY MGR. APPROVAL Recommended Action: Accept proposal of William G. Rufner to be done on a per diem basis not to exceed $3500. Council Action (Originally scheduled for 3119186 meeting, but handled at study session 3/11/86.) 3/11: Awarded to M:B. RSS:cd O'JL ©0 0 Li) ''COZI gpcv REPORT TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: VILLAGE PARKING DISTRICT #3 APPRAISAL PROPOSALS We have received five proposals to provide appraisals for properties in the area commonly referred to as Village Parking District #3. 1. MCB, Inc. $4000 costs 2. Brodd, Hollwedel, $6750 Reese Associates 3. Rufner $2500 -$3500 4. Clevenger $7500 5. Gilbeau Hulberg $7000 Associates, Inc. Rob 3. Shook City Engineer DATE: 3 -10 -86 COUNCIL MEETING: 3 -19 -86 30 days 6 -8 weeks 60 days 4 -8 weeks After reviewing these several proposals I would recommend awarding the work to the firm of William G. Rufner. This proposal is a per diem, which on the high side will include analysis of severance damage and will reflect before and after values. It also includes a provision for reduced costs if there is significant market data indicating land value is available. Arlen C. Mills, MAI CRE Chris L. Carneghi, MAI James Bautovich, MAI Lawrence L. Mansbach Kathleen C. Christensen Wendell H. Martin, Jr., MAI Kathi M. Ridley Ellen G. Byrne Mary-Jon Somers Steven G. Murphy Jonathan H. Frank, MAI Mr. Robert S. Shook Director of Community Development City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California 95070 Dear Mr. Shook: MILLS CARNEGHI BAUTOVICH, INC. CONSULTANTS IN REAL ESTATE URBAN ECONOMICS RECEIVED FEB 191986 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT February 14, 1986 This letter is a proposal for Mills Carneghi Bautovich, Inc. to provide you with an appraisal of the property identified on the map included in your letter of February 12, 1986 as Parcels 4, 7, and 10. Your letter states that it will be necessary for the appraisal to be a value per square foot since the exact size of the parcels has not yet been determined. Based on this require- ment, I am assuming we will be appraising only vacant land and with building improvements involved. Our appraisal would address the market value of the property. It is my understanding that our appraisal would be used for the possible acquisition of the property. In order to expedite our appraisal assignment, we will need a preliminary title report for the property. We will also require any other material you have that will assist us in analyzing the property. Your cooperation in pro- viding us this information is required in order for us to complete our work in a timely manner. It will take us approximately 30 days from receipt of notice to proceed in order to complete this assignment. You will receive two copies of our narra- tive appraisal report. Our fee for this work will be $4,000 plus any inci- dental expenses such as additional copies of our report, travel, photos or renderings, or special deliveries. We require a signed letter of authoriza- tion in order to begin work on an assignment. I have included with this letter a brochure on Mills Carneghi- Bautovich, Inc. in order to further acquaint you with our firm and our qualifications to do this work. If this proposal is acceptable to you, please sign one copy of 120 MONTGOMERY ST. SUITE 1776 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104 •415 •398 -2666 1150 NORTH FIRST ST. SUITE 209 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95112 408 •971 -0877 Mr. Robert S. Shook 2 February 14, 1986 this letter and return it to me. Your signature serves as our authorization to proceed and guarantees payment of our fee at completion. If you have any questions concerning this proposal, please contact me. We look forward to working with you on this assignment. CC /mmg Enclosures Accepted By: Print or Type Name: Title: Date: Sincerely, MILLS CARNEGHI BAUTOVICH, INC. Chris Carneghi, M.A.I. E.P. BRODD, INC. JOHN J. HOLLWEDEL ROBERT C. REESE Mr. Robert S. Shook, Director of Community Development City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, Ca. 95070 ASSOCIATED APPRAISAL OFFICES OF BRODD, HOLLWEDEL, REESE ASSOCIATES REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS AND CONSULTANTS February 28, 1986 Re: Appraisal of Saratoga Village Parking Lots Ptns. of APN's: 503 -24- 004,007 010 Big Basin Way, Saratoga, Ca. Dear Mr. Shook: REtd`ZNED FEB 2 81986 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 920 SARATOGA AVENUE, SUITE 113 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95129 (408) 248-7821 We again appreciate the opportunity to respond to your request for proposals in connection with your real estate appraisal needs on the above referenced properties. We have provided appraisal services to the City of Saratoga in the past and look`forward to working with you on this project. Presently, we are involved in the appraisal of a bank branch within the downtown area which should assist our ability to respond to your need in this particular instance. In your letter dated February 12, 1986 you indicated that the precise specifica- tions for your acquisitions had not yet been determined and that you were initially interested in the land value on a per square foot basis rather than on a per parcel basis. While it is entirely possible to render an opinion as to the land value on a per square foot basis assuming that there are no severance damages or special benefits to the remainder parcels, it might very well be the case that there are. At some point it may be necessary for you to expand the scope of-the appraisal to take into consideration the potential severance damages and /or special benefits to the remainder parcels. The severance damages might possibly include limitation on the utility of the remainder parcels as the rear yards are lost and their potential for on -site parking, loading and storage are diminished. Given these considerations, we offer two bids for the appraisal assignment, one of which addresses your immediate request and the other which addresses the concerns which may appear as you enter the process. Our fee and time frame to estimate the land value of the proposed parking areas on a per square foot basis is $2,750 and we anticipate being able to undertake and complete the assignment within an approximately six week time frame. Should your need arise for full appraisals on the entire properties which would take into consideration any potential severance damages and /or special benefits to the remainder parcels, our appraisal fee would be an additional $4,000 and we would anticipate being able to undertake and complete that assignment within an approx- imately eight week time frame. The estimated time frames would be from your authoriza- tion to proceed. It is entirely possible that we could commence upon Phase 1 of the Re: Saratoga Village Parking Lots Big Basin Way, Saratoga Page Two. assignment as you consider the future nature of your needs for appraisals in the area. I have included a copy of my resume for your review along with that of Brian O'Neill, who will be working with me on the assignment. We have appreciated the opportunity to respond to your request for appraisal services. If you have any further questions, or if we may be of additional assistance, please do not hesitate to call. RC R/ j r Enc. Sincerely, BRODp, HOLLWEDEL, REESE ASSOCIATES a -ex-A.__ ROBERT C. REESE, M.A.I. WILLIAM G. RUFNER Mr. Robert S. Shook Director of Community Development City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Saratoga, Ca. 95070 Dear Mr. Shook: FASA SR/WA SRA FSVA Real Property Valuations c RECEIVED JAN 2 7 1985 N. Fourth Street Suite 205 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEEto Jose, CA 95112 (408) 295-6085 January 24, 1986 Re: Appraisal of Properties Big Basin Way for Off- Street Parking I apologize for the delay in answering your letter of December 27, 1985 request- ing a proposal for the appraisal of the 3 properties requested. My appraisal fees are based upon $500 per diem and I would estimate that it would take between 5 and 7 days to complete the appraisal on the individual parcels, which would be included in one report. The reason for the differential in time would be occasioned by the consideration of any Severance Damage that might acrue by reason of this partial taking from a larger holding. It appears that all of the parcels are of sufficient size as to land area as to permit for enlargement of the existing structures and a determination would have to be made regarding possible Severance Damage occurring. The appraisal would be based on a Market Data Analysis as to arriving at an opinion of land value and would be based on the available market data for commercial prop- erties in the Saratoga Area and an analysis of the sale properties with the subject properties as to size, date of sale, utility of use and other comparable factors. A report would be complete with market data supporting the value and the analysis for consideration of the possibility of Severance Damage would be based on a review of the potential of the property in the "before" condition and in the "after" condition. Should there be an abundance of market data offering good indication of land value, then the total appraisal fee would be adjusted downward. I apologize again for the delay in answering your letter, but circumstances prevented me from doing so until now. WGR:jm Attachments. Very truly yours, /144. William G. Rufner, FASA, SR/WA, SRA Dear Mr. Shook: DS:ng Authorized by FLOYD D. CLEVENGER, M.A.I.; S.R.P.A., A.S.A. LAWRENCE E. WILLS, A.S.A., S.R.P.A. DAVID L. SNIVELY MARSHA L. DENIS DAVID L. O'HARE Mr. Robert S. Shook Director of Community Development City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 REALTY APPRAISAL COMPANY The purpose of this letter is to provide a fee proposal for a narrative appraisal report containing a fair market valuation of 3 ownerships located at 14415, 14435 and 14453 Big Basin Way, Saratoga (APN: 503- 24 -4,7 and 10). The report will be narrative in form and will comply with the standards of a narrative report as established by the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers. Our methodology in regards to the proposed partial takings of these three ownerships will include valuations of the whole individual ownerships before acquisition; value of the acquisition areas as a part of the whole; value of the individual remainders as a part of the whole; value of the remainder in its after condition and an analysis of any severance damages or benefits. Four copies of the report will be provided. The fee for this assignment is $7,500.00. Any additional work including; meetings, conferences, court preparation or time spent with any agent or reviewer will be billed at $100.00 per hour. The report will be provided within 4 to 8 weeks of receiving your authorization. If all of these are acceptable, you may authorize this office to proceed by signing and returning the enclosed copy of this agreement. This proposal expires if not signed and returned within 30 days. We look forward to working with you and please call if you have any questions about this proposal. Sinc ly, VENG s oy: 1. Clevenger David L. Snively RECEIVED JAN 0 21985 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R Y APPRAISAL COMPANY date 2363 PRUNERIDGE AVENUE SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA 95050 TELEPHONE (408) 241 -2787 December 30, 1985 Gilbeau Hulberg Associates, Inc. REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS February 27, 1986 Mr. Robert S. Shook Director of Community Development City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, California. 95070 Re: Aperaisal of the Village area Barking facility Dear Mr. Shook: As you requested in your letter of February 12, 1986, we are happy to submit a proposal to appraise several properties within the Village area of the City of Saratoga. The purpose of this appraisal would be to value the property to be acquired in conjunction with construction of a public parking facility. The legal property rights appraised would be those of fee simple interest. The properties to be appraised would be the areas acquired from Parcel Numbers 4, 7 and 10, as shown in the plat attached to your letter. Based on our past experience with similar assignments, we would expect our methodology to include: Research of comparable land sales. Consideration of economic factors in the subject's neighborhood. A valuation of possible severance damages by virtue of the acquisition, including the impact of changes in driveways and parking ratios. 1520 PARKMOOR AVENUE The valuation of possible special benefits. SAN JOSE. CALIFORNIA 95128 KENNETH W. GILBEAU M.A.I. NORMAN C. HULBERG M.A.I. (408) 279-1520 Re: City of Saratoga Village area parking facility Feb. 27, 1986 It is our understanding that this appraisal will be used in acquiring portions of Parcel Numbers 4, 7 and 10, which are to be used as parking. The report will be prepared as a full narrative report, with individual values reported for each of the three parcels within a single appraisal. This appraisal will be prepared in accordance with the Standards of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers. A copy of our standard Limiting Conditions of appraisal, which will be part of this agreement, is attached. The fee for this appraisal will be $7,000. We will furnish you with three copies of the appraisal report. Additional copies will be available at our cost of preparation. If this proposal is agreeable with you, please authorize us to proceed with the appraisal by signing below. Should you desire to discuss the assignment further, or if you have questions on the scope of this assignment, just call. We are looking forward to working with you on this assignment. Sincerely, Norman C. Hulber g, M.A.I. Accepted by: Date: :br attach. GILBEAU HULBERG ASSOCIATES, INC. Page 2 SAN JOSE. CALIFORNIA LIMITING CONDITIONS The appraisal is subject to the following Limiting Conditions: The legal description furnished us is assumed to be correct. We assume no responsibility for matters legal in character nor do we render any opinion as to the title which is assumed to be good. All existing liens and encumbrances have been disregarded and the property is appraised as though free and clear under responsible ownership and competent management. We have made no survey of the property and assume no responsibility in connection with such matters. The sketch in this report is included to assist the reader to visualize the property. Stable soil conditions and the absence of environmental contamination are assumed, unless otherwise noted in the report. We believe the information furnished by others in this report to be reliable, but we assume no responsibility for its accuracy. We are not required to give testimony or attendance in court by reason of this appraisal, with reference to the property in question unless arrangements have been made previously. Distribution of this report is at the sole discretion of the client and we will make no distribution without the specific direction of the client. However, no reproduction of this report, in whole or in part, shall be made without our prior approval. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report shall be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media without the written consent and approval of the authors, particularly as to valuation conclusions, the identity of the appraiser or firm with which the appraiser is connected, or any reference to the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, or the M.A.I. designation. If this appraisal relates to an estate in land that is less than the whole fee simple estate, the value report for such estate relates to a fractional interest only in the real estate involved and the value of all other fractional interests may or may not equal the value of the entire fee simple estate considered as a whole. If this appraisal contains a valuation relating to a geographical portion of a large parcel or tract of real estate, the value reported for such geographical portion relates to such portion only and should not be construed as applying with equal validity to other portions of the larger parcel or tract, and the value of all geographical portion may or may not equal the value of the entire parcel or tract considered as an entity.