HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2233 RESOLUTION NO. 2233
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SARATOGA STAYING THE PERIOD OF TIME FOR
EXPIRATION OF TENTATIVE BUILDING SITE APPROVAL
FOR SDR-129{)
WHEREAS, LAUI~EN HULSE and JOYCE HULSE ("Hulse") applied to the
City of Saratoga for tentative building site approval to divide that certain real
property located at 21801 Mt. Eden Road into two tots, such application being
identified as SDR-1290; and
WHEREAS, tentative building site approval was granted by the City on or
about February 17, 1977; and
WHEREAS, on September 17, 1981, Hulse commenced a lawsuit against the
City in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara,
Case No. 483896, pertaining to the applicatiuon of the initiative ordinance known as
Measure A to SDR-1290, and said lawsuit is still pending as of this date; and
WHEREAS, a settlement of said lawsuit has been negotiated between the
City and Hulse, as set forth in that certain Stipulation for Settlement attached hereto
as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 66452.6(c) of the California Government
Code, Hulse has applied to the City for a stay on the period of time otherwise provided
for expiration of SDR-1290,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
CITY OF SARATOGA AS FOLLOWS:
1. By reason of the pending litigation between the City and Hulse
involving SDR-1290 and pursuant to the authority granted under Section 66452.6(c) of
the Government Code, a stay is hereby approved for a period of Twenty-Six (26)
months, commencing as of the expiration date otherwise applicable to SDR-1290 and
terminating on May 25, 1986.
2. The stay is conditioned upon the execution by all parties of the
Stipulation for Settlement, in the form of Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
Passed ar~eadopte~s%t a regular meet~of the City Council of the City of
Saratoga held on day of ., 1985, by the
following vote:
A YES: Councilmembers Clevenger, Hlava, MOyles and Mayor Fanelli
NOES: None
-i-
ABSENT: Councilmember Callon
ATTEST~
CITY CLERK
-2-
STIPULATION FOR SETTLEMENT
'~ This Stipul~ltion for Settlement ("Agreement"), by and between LAUREN L.
HULSE and JOYCE C. HULSE ("Owners") and the CITY OF SARATOGA, a municipal
corporation ("City"), is made with reference to the following facts:
A. Owners are the fee owners of approximately two acres of certain reat
property located at 21801 Mt. Eden Road (the "Subject Property"), which property is
within the Northwestern Hillside area of the City of Saratoga ("Northwestern
Hillside").
B. Owners entered into a contract to sell one acre out of the Subject
Property to Fred Irany and Chris Irany ('~rany").
C. Owners filed an application with City for tentative building site
approval to divide the Subject Property into two lots, such application being identified
as SDR-1290, and on or about February 17, 1977, such application was approved by
City, subject to various conditions to be satisfied by Owners prior to recordation of a
final map.
D. 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. '*
E. Section 7 of Measure A states in pertinent part:
"Pending final coinpletion 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 4/5ths vote of
the City Council."
~1-
Section 3 of Measure A also states in pertinent part:
"The City of Saratoga shall within one year from the effective date
of this ordinance, 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."
F. On June 7, 1981, pursuant to and consistent with Measure A and
Sections 65450-65553 of the Government Code, 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 NS-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 tentative building site approval for the Subject Property.
G. City has contended and still contends that SDR-1290 is subject to all
provisions of Measure A, the Specific Plan and Ordinance NS-3.47, including the
density provisions thereof, whereas Owners have contended and still contend they are
entitled to divide the Subject Property into two lots, upon compliance with all
conditions for final map approval and that they are further entitled to building permits
authorizing the construction of a single family residence upon Parcel B, as shown on
SDR-1290.
H. On September 17, 1981, Owners and Irany commenced an action in
the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara, entitled
Irany~., et ai:~ vs. City of SaratOga~ et al., Case Number 483896 ("the Lawsuit").
Pursuant to stipulation between the parties, no responsive pleading to the Complaint
has been filed on behalf of defendants. Owners and Irany have cancelled their
purchase agreement pertaining to the Subject Property and the Iranys no longer have
or claim any right, title or interest therein, and no longer have or claim any right, title
or interest in the Lawsuit, all such interest in the Lawsuit having been either
relinquished, dismissed or assigned by Irany to Owners.
I. The City has denied and continue to deny each and every allegation
of Owners in the Lawsuit as to all issues and in all respects.
-2-
J. Without admitting the validity of any of the contentions which have,
or might have been made by any of them, the parties to this Agreement desire and
intend fully and finally to compromise and to settle all such contentions and other
'matters in controversy among them.
K. 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."
L. This Agreement contains the entire agreement and understanding
concerning the subject matter between the parties to this Agreement and superse~des
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 herein 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.
M. In addition to the settlement of all matters in controversy with
respect to the Lawsuit set forth above, the parties hereto desire to settle all other
claims, demands and causes of action which may exist between them whether known,
unknown, or suspected, except as they may arise from this Agreement.
N. All of the parties to this Agreement hereby acknowledge that they
have either been represented by independent counsel of their own choice throughout
all negotiations which preceded the execution of this Agreement or have voluntarily
elected not to retain counsel, and that they have either executed this Agreement with
the consent of, and {lpon the advice of, their own counsel, or had sufficient opportunity
to seek such advice.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed as follows:
1. Recitals A through N are incorporated herein by reference.
2. In consideration of the additional public improvements to be
constructed by Owners, as described in Paragraph 5 below, and dismissal by Owners of
the Lawsuit with prejudice, as to all claims and all defendants, and subject to
-3-
compliance by Owners with the conditions set forth in SDR-1290, City agrees to grant
final building site approval for the division of the Subject Property into two lots, in
accordance with the tentative building site approval as originally granted by City.
City 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 Parcel B as shown on SDR-1290,
conditioned upon prior design review approval thereof and compliance 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 Specfic Plan.
3. From and after the effective date of this Agreement, neither City
nor Owners shall prosecute the Lawsuit, nor shall Owners commence any new ac{ion
concerning the subject matter of the Lawsuit and this Agreement. Owners may,
within one (1) year from the date hereof, reactivate the Lawsuit in the event City fails
to perform any material provision of this Agreement and such action has not
previously been dismissed with prejudice, in acc~)rdance with Paragraph 4 hereof.
4. Concurrent with the execution of this Agreement, Owners shall
execute a Stipulation ("the Stipulation") for unconditional dismissal of the Lawsuit,
with prejudice, as to all claims and all defendants. The Stipulation shall be held in
trust by counsel for City and shall not be filed until the time provided herein. Upon
the expiration of one (1) year after the granting by City of final building site approval
for SDR-1290, or upon issuance by City of a building permit for construction of a
single family dwelling upon Lot B, whichever sh~ll first occur, counsel for City shall be
authorized to file the Stipulation wiJ:h the Santa Clara Superior Court and obtain an
order thereon dismissing the Lawsuit, with prejudice.
5. In addition to any and all other requirements to be satisfied by
Owners for final building site approval as contained in SDR-1290, Owners hereby agree
to perform or cause to be performed at their own expense and at no expense to City,
the undergrounding of all overhead utility lines on Mt. Eden Road, commencing at the
point where such utilities have been, or wi]l be, undergrounded by the developer of
Tract 6781, commonly known as the Teerlink Ranch (such point being approximately at
the property line separating Tract 6781 and the land now owned by Ty Teerlink), and
terminating at the point where such utilities have been, or will be, undergrounded by
the developers of Tract 6701, being a distance of approximately 220 feet generally
running along the irontage of the Subject Property. All such work shall be performed
in a good and workmanlike manner, in accordance with plans and specifications
approved by City and the utility companies prior to the issuance of building, grading or
other permits for the work. In the event Owners have satisfied all other conditions for
final .building site a[~proval except the undergrounding of said utilities, Owners may
enter' into a Deferred Improvement Agreement with City providing for the
performance and completion of such work within a perfoil 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 building site approval. All construction shall be guaranteed by Owners
against defects in material or workmanship for a period of one 11) year after the hate
of completion and acceptance by City.
6, As a further consideration for City's approval of said final building
site approval, Owners hereby agree that Lot B shall be subject to a Development
Impact Fee to be payable at the time a building permit is issued for the construction
of a new dwelling thereon, in accordance with the ordinance as adopted by City
requiring the payment of such fee.
7. Owners hereby stipulate that Measure A is a valid and enforceable
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 fdrce or effect in the event of City's breach of this Agreement.
8. Owners and City shall bear his, her or its own attorney's fees and
costs incurred in connection with the prosecution or defense of the Lawsuit and the
negotiation and preparation of this Stipulation for Settlement.
9. Conditioned upon full performance of this Agreement by all parties:
(a) Owners, on behalf of themselves and their respective 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, attorneys and their insurance carriers, from any and
all claims, demands and/or causes of action which may exist
between them, whether known, unknown, or suspected, and
Owners hereby waive the provisions of Civil Code Section 1542
-5-
set forth in Recital K above. The release of unknown claims
contained in this Paragraph 9(a) is a separate consideration for
the release contained in Paragraph 9(b) hereof and Owners
would not have executed this Agreement or agreed to this
Paragraph 9(a) but for the release contained in Paragraph 9(b).
,, (b)_ City, on behalf of itself and its officials, officers, agents,
'representatives, employees, attorneys and insurance carriers,
does hereby release Owners from all claims, demands and/or
causes of action which may existSbetween them, whether known
or unknown or suspected and City hereby waives the provisions
of Civil Code Section 1542 set forth in Recital K above. The
release of unknown claims contained in this Paragraph 9(b) is a
separate consideration for the release contained in Paragraph
9(a) hereof and City would not have executed this Agreement or
agreed to this Paragraph 9(b) but for the release contained in
Paragraph 9(a). "
10. This Agreement may be amended by an instrument in writing
referring here to, signed by the parties. Such amendment must specifically state that
it is an amendment to this Agreement. This Agreement may not be amended orally or
otherwise than as set forth in this Paragraph 10.
11. Owners shall have the right to assign all or any part of their rights or
obligations under this Agreement, subject to prior written approval of City, which
approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
12. Owners 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 .SDR-1290 and this Agreement. Owners further represent and warrant to
City that the Iranys have no right, title or interest in the Lawsuit and no longer are
parties to said action.
13. This Agreement is entered into for the benefit of the parties hereto
and shall 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 Lawsuit, no third person shall be entitled, directly or indirectly, to
base any claim or have any right arising from or related to this Agreement.
-6-
14. If it becomes necessary to enforce any of the terms of this
Agreement or to declare rights hereunder, the prevailing party shall be entitled to
reasonable attorneys' fees and other costs of litigation in addition to any other relief
to which he, she or it may be entitled.
15. The effective date of this .Agreement shall be the date upon which it
is last signed by all parties. It may be signed in one or more counterparts and, when
all parties have signed the original or counterpart, such counterparts together shall
constitute one original document. When so signed, this Agreement shall be filed with
the Court in the Lawsuit as a Stipulation for Settlement, but the effectiveness of this
Agreement does not depend upon Court approval or any Court order or r~~/~/Z o er.
Dated:
· ~ LAUREN L-' HUF~E ' '
THE CITY OF SARATOGA,
a mni i cot or ion
" / ~ IA LA E FANELLI May r
Attest:
A Cler~
~ to form
AROLD .
City Attorney
-7-