HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-21-1982 CITY COUNCIL AGENDACITY OF SARATOGA
AGENDA BILL NO. 2_S(.0
DATE: April 21, 1982
DEPARTMENT: MAINTENANCE SERVICES
SUBJECT: LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT L LA - 1
Issue Summary
Initial: '
Dept. Hd.�,�—
C. Atty
C. Mgr.
For the past two years, the City of Saratoga has utilized the provisions of the
"Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972" to raise the revenue necessary to fund required
maintenance and incidental costs within the Landscaping and Lighting District -L LA -1.
Pursuant to the Act, proceedings are required for each fiscal year during which an assess-
ment is to be levied and collected within the District.
Resolution No. directs the City Engineer to prepare a report describing the
improvements, the costs, the areas involved and the proposed assessments for each parcel.
This district includes all previously existing districts Azule, Azule Annexed and Saratoga
Village; three (3) Park Maintenance Districts, Manor Drive, Fredericksburg Drive and
Greenbrier; one (1) Parking District, Village Parking District No. 1.
It is anticipated that the Engineer's Report will be ready for preliminary approval
at the May 5, 1982 City Council Meeting. Also, at the�.May 5, 1982 meeting, the resolution
of intention fixing time and place of hearing (hearing should be held on June 2, 1982),
should be passed.
Recommendation
Adopt Resolution No. . A'Resolution describing improvements and directing preparation
of Engineer's report for fiscal year 1982 -1983.
Fiscal Impacts
The costs for the administration, maintenance servicing and lighting energy are
charged to the various zones within the District based on benefit receiver. The Santa
Clara County Assessor's Office will collect the amount through the taxes and, in turn,
remit to the City.
Exhibits /Attachments
Resolution No. together with Exhibit "A ".
Council Action
4/21: Mallory /Clevenger moved to adopt Resolution 1075. Passed 5 -0.
aca: {�'.�sr':.A�,.b. s: -i3+�E •u�,.., ::',crr� �a<. a :::
��,-i 'r ' 'y {.��A'�'�`�l.a^G' "°"'"✓���.�.. may' �i
`z r
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION DESCRIBING IMPROVEMENTS AND
DIRECTING PREPARATION OF ENGINEER'S REPORT
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1982 -1983
CITY OF SARATOGA
LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT LLA -1
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Saratoga, California, as
follows:
1. This Council did, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and
Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the
State of California, conduct proceedings for the formation of the City of Saratoga
Landscaping and Lighting District LLA -1 and for the levy and collection of assessments
for fiscal year 1980 -1981, and did, on June 18, 1980, pursuant to proceedings
duly had, adopt its Resolution No. 950-D, A Resolution Overruling Protests and
Ordering the Formation of an Assessment District and the Improvements, Ordering
Reduction of Certain Assessments and Confirming the Diagram and Assessment;
2. The public interest, convenience and necessity require, and it is the
intention of said Council to undertake proceedings for the levy and collection
of assessmeAts.upon the several lots or parcels of land in said District, for the
construction or installation of improvements, including the maintenance or servicing,
or both, thereof for the fiscal year 1982 -1983.
3. The improvements to be constructed or installed, including the maintenance
or servicing, or both, thereof, are more particularly described in Exhibit "A"
hereto attached and by reference incorporated herein.
4. The costs and expenses of said improvements, including the maintenance
or servicing, or both, thereof, are to be made chargeable upon said District, the
exterior boundaries of which District are the composite and consolidated area as more
particularly shown on a map thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of the City
of the City of Saratoga to which reference is hereby made for further particulars.
Said map indicates by a boundary line the extent of the territory included in said
District and of any zone thereof and shall govern for all details as to the extent
of the assessment district.
5. The Engineer of said City be, and here is hereby, directed to prepare
and file with said Clerk a report, in writing, referring to the assessment district
by its distinctive designation, specifying the fiscal year to which the report applies,
and, with respect to that year, presenting the following:
a) plans and specifications of the existing improvements
and for proposed improvements, if any, to be made
within the assessment district or within any zone
thereof;
b) an estimate of the cost of said improvements, if any, to be
made, the costs of maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof
and of any existing improvements, together with the incidental
expenses in connection therewith;
c) a diagram showing the exterior boundaries of the assessment
district and of any zones within said district and the lines
and dimensions of each lot or parcel of land within the
district as such lot or parcel of land is shown on the
County Assessor's maps for the fiscal year to which the
report applies, each of which lots or parcels of land
shall be identified by a distinctive number or letter
on said diagram; and
d) a proposed assessment of the total amount of the estimated
costs and expenses of the proposed improvements, including
the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, upon the
several lots or parcels of land in said district in proportion
to the estimated benefits to be received by such lots or
parcels of land respectively from said improvements, including
the maintenance or servicing, or both, thereof, and of the
expenses incidental thereto.
6. The office of the Assistant Director of Maintenance Services of said
City be, and is hereby designated as the office to answer inquiries regarding any
protest proceedings to be had herein, and may be contact during regular office hours
at the City Hall, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California, 95070 or by calling
(408) 867 -3438.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of
a resolution duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Saratoga,
California, at a meeting thereof held on the day of 1982, by the
following vot of the members thereof:
APPROVED:
Mayor
AYES, and in favor thereof, Councilmen:
NOES, Councilmen:
ABSENT, Councilmen:
City Clerk of the City of Saratoga
1
CITY OF SARATOGA
LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING DISTRICT LLA -1
a) The construction or installation, including the maintenance or
servicing, or both, thereof, within Zones 1, 2 and 3 as herein-
after described, of landscaping, including trees, shrubs, grass,
or other ornamental vegetation, statuary, fountains and other
ornamental structures and facilities, including the cost of
repair, removal or replacement of all or any part thereof,
providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping,
including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying,
fertilizing or treating for disease or injury, the removal of
trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste, water for the
irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains or
the maintenance of any other improvements.
b) The construction or installation, including the maintenance or
servicing, or both, thereof, within Zones 4, 5, 6 and 7, as
hereinafter described, of public lighting facilities for the
lighting of any public places, including ornamental standards,
luminaires, poles, supports, tunnels, mainholes, vaults, conduits,
pipes, wires, conductors, guys, stubs, platforms, braces,
communication circuits, appliances, attachments and appurtenances,
including the cost of repair, removal, or replacement of all or
any part thereof, electric current or energy, gas or other
illuminating agent for any public lighting facilities or for the
lighting or operation of any other improvements.
c) Tt'e construction or installation, including the maintenance or
servicing, or both, thereof, within Zone 8 as hereinafter
described, of landscaping, including trees, shrubs, grass, or
other ornamental vegetation, statuary, fountains and other
ornamental structures and facilities and public lighting
facilities for the lighting of any public places, including
ornamental standards, luminaries, poles, supports, tunnels,
manholes, vaults, conduits, pipes, wires, conductors, guys, stubs,
platforms, braces, transformers, insulators, contacts, switches,
capacitors, meters, communication circuits, appliances, attachments
and appurtenances, including the cost of repair removal or
replacement of all or any part thereof providing for the life,
growth, health and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation,
irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing or treating for disease
or injury, the removal of trimmings, rubbish debris and other solid
waste, electric current or energy, gas or other illuminating
agent for any public lighting facilities or for the lighting or
operation of any other improvements, water for the irrigation of
any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance
of any other improvements.
EXHIBIT "A"
CITY OF SARATOGA
AGLNIDA BILL NO. 2 S O
DATE: April 21, 1982
DEPARTMENT: Maintenance Services
SUBJECT: COMMUNITY GARDEN PLOT PROGRAM
Issue Summary
Initial:
Dept. Hd.
C. Atty.
C. Mgr.
The final phase of development of E1 Quito Park included fencing and water connections
for a Community Garden Plot Program in the area reserved for future tennis courts. The
Plot Program was not implemented last summer because of the Medfly situation. Staff are
now recommending the Plot Program be implemented in conjunction with the Saratoga
Community Garden. A memo outlining the background and proposed program is attached
for your review. The Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the proposed program
and recommends approval.
Recommendation
Approve Agreement with the Saratoga Community Garden to oversee the operation of the
Community Garden Plot Program, approve fees of $40 for 1982, review and comment on
rental agreement and Community Garden Plot Rules and Regulations.
Fiscal Impact
Fees charged plot holders will cover the cost of the City's administration, water and the
services of the Saratoga Community Garden to oversee and supervise the Plot Program.
Exhibits /Attachments
Agreement with the Saratoga Community Garden.
Background Memo.
Rental Agreement.
Rules and Regulations.
Council Action
4/21: Mallory /Jensen moved adoption of agreement. Passed 5 -0.
•� 1
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SARATOGA
AND THE SARATOGA COMMUNITY GARDEN
FOR OPERATION AND SUPERVISION OF THE
COMMUNITY GARDEN PLOT PROGRAM
-This Agreement made the day of 1982 by and between the
City of;Saratoga, a municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City ', and
Saratoga Community Garden, a non - profit organization, hereinafter referred to as
"Community Garden ".
?r;l'S.•'.�.c`1'�.Yil'1X• =.: G:�fv� :mi.:`:I::.:�ii.i::.`. rti y.�i ice': ti%�j:
WHEREAS, the City is desirous of operating a Community Garden Plot Program; and
WHEREAS, the Saratoga Community Garden Manager and staff have the expertise to
supervise and oversee the operation of the Plot Program;
NOW, THEREFORE, the following terms and conditions shall be agreed upon by the
City and Community Garden:
'
1) City agrees to make initial preparation of the plot area for use by rototilling,
installing a wider gate in the fence.
2) City agrees to provide stakes and strings to mark plots, bark for pathways,
and an area inside the fence for composting.
3) ,City agrees to provide water for-purposes of preparation and for use in the
gardening of plots.
4) City will establish rules and regulations acceptable to the Community Garden
Manager, to administer the plot rental application and fees and to notify
Community Garden.of same.
5) The City shall pay�the Saratoga Community Garden a sum per plot per growing
season, as established by City Council, to oversee and supervise the Plot
_•:::
Program. Sum shall be no less than $25 per plot per growing season.
6) The Community Garden agrees to stake out plots and determine size and number
of plots.
7) Community Garden agrees to provide workshops in organic gardening at least twice
a year for Community Garden plot holders, and this workshop shall be free of
additional charges.
8) Community Garden agrees to be responsible for organizing and supervising
work days for plot holders to participate in the general maintenance and
improvements of the entire Community Garden plot area.
9) Community Garden agrees to initiate and maintain compost piles and main pathways.
_
10) Community Garden agrees to direct and enforce garden rules and policies in the
Community Garden plot area, uncluding notifying people of possible loss of
rental agreement if plot is not maintained properly.
11) Community Garden agrees to provide direction and information on gardening
v:?a��ar'::x>b •iaucaru:,'.�
techniques and problems for holders of plots.
12) Community Garden agrees to recommend to City cancellation of agreement of
any individual plot holder who is not maintaining their plot in an acceptable
manner as outlined in the rules and regulations.
13) Community Garden agrees to make periodic reports to the City, to make recommendations
for improvements or address problems.
14) This Agreement begins with the 1982 growing season and shall automatically
renew from year to year until such time as City or Community Garden terminates
the Agreement as outlined below.
+ S t!
ri: Vii/ �' 3' ' ✓ �
r
I
15) Anything to the contrary hereinabove notwithstanding, City reserves the
right to terminate the Agreement on sixty (60) days prior written notice
to Community Garden.
v
16) In addition to the foregoing, Community Garden reserves the right to
terminate the within license on sixty (60) days prior written notice providing
the notice is presented so that termination occurs during the non - crowing
season of December or January of any year.
17) It is understood and agreed that the Community Garden has not been given
and is not given a lease of said premises or any part thereof and acquires
no easement or interest in property being used for Community Garden Plot
Program.
18) This Agreement and any and all rights contained herein is not assignable by
Community Garden without the written consent of the City.
19) In witness thereof the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day
and year first written above.
Community Garden
Attest
City Clerk
9
Mayor, City of Saratoca
City Attorney
O
REPORT
TO MAYOR AND
CITY COUNCIL
DATE: 3/23/82
COUNCIL MEETING: 4/21182
SUBJECT: COMMUNITY GARDEN PLOT PROGRAM
Background
When the revision of the master plan for E1 Quito Park was made in 1978,
the residents as well as the Parks.and Recreation Commission wanted to
retain as open space the area designated in the master plan for two tennis
courts. In order to provide that the undeveloped area not be a perpetual
weed patch, it was proposed that it be used for a Community Garden Plot
Program. This proposal was accepted by the Parks and Recreation Commission
and City Council and the water lines and fencing were installed as part of
Phase III construction of the Park.
Concept of Plot Program
In order to proceed with the Community Garden Plot Program staff obtained
information from other cities who were operating such programs. Both San Jose
and Cupertino were very cooperative in providing the City with background
information, suggestions and forms. The programs have been very successful
in other cities and one of the .main keys to this success was the fact that
the cities provide a Garden Manager or person responsible for assisting plot
holders.in gardening techniques and making sure the plots are used properly
and maintained. After considerable review and discussion by City staff, it
was felt that a cooperative program between the City and the Saratoga Community
Garden be proposed in order for the City to administer and operate the plot
program in an acceptable manner. Basically, plots would be rented for a
growing season, a fee to cover the City's administrative costs, water and
sufficient funds to cover the cost of Community Garden staff would be established
and charged on a yearly basis.
Discussions were held with the Manager of the Community Garden and other
Community Garden staff and they are very enthusiastic about the Program, are
willing to undertake the challenge and are certainly capable of assuming the
respons-ibi'litjr cif Garden. Manager.
Community Garden Plot Program
Page Two
Start Up of the Plot Program
To initiate the Plot Program the City would rototill the area (which we would do
anyway to cut down the weeds), convert the single gate to a double gate and,loan
the Community Garden stakes and strings for marking the plots. The City will
also supply bark for the pathway and the initial water needed. The Community
Garden will be required to determine the size of plots and stake out plots, mark
the pathways, start the compost pile and orient their staff to be prepared to
accept the responsibility of the Community Garden Plot Program.
Operation of the Plot Program
For the actual operation the City will administer the rental program by accepting
all rental applications and fees, establishing the rules and regulations and
provide water. The City would also be the agency to cancel a rental agreement
upon the recommendation of the Community Garden Plot Manager if a plot is not being
maintained as it should be according to the Rules and Regulations.
The Community Garden will accept complete control of the Plot Program, will provide
classes for the participants at least:�twice a year, will organize and supervise the
work days for general maintenance, will maintain pathways, compost pile and the
main area, direct and enforce the Garden rules and regulations, provide information
on garden techniques for plot holders, and assume responsibility for notifying
plot holders of potential cancellation of their rental agreement if the plot is
not being taken care of appropriately. The Community Garden also will make periodic
reports to the City and any recommendations for improvement of the Plot Program.
Fees
It is recommended that plot holders be charged a fee of $45 per growing season,
February lst to December lst, and that of this fee $20 be retained by the City to
cover administrative costs and water and $25 be paid to the Saratoga Community
Garden for garden supervision and management. It is further recommended that because
of the late start this year the fee be pro -rated so the 1982 fee would be $40,
with $25 being paid to the Community Garden and the City retaining $15 because of
no water use for the first three months.
Rental Agreement
Upon renting a plot each plot holder will be required to sign an agreement releasing
the City of liability and agreeing to follow-the rules and regulations of the Plot
Program. A copy of the rental agreement and the rules and regulations are attached.
Staff will be available at the meeting to answer any questions you might have on
this proposal for a Community Garden Plot Program at E1 Quito Park. If the program
is approved, staff will begin immediately to begin implementing rental of plots for
the 1982 season, with appropriate publicity and advertisement in order to notify
residents of the availability.
Barbara Sampson, Director
Maintenance Services Department
L'
CITY OF SARATOGA
COMMUNITY GARDEN PLOT RENTAL AGREEMENT
Completed Rental Agreements must be returned to the Office of the Director of Maintenance
Services and fees must be paid prior to the assignment of a Garden Plot.
Name
Address
Home Telephone
Work Telephone
Fees Paid $ Date From to
I) Rental Fee is $45.0'0 per year, Rental Agreement is not transferable.
2) The maximum time for rental of plots shall be from February 1st to December 1st
of any year.
3) Plot holder agrees to abide by the rules and regulations of the Community Garden
Plot P(rogram or forfeit all fees paid and the right to continue use of a plot.
4) If a plot holder must give up the plot for any reason other than outlined in
## 3 above, the fee may be prorated if a new plot holder is obtained and a new
Agreement is signed with the City.
5) Each plot holder will be issued a key to the gate and agrees to return the key
at the conclusion of the rental agreement.
6) All family members using the plot must sign below and must adhere to the following
statement:
I, we, the undersign do hereby agree to indemnify and hold harmless the City
of Saratoga, its officers and employees, and the Saratoga Community Garden,
its officers and employees, from and against any and all liability for any
injury which might be suffered by the undersigned or his agent, arising out
of or in any way connected with the individual's participation in the Community
Garden Plot Program.
Signature of Applicant
Other Family Member
COMMUNITY GARDEN PLOT PROGRAM
RULES AND REGULATIONS
1) Each plot must be maintained in an acceptable manner, kept free of debris
and weeds controlled as stipulated or directed by either the City or the
Saratoga Community Garden.
2) New plot holders shall take a course from the Saratoga Community Garden
in organic gardening either in the spring or fall, or show some evidence
of proficiency or knowledge of organic gardening techniques.
3) Organic gardening techinques and fertilizers should be used at all times,
any deviation must be reviewed and approved by the Saratoga Community Garden
or City.
4) All pesticides of any kind must be non -toxic to humans and animals and
must be approved by the City or Saratoga Community Garden prior to use.
5) Should a plot be deemed neglected or abandoned, the plot holder will be
given 15 days to correct the problem or make other arrangements, or
forfeiture of the fees and plot will be required.
6) Plot holders will be asked to donate nine hours of their time per year for
the general upkeep of the Garden and will maintain the paths on two sides
of their plot.
7) Plot holders will supply their own tools and water hose and will remove them
after each use.
8) Water should be used only when needed and not in excess so that run off does
not become a problem to other plots.
9) Compost piles are to be in designated areas only.
10) Each plot holder shall be considerate of other plots and not engage in any
activity or function that is detrimental to other plot holders.
11) Each plot is for individual or family use only, and no more than one plot
per each individual or family shall be allowed.
12) Family members under 12 should be accompanied by an adult member of the family
when working at the plot area.
13) Former plot holders will be mailed applications on December 15th of any year
and will be given first choice of plots for the following year.
14) Former plot holders must submit their rental agreements by February lst in order
to reserve their plot or it will be rented to another individual or family.
CITY OF SARATOGA, APRIL 1982
CITY OF S11W00GA
Initial:
AGENDA BILL NO. D Dept. Hd.
DATE: 4 -21 -82 C. Atty.
DEPARPhENT:. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C. Mgr.
SUBJECT: SDR -1518 Montewood Dr. Dr. C. M. Mayo
Issue Sumary
1. This is over 50% addition to existing single family residence.
2. The SDR -1518 is ready for Final Building Site Approval
3. -- Requirements for City Departments and other agencies have been met.
Reconmendation
Adopt resolution on 1518 -02 attached, approving Final Building Site Approval.
Fiscal Impacts
None.
Exhibits /Attachments
1. Resolution 1518 -02
2. Location map
3. Copy of Tentative Map
4. Report to Planning Commission
5. Status Report for Building Site Approval
Council Action
4/21: Clevenger/Mallory rroved to approve on Consent Calendar. Passed 5 -0.
RESOLUTION NO 1518 -02
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA
APPROVING BUILDING SITE OF C. M. MAYO
The City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as
follows:
SECTION 1: The existing Lot #7 of Tract #3219 recorded in Book
#151 of Maps, Pages 7, 8 and 9, and submitted to City Engineer,
City of Saratoga, be approved.as one, (1) 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 21st day of April 19 82 01
by the following vote: .
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
ITY CLERK
MAYOR
J Z?
A
11111 i� 111,01i
I I ROX.2,111
� .5S7;T
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION
CItY of SaratoaR
APPROVED BY:
DATE: 3/19/82
met Commission Meeting: 3/24/82
SUBJECT: SDR -1518, Dr. & Mrs. Mayo, 18801 Montewood Drive, Tentative Building
site approval - 1 lot (Over 50% expansion)
REQUEST: Tentative Building Site Approval to construct an (over -50% expansion)
addition to an existing residence which has previously received Floor Area
Ratio Variance and Design Review Aprrovals from the City Council on appeal.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: This project is classified as a Categorical Exemption
Class 1 Section 15101(e).
PUBLIC NOTICING: Noticing of this request is not required by Ordinance.
However the Variance and Design Review Approval hearings and appeal were
noticed in the paper, on site and by mailings.
` GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
ZONING: R -1- 40,000
Very low density residential.
SURROUNDING LAND USES: Single family residential
SITE SIZE: 44,897 sq. ft.
SITE SLOPE: 9.7%
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is proposing to convert the existing garage
to a recreation room, add a second story master bedroom and a racquetball court
to the southwestern portion of the dwelling. The site contains a variety of
trees and other vegetation around the periphery of the lot. One 12" evergreen
tree will need to be removed for construction of the new driveway turnaround.
(previous reports attached). The map has been sent to the responsible agencies
and no unusual concerns have been noted.
Report to Planning all
IE..nission 3/19/82
SDR -1518, Dr. & Mrs. Mayo Page 2
PROJECT STATUS: Said project complies with all obejctives of the 1974
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.
A Negative Declaration was prepared and will be filed with the County of
Santa Clara Recorder's relative to the environmental impact of this project,
if approved under this application. Said determination date:
The Staff Report recommends approval of the tentative map for SDR -1518
(Exhibit B filed February 10,1982) 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 regulations and applicable
Flood Control regulations and requirements of the Fire Department.
Reference is hereby ma�e 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 - DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTION SERVICES
A. Geotechnical investigation and report by licensed professional to
be submitted prior to issuance of building permit on foundation.
B. Detailed on -site improvement plans to be submitted prior to issuance
of building permit showing:
1. Grading (limits of cuts, fills; slopes, cross - sections,
existing and proposed elevations, earthwork quantities)
2. Drainage details (conduit type, slope, outfall, location, etc.)
3. Retaining structures including design by A.I.A. or R.C.E.
for walls 3 feet or higher.
III. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - CENTRAL FIRE DISTRICT
A. Construct a turnaround at the proposed dwelling site having a 32
foot inside radius. Other approved type turnaround must meet
requirements of the Fire Chief. Details shall be shown on building
plans.
Report to Planning Commission 3/19/82
SDR -1518, Dr. & Mrs. Mayo Page 3
B. Provide 15 foot clearance over the road or driveway including
turnaround to building site. Remove all vertical limbs, wires,
or other obstacles.
IV. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
A. Domestic water to be provided by San Jose Water Works and
sanitary sewers to be provided by Sanitation District No. 4.
V. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
A. Applicant shall, prior to Final Map Approval, submit plans .
showing location and intended use of any existing wells to the
SCVWD for review and certification.
VI. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
A. Prior to issuance of building permits individual structures shall
be reviewed by the Permit Review Division to evaluate the potential
for solar accessibility. The developer shall provide, to the extent
feasible, for future passive or natural" heating or cooling opportuni-
ties on /in the subdivision /building site.
VII. COMMENTS
A. Tree removal prohibited unless in accord with applicable City
Ordinances.
Approved:
Kathy Kerdus, Asrsociate Planner
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF SARATOGA
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SUBJECT: Status Report for Building Site Approval,
All conditions for Building Site Approval SDR- 1518., C. M. Mayo
(have) )(2D€ X&Ut� been met as approved by the Planning Commission on March 19, 198:
Listed below are the amounts) dates and City receipt numbers for all required
items:
Offer of Dedication
NA
Date Submitted
NA
Record of Survey or Parcel Map
NA
Date Submitted
NA
Storm Drainage Fee NA Date Submitted
NA Receipt
# NA
All Required Improvement Bonds
NA Date
Submitted NA
Receipt#
All Required Inspection Fees
NA Date
Submitted NA
Receipt # --- N7V---
Building Site Approval Agreement
NA Date
Signed NA
Park and Recreation Fee
Submitted NA
Receipt# NA
It is, therefore, the Community Development Department recommendation that
XXXX)§XW (Final) Building Site Approval for Mr. C. M. Mayo
SDR -1518 be granted.
If Conditional Building Site Approval is recommended, it shall become un-
conditional upon compliance with the following conditions:
Condition(s) Reason for Non - Compliance
Robert S. Shook
Director of Community Development
. t
AGL�DA BILL ISO. a(0
CITY OI' SiY ATOGA
DATE: April 21, 1982
DEPlU: -, , T: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
-------------------------------------------
SUBJECr: TRACT 6528, P -arker Unit II.
Issue Su�mary
Prospect Road.
Initial:
Dept. Hd.
C. Atty.
C. Mgr.
Blackwell Homes
1. The Tract 6528 Parker Ranch Unit II is ready for Final Approval.
2. All Bonds and Agreements have been submitted to City.
3. All requirements for City Departments and other agencies have been met.
4. Negative Declaration Environmental Impact Evaluation was filed 9 -14 -78
with County.
5i Parker Unit I was approved by City Council at their regular meeting held
- -July - 10:, 1979.
Recommendation
Adopt Resolution on 1339 -02, attached, approving the Final Ijap of the Tract
6528 and authorizing execution of the improvement agreement.
Fiscal Imoacts
None.
Exhibits /Attachments
1. Resolution 1339 -02.
2. Location map.
3.- Copy -of Tentative Map approval.
4. Copy of Report to Planning Commission.
Council Action
4/21: Mallory /Matson moved to approve on Consent Calendar. Passed 4 -0 (Jensen abstaining).
ri:;i:i�.'yi�.;;Hi�;ai. r "r.i7N�sY.�•�, °%K.''�ss?�:, f'G;'!�.w:f'aT t>�
RESOLUTION NO. 1339 -2
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL MAP OF
TRACT 6528
WHEREAS, a final subdivision map of Tract 6528 Parker Ranch
having heretofore been filed with this City
Council for approval, and it appearing that all streets, public ways and
easements shown thereon have not been satisfactorily improved nor completes,
and it further appearing that otherwise. said map conforms with the rec -ire-
ments of Division 2 of Title 7 of the Government Code of the State of
California, and with all local ordinances applicable at the time of
approval of the tentative map and all rulings made thereunder, save
and except as follows:
None.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
(1) The aforesaid final amp is hereby conditionally approved. Said
approval shall automatically be and become unconditional and fines_
upon compliance by subdivider with such requirements, if any, as se*_ for='-_
immediately above as not yet having been complied with, and upon compl_an=u
with Section (3) hereof.
(2) All street dedications, and all other dedications offered on said
final map (except such easements as are declared to be accepted b-:
the terms of the City Clerks certificate on said map), are hereby rejezte_�
pursuant and subject to Section #66477.1 of the Government Code of the
State of California.
(3) As a condition precedent to and in consideration of the future accep_-
ance of any streets and easements not by this resolution now accented,
and as a condition precedent to the City Clerk certifying the approval any
releasing said map for recordation, the owner and subdivider shall enter
into a written agreement with the City of Saratoga, secured by good anal
sufficient surety bond or bonds, money or negotiable bonds, in amount of : -e
-1-
1
estimated cost of improvements, agreeing to improve said streets, public
ways and easements in accord with the standards of Ordinance No. NS -60
as amended and with the improvement plans and specifications presently
on file, and to maintain the same for one year after completion. The form
and additional terms of said written agreement and surety bond shall be
as heretofore adopted by the City Council and as approved by the City
Attorney. The mayor of the City of Saratoga is hereby authorized to exe-
cute the aforesaid improvement agreement on behalf of said city.
(4) Upon compliance by subdivider and /or owner with any remaining require-
ments as set forth in the preamble of this resolution (if any) and
with the provisions of Section (3) hereof, the City Clerk is authorized
and directed to execute the City Clerk's certificate as shown on said map
and to transmit said map as certified to the Clerk of the Santa Clara
County Board of Supervisors.
The above and foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced
and passed by the City Council of the City of Saratoga on the day
of 19
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
, by the following vote:
MAYOR
4t.,
tir
Q�
QP
r
J Ley o
PROSPECT `RD
ID
J-,4. - F7
C
o Q- D a
� F
o � Q
f _
t'
Y
2 wM e
z
KR 1s [R
T
•� '// O ROOK
/, •V[.
X
W
W
? 2
V J
J
J
t
M
O
•
LOCATION. MAP
TRACT 6528
Y
O 7
Y
RDlLL
lz2
K
Y l
F
i s City of Sarafogo
APPROVED. BY:
DATE- / �6� -,
CITY OF,SARATOGA INITIALS:
f5i -_ ..
31, 197S
Exhibit "A'
STAFF REPORT
SD -1339 Blackwell Homes Inc. Prospect Road, Tentative Map Approval - 98 Tots
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Tentative Subdivision Approval
for 98 lots on 201 acres -South of Prospect Road, known as the Parker Ranch and the
adjoining 17 acres, part of the Hall Ranch, in the HC -RD zoning district. The
�',8Yiginal application requested 101 lots.
CT-'he site contains oak woodland, a dense riparian belt, grassland, old orchards
and specimen trees, equestrian use predominating currently. The Parker Ranch
house and a number of other buildings barns and sheds exist on the site - -all to
;
be removed. The elevations range from 350 to 900. Three landslide areas have
been avoided in the development plan. Drainage for the site has been reviewed ex-
tensively with previous applications and the two EIR documents and conditioned im-
provements will lessen the flooding problems experienced in the Blue Hills plan-
ning area. Approximately half of the proposed homes will be visible from several
points in Saratoga, All homes are conditioned to Design Review and are to he placed
according to the Site d ' Development Plan. A water tank is to be place on the south-
west corner of the property.
All of the proposed lots are equal to or greater than 1 acre in size, with the re-
quired depths, widths and frontages. Three open space parcels, A, B and C, of 21.5
acres, 11.2 acres and 31.0 acres respectively, are also proposed. The eucalyptus
grove is indicated to be saved within the public right of way. Scenic easements
have been placed on many of the lots with conditioning for no development (which
means no decks, fences and landscaping as well as other structures).
As proposed, twenty -five (25) lots of the subdivision will access out throu3h Comer
Drive. An emergency access road and barrier will be constructed, separatir.3 these
25 lots from the rest of the subdivision. Staff has conditioned the access to Comer
Drive to be built to public street standards. Access points for the remainLig 73 lots
will be 1) a bridge to the westerly portion of Prospect Road 2) an intersec`.ion near
Stelling onto Prospect and 3) an access to Hillmoor Drive or other public street with
the construction of Unit #3 (per conditions of Public Works Department). One future
connection to the Fremont High School property is proposed with a possible additional
connection where 3 proposed road borders the High School property. Staff is not con-
ditioning the major portion of Prospect (to the west of the subject property) to be
improved.
Some internal streets shown on the Tentative Map exceed the 400 feet maximu= cul -de-
sac length specified in the Subdivision Ordinance, however the Planning Comrussiion
may allow longer lengths if this is the only feasible method of development. The
first unit of the proposed subdivision will cause 18 homes to be built with only one
means of access, exceeding the subdivision and General Plan policy of 15 ho=es on a
cul -de -sac or dead end street without a secondary access. However with the construc-
tion of the second and third units, two additional accesses and one emergency access
would be provided. The street widths will be 26' of improvements and 1S' on one way
streets with 26' bulges near the residences.
The proposed subdivision street layout calls for removal of approximately 1C0 heri-
tage size trees. Additional trees will be lost with the construction of driveways
and residences, however these removals are conditioned to be reviewed and approved
only with Design Review Approval.
STATUS: An Environmental Impact Report was certified by the Planning Commission as
adequate on June 28, 1978 and a Notice of Determination will be filed with he County
of Santa Clara Recorder's Office if this project is approved.
FINDINGS: Said project complies with all objectives of the 1974 General Plan, and
all requirements of the zoning and Subdivision Ordinances of the City of Saratoga.
The planning Commission is responsible for making the necessary findings according
to Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act. The Commission: must Make
one or more of the following findings with Exhibit "D" , in addition to previous _-Eincngs.
(a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated
into, such project which mitigate or avoid the significant en-
vironmental effects thereof as identified in the completed en-
vironmental impact report.
(b) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency and such changes have
uY i Yl sy^9r` {y t P
.,!! ".,•, been adopted by such other agency, or can and should be adopted
by such other agency.
Ai ist 31, 1978
' `STAE�F RE' #2
RE: �" � °�l
RE: SD -1339, Blackwell Homes Inc.
�(a Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infea-
sible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identi-
fied in the environmental impact report.
TheStaff Report recommends approval of the tentative map for SD -1339 (Exhibit "B -1"
filed August 15, 1978) subject to the following conditions:
GENERAL CONDITIONS
A. Comply with Standard Engineering Conditions dated April 11, 1977.
SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
A. Widen (reconstruct as necessary) the two (2) existing bridges on Prospect
Road to include street improvements plus 6 ft. sidewalk. If bridges must be
removed and reconstructed, sidewalks must be provided on each side.
B. Construct new bridge to provide 32 ft. street section plus 2 ft.
additional walkway on each side.
C. Construct access road to serve water tank site and lots 83, 84
and 86 to "Minimum Access Road" standards. (Special Exception
by Planning Commission is required for City to allow this access
road) .
D. Construct connection to Comer Drive to 50 ft. right- of -way stan-
dards including concrete curbs and gutters (subject to reimburse-
ment).
F. Provide "Left Turn Lane" on Prospect Road at northerly entrance
street. E
G. Street improvements on 50 -foot right -of -way to be 32 feet.*
H. Street improvements 40 -foot right -of -way to be 32 feet.*
I. Street improvements on 30 -foot right -of -way (one -way) to be 18 feet.*
NOTE: *per "cross- sections on "Tentative Map"
J. Submit an irrevocable offer of dedication to provide for a 30 -foot
half- street on Prospect Road along entire frontage.
K. Dedicate and improve Prospect Road from easterly tract boundary to
200 -ft. southerly of Maria Lane to provide for a standard 30 -ft.
half- street.
L. Construct storm line as per Master Drainage Plan and directed by
Director of Public works, (compatible with EIR recommendations).
M. Dedicate 2 ft. strip in fee to the City at all locations where streets
adjoin property not with this development.
N. Provide adequate sight distance at all driveways as approved by the Director
of Public Works.
NOTE: 1. The "Structural Section" of the road bed
to be 125% of the "Gravel Equivalent" as
determined by standard design practice.
2. The cross slope of the "one -way" street
section shall slope into the hill.
3. The "storm drain system" shown on the
"Tentative Map" is not approved.
0. Improvement Plans to include the design of both halfs of the roadway adjacent
to lot 68,69, 75 & 76. One half of this street is to be constructed as part of
the improvements required for Unit 2 and to be used as a joint driveway emergency
access road. A bond will be posted to assure completion of the second half of the
street if so required by the City within 2 years after the final acceptance of the
street improvement within Unit 2. Submit irrevocable offer of dedication for
necessary right of way for full street improvement.
III. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - DEPT OF INSPECTION SERVICES /BUILDING DEPARTMENT
; ^ ^ A. Geotechnical Report required po q prior to final approval. Applicant's geo-
;,etg technical consultant should speak to all matters that may be affected
by or have effect on the proposed development.
StAFF REPORT < August 31, 1978
f:- - RE: SD -1339, Blackwell Hom&s,'fnc. `;, Page #3
B. Applicants' geotechnical consultant shall review all site, pool, grading,
^ar .
4 i
C.
drainage, and foundation plans for each lot and provide a written statement
to the City certifying he has done such a review, and that the plans are
consistent with the recommendations of his report. Building permits will not
be issued until this statement is received.
A grading plan for each lot shall be submitted and approved prior
to building permits at time of design review. This plan is to be
prepared by a licensed engineer. This plan is to be accurate to
within +0.5 foot and be of such scale and contain detal as to
allow accurate determination of slopes, cut and fill quantities
and limits of grading /excavation. Cross- sections and calculations
shall be submitted as appropriate. All grading shall be in accor-
dance with city grading ordinance and the applicable geotechnical
report. All grading shall be contoured.
D. All slopes either stripped during or created by construction shall
be treated adequately for erosion control. The grading plan shall
contain details of how this is to be accomplished. This work shall
be completed prior to final inspection /certification of occupancy.
No cuts or fills shall be made at a time likely to be subject to
rainfall. Erosion control measures shall be installed prior to
rainfall season or occupancy, whichever is first.
E. All engineering structures /components, foundations and retaining
walls over 3 feet.in face height shall be designed by a registered
��civil engineer.
F. All structural fills shall be keyed into side - slopes, placed on
stable existing ground stripped of all organic /deleterious material,
and compacted to a minimum 908 relative compaction. Non - structural
fills shall be likewise,placed except to a minimum 858 relative
compaction.
G. A drainage plan for each lot shall be submitted and approved prior
to building permits. This plan should address all potential runoff
reaching, created by and leaving the site (including water from
paved and roof areas). Plan shall show method of collecting, carrying
and disposing of all such water. water shall not be directed onto
adjacent private property without proper authority (existing natural
water - course, private storm drain easement, etc.)
H. Existing above and below ground structures shall be removed from site.
Demolition permits required.
I. All dead trees near proposed structures shall be removed from site.
J. "P.G. &E. Power transmission tower shall be fenced.
K. All structures shall be designed in accordance with 1976 Uniform
Building Code Seismic design requirements.
L. All on -site construction shall be sufficiently observed by the
geotechnical consultant so as to allow him to validate the geo-
technical reports findings and compliance with the reports recommen-
dations. Written certification that this was done will be required
prior to final inspections.
M. All grading is to be certified by a registered civil engineer as
complying with the approved grading plan.
IV. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - CUPERTINO SANITARY DISTRICT
A. Sanitary sewers to be provided and fees paid in accordance with
requirements of Cupertino Sanitary District.
B. Provide easements for building sewers to service adjacent parcels
in accordance with letter dated Feb. 6, 1978. Developer to provide
access roads to sewer lines and manholes as required by Cupertino
Sanitation District letter dated February 6, 1978.
V. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SARATOGA FIRE DISTRICT
A. Property is located in a potentially- hazardous fire area. Prior to
issuance of building permit, remove combustive vegetation as specified.
Fire - retardant roof covering and chimney spark arrestor details shall
be shown on the building plan. (City Ordinance 38.58 and Uniform
Fire Code, .Appendix E).
+• •,-� :err .,�;�, -. �4'� -cam; '�.�,u;:�
� � =r
-: < >..,.,...,,.. -_ .......:_ .....:.. :. ...... : _.. :.: ...
STAFF REPORT AUGUST 31, 1978
x 7 `
RE: SD -1339, Blackwell Homes, Inc. Page #4
B. 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. Slope driveway shall not exceed 12113 with
j '• out adhering to the following:
`s
- Driveways having slopes between 12113 to 15 3 shall be surfaced
using 2Y" of A.C. on 6 -inch aggregate base.
! - Driveways.habing.slopes between 153 to 1711 shall be surfaced
using 4" of P.C.C. concrete rough surfaced on 4 -inch aggregate
w�. tv .,i- c, - *,•
base and shall not exceed 50 feet in length.
- Driveways with greater slopes or longer length will not be accepted.
C. Construct a turaround at the proposed dwelling site having a 32 -foot inside
radius. Other approved type turaround must meet requirements of the Fire
`
i
Chief. Details Shallbe shown on building plans.
D. Driveway shall have a minimum inside curve radius of 42 -fee-.
E: Provide a parking area for emergency vehicles at proposed building site, or
_
as required by the Fire Chief. Details shall be shown on building plans.
F. Estension of existing water system adjacent to site is required for fire pro-
tection. Plans to show location of water mains and fire hydrants.
G. Proposed dwelling must have a minimum recognized water supply capable of deli-
vering 1000 gallons per minute for 2 hours. This is based upon the Insurance
Service Office grade for determining a required Fire Flow to maintain a Grade
Five (5) rating— Minimum.required fire flow for the subject facility shall
be 100 gallons per minute'from the subject facility shall be 100 gallons per
minute from the three hydrants flowing with 20 psi residual.
H. Provide 15 -foot clearance over the road or driveway (vertical) to building
site. Remove all limbs, wires or other obstacles.
I. Developer to install 31 hydrants that meet Saratoga Fire District's specifica-
tions and deposit $6,045.00 to cover hydrant rental for a period of five (5)
years. Hydrant to be installed and accepted prior to issuance of building
permits.
J. Construct passing turnouts 10' wide and 40' long as required by Fire Depart-
ment. Detail shall be shown on bulding plans.
K. All bridges and roadways shall be designed to sustain 35,000 lbs., dynamic
loading.
L. Construct a turn around at the south end of lot 84 (road leading to water
tank) having a 32' inside radius. Details shall be shown on building plas.
Other approved type turnaround must meet requirements of the Fire Chief.
M. Developer shall deposit a fee of $10.00 per hydrant for a total of $310.00
prior to issuance of building permits.
VI. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
A. Sewage disposal to be provided by sanitary sewers installed and connected by the
developer to one of the existing trunk sewers of the Cupertino Sanitary District.
Piror to final approval, an adequate bond shall be posted with said district to
assure completion of sewers as planned.
B. Domestic water to be provided by San Jose Water Works.
C. Well(s) on site,to be abandoned in accordance with County Standards.
VII. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
A. Dedicate right -of -way along entire Prospect Creek frontage to Santa Clara Valley
Water District, that would extend from Prospect Road to at least 50 -feet on the
opposite side of the existing creek center line.
B. Bridge to be constructed per SCVWD letter dated March 27, 1978.
�}
h
C. Elevations of all building foundations to be a minimum of 8 -feet above the exist -
'
ing creek bottom. Building setbacks to be 2 times the distance above the creek
bottom from the existing tOe of bank.
- cam: ,NL : - �- r ,.� .k •: �; .;,, r,
.
M,
AU UL T 31, 1978
STAFF REPORT Page #5
RE: SD -1339, Blackwell Homes, Inc.
i D. Detailed plans for siltation basins and other plans to solve siltation problems
of Prospect Creek to be submitted to SCVWD for review and approval prior to
Final Approval.
E. Applicant shall, prior to Final Map Approval, submit plans showing the location
!� and intended use of any existing wells to SCVWD for review and certification.
F. Detail of storm drain outfall into Prospect Creek to be reviewd and approved by
SCVWD prior to Final Approval.
ra:
/ VIII. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS - COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
r
' A. Dedicate trail easements as shown on Tentative Map.
i J
f � ..�tiJ I V.yT 2- ;L,1.�S+ �- �i�{,. 4 �, s., fa:,'%y.. 1 r(.•
B. Equestrian trails to be a minimum of 8' wide with additional land if necessary
to go around obstructions. Other approved width to meet requirements of Parks
and Recreation Commmission. Trail grading to be done by developer prior to .'
issuance of building permit. Pathway to comparatively level from side to side
and unobstructed.
IX. SPECIFIC CONDITION - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
A. Prior to Final Approval, Submit CC & Rs which state:
1. No pools (excluding spas) are allowed on Lots 13 -15
18, 19, 25 -32, 34 -37, 55 -61, 63, 64, 66, 68 -73, 75 -82,
84 -87, & 91 =95. Pools on remaining lots are to be placed
on slopes of 208 or less and will be subject to City staff
design review to insure correct placement in relation to
trees and slope. Decisions are appealable to the Planning
Commission through the Design Review process.
2. No recreational courts are allowed on any lot.
3. Residences require Design Review Approval. Individual house
Design to be evaluated on the basis of compatibility with the
physical environment and compliance with Site Development Plan.
Complete plans for all on -site grading to be included in evalua-
tion. All grading to be contoured so as to form smooth transi-
tions. All grading to be smooth transitions between natural and
man-made slopes.
4. Fences, walls and hedges are allowed only per City of Saratoga's
HC -RD Zoning District Regulations - "proximate to the principal
structure and in no event to enclose or encompass an area in excess
of 4000 square feet ".
5. Scenic easement restrictions as shown on Final Map.
6. Mitigation Measures as stated on the Tentative Map. These CC & R's
are not to be amended without written consent of the City of Sara-
toga and are enforceable by the City.
B. Design Review Approval of all structures and landscaping required prior to
issuance of permits, per HC -RD Ordinance.
C. Design Review Approval for the following is required prior to Final Subdivisicn
Approval
a. Treatment of pedestrian / equestrian easement
b. Design of any retaining walls over 3 feet in
height
c. Eucalyptus area grove treatment in Right of Way (with
room for fire hydrants if necessary)
d. Treatment of emergency access road and barrier
e. Fencing for PGE transmission line
f. Landscaping for graded area with slo es of 3:1 or flatter and
exceeding g0 ft. in heighI toe to tops or with slopes steeper than
3:1 and exceeding 10 ft. in height (toe to top)
STAFF REPORT
RE: xxSD-1399, Blackwell Homes, Inc.
LY.r!
p.,',.
August 31, 1978
Page #6
-ir
D. Enter into Scenic Easement Agreement with the City for the scenic easements
(including eucalyptus grove) prior to Final Map Approval (to be included in
the recorded CC&R's, amended only with City permission and enforceable to
City of Saratoga.
E. Any modifications to the Site Development Plan shall be subject to Planning
Commission approval.
F. Design Review Approval of the water tank is required prior to issuance of buil-
ding permits for Unit 2.
G. Tree removal on lots subject to Design Review with residences.
H. Special architectural mitigation measures for the residences shall be reviewed
and approved by the PC prior to.Final Approval.
I. Scenic Easements to be shown on Final Map per the following- „written statement:
We further dedicate to public use easement for
permanent open space on and over those certain
areas designated as "scenic easement" on the
written map, which are to be kept open and free
from building and structures and other improvements
(including landscaping, fencing and decks), but
subject to the rights, limitations, powers and
obligations as set forth on that certain Scenic
Easement Agreement dated and which is
being recorded concurrently herewith.
J. Slopes on east facing side shall be graded to no more than 3:1 maximum slope.
K. All cut and fill slopes shall be of such material as to fully support land-
scaping.
L. No single retaining wall to be more than 5 feet in exposed face height.
M. Cuts for'driveways,visible from viewshed, shall be hidden behind houses
and/ or screened.
X. COMMENTS
A. Tree removal prohibited unless in accord with applicable City Ordinances
APPROVED: . k-_, , .) CL.[.L ---
Planning Commissi n Agenda: Kathy Terdus, Assistant Planner
SD -1339 (Blackwell Homes)
t t.
l 1'._�{•t Al } "Si!.�v� .}4�}4 ^�i.t A
EXHIBIT "D"
September 12, 1978
The following changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
such project which mitigate or avoid any significant environmental effects there-
of as identified in the completed environmental impact report.
• All homes will be designed in accordance with the 1976
Edition of the Uniform Building Code and the corresponding
Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and Commentary, 1974
Edition, SEANC, in order to assure compliance with the most
up -to -date seismic design criteria.
e The subdivision is designed to avoid all landslides and unstable
areas.
• Grading will be performed per the explicit instructions of the
soil engineer.
• Storm drain will be constructed to reduce flow of water to Verde
Floor and Norada Court's storm drains.
• Siltation ponds will be constructed where possible, such as the
confluence of the two existing swales within drainage basin 6 -2
along the easterly property line of the site. The design of -
said ponds to conform to requirements of the City Engineer when
construction drawings are prepared.
• All storm drainage systems within the proposed development will
discharge into energy dissipator structures so that no concen-
trated water is discharged directly into an earth swale without
some form of energy dissipation device. Energy dissipatoos shall
be designed to criteria of City Engineer when construction
drawings are prepared.
• All grading will be fully engineered with appropriate storm drain
facilities installed for draining and protecting said graded
slopes.. Said engineering to be set forth in final Soil Report.
• _ The timing of the development for the project to be scheduled
so that any areas to be graded will be completed and the streets
and drainage facilities within said graded area to be constructed
prior to the next rainy season. This would include the treatment -
of all slopes with erosion control planting.
• All roof water from those houses which do not drain directly to
the streets will be collected in gutters and conveyed by some
type of.gravity pipeline, drainage swales or similar acceptable
devices to acceptable points of discharge insuring that there
are no concentrations of drainage water which might cause erosion
wherever the run -off is introduced into natural drainage regimes.
• All newly graded slopes will receive erosion control planting
designed by a landscape architect taking into consideration fire
retardant materials and the need for early ground cover to protect
the newly graded slopes while insuring a perennial ground cover
offering an appearance similar to the natural vegetation in the
area.
0 Extensive grazing on the site is discontinued, thereby facilita-
ting regrowth of natural ecosystems.
- 1 -
'"'"'j�iiy;'4.y�,'h4.�'. -,ate..
z �
1
t t.
l 1'._�{•t Al } "Si!.�v� .}4�}4 ^�i.t A
EXHIBIT "D"
September 12, 1978
The following changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,
such project which mitigate or avoid any significant environmental effects there-
of as identified in the completed environmental impact report.
• All homes will be designed in accordance with the 1976
Edition of the Uniform Building Code and the corresponding
Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and Commentary, 1974
Edition, SEANC, in order to assure compliance with the most
up -to -date seismic design criteria.
e The subdivision is designed to avoid all landslides and unstable
areas.
• Grading will be performed per the explicit instructions of the
soil engineer.
• Storm drain will be constructed to reduce flow of water to Verde
Floor and Norada Court's storm drains.
• Siltation ponds will be constructed where possible, such as the
confluence of the two existing swales within drainage basin 6 -2
along the easterly property line of the site. The design of -
said ponds to conform to requirements of the City Engineer when
construction drawings are prepared.
• All storm drainage systems within the proposed development will
discharge into energy dissipator structures so that no concen-
trated water is discharged directly into an earth swale without
some form of energy dissipation device. Energy dissipatoos shall
be designed to criteria of City Engineer when construction
drawings are prepared.
• All grading will be fully engineered with appropriate storm drain
facilities installed for draining and protecting said graded
slopes.. Said engineering to be set forth in final Soil Report.
• _ The timing of the development for the project to be scheduled
so that any areas to be graded will be completed and the streets
and drainage facilities within said graded area to be constructed
prior to the next rainy season. This would include the treatment -
of all slopes with erosion control planting.
• All roof water from those houses which do not drain directly to
the streets will be collected in gutters and conveyed by some
type of.gravity pipeline, drainage swales or similar acceptable
devices to acceptable points of discharge insuring that there
are no concentrations of drainage water which might cause erosion
wherever the run -off is introduced into natural drainage regimes.
• All newly graded slopes will receive erosion control planting
designed by a landscape architect taking into consideration fire
retardant materials and the need for early ground cover to protect
the newly graded slopes while insuring a perennial ground cover
offering an appearance similar to the natural vegetation in the
area.
0 Extensive grazing on the site is discontinued, thereby facilita-
ting regrowth of natural ecosystems.
- 1 -
SD -1339 (Blackwell Homes)
�L HIBIT "D"
September 12, 1978
• Preservation of eucalyptus grove.
• Planting of street trees.
• Homes are set down from the ridgelines to retain the predominant
ridge profile.
• "Landmark" trees on the ridgelines are preserved.
• Retention of 67 acres in natural open space with scenic easement.
• Clustering of homes within limits of HC -RD zoning ordinance to.
allow preservation of common open space*.
• On -site trails with public easement afford linkage to trail routes
planned by City and M.R.O.S.D.
• Homeowners association, subject to approval of City Attorney,
shall own, operate, and maintain common open space.
• All structures and landscaping plans will be subject to design
review.
• Home placement and most suitable building design are recommended
for each site to minimize environmental impact. -
• Retention of original Parker Ranch entrance as access to trail.
• Construction of public easement trails in accord with•City's
master trails plan.
• Emergency access linkage to assure multi- directional access to.
homes.
• Increased fire protection capability in hazardous fire area by
extension of water mains.
• Cleared trails can also serve as firebreaks.
• Widening of two bridges on Prospect Road crossing Prospect Creek.
• All additional plans (i.e., grading, foundation implement, drainage,
etc.) should be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical consultants.
• All grading within the Parker Ranch property should be supervised
by the geotechnical consultants.
• Each of the.proposed residential lots should be evaluated by the
geotechnical consultants in order to determine the proper founda-
tion system. In addition, foundation and retaining wall excava-
tions should be inspected and approved by the soil engineer prior
to erecting forms of the installation of steel and concrete.
• 'Construct an adequate channel from the silt basin to the existing
inlet of the Arroyo de Arguello culvert.
a Construct berms around the Arroyo de Arguello inlet to provide
three feet of head (as a minimum) without flooding existing
homes.
• Concrete sack the northern bank and perform clean up of Prospect
Creek from the railroad tracks to Calabazas Creek. Leave planter
holes for trees and vegetation to soften effect.
• The storm drainage system must be designed so that the
project does not aggravate the existinp doimstream flooding
problem.
ri^C.iv�.a }'k1..Etii�- �`....,a"\�'�;•+G n r = =. -.i- „� � rl',�,
�ivW4� ~rja',`+�41?F+�`.�i"Kr'I'�Sy t"°.�•K[`ti`P! Tom. _..; t'
i4
4 411« H { i•�\ Ll h .t \
+G'FK ft>>• �.7Ir'lif 1 �l'Alh n v{
L
i
a�l
SD -1339 (Blackwell Homes)
(b)
,i
September 12, 1978
Exhibit 'D"
Page 3
• Examine feasibility of active solar energy systems for homes.
• if any evidence of potential archaeological significance is found
during site preparation and grading operations, work should be
halted until the significance of the find has been evaluated by
a qualified archaeologist.
• Recognize historical significance of property through selection of
conuuemorative street names. installation of trail markers, etc.
• Design' review must assure that homes on lots with minimum sideyard
setbacks be carefully sited to avoid appearance of higher density.
• Require developer post a bond to guarantee long -term success of
revegetation program-in areas of grading.
• Consider alternatives to extensive cut and fill for road construction.
• Placement of water tank in cut of uphill slope with landscaped
berm on downhill side can visually screen tank.
• Confirm tree preservation as plan proposes by consultation with
tree specialist.
• Install barriers to prevent trail and open space access by motor-
cycles and offroad vehicles..
The following changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction
of another public agency and such changes have been adopted by such other agency,
or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
• Insure SCVWD performs adequate maintenance of silt pond in Calabazas
Creek. (As of February 2, 1978 the basin needed clean out due to
heavy January storms.)
• The Santa Clara County Water District will be requested in the area of
Prospect Creek right -of -way adjacent to and westerly of Arroyo de Arguello,
to regrade the area to eliminate the present silted material and to
create an adequate channel with some ability for silt retention.
• All improvements made to Prospect Creek should be designed to Santa Clara
Valley Water District requirements.
• With or without project, the existing intersection at Bubb Road/Prospect
Road (east of Stellir_g and the railroad) should be redesigned.
(c) Specific economic and social considerations make infeasible the following possible
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental ixpact
report.
• Constructing a silt basin for Prospect Creek in the area of Norada
Court and the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks.
• Increase capacity of inlet to Norada Court storm drainage system, if
lengthy delay anticipated before Fremont Union High School District and
Parker Ranch sites are developed.
CITY OF SARATOGA
Initial:
AGENDA BILL NO. Dept. Hd.
DATE: April
15,
1982
C.
At
DEPARTMENT:
City
Manager
C.
Mgr.
Sua=: Contract -_ Community Service Officer Program
Issue Sunmary
Since 1978, the City's cost for contract law enforcement services have nearly
doubled, rising from $495,000 to more than $900,000 in 1982. Simultaneous
with this increase, the City's revenues have not increased and now appear
to be declining. The City must find more cost efficient means of providing
law enforcement services, allow the voters to authorize additional revenue
sources, or both, in order to maintain adequate levels of law enforcement.
In recent years, both cities and counties have utilized the concept of
Community Service Officers as paraprofessionals to assist regular law enforce-
ment personnel as one means of improving the cost efficiency of law enforcement
service. Preliminary indications are that this concept would work equally
effec.ttvely in Saratoga, but that because we contract for law enforcement with
the Sheriff there are unique circumstances which must be addressed. It is
prudent to analyze this concept quickly if the benefits are to be obtained in
• timely manner. For that reason, staff has recommended the utilization of
• local consultant to assist in the final analysis of the Community Service
Officer Program and the method for implementation in Saratoga. Proposals
have been obtained from local qualified consultants, and staff now recommends
the City award a consulting services contract with a study to be completed
within five weeks.
Recommendation
That the City Council award a consulting services contract to Mr. William
Gloege, and authorize the Mayor to sign the attached agreement on behalf of
the City.
Fiscal Impacts
The cost of the consulting services are not to exceed $7,540. If the Community
Service Officer Program is implemented, potential savings could far exceed
this cost. Revenue Sharing funds have been appropriated for implementation
of the Community Service Officer Program.
Exhibits /Attachments
1. Staff report dated 4/15/82 - Exhibit A
2. Proposal, William Gloege - Exhibit B
3. Proposal, Marge Faulstich - Exhibit C
4. Original Request for Proposal - Exhibit D
Council Action
4/21: Mallory /Jensen moved to accept Gloege proposal. Passed 4 -1 (Watson opposed)
:�IE�1OR � NDU1I
ahibith
0 ME W @ 0 0 &U LAME Q) 0,i \
13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070
(408) 867 -3438
TO: Mayor and City Council DATE: April 15, 1982
FROM: City Manager
SUBJECT: Utilization of Community Service Officer Program in Saratoga
SUMMARY:
Since 1979, the cost of law enforcement services to the community has
increased dramatically, rising from $495,000 in 1978 to more than
$900,000 in 1982. This substantial increase in the cost of these
services provided under contract with the Santa Clara County Sheriff's
Department has occurred at a time when City revenues are in decline
following Proposition 13. Continuation of adequate levels of law
enforcement services to the community is essential. Yet these cost and
revenue trends clearly show that if present levels of law enforcement
are to be continued, the City must find more cost efficient methods of
service delivery, additional sources of revenue, or both.
City staff has been exploring the concept of the Community Service
Officer as one means of improving the cost efficiency of law enforcement
services. Results of this preliminary investigation indicate that,
though the concept of Community Service Officer is new, it has proven
itself to be cost effective in communities both smaller and larger than
Saratoga, and is expanding rapidly among police agencies in California.
Although the Community Service Officer concept is being utilized
effectively both in municipal police departments and county sheriff's
departments, to date, no city receiving law enforcement services under
contract with the county has implemented the program. Although there
may be special and unique circumstances which must be addressed in the
contract city situation, there is no apparent reason why this concept
would not work as effectively under contract.
Time is running short for the City to correct the growing imbalance in
its revenues and expenditures, and we face the prospects of further
rapid increases in service costs for law enforcement in the coming
fiscal year. For this reason, we believe it is prudent for the City
to utilize the expert services of local consultants to assist in the
final analysis of the implementation of a Community Service Officer
Community Service Officer Program
April 15, 1982
Page two
Program with the expectation that the concept can be implemented in
the next several months if it is determined to be feasible. The City
Council has authorized staff to obtain proposals from local consultants
to assist in final analysis and preparation of implementation of the
Program for Council consideration. Staff has completed review of the
proposals received and it is RECOMMENDED that:
City Council award a contract for consultant services to
Mr. William Gloege for preparation of an analysis and
report on the Community Service Officer Program implemen-
tation in Saratoga. The cost of these services -is, not to
exceed $7,540.
BODY OF REPORT:
During the past six to eight months staff has
possibility of initiating a Community Service
the City of Saratoga as a means of reducing c
more efficient code enforcement program. The
the Council during last year's budget process
reducing costs.
been researching the
Officer Program within
Dsts and establishing a
concept was presented to
as a viable means of
A. Potential Cost Saving - In staff's initial analysis of the program
it is apparent that the major cost savings would be in the follow-
ing areas:
- The exisitng Sheriff's contract averages about $83 /activity
hour while the CSO Program will average approximately $30 -40/
activity hour.
- There will be a greater shift away from the Sheriff's contract
to the less expensive CSO Program.
- With increased emphasis on the CSO Program, the City would
gain greater control over the costs related to law enforcement.
- The City could increase its code enforcement program which, if
based on infractions, could be an increase in revenues.
The consultanC s study will "determine not only the immediate costs and
benefits of introducing the Community Service Officer Program, but also
to estimate possible long -term, incremental savings." (page 1, proposal -
Gloege) .
Community Service Officer Program
April 15, 1982
Page three
B. Typical Duties of CSO - During December and January, staff made
several visits to communities which have established programs,
to determine typical duties and responsibilities of a CSO. In
summary, the duties and responsibilities will vary from city to
city and tend to expand with increased experience of the indivi-
duals. There are obvious differences between a CSO and a deputized
peace officer. A deputized peace officer will deal with all
emergency or hazardous type activities while a CSO deals with non -
emergency activities. Non - injury related traffic reports, petty
thefts amounting to less then $250, public speaking engagements,
neighbor watch programs, fingerprinting, parking ticket citations,
and high school information programs are examples of some of the
duties of a CSO. The key factor is that the more expensive
deputized personnel are free to concentrate on the emergency situ-
ations. It should be noted that the police officers accept the CSO
and find their contributions to be extremely valuable.
The consultant will be defining duties and functions of the CSOs
within Saratoga. There has been and will be continued coordination
between the staff, Captain Tamm, and the consultant to ensure that
there are'no duplications of duties between the two law enforcement
organizations.
SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR THE CSO STUDY:
The City Council set aside $30,000 for the CSO Program in this year's
Capital Improvement Budget. Before any expenditure of funds, staff was
to conduct the appropriate analysis of the program. The proposed con-
tract for $7,540 for the consultant will complete the initial phase of
the project. The second phase (implementation) will be dependent upon
further Council approval. The funds being requested are Federal
Revenue Sharing and can be spent on this type of activity.
BACKGROUND RE: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL:
Staff received approval from the Council to solicit proposals for com-
pleting the study at their March 23 Committee -of -the -Whole meeting.
Request for proposals were sent to the follwoing individuals or firms:
Mr. William Gloege
Ms. Eileen E. Macmillan, PHD
Ms, Marge Faulstich
Hughes and Heiss Consultants
Community Service Officer Program
April 15, 1982
Page four
Mr. Gloege and Ms. Macmillan joined together to submit a proposal
while Ms. Faulstich submitted one independently. The consulting
firm opted not to submit a proposal.
TIMING
A draft study will be completed within five (5) weeks of the award
of contract. A final report will be submitted within two weeks after
receiving Council and citizen input. The timing is critical if the
CSO Program is to be included in the Fiscal Year 82 -83 Budget.
R. S. Rob'nson Patricia M. Mu teens ele
Director Planning & Policq Analysis Assistant City Manager
ck
Attachments: Proposal from Mr. William Gloege
Proposal from Ms. Marge Faulstich
Copy of original Request for Proposal
Exhl61tg
P R O P O S A L
THE CITY OF SARATOGA
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS
13109 Regan Lane
Saratoga, CA 95070
April 10, 1982.
Mr. R. S. Robinson, Jr.
Director of Planning and
Policy Analysis,
City of Saratoga,
13777 Fruitvale Avenue,
Saratoga, CA 95070.
Dear Mr. Robinson:
I am pleased to submit this proposal to conduct a study leading
to the implementation of a Community Service Officer Program in
Saratoga. As proposed, this study will provide the basic
elements needed to implement a Community Service Officer Program
(CSO) .
The proposal is based on:
1 Your request for a proposal (3.24.82)
2 Information provided at our meetings of February 26
and March 30, 1982;
3 Review of. various documents from the Sheriff's
Department, existing CSO programs and our own
files on Community Service Officer programs;
4 Our previous experience working with the Sheriff's
Department, other law enforcement agencies, other
entities of the criminal justice system, and a wide
variety of consulting and governmental assignments
both in law enforcement and other areas of local
government.
Our effort will have three principal goals:
1 To provide a program which maintains or improves
law and code enforcement in Saratoga
2
2 To provide maximum cost benefits for the city while
maintaining or improving the level of law and code
enforcement
3 To recommend effective means of involving citizens
in planning, implementation and operation of the CSO
program
The proposal is divided into two sections: First, a method of
conducting a needs assessment of current law and code enforcement
service is set forth. This section indicates how specific
analysis will be carried out to determine such critical charact-
eristics of the CSO program as description of duties, mechanisms
of coordination, development of job descriptions, salary schedules,
training and other, related matters. Together, the products of
this first section will be a detailed description of the Saratoga
CSO program, as well as actual tools for its implementation.
The second section of the proposal describes the plan for defining
how the program will be implemented. The product of this section
will be a recommended series of steps.for applying the results of
the first part of the study to achieve full implementation of the
program in Saratoga.
Dr Eileen Macmillan will participate with me in this study.
Together we have over twelve years' experience in law enforcement
and criminal justice programs. In my case, this includes long
term direct involvement in a law enforcement agency. Our
collective experience includes design and implementation of training
programs, law enforcement research and familiarity with the Sheriff's
Department and service data bases., We have direct access to local
experts in law enforcement training and local law enforcement
communications systems. We are familiar with staff and officials
of Saratoga which we believe will facilitate our study should we be
selected.
We believe coordination between the City of Saratoga and its citizens,
and the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department is critical in both
the study phase of CSO and in its implementation and operation.
The study we propose will place a high level of importance on
devising sound alternative means of coordination for all phases of
the CSO Program.
We look forward to working with Saratoga on the Community Service
Officer Program.
Sincerely,
kv-L �/,w
William P
Y•
Gloege.
C O N T E N T S
Page
I Needs Assessment
a Analysis of Sheriff's Activity Report 1
b Overview of Sheriff's Contract 1
c Duties and Functions of CSO's 2
d Staffing Requirements of the CSO Program 2
e Analysis of Coordination between the City
and the Sheriff 3
f CSO Job Description and Salary 4
g CSO Program Equipment Requirements 4
h CSO Training Requirements 4
II Program Implementation
a Recruitment 6
b Selection 6
c Implementation Schedule 6
d Program Goals, Objectives, Monitoring and
Evaluation 6
e Citizen Involvement 7
III Work Schedule g
IV Resumes 9
V Cost 13
VI Draft Contract 14
I
1
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
a Analysis of Sheriff's Activity Reports
The purpose of this analysis will be to determine which of the
law enforcement services currently provided by the Sheriff can
be provided by LSO's. Also, a determination will be made
regarding which code enforcement activities can be carried out
by Community Service Officers.
To conduct this analysis, these tasks will be performed:
Analyze data reports from the Sheriff's Department
to determine the type, frequency, hours of occurance
of duties that could be performed by CSO's
Analyze city records and interview city staff to
determine the type and frequency of code- related
complaints
Identify with the city those duties most suited to
CSO's from lists of potential tasks developed through
review of Sheriff and city data
Identify areas where cooperation or consolidation of
work tasks may save resources and provide improved
service
Estimate the time,and cost of providing identified
services through use of CSO's and estimate savings to
the city
These analyses will make it possible to determine not only the
immediate costs and benefits of introducing the Community
Service Officer Program but also to estimate possible long
term, incremental savings. The initial list of CSO duties
may be purposely limited in the first year(s) of the program.
Later, as the City, CSO personnel, the Sheriff and the citizens
gain experience and confidence in the program the list of duties
may be expanded tofurther increase savings to the city. Our
study approach will allow for consideration of this procedure
should it prove desirable.
b Overview of the Sheriff's Contract
The contract between the City of Saratoga and the Sheriff's
Department will be reviewed. The Sheriff's Department and
the City Attorney will be invited to participate in
E
discussions to reach agreement on modifications which take
into account implementation of the Community Service Officer
Program.
The consultant will coordinate with the City Attorney through-
out the study to insure that he has full information required
for preparation of ordinances needed to implement the CSO
Program.
c Duties and Functions of CSO's
Based on the results of the analyses of the Sheriff's Activity
Reports, duties and functions of CSO's will be specified.
This activity will include:
Final identification of initial law and code
enforcement duties with participation by City staff,
the Sheriff's representative and others designated by
the City Manager
With city participation, some elaboration by the
consultant on qSO procedures in given call- response
situations
Initial duties and functions may be limited with duties being
added as the program gains experience and confidence of the
citizens. It will be important to keep the public informed
about the program scope so that misunderstandings about the
level of public safety service do not develop. The community
must understand that the city will retain the services of
fully trained, sworn officers to respond to emergency calls.
d Staffing Requirements of the CSO Program
Analysis of Sheriff's service data will indicate required
staffing levels. To some extent, the decision on staffing
levels will be dictated by the types of service the City
decides CSO's should provide. (Section "c" above.)
The analysis will also indicate peak hours and days of the
week for demand. In determining staffing requirements, the
decisions on which code enforcement duties are to be assumed
will be taken into account. Anticipated cost savings
based on duties to be assumed by the CSO's will have an impact
on the level of staffing. The output of this part of the
study will be the recommended number of CSO's to hire, the
shifts to be worked and the days to be worked. Vacations,
sick leave, training time, position vacancies and other
factors will be considered to provide adequate staffing to
meet service demand.
3
e Analysis of Coordination between the City and the Sheriff
This is perhaps the most important aspect of the program design.
The Community Service Officers will be City employees and as
such will be accountable to the City Manager and those he
designates to oversee the program. Nevertheless, extremely
close coordination with officials of the Sheriff's Department
is essential for provision of quality law enforcement services.
The consultants will obtain the City Manager's criteria for
performance, coordination and accountability. The requirements
of the Sheriff and his field commanders regarding communication
and accountability will also be obtained. If required, the
consultant will facilitate discussion and negotiation between
the City and the Sheriff on any possible points of disagreement.
From these two complimentary sets of standards a system of
accountability will be devised.
Measurement of the effectiveness of the coordination and
accountability from the standpoint of the City Manager and
the Sheriff will be part of tie monitoring and evaluation
process that will be recommended.
The consultants will provide information for prepration of
memorandum of understanding between the City and the Sheriff
which describes procedures for coordination. (It is antic-
ipated that the contract between the City and the Sheriff
for law enforcement services will be modified to reflect the
new CSO program. The memorandum described here will
furnish additional detail.)
Related to program coordination is the issue of radio
communication for the Community Service Officer Program.
CSO's must be able to communicate with the city for code
enforcement assignments and with County Communications and
the Sheriff regarding law enforcement duties. Communication
capability between the CSO's and Deputies in the field may be
required.
Communications procedures will be recommended by the consultant
after reviewing the requirements of the City and the Sheriff.
County Communications policies and procedures will be taken
into account in preparing this recommendation. We will
consult directly with communications experts in local.law
enforcement agencies to gain the advantage of their experience
and advice.
With regard to communications and coordination methods, we
plan to take advantage of means devised by existing CSO
programs. We intend to spend a minimum of time on reinventing;
instead we will concentrate on refining existing procedures
to meet Saratoga's needs.
f CSO Job Description and Salary
Based on analysis and decisions described above, a Job
Description will be prepared using the format of the City of
Saratoga. In addition, a Job Announcement will be prepared.
A graduated salary program will be developed which will take
into account completion of probation, successful evaluations
and longevity of service. Information from other cities
will be supplied to Saratoga to assist in design of a benefits
package. We will ask the city to investigate with their
Insurers any additional costs or special provisions required
by the Community Service Officer Program. The information is
required for accurate calculation of program costs.
g CSO Program Equipment Requirements
Analysis leading to decisions on the scope of the program and
level of staffing will have implications for equipment-require-
ments. As a part of our study we will survey other Community
Service Officer programs to gather information on equipment and
other aspects of CSO programs.
Information on effective equipment will be sought so that
Saratoga can take full advantage of program experience in other
jurisdictions. The most economical means of equipment purchase
will be determined. For example, some jurisdictions made
equipment purchases through the California Highway Patrol to
obtain lower costs through volume purchases. The consultants
will produce a schedule for purchase of equipment selected by
the city.
h Community Service Officer Training Requirements
Certain components will be required for training CSO's:
Basic CSO Training Course (law enforcement orientation)
Code Enforcement Training Course
Field Training with Sheriff's Deputies
Training regarding City of Saratoga procedures
The specific requirements of law and code enforcement
training will be determined by the scope of the program
developed earlier in the study. We have identified potential
training sites in the Santa Clara Valley and elsewhere in
Northern California and discussed training curricula with
training officials. We have explored State reimbursement for
training costs. It is our opinion that adequate training
facilities exist so that a course meeting Saratoga's needs
can be structured. (We are addressing the law enforcement
aspects primarily.)
The consultants will recommend the basic structure for the
code enforcement portion of the training to be carried out
by Saratoga staff. We'will review existing training materials
for code enforcement officials and make recommendations on
training of CSO's. The development of this training program
will take place after Council decides to implement the CSO
Program.
The consultants willt: recommend a training program for field
experience with Sheriff's Deputies. We have received initial
assurances from the Sheriff's Department that such a program
is both feasible and desirable from their point of view.
We will work with the City to design training to familiarize
the CSO's with their duties and responsibilities as city
employees. They will learn procedures for interaction and
coordination with designated city staff. They will become
familiar with general functions and procedures of the city
government of Saratoga. They will be introduced to key city
officials.
II PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION
a Recruitment
Methods and sources for recruitment will be recommended
based on the experience of the consultants and methods that
they have found to be successful in other CSO programs.
Use of the media for advertisement of positions, as well as
techniques of personal recruitment will be addressed.
Recruitment techniques will depend on the type of candidate
deemed most suitable for the program. We have already discussed
potential types of candidates with the City and the Sheriff's
Department. We will gather further information from other
CSO programs to determine ideal candidate - characteristics to
meet Saratoga's needs.
b Selection
A process for screening and final selection of applicants will
be recommended. Included will be criteria for selection
based on our experience with local programs, our survey of
other CSO programs and the particular criteria established by
Saratoga. Personnel evaluation methods and criteria will be
recommended, as well as probationary periods and other
aspects of CSO personnel administration.
c Implementation Schedule
A schedule for implementation tasks will be prepared. Using
this schedule Saratoga staff will have a recommended sequence
of steps for initiating the program. Based on the final
program design, we will recommend the methods whereby the city
can oversee and coordinate the program. The administrative
structure may take 'different forms in the program start -up
phase and in the ongoing program.
d Program Goals, Objectives, Monitoring and Evaluation
The consultants will outline preliminary statements of program
goals and objectives. We believe the final statement of goals
and objectives should be prepared by elected officials, the
city staff and citizens.
The duties and functions of CSOs and other aspects of the
initial program design will influence the content of the goals
and objectives statement, of course. But we believe a longaer
range statement should be prepared by the city and citizens
that addresses what the program might become. The program
will give the city a new capability for outreach into the
community that has many potential uses for service.
We will recommend means of monitoring the program so that the
city can determine whether predetermined milestones are being
met. The monitoring reports would be available for review by
staff and officials, as well as by citizens...
The city might consider implementing the program with a "sunset"
provision. That is, the program could be designed to terminate
if specific action is not taken by Council to continue it.
Considering the program experimental may have advantages that
would outweigh any disadvantages of the program possibly being
temporary.
The consultants will recommend an evaluation procedure that
ties into the final statement of goals and objectives. In
addition, the recommended evaluation procedure would be
designed to contribute to the decision on program continuation.
Cost savings, citizen satisfaction with the program, and the
impact on code and law enforcement would all play a role in
program evaluation.
e Citizen Involvement in the CSO Program
The city has expressed its interest in involvement of citizens
in the initiation and operation of the CSO Program. We believe.
citizen involvement and the form this involvement takes is
critical to program success.
As stated earlier in the proposal, the community must understand
the service and the limits of service that the Community Service
Officers will provide. They must understand the link between
the program and the Sheriff's Department and, more specifically,
the link with the Deputies in the field.
A citizen group can help shape the initial program to meet
community desires. It can serve to inform the community of
the progress of the program and steps that are being taken to
address any shortcomings.
We will suggest ways in which citizens can become involved in
the program in a way that will insure representative participation.
We will address citizen involvement methods in the initial
phase of the program, as well as in the later, ongoing phase.
III WORK SCHEDULE
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5
TASK
I Needs Assessment
Analyse Sheriff's & Code
Activity (I - a, .b)
Define CSO Duties & staffing
Requirements (I - c, d)
Analysis of Coordination
(I - e)
Job Description, Salary,
Equipment & Training (I - f, g, h)
II Program Implementation
.Recruitment & Selection (I - a, b)
Implementation Schedule (II - c)
Goals, Objectives, Monitoring and
Evaluation (II - d)
Citizen Involvement (II - e)
..
9
William P. Gloege
Mr Gloege has over seventeen years experience in applied
social science research. Most of this research has been done
directly for local government. In Reading, Pennsylvania,
in Atlanta, Georgia and in San Jose, California he served as
Director of Research and Evaluation of Model Cities Programs.
(Model Cities was a federally funded, locally operated urban
renewal program impacting housing, schools, recreation, law
enforcement, health and other sectors of municipal life.)
In these positions he was responsible for supervising a research
staff in gathering basic data on city conditions to be used in
renewal planning and program implementation.
In these positions he was also responsible for evaluating the
progress of local renewal programs in housing, transportation,
recreation, employment, law enforcement and other areas. The
evaluation reports were used by city officials to make decisions
on program continuation, expansion or termination.
t-
Prior to this experience, Mr Gloege served as an assistant to
a Congressman in the U S House of Representatives. He was
also a Research Associate with the American Institutes of
Research in the Behavioral Sciences in Silver Spring, Maryland.
For the last seven years Mr Gloege has served as a Senior
Assistant to the Chief of Police in San Jose, California. In
this position he has been responsible for preparation of
Program Budgets for the Department. Among other duties,
Mr Gloege has been responsible for overseeing in excess of one
million dollars in federal grants operated by the city. He
has prepared successful grant proposals, including a proposal
that was funded through the State of California for $200,000
to establish Crime Prevention activities throughout the city.
Mr Gloege was responsible for designing and implementing a major
MBO reporting program within the police department that has
gained national attention. He has been requested by the U S
Congress to testify on the subject of Grand Jury Reform.
Mr Gloege has done research into Community Service Officer
Programs and has prepared background materials for CSO program
implementation.
Mr Gloege received his Bachelor's degree from Northridge State
University in Political Science and he holds a Master's degree
from Georgetown University in Washington, D C in Government.
Mr Gloege has been a resident of Saratoga, California since
1979. He is married and has two children.
10
List of Publications
by William Gloege
1. "Report on Latin America," Congressional Record, for Congressman
William Cramer, Oct. 4, 1964. 88th Congress
2. Gloege, William P. In the Crowd's View: A Case Study of Rural
Community Action in India. Washington, D. C.: American Institutes
for Research, 1965. (For the Peace Corps)
3. Gloege, William P. Where Are You Going: A Case Study of Teaching
in Thailand. Washington, D. C.: American Institutes for Research,
1965. (For the Peach Corps) i
4. Gloege, William P. Evaluation of Project "44" - The Job Corps
Capital Center. Washington, D. C.: American Institutes for Re-
search, Oct., 1966.
5. Graham, W. R., Wagner, C. B., Gloege, W. P., Zavala, A. Explora-
tion of Oral /Informal Technical Communication by Scientists.
Washington, D. C.:American Institutes for Research, Aug., 1967.
6. Kinkade, R., Wheaton, G., Baker, W, Gloege, W. Factors Affecting
Reenlistment in the U.S. Navy. Washington, D. C.: American Insti-
tutes for Research, March, 1968.
7. Gloege, William P. "Successful Police Department Budgeting - The
San Jose Experience," The Police Chief Magtzine. International
Association of Chiefs of Police, Gaithersburg, Md., May, 1977.
8. Gloege, William P. Evaluation of the Citizens' Awareness Program.
11
Eileen E Macmillan PhD
248 Flynn Avenue
Mountain View CA 94043
SPECIALIZED PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE
Policy analysis: state, federal and international legs -
lation, regulatory reform, particularly criminal systice
systems.
Project Design and Management: Sampling, questionnaire
design, field management, statistical analysis, organiz-
ation of work flows and design of systems.
Clinical applications: implementation ofresearch, group
work, personal facilitation.
REPRESENTATIVE RESEARCH EXPERIENCE
Evaluation of Grant Funded Projects and Grants_
Administration Contract with San Jose Police Department
Evaluating progtams funded by LEAA and OCJP, organizing
and supervising audit, administering phase -out of grants.
Research for Community Service Officer program.
Interdepartmental Communication in State Government
Department of Public Administration (Professor Bendor)
Graduate School of Business Stanford University Sampling,
interviewing government officials and policy experts,
collating and analysing data.
Survey of Jail Inmates Hughes -Heiss Inc - part of
Criminal Justice Masterplan for Santa Clara County.
Clarified topics for inclusion, conducted focus groups,
designed and tested survey instrument, supervised
interviewing, coding etc.
New Procedures for Adult Probation Department Adult
Probation Department Santa Clara County Charted
present practices, analysed work flow, designed new
procedures, integrated these with agency systems and with
associated agencies (including CJIC) supervised partial
implementation.
Study of American Employment Policies Client private
Outlined present position and likely developments.
Westburn Action Group Wester Hailes_Project Participant
Observation /Action Research in public housing area.
orked with citizens to identify areas of concern, educated
citizens in dealing with local government issues and
procedures, in defining problems and in methods of resolving
them.
;3
a
,y
w'
12
The Effect of Orientation of Probation Workers and a
Comparison of Outcome of Probation in Scotland and
England Social Science Research Council /University
of Edinburgh (Four year project) Traced and analyzed
development of probation in Scotland and England; developed
new theory accounting for differences in probationer
behavior, established rationale, theoretical background,
construct and empirical validity of theory, tested theory
using large scale survey. Designed questionnaire and
sampling frame, collected data, including data from Police
Records, analysed data using SPSS.
Development of Procedures in new Scottish Juvenile
Justice System Edinburgh City Council After rigorous
study of ethical implications and theoretical foundations
of new Scottish juvenile justice system helped create
detailed procedures for new system in accordance with
overall design mandated by law.
EDUCATION
PhD Social Administration University of Edinburgh
1979
Diploma in Social Administration University of
Edinburgh 1973
MA Psychology University of Edinburgh 1971
Worked in France, Greece, Japan, visited Brazil,
researching social systems and services, particularly
in criminal justice.
13
V COST
Work will begin upon approval of the contract by Council.
Approval is expected on April 21, 1982. The draft final
report will be submitted at the end of May. A payment will
be made by the City at the mid -point of the assignment -
approximately May 14, 1982. The remaining portion of the
fee will be payable upon acceptance by the City of the final
report and not later than June 18, 1982.
We have built-into our costs several hours for discussion with
city staff and time for revision of the draft submitted at the
end of May. We anticipate this revision process will not
extend beyond the second week in June, 1982.
The tentative project budget is estimated as follows:
Professional Time *
Consultants
142 hours $7,140
Expenses 400
Not to Exceed $7,540
* Consultant hourly fee is $50
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
I. PROBLEM STATEMENT
During the past several years costs of providing law enforcement
services for Saratoga have increased steadily, while the City's
general revenues have increased at a much slower rate. In an
attempt to reduce costs and improve services in the areas of law
and code enforcement, the City of Saratoga is seeking assistance
in order to define a Community Service Officer (CSO) Program for
the City of Saratoga.
The aim of developing a CSO Program for Saratoga is to reduce the
amount of supplemental services purchased through the County
Sheriff':s Department contract, to reassign certain low priority,
non - violent law enforcement functions from the Sheriff's deputies
to the CSO, and to provide a cost effective municipal and zoning
code enforcement program.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE COMMUNITY:
Saratoga is located in the western foothills of Santa Clara County
and has a population of 29,761. The City is comprised of approxi-
mately 12 square miles.
The City is 90% developed with the exception of the Western Hill-
side area which comprises approximately 800+ acres of land. The
densities in Saratoga range from a maximum of 14 units /acre to 1
unit /10 acres in the Western Hillsides.
In 1956, the main emphasis of the City was toward the residential
aspects of the community. That goal is still valid today. There
is only one major industry within the City while there are three
main commercial districts located on the major thoroughfares within
the City. At present, there is only one major vacant parcel left
which could be developed for commercial activities. It is esti-
mated that the holding capacity for Saratoga is approximately
32,000 people at build out.
Saratoga is served by two high school districts and seven separate
school districts. As with most communities in the Bay Area, Saratoga's
schools are experiencing a decline in population and as a result
some of the current school sites are being sold for other uses.
The City of Saratoga's operating budget for 1981 -82 totaled
$3,173,730 while the capital expenditures totaled $1,552,271. The
largest expenditures in the operating budget are personnel and
police services. As with other communities with a minimal amount
of commercial and industrial activities, the City is continually
evaluating its operating expenses and looking for ways of minimiz-
ing its expenditures knowing that the revenues will not increase
significantly.
t Request for Propos� •
March 19, 1982
Page 2
III. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES:
Following is a detailed description of services being required
by the consultant(s) in order to complete the study of the
Community Service Officers Program:
1. Completion of a needs assessment for
the Community
Service Officers Program to include:
a.
A detailed analysis of the Sheriff's
activity report
b.
Brief overview of the Sheriff's
contract
C.
The typical duties and functions
of a Community Service
Officer
d.
The staffing requirements
e.
Analysis of the coordination and
responsibilities
between the Sheriff, the City as
it relates to the
Community Service Program
f.
A detailed job description which
could be used for
hiring purposes, and a salary range
recommendation
g.
Equipment requirements including
uniforms, vehicles,
radios
h.
Appropriate training.for the Community Service Officer
2. Implementation procedures to include recruitment, interview-
ing, screening, and on- the -job training program.
IV. SCOPE OF WORK:
A. Methodology - The candidate(s) selected to complete this
study will be required to coordinate with the City Manager and
the Sheriff's Department in order to receive copies of the
Sheriff's contract and the various activity reports submitted
to the City during the last 12 to 18 months. As a result of
reviewing the activity reports and interviews with City staff,
it would be necessary to determine the appropriate duties which
would be applicable to the Community Service Officers Program.
The report should indicate the numbers of CSO members with an
in depth description of the working relationship between the
Sheriff's Department, the Community Service Officers Program
and the City of Saratoga. Additionally, there would be a job
description which should be applicable to several candidates
with salary ranges compatible with the Santa Clara County and a
detailed list of prerequisites for one wishing to apply for the
position.
It would be necessary to analyze the equipment required to
implement the Community Service Officers Program. The equip-
ment list should be in sufficient detail to expedite the City's
requisition of automobiles, radios and uniforms.
The training requirements should involve review of the training
programs in the Bay Area and any types of on- the -job training
(OJT) programs which would be required during the interim
period of time from hiring the candidates to their attendance
.Rpquest for Prop o l
L March 19, 1982
Page 3
CJ
at one of the required training programs. Recommendation for
continuing education /training should be included in the study.
An important factor of the study is the implementation process
for the Community Service Officers Program. The report
prepared should indicate recruiting and interviewing procedures
and the necessity for special screening or physical testings
of the candidate once hired.
B. Time Frame - Within fifteen days after receipt of the request
for proposal (RFP), applicants should submit their proposals
for completing the work as outlined in the proposal.
It is anticipated that the complete anal
Service Officers Program for the City of
completed by the end of May to allow the
opportunity to include such a program in
sure that the program can be implemented
year.
ysis of the Community
Saratoga should be
City Council an
the budget and to in-
during the next fiscal
C. Meeting Required - The consultant selected will be required
to have an interim meeting with the City staff regarding the
progress of the report within two weeks of receiving the contract,
a periodic progress report at one month and a draft report for
staff review within six weeks after receiving Award of the
Contract.
The consultant(s) should plan on attending one meeting as
designated by the City. All additional meetings, may be
charged on a time and material basis.
D. Method of Compensation - The consultant will submit an
estimate of the total cost of completing the project. The
consultant should state an hourly rate for additional work re-
quested by the City (i.e. additional meetings).
E. Statement of Qualifications - All applicants should submit
a resume supporting their qualifications for completing the
subject study.
F. Documents to be Submitted by Applicant - The consultant
will be required to prepare two draft copies of the proposal
for staff review after six weeks and two final copies of the
report once the City Council has approved the final project.
G. Contract Required -
an agreement for review
their proposal for comp
refer to the work to be
responsibilities of the
by the consultant.
The applicant should submit a sample of
of the City Attorney when submitting
letion of the work. The agreement should
completed by the consultant, the
City and the method of payment desired
` "',Request for Prop l
l' March 19, 1982
Page 4
H. Closing Dates for Proposal - The applicant should submit
all proposals by 5 p.m. on April 12th
V. Individuals requesting more information about the Community
Service Officers Program should contact Patricia Mullens or R. S.
Robinson, Jr. at 867 -3438.