Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20090513 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 09-14 it Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Meeting 09-14 REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 7:00 p.m. Wednesday, May 13, 2009 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, California AGENDA REGULAR MEETING 7:00* REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ROLL CALL ORAL COMMUNICATIONS—Public ADOPTION OF AGENDA 7:10* CONSENT CALENDAR I Approve Minutes of the Special and Regular Board Meetings of April 08, 2009 2 Approve Revised Claims Report 3 Approve Written Communications—None 4 Approve Interim District Clerk Appointment—A. Spiegel 7:20* BOARD BUSINESS 5 Approval of Amendments to Appendix B: Family and Medical Leave Policy in the District's Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual—A. Spiegel 6 Determination that the Recommended Actions are Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and Approval of Contract with Go Native, Inc. Not to Exceed $172,200 to Provide Vegetation Management(including Herbicide Application)at Various Open Space Preserves in Fiscal Years 2009-2012—C. Roessler 7 Approval of proposed purchase of the Peninsula Open Space Trust(Moore)property as an addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, located near the end of Weaver Road in unincorporated Santa Clara County(Santa Clara County Assessor's Parcel Number 558-30- 00 1)—M. Reeves Meeting 09-14 Page 2 8 Approve Amendments to the District's Open Space Use and Management Planning Process—S. Schectrnan 9 Continue Consideration of Bids for Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch and Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration to May 27, 2009 Regular Meeting—C. Koopmann 10 Authorization to Amend Contract with Sage Associates to Provide Conservation Grazing Planning Services—C. Koopmarm INFORMATIONAL REPORTS—Reports on compensable meetings attended. Brief reports or announcements concerning activities of District Directors and staff, opportunity to refer public or Board questions to staff for factual information; request staff to report back to the Board on matter at a future meeting; or direct staff to place a matter on a future agenda. A. Committee Reports B. Staff Reports C. Director Reports ADJOURNMENT Times are estimated and items may appear earlier or later than listed.Agenda is subject to change of order. TOADDRESSTHEBOARD.- The Chair will invite public comment on agenda items at the time each item is considered by the Board of Directors. You inoy address the Board concerning other matters during Oral Communications. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to three minutes. Alternately,you may comment to the Board by a written communication, which the Board appreciates. Consent Calendar. All itenis on the Consent Calendar may be approved without discussion by one motion. Board members, the General Manager, and members of the public may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar during consideration of the Consent Calendar. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the District Clerk at(650)691-1200. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the District to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting,. Written materials relating to an item on this Agenda that are considered to be a public record and are distributed to Board members less than 72 hours prior to the meeting,will be available for public inspection at the District's Administrative Office located at 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos,California 94022. CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA 1,Anna Jatczak,Interim District Clerk for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District(MROSD),declare that the foregoing agenda for the May 13,2009 Regular Meeting of the MROSD Board of Directors was posted and available for review on May 8,2009 at the Administrative Offices ot'MROSD,330 Distel Circle,Los Altos,California,94022. The agenda is also available on the District's web site at http://www,opensr)ace,org. Signed this 8th day of May 2009,at Los Altos,California. I fl. y Interim District Clerk Date: 05/08/09 ti Claims No. 09-09 Meeting 09-14 Date 5/13/09 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 10290 $249,000.00 ## North American Title Company Land Acquisition-POST Moore Property 10291 $8,911.34 Northgate Environmental Management Environmental Consulting Services-Review U.S.Army Corps Of Engineers Work At Mt. Umunhum 10292 $5,890.34 *1 First National Bank Computer Expenses/Digital Image Workstation Supplies/GIS Software/5 Monitor Stands/Docking Station/Translation Services For Website/5 Encrypted Hard Drives/Computer Memory Upgrades 10293 $5,269.56 Roy's Repair Service Vehicle Repairs&Service 10294 $5,075.01 *1 First National Bank Conferences&Training Expenses-Rigging Workshop For 4 Employees/Trail Conference/CSDA Workshop/Cobra Seminar /Native Grassland Conference 10295 $4,472.80 *1 First National Bank Field Supplies/Radar Unit&Case/Straw Bales/Oxygen Kit/ Slide Hammer/Concrete/Sunscreen/Tools For Shop Cart/ Digital Camera Card&Batteries/Quick Couplers For Herbicide Spraying/Flare Containers/Sawchain Parts/Vise/10 LED Bulbs 10296 $4,350.00 First American Core Logic Annual Fee-Assessors Parcel Data Service 10297 $2,500.00 Dana Property Analysis Appraisal Services 10298 $2,491.31 02 Marketing&Design District Uniform&Ball Cap Patches 10299 $2,125.00 Concern Employee Assistance Program Quarterly Fee 10300 $2,028.50 Firestone Complete Auto Care Tires 10301 $1,874.54 Grand Prix Mule Repair 10302 $1,760,95 Cartridge World Printer Supplies-Cartridges 10303 $1,714.08 *1 First National Bank Business Related Meals-Board Meetings/Spring Social Event 10304 $1,567.98 Cascade Fire Equipment Company Field Supplies-Fire Goggles, Pumps For Water Pumpers, Head Lamps&Gear For New Ranger 10305 $1,563.85 Office Depot Office Supplies, Name Plates,Key Storage Box,Copy Paper, Laserjet Postcards, Printer Cartridge 10306 $1,489.19 Peninsula Digital Imaging Printing Services-20 Bound Copies Of La Honda Creek Draft Master Plan 10307 $1,399.34 CMK Automotive Vehicle Maintenance&Repairs 10308 $1,316.37 Gardenland Power Equipment Field Supplies/Weed Whip/Chain Saw Parts/Fuel Hose/Air Filters 10309 $1,277.56 *1 First National Bank Rental Residence Expenses-2 Refrigerators 10310 $1,250.00 Hulberg&Associates Appraisal Services 10311 $1,172.10 Summit Uniforms Uniform Expenses 10312 $1,080.00 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Legal Services&Advice 10313 $1,007.00 Santa Rosa Junior College Enrollment Fees For New Recruitment Academy Training 10314 $974.99 R. E. Borrmann's Steel Company Steel For Tri-Pods 10315 $950.00 Econo Tree Service Hazardous Tree Removal At Rental Residence 10316 $896.99 VP II Earthday 2009 Giveaways 10317 $815.00 Montgomery Highlands Association Road Improvements Per Settlement Agreement 10318 $788.78 Del Woods Consulting Services-Land Purchase Projects 10319 $768.69 Ergo Works Ergonomic Equipment 10320 $667.30 *1 First National Bank Van Shuttle For Fremont Older House Tour 10321 $654.41 Hsieh, Benny Reimbursement-Mac Mini For Web Development Box 10322 $616.83 Langley Hill Quarry Drain Rock For Rental Residence Driveway 10323 $606.98 Acme Rigging&Supply Company Freight-Rigging Equipment For Bridge Installation 10324 $602.61 Lab Safety Supply Field Supplies, Safety Gloves&Goggles 10325 $573.09 Metro Mobile Communications Radio Repairs&Supplies 10326 $560.45 Forestry Suppliers Field Supplies-Herbicide Sprayer&Sun Screen 10327 $548.16 United Site Services Sanitation Services-Sierra Azul&Fremont Older 10328 $522,50 Greg's Trucking Service Rock Delivery Services For Skyline Ridge Parking Lot Potholes Page 1 of 4 Claims No. 09-09 Meeting 09-14 Date 5/13/09 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 10329 $500.00 *2 California Regional Water Quality Application Fee-Water Quality Certification For Rapley Ranch Control Board Culvert Removal 10330 $495.96 *3 AmeriGas Propane Tank Service-Hosking Barn 10331 $491.00 State Water Resources Control Board Annual Fee-Storm Water Permit 10332 $480.00 California Park&Recreation Society Membership Dues 10333 $457.34 All Chemical Disposal Hazardous Material Disposal 10334 $419.09 *1 First National Bank Office Supplies/Toner Cartridges/Name Plates&Badges/Self Ink Stamp/Ergonomic Equipment 10335 $380.00 Mission Valley Ford Vehicle Service-Smoke Opacity Tests 10336 $375.00 L. Craig Britton Consulting Services 10337 $340.00 *1 First National Bank Nature Center Supplies/Microscope Bulbs/Collection Tubs& Nets 10338 $315.00 Morrison, Sonya Reimbursement-Tuition 10339 $312.00 County Of Santa Clara-Office Of The Fingerprinting Services Sheriff 10340 $311.09 All Star Glass Patrol Truck Window Replacement 10341 $308.48 Maaco Vehicle Repairs 10342 $281.82 Ergo Vera Ergonomic Evaluations 10343 $277A6 Pringle Tractor Company Tractor Supplies 10344 $262.12 Safety Kleen Solvent Tank Service-SFO 10345 $251.00 American Red Cross Emergency Response Training&Certificates 10346 $245.64 *1 First National Bank Advertising,Subscriptions&Books-Recruitment Ad For Training &Safety Coordinator/Survey Monkey Monthly Subscription 10347 $229.30 ADT Security Services Alarm Service-SFO 10348 $212.65 California Water Service Company Water Service-AO&Windy Hill 10349 $211.79 The Workingman's Emporium Uniform Expenses 10350 $180.07 *1 First National Bank Volunteer Supplies 10351 $171.35 Williams,Jennifer Reimbursement- Nature Center Supplies/Fremont Older House Tour Supplies 10352 $166.00 Del Rey Building Maintenance Janitorial Supplies-AO 10353 $165.47 Los Altos Garbage Company Garbage Service-AO 10354 $160.30 McKowan, Paul Reimbursement-Volunteer Training&Storage Supplies 10355 $157.56 Target Specialty Products Landscaping Supplies 10356 $157.44 Allied Waste Services Garbage Service-Hosking Barn 10357 $156.39 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Supplies 10358 $153.97 *4 San Mateo County Hazardous Waste Disposal Fee 10359 $137.50 Duong,Anna Reimbursement-Mileage 10360 $135.00 Casaretto,Mark Reimbursement-Uniform Expense 10361 $120.16 Honda Peninsula Motorcycle Helmet 10362 $119.00 Coastal Sierra Internet Service-SFO 10363 $100.00 City Of Palo Alto Utilities Utility Fees-Black Mountain 10364 $100.00 *5 Town Of Woodside Deposit-Meeting Room For Slender False Brome Information Workshop 10365 $98.33 Cermeno,Sal Reimbursement-Uniform Expense 10366 $98.26 Costco Office Supplies 10367 $98.00 Beckman,Craig Reimbursement-Rigging Training Expenses 10368 $91.31 Peterson Tractor Tractor Supplies-Filters 10369 $89.90 Goodco Press Printing Services-Warning Notices 10370 $84.29 Priority 1 Public Safety Equipment Repair Patrol Truck Spotlight 10371 $82.81 Foster Brothers Lock&Key Services 10372 $80.00 Northern Energy Propane Tank Rental 10373 $78.00 G&K Services Shop Towel Service Page 2 of 4 Claims No. 09-09 Meeting 09-14 Date 5/13/09 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 10374 $78.00 Pacific Telemanagement Services Pay Phone-Black Mountain 10375 $76.69 Tadco Supply Janitorial Supplies 10376 $73.20 Paterson, Loro Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses 10377 $52.00 National Notary Association Notary Membership Renewal 10378 $50.00 '6 County Of San Mateo Notice Of Exemption Fee For Eucalyptus Tree Removal At Pulgas Ridge 10379 $48.99 San Jose Mercury News Quarterly Subscription 10380 $44.79 Barron Park Supply Plumbing Supplies 10381 $43.00 Allen's Press Clipping Bureau Clipping Service 10382 $38.56 "1 First National Bank Key Remote For Ford Expedition 10383 $32.19 '1 First National Bank Uniform Expenses 10384 $21.11 L.C.Action Police Supply Patrol Supply 10385 $19.25 ID Plus Name Tags 10386 $15.00 Tires On The Go Tire Repair 10387 $9 83 Parry, Rick Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses 10388 R $2,470.00 Normal Data Consulting Services-Citation Database Development&Support 10389 R $1,932.50 Steven Ash Pest Control Recommendations&Professional Advice 10390 R $798.71 Ron's Transmission Vehicle Repairs&Service 10391 R $704.31 Arbill Field Supplies-Protective Gloves 10392 R $525.00 Sierra Consulting&IPM Preparation Of Pest Control Recommendations For Maintenance Spraying 10393 R $506.32 Fitzsimons,Renee Reimbursement-National Association Of Interpretation Workshop Registration, Docent&Nature Center Supplies 10394 R $500.30 Los Altos Garbage Company Garbage Service-FFO 10395 R $463.93 San Jose Water Company Water Service-RSA County Park 10396 R $276.56 Great Printing&Copies Printing Services-Spaces&Species Passports&Inserts 10397 R $274.56 AccounTemps Accounting Temp 10398 R $259.50 Ergo Vera Ergonomic Evaluation 10399 R $235.00 Villarreal,Jaime Reimbursement-Emergency Response Training 10400 R $205.00 ADT Security Services Alarm Repair-FFO 10401 R $162.75 Petty Cash Parking&Mileage/Training&Conference Expenses/Office Supplies/Field Supplies 10402 R $140.00 California Regional Water Quality Additional Application Fees-Water Quality Certification For Control Board Rapley Ranch Culvert Removal 10403 R $109.35 Hapke,Alexander Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses 10404 R $99,00 Premiere Global Services Fax Broadcast Services 10405 R $73.19 Stanton, Elisa Reimbursement-Uniform Expense 10406 R $71.50 Laustsen,Gretchen Reimbursement-Mileage 10407 R $70.91 Fed Ex Office Copy Services-Color Copies For Slender False Brome Workshop 10408 R $64.80 Coastal Tractor Mule Parts 10409 R $60.00 Bankosh,Michael Reimbursement-Cell Phone 10410 R $25.25 Rayne Of San Jose Water Service-Fremont Older Page 3 of 4 Claims No. 09-09 Meeting 09-14 Date 5/13/09 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description Total $341,902.50 *1 Urgent Check Issued 04/29/09 The Total Amount For First National Bank Is$20,352.64 *2 Urgent Check Issued 5/5/09 *3 Urgent Check Issued 5/6/09 *4 Urgent Check Issued 5/5/09 *5 Urgent Check Issued 5/5/09 *6 Urgent Check Issued 5/6/09 ## In The Event Agenda Item Is Not Approved,This Claim Will Not Be Processed Page 4 of 4 Claims No. 09-09 Meeting 09-14 Date 5/13/09 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 10290 $249,000,00 ## North American Title Company Land Acquisition-POST Moore Property 10291 $8,911.34 Northgate Environmental Management Environmental Consulting Services-Review U.S.Army Corps Of Engineers Work At Mt. Umunhum 10292 $5,890.34 *1 First National Bank Computer Expenses/Digital Image Workstation Supplies/GIS Software/5 Monitor Stands/Docking Station/Translation Services For Website/5 Encrypted Hard Drives/Computer Memory Upgrades 10293 $5,269.56 Roy's Repair Service Vehicle Repairs&Service 10294 $5,075.01 '1 First National Bank Conferences&Training Expenses-Rigging Workshop For 4 Employees/Trail Conference/CSDA Workshop/Cobra Seminar /Native Grassland Conference 10295 $4,472.80 "1 First National Bank Field Supplies/Radar Unit&Case/Straw Bales/Oxygen Kit/ Slide Hammer/Concrete/Sunscreen/Tools For Shop Cart/ Digital Camera Card&Batteries/Quick Couplers For Herbicide Spraying/Flare Containers/Sawchain Parts/Vise/10 LED Bulbs 10296 $4,350.00 First American Core Logic Annual Fee-Assessors Parcel Data Service 10297 $2,500.00 Dana Property Analysis Appraisal Services 10298 $2,491.31 02 Marketing&Design District Uniform&Ball Cap Patches 10299 $2,125.00 Concern Employee Assistance Program Quarterly Fee 10300 $2,028.50 Firestone Complete Auto Care Tires 10301 $1,874.54 Grand Prix Mule Repair 10302 $1,760.95 Cartridge World Printer Supplies-Cartridges 10303 $1,714.08 "1 First National Bank Business Related Meals-Board Meetings/Spring Social Event 10304 $1,567.98 Cascade Fire Equipment Company Field Supplies-Fire Goggles, Pumps For Water Pumpers, Head Lamps&Gear For New Ranger 10305 $1,563.85 Office Depot Office Supplies,Name Plates, Key Storage Box,Copy Paper, Laserjet Postcards, Printer Cartridge i 10306 $1,489.19 Peninsula Digital Imaging Printing Services-20 Bound Copies Of La Honda Creek Draft Master Plan 10307 $1,399.34 CMK Automotive Vehicle Maintenance&Repairs 10308 $1,316.37 Gardenland Power Equipment Field Supplies/Weed Whip/Chain Saw Parts/Fuel Hose!Air Filters 10309 $1,277.56 '1 First National Bank Rental Residence Expenses-2 Refrigerators 10310 $1,250.00 Hulberg&Associates Appraisal Services 10311 $1,172.10 Summit Uniforms Uniform Expenses 10312 $1,080.00 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Legal Services&Advice 10313 $1,007.00 Santa Rosa Junior College Enrollment Fees For New Recruitment Academy Training 10314 $974.99 R.E. Borrmann's Steel Company Steel For Tri-Pods 10315 $950.00 Econo Tree Service Hazardous Tree Removal At Rental Residence 10316 $896.99 VP 11 Earthday 2009 Giveaways 10317 $815.00 Montgomery Highlands Association Road Improvements Per Settlement Agreement 10318 $788,78 Del Woods Consulting Services-Land Purchase Projects 10319 $768.69 Ergo Works Ergonomic Equipment 10320 $667.30 '1 First National Bank Van Shuttle For Fremont Older House Tour 10321 $654.41 Hsieh, Benny Reimbursement-Mac Mini For Web Development Box 10322 $616.83 Langley Hill Quarry Drain Rock For Rental Residence Driveway 10323 $606.98 Acme Rigging&Supply Company Freight-Rigging Equipment For Bridge Installation 10324 $602.61 Lab Safety Supply Field Supplies, Safety Gloves&Goggles 10325 $573.09 Metro Mobile Communications Radio Repairs&Supplies 10326 $560.45 Forestry Suppliers Field Supplies-Herbicide Sprayer&Sun Screen 10327 $548.16 United Site Services Sanitation Services-Sierra Azul&Fremont Older 10328 $522.50 Greg's Trucking Service Rock Delivery Services For Skyline Ridge Parking Lot Potholes Page 1 of 3 y Claims No. 09-09 Meeting 09-14 Date 5/13/09 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 10329 $500.00 *2 California Regional Water Quality Application Fee-Water Quality Certification For Rapley Ranch Control Board Culvert Removal 10330 $495.96 *3 AmeriGas Propane Tank Service-Hosking Barn 10331 $491.00 State Water Resources Control Board Annual Fee-Storm Water Permit 10332 $480.00 California Park&Recreation Society Membership Dues 10333 $457.34 All Chemical Disposal Hazardous Material Disposal 10334 $419.09 *1 First National Bank Office Supplies/Toner Cartridges/Name Plates&Badges/Self Ink Stamp/Ergonomic Equipment 10335 $380.00 Mission Valley Ford Vehicle Service-Smoke Opacity Tests 10336 $375.00 L.Craig Britton Consulting Services 10337 $340.00 *1 First National Bank Nature Center Supplies/Microscope Bulbs/Collection Tubs& Nets 10338 $315.00 Morrison,Sonya Reimbursement-Tuition 10339 $312.00 County Of Santa Clara-Office Of The Fingerprinting Services Sheriff 10340 $311.09 All Star Glass Patrol Truck Window Replacement 10341 $308.48 Maaco Vehicle Repairs 10342 $281.82 Ergo Vera Ergonomic Evaluations 10343 $277.46 Pringle Tractor Company Tractor Supplies 10344 $262.12 Safety Kleen Solvent Tank Service-SFO 10345 $251.00 American Red Cross Emergency Response Training&Certificates 10346 $245.64 *1 First National Bank Advertising, Subscriptions&Books-Recruitment Ad For Training &Safety Coordinator/Survey Monkey Monthly Subscription 10347 $229.30 ADT Security Services Alarm Service-SFO 10348 $212.65 California Water Service Company Water Service-AO&Windy Hill 10349 $211.79 The Workingman's Emporium Uniform Expenses 10350 $180.07 *1 First National Bank Volunteer Supplies 10351 $171.35 Williams,Jennifer Reimbursement- Nature Center Supplies/Fremont Older House Tour Supplies 10352 $166.00 Del Rey Building Maintenance Janitorial Supplies-AO 10353 $165.47 Los Altos Garbage Company Garbage Service-AO 10354 $160.30 McKowan, Paul Reimbursement-Volunteer Training&Storage Supplies 10355 $157.56 Target Specialty Products Landscaping Supplies 10356 $157.44 Allied Waste Services Garbage Service-Hosking Barn 10357 $156,39 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Supplies 10358 $153.97 *4 San Mateo County Hazardous Waste Disposal Fee 10359 $137.50 Duong,Anna Reimbursement-Mileage 10360 $135.00 Casaretto,Mark Reimbursement-Uniform Expense 10361 $120.16 Honda Peninsula Motorcycle Helmet 10362 $119.00 Coastal Sierra Internet Service-SFO 10363 $100.00 City Of Palo Alto Utilities Utility Fees-Black Mountain 10364 $100.00 *5 Town Of Woodside Deposit-Meeting Room For Slender False Brome Information Workshop 10365 $98.33 Cermeno,Sal Reimbursement-Uniform Expense 10366 $98.26 Costco Office Supplies 10367 $98.00 Beckman,Craig Reimbursement-Rigging Training Expenses 10368 $91.31 Peterson Tractor Tractor Supplies-Filters 10369 $89.90 Goodco Press Printing Services-Warning Notices 10370 $84.29 Priority 1 Public Safety Equipment Repair Patrol Truck Spotlight 10371 $82.81 Foster Brothers Lock&Key Services 10372 $80.00 Northern Energy Propane Tank Rental 10373 $78.00 G&K Services Shop Towel Service Page 2 of 3 Claims No. 09-09 Meeting 09-14 Date 5/13/09 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 10374 $78.00 Pacific Telemanagement Services Pay Phone-Black Mountain 10375 $76.69 Tadco Supply Janitorial Supplies 10376 $73.20 Paterson, Loro Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses 10377 $52.00 National Notary Association Notary Membership Renewal 10378 $50.00 *6 County Of San Mateo Notice Of Exemption Fee For Eucalyptus Tree Removal At Pulgas Ridge 10379 $48.99 San Jose Mercury News Quarterly Subscription 10380 $44.79 Barron Park Supply Plumbing Supplies 10381 $43.00 Allen's Press Clipping Bureau Clipping Service 10382 $38.56 *1 First National Bank Key Remote For Ford Expedition 10383 $32.19 *1 First National Bank Uniform Expenses 10384 $21.11 L.C.Action Police Supply Patrol Supply 10385 $19.25 ID Plus Name Tags 10386 $15.00 Tires On The Go Tire Repair 10387 $9.83 Parry, Rick Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses Total $331,874.06 *1 Urgent Check Issued 04/29/09 The Total Amount For First National Bank Is$20,352.64 *2 Urgent Check Issued 5/5/09 *3 Urgent Check Issued 5/6/09 *4 Urgent Check Issued 5/5/09 *5 Urgent Check Issued 5/5/09 *6 Urgent Check Issued 5/6/09 ## In The Event Agenda Item Is Not Approved,This Claim Will Not Be Processed Page 3 of 3 i Midpeninsula Regional • ' Open Space District R-09-63 Meeting 09-14 May 13, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 4 AGENDA ITEM Approval of Interim District Clerk. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Appoint Anna Jatczak as Interim District Clerk. DISCUSSION With the departure of Gregory Sam on April 24, 2009, it is requested that Anna Jatczak, Interim Administration and Human Resources Manager, be appointed Interim District Clerk and authorized to perform all duties and responsibilities of the District Clerk. Ms. Jatczak comes to the District with over 18 years of public sector experience and is familiar with Board meeting procedures. This appointment will continue until a permanent employee is hired and begins his or her duties for the District. Recruitment for an employee who will serve as District Clerk has begun. TICS PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE This proposed action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and no environmental review is required. NEXT STEPS If approved by the Board, Anna Jatczak will begin performing interim District Clerk duties immediately. Prepared by: Annetta Spiegel, Human Resources Analyst Contact person: Same as above 4 ' IMidpeninsula Regional Open Space District R-09-56 Meeting 09-14 May 13, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 5 I AGENDA ITEM Approval of Amendments to Appendix B: Family and Medical Leave Policy in the District's Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Approve amendments to Appendix B: Family and Medical Leave Policy in the District's Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual DISCUSSION On November 17, 2008, the U.S. Department of Labor published final regulations incorporating �> it and Medical Leave Act regulations of the federal Family numerous changes to the existing regulat o s y (FMLA). These new regulations went into effect on January 16, 2009. The change in regulations required the District to amend its Family and Medical Leave policy, which is incorporated into the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual as Appendix B, in order to remain compliant with the FMLA. Staff retained the services of the public employment law firm Liebert Cassidy and Whitmore (LCW) to prepare the necessary policy amendments. Since major revisions to the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual require Board approval, staff is requesting the proposed amendments to the policy be approved in order to stay compliant with the FMLA. The Department of Labor implemented some significant changes to the FMLA. These changes include: • Codifying into the FMLA new military family leave provisions provided under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2007. This includes Military Caregiver Leave which provides eligible employees who are family members of covered service members up to 26 work weeks of leave in a "single 12-month period" to care for a covered service member with a serious illness or injury incurred in the line of duty on active duty. This provision also extends FMLA protection to additional family members (i.e., next of kin). i • Adding military leave entitlement for a"qualifying exigency." This helps families of members of the National Guard and Reserves manage their affairs while the member is R-08-107 Page 2 i on active duty in support of a contingency operation. This provision provides the normal 12 workweeks of FMLA job-protected leave available to eligible employees with a covered military member serving in the National Guard or Reserves to use for"any qualifying exigency" arising out of the fact that a covered military member is on active duty or called to active duty status in support of a contingency operation. • Amount of time an employer has to issue FMLA eligibility and designation notices. I • Providing clarification in several areas of the FMLA that were ambiguous, such as how to count holidays towards unpaid leave time in cases where an employee takes leave in increments of less than a full workweek. • Obtaining clarification regarding medical certification reporting requirements for both employees and employers The key amendments being proposed to Appendix B: Family and Medical Leave Policy are: Sections B. 2 e) and f); B. 3 d); B. 5 d); B. 6 b) and i); B. 7 a) and B. 8. as shown in the strike-out version of the proposed amended policy. FISCAL IMPACT There is no anticipated fiscal impact to budget. Staff is not aware of any District employees who are affected by the new military family leave provisions of the FMLA. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE li Act and no hCaliforniaEnvironmental Quality This proposed action is not a project under the C Q y p p P J environmental review is required. NEXT STEPS If approved by the Board, staff will implement the proposed amendments to Appendix B: Family and Medical Leave Policy, in the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual. Attachments: 1. Proposed Amended Appendix B: Family and Medical Leave Policy - Clean Version d Medical Leave Policy - Strike-Out Version 2. Proposed Amended Appendix B: Family a y P pP Y n Prepared by: Annetta Spiegel, Human Resources Analyst i Contact person: Same as above Attachment 1 : Appendix B: Family and Medical Leave Clean Version Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES APPENDIX B FAMIL YAND MEDICAL LEAVE The District will authorize a leave of absence for ellgll.-)Ie employees as required by the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 ("I'MI-A") and the California Family Rights Act ("CFRA"). Section B. 1 Eligibility requirements An employee is eligible for Family/Medical Leave under this policy if the employee: a) Has been employed for at least twelve (12) months; and b) Has actually worked for at least 1,250 hours during the 12-month period immediately preceding the beginning of the,leave. Section B. 2 Reasons for Leave Family/Medical Leave is permitted for the following reasons: a) The birth of a child or to care for a newborn of an employee; b) The placement of a child with an employee in connection with the adoption or foster care of a child; c) Leave to care for a child, parent, domestic partner or a spouse who has a serious health condition; d) Leave because of a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the functions of his/her position; e) Leave for a "qualifying exigency" arising out of the fact that an employee's spouse, son, daughter, or parent is on active duty or call to active duty status in the National Guard or Reserves in support of a contingency operation ; or Leave (military caregiver leave) to care for a spouse, son, daughter, parent, or next of kin" service member of the United States Armed Forces who has a serious injury or illness incurred in the line of duty while on active military duty Fan-lily/Medical leave under CFRA is not available for leave for medical conditions due to pregnancy or childbirth, qualifying exigency or for military care giving. Instead, a separate leave for this purpose is available for pregnancy disability. See the District's Pregnancy Disability Leave policy (Appendix D) for more information or contact Human Resources. Section B. 3 Duration ofLeave Midpen' sula Regional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES An eligible employee is entitled to Family/Medical Leave of: a) Up to 16 weeks of leave during a twelve-month period for the employee's own serious health condition, the birth/adoption or foster care placement of child or care of family member. The twelve-month period is measured forward from the first date the employee takes Family/Medical leave. This leave may be taken intermittently or as a reduced schedule only with documentation of medical necessity for such leave. b) The General Manager, upon written request, and on a case-by-case basis, may grant an extension of up to an additional eight (8) months for an employee's own medical condition. c) For birth, adoption or foster care placement bonding leave, the minimum duration of leave is two weeks. However, an employee is entitled to leave of less than two weeks on any two occasions in the first year after birth or adoption, or foster care placement. d) Up to 26 weeks of leave during a twelve-month period to care for a covered service member. Where FMLA leave qualifies as both military caregiver leave and care for a family member with a serious health condition, the leave will be designated as military caregiver leave first. The twelve-month period is measured forward from the first date employee takes the leave. Section B. 4 Spouses Both Employed by District a) In any case in which a husband and wife both employed by the District are entitled to leave, the aggregate number of workweeks of leave to which both may be entitled may be limited to 12 workweeks during any 12-month period if leave is taken for the birth or placement for adoption or foster care of the employees' child (i.e., bonding leave). b) In any case in which a husband and wife both employed by the District are entitled to leave, the aggregate number of workweeks of leave to which both may be entitled may be limited to 26 workweeks during any 12-month period if leave is taken to care for a covered service member. Except as noted above, these limitations do not apply to any other type of leave under this policy. Section B. 5 Request for Leave/Required Documentation An eligible employee requesting such leave is required to: a) Make the request in writing to the General Manager a minimum of 30 days prior to a foreseeable need for leave, or as soon as possible for unforeseeable needs for leave. Mi(penznsula Regional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES b) Supply supporting documentation from the attending health care provider to certify the need for leave before the requested leave date, or within 15 days after the request if it was not possible to provide certification earlier. c) All forms needed are available through Human Resources. d) If the District has reason to doubt the validity of a certification, the District may require a medical opinion of a second health care provider chosen and paid for by the District. If the second opinion is different from the first, the District may require the opinion of a third provider jointly approved by the District and the employee, but paid for by the District. The opinion of the third provider will be binding. An employee may request a copy of the health care provider's opinions when there is a second or third medical opinion sought. Section B. 6 Pay and Benefits While on Family/Medical Leave Family/Medical leave is generally unpaid, however, an employee may use accrued sick leave as allowed under the sick leave usage policies, and must use all but forty (40) hours of paid leave time during the period the employee is on leave. For purposes of this Policy, "paid leave time" shall mean accrued vacation, holiday bank, personal or administrative leave. a) When an employee is in paid leave status, benefit hours (sick, vacation, etc.) will continue to accrue at the same rate that applies during paid work time. These benefit hours will not accrue when an employee begins unpaid leave. b) An employee will continue to be covered by the District's group health insurance plan (medical, dental, vision, life and long-term disability) to the same extent that coverage is provided as if working for a period of up to twelve 12) weeks, unless for military caregiver leave, then up to twenty-six (26) weeks, during the 12-month period. In no case, is an employee entitled to more than twelve (12) weeks of health insurance benefit continuation within a 12-month period inclusive of all family/disability or pregnancy leave except when the employee pays for COBRA continuation coverage. The 12 week limitation for health insurance benefit continuation within a 12-month period does not apply to military caregiver leave. For ri-iihtaty caregiver leave, in no case, is an employee entitled to more than twenty-six (26) weeks of health insurance benefit continuation within a 12-month period. c) If the leave extends beyond twelve (12) weeks, or twenty-six (26) weeks for military caregiver leave, an employee can continue such benefits for the duration of the leave by paying the full premiums of these benefits. Extensions of coverage will be subject to any restrictions in the applicable benefit policy or plan. d) If an employee is unable to return after exhausting his or her leave entitlement, the employee can continue such benefits by paying for COBRA continuation coverage. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES e) If an employee does not return to work or returns to work for less than 30 days after the expiration of his or her leave entitlement, the District will have the right to recover its share of health plan premiums paid on behalf of the employee while in unpaid status unless the failure to return to work is because of the continuation, recurrence, or onset of a serious health condition of the employee/family member as defined in this Appendix. In the event of an extenuating circumstance beyond the employee's control, (as defined by FMLA and CFRA, including retirement within 30 days of returning to work), the right to recover the health plan premiums does not apply. If an employee is on leave of absence without pay in excess of two (2) complete pay periods his/her anniversary date for purposes of probationary time, evaluation, pay increases and vacation/sick/personal/administration time accrual shall be extended by the number of days included in the period of leave without pay. Also, if an employee is on leave of absence with pay, for the purposes of probationary time and related evaluation periods and pay, such probationary time will be extended by the number of days included in the period of leave. g) State Disability Insurance (SDI) An employee who applies and qualifies for SDI may receive benefits based upon wages paid during a specific 12-month base period, determined by the date an SDI claim begins. This benefit is for non-work related disabilities and can be coordinated with an employee's paid leave time. The first seven days are considered a "waiting period" and no benefits are paid. h) Paid Family Leave (11FI.) An employee may apply for PFL benefits within the SDI prograin for the care of parents, children, spouse and domestic partner or to bond with a new child. PFL offers up to six weeks of benefits (in a 12 month period). This benefit can be coordinated with an employee's paid leave time. The first seven days are considered a "waiting period" and no PFL benefits are paid. i) Military Spouse Leave (Military and Veterans Code section 395.10) An employee who works more than 20 hours a week can take an unpaid leave of up to 10 days while the employee's spouse is on leave from deployment. Section B. 7 Reinstatement Upon Return From Leave a) Upon the expiration of the Family Medical Leave, an employee will be returned to the same position or to an equivalent position with equivalent pay, benefits and terms and conditions of employment held prior to the leave. However, the employee has no greater rights to reinstatement, benefits or other conditions of employment than if the employee had been continuously employed during the leave period. If the reinstatement date differs from the original agreement of the employee and the District, the employee will be reinstated within two business days, where feasible, after the employee notifies the employer of his/her readiness to return. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES b) All employees taking leave for their own medical condition will be required to present a return to work certification from the attending health care provider as a condition of reinstatement. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES Section B. 8 Relationship ofTamily/Medical Leave To Other Leaves Famdy/Medical Leave runs concurrently with other leaves taken for any reason that is FMLA/CFRA qualifying, for example, sick leave or leave for an on-the-job injury. However, CFRA leave does not run concurrently with Pregnancy Disability Leave, but is in addition to it. CFRA leave does not run concurrently with Qualifying Exigency or Military Caregiver leaves. Additional Information For more detailed explanation or answers to questions, employees should contact the Human Resources department. Attachment 2: Appendix B: Family and Medical Leave Strike-out Version i Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES APPENDIX B FAMILYAND MEDICAL LEAVE The District will authorize a leave of absence for eligible employees as required by the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 ("FMLA") and the California Family Rights Act ("CFRA"). Section B. 1 y requirements Eli ibiEt g under this policy if the employee: An employee is eligible for Family/Medical Leave u p y a) Has been employed for at least twelve (12) months; and 11 worked for at least 1 250 hours during the 12-month period b Has actually Y g immediately preceding the beginning of the leave. Section B. 2 Reasons for Leave Family/Medical Leave is permitted for the following reasons: a) The birth of a child or to care for a newborn of an employee; b) The placement of a child with an employee in connection with the adoption or foster care of a child; c) Leave to care for a child, parent, domestic partner or a spouse who has a serious health condition; or d) Leave because of a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the functions of his/her position: ,r , ,. Et tt•` i tt c. n�.�➢;tl'CEIY t• tj?t }It,l1\£` €,t�!E\ {�S' t';i31 1.t, ,1+ tint. G�kSi; Idi�,1'i Eli t�t�' � f kill ......��ffib.,«Berl-"1CC member of ih. t tw(d �1 � ii a' t,"tr +tl', iti �9i" 'ii Iif114" r• at1C`I£I'P`Ctl 39E 1 . ' Ill 1_� " ;1t;i' l!1( t' n5ai ,it 21".i` liltflt;=t1" Family/Medical yMedical leave under CFRA is not available for 1£ ,r,, 6)r medical conditions due to pregnancy or childbirth, £it, t �?__'v, ::> �_�£ , £, _for�l�i�ii_mi _�r�i care giving. Instead, a separate leave for this purpose is available for pregnancy disability. See the District's Pregnancy Disability Leave policy (Appendix D) for more information or contact Human Resources. 1V lidpeninsula 1�e,gional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES Section B. 3 Duration ofLeave An eligible employee is entitled to Family/Medical Leave of. a) Up to 16 weeks of leave during a twelve-month period for the employee's own serious health condition, the birth/adoption or foster care placement of child or care of family member. The twelve-month period is measured forward from the first date the employee takes Family/Medical leave. This leave may be taken intermittently or as a reduced schedule only with documentation of medical necessity for such leave. b) The General Manager, upon written request, and on a case-by-case basis, may grant an extension of up to an additional eight (8) months for an employee's own medical condition. c) For birth, adoption or foster care placement bonding leave, the minimum duration of leave is two weeks. However, an employee is entitled to leave of less than two weeks on any two occasions in the first year after birth or adoption, or foster care placement. ITIcInI)cl- \tOl �1 scll�m, llc�dtl) condill('1), dl� �tfld f 1( :1v,,1, ]]I 1)c dusl,E'Iplcd c 11c te,\'ck c lm)ntll jwn )tt 1e, ........ leave..... Section B. 4 Spouses Both Employed by District a) In any case in which a husband and wife both employed by the District are entitled to leave, the aggregate number of workweeks of leave to which both may be entitled may be limited to 12 workweeks during any 12-month period if leave is taken for the birth or placement for adoption or foster care of the employees' child (i.e., bonding leave). b) In any case in which a husband and wife both employed by the District are entitled to leave, the aggregate number of workweeks of leave to which both may be entitled may be limited to 26 workweeks during any 12-month period if leave is taken to care for a covered , ' �--seryicc inciiiber. Except as noted above, th. t, limitation= doe, not apply to any other type of leave under this policy. Section B. 4.; Request for Leave/Required Documentation An eligible employee requesting such leave is requited to a) Make the request in writing to the General Manager a minimum of 30 days prior to a foreseeable need for leave, or as soon as possible for unforeseeable needs for Midpeninsula e R,gional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES leave. 1,)) Supply supporting documentation from the attending health care provider to certify the need for leave before the requested leave date, or within 15 days after the request if it was not possible to provide certification earlier. c) All forms needed are available through Human Resources. J, 11 1 1 )!"11,1(1 lea rc l,on 1(1 CIOLII)l I III,' 1.lIldtl �_crl I I jc it 1E)]I, t I Ic 1)1,1 rif"! I ia� ()ft Cc()ml 11( 11til (are prr \ ,Jcr, and p'lld ,r Im ol)lnioll Is differunt Ina", rctiml,c d 111c I )1wlrltt 'Ind tltc jqld 1''--I-----l--r----,--- 111C I I 11c (q)II11oll ()f III din d Id--c---- A] 1,)c I ind n" 1 oft1le 11calill I)rm ...... "coMd ,I" Olff'! nwdic-al Section B. sib; Pay and Benefits While on Family/Medical Leave Family/Medical leave is generally unpaid, however, an employee may use accrued sick leave as allowed under the sick leave usage policies, and must use an but forty (40) hours of paid leave time during the period the employee is on leave. For purposes of this Policy, "paid leave time" shall mean accrued vacation, holiday bank, personal or administrative leave. a) When an employee is in paid leave status, benefit hours (sick, vacation, etc.) will continue to accrue at the same rate that applies during paid work time. These benefit hours will not accrue when an employee begins unpaid leave. b) An employee will continue to be covered by the District's group health insurance plan (medical, dental, vision, life and long-term disability) to the same extent that coverage is provided as if working for a period of up to twelve (12) 1,)I- Inl1ii;ln cr lc�lti( fl-lcll III) lo IV'TW", �,'26� weeks, during the (-,12-month -.. period. In no case, is an employee entitled to more than weeks of health insurance benefit continuation within a 12-month period inclusive of all family/disability or pregnancy leave except when the employee pays for COBRA continuation coverage.-, I he 12 1 ccl, lin) tat )n t'­r bc�1111) 111�kff per)d cl, lllilit.II-\ carct het Ica\c, In_tk,'Kisc IS,lll CM1)1m(:c clMdcd 1c) Ili(,rc tl)an t'26 1,2 ln )1111) c) If the leave extends beyond twelve (1 weeks,_(�r-M an employee can co2)ntinue such benefits for the duration of the leave by paying the full premiums of these benefits. Extensions of coverage will be subject to any restrictions in the applicable benefit policy or plan. d) If an employee is unable to return after exhausting his or her leave entitlement, the employee can continue such benefits by paying for COBRA continuation Midpeninsula Re gional Open Spat-e District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES coverage. e) If an employee does not return to work or returns to work for less than 30 days after the expiration of his or her leave entitlement, the District will have the right to recover its share of health plan premiums paid on behalf of the employee while in unpaid status unless the failure to return to work is because of the continuation, recurrence, or onset of a serious health condition of the employee/family member as defined in this Appendix. In the event of an extenuating circumstance beyond the employee's control, (as defined by FMLA and CFRA, including retirement within 30 days of returning to work), the right to recover the health plan premiums does not apply. If an employee is on leave of absence without pay in excess of two (2) complete pay periods his/her anniversary date for purposes of probationary time, evaluation, pay increases and vacation/sick/personal/administration time accrual shall be extended by the number of days included in the period of leave without pay. Also, if an employee is on leave of absence with pay, for the purposes of probationary time and related evaluation periods and pay, such probationary time will be extended by the number of days included in the period of leave. g) State Disability Insurance (SDI) An employee who applies and qualifies for SDI may receive benefits based upon wages paid during a specific 12-month base period, determined by the date an SDI claim begins. This benefit is for non-work related disabilities and can be coordinated with an employee's paid leave time. The first seven days are considered a "waiting period" and no benefits are paid. h) Paid Fammily Leave (PFL) An employee may apply for PFL benefits within the SDI program for the care of parents, children, spouse and domestic partner or to bond with a new child. PFL offers up to six weeks of benefits (in a 12 month period). This benefit can be coordinated with an employee's paid leave time. The first seven days are considered a "-"-waiting period'"—" and no PFL benefits are paid. _. .1ilx� i,<,, •w� .1 c � 10 r<t � Ind_Ve tcran6 Coda Cocic sectip-€7 9.. .1� n c t l+��c�z_ S),ft"} '.E""+3`l�` l )"si`# t}61ai .)a� Elf3ilr"•d C tz t c:f�. 4 ni f lvC 4i,91 lftl)`] d 1€ X C i)f UD ) I-, fort lc t\c n()tik,,,_t.ic`��is>" iSlt"lli_..a. Section B. 't;%W Reinstatement t Upon Return From Leave a) Upon the expiration of the Family Medical Leave, an employee will be returned to the same position or to an equivalent position with equivalent pay, benefits and terms and conditions of employment held prior to the leave. However, the employee has no greater rights to reinstatement, benefits or other conditions of employment than if the employee had been continuously employed during the leave period._] tl (�, t<t ctsl. icy (ludw_diffet- f'rd7tr� lid: f>s� i��. , agl,ecrncni ot illc'__c.illf-olmec• ;Ind t3Ic_ t\�c) bc;srnc 7 (i<I \\,I)Cre fc t tblc-, i',. f 3fE,' C.''1j3� >' s`E,i?)t91�t[•(; [lid.' c_P11133c>SC'I' f3i Illt;; �lt'9 131CS`l 1f1 T'l'il13`11,... Midpeninrula Re,gional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES b) All employees taking leave for their own medical condition will be required to present a return to work certification from the attending health care provider as a condition of reinstatement. 1 I, I Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District PERSONNEL POLICIES&PROCEDURES Section B. 817 Relationship of TatnilylMedical Leave To Other Leaves Family/Medical Leave runs concurrently with other leaves taken for any reason that is F"MLA/CFR-A qualifying, for example, sick leave or leave for an on-the-job injury. However, CFRA leave does not run concurrently with Pregnancy Disability Leave, but is in addition to it. 1 1-t ni,I col�cm,"cwk \�11 h 01til f"\in�' I Additional Information For more detailed explanation or answers to questions, employees should contact the Human Resources department. r Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District R-09-21 Meeting 09-14 May 13, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 6 AGENDA ITEM Determination that the Recommended Actions are Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and Approval of Contract with Go Native, Inc. Not to Exceed $172,200 to Provide Vegetation Management (including Herbicide Application) at Various Open Space Preserves in Fiscal Years 2009-2012. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS Z�W 1. Determine that the recommended action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set out in this report. 2. Authorize the General Manager to enter into an Agreement with Go Native, Inc, for a total contract amount not to exceed $172,200, to perform the safe application of herbicides and mechanical methods to control non-native plants and weeds. The contract will run for three years. DISCUSSION Practices The District uses herbicides and mechanical methods to control weeds and non-native invasive plants in District preserves. The work provided under this contract supplements work completed by staff and volunteers to control invasive plants using an integrated pest management approach. Integrated pest management is a long-term strategy to control target pest species with minimum impact to human health, the environment and nontarget organisms using a range of alternatives and regular monitoring. This contract involves the safe application of various herbicides and mechanical methods to control non-native plants and weeds. District experience suggests an estimated annual level of work for the contractor would be 800 to 1,500 hours for a period of three (3) years. Typical plants that will be controlled include yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis), purple starthistle (Centaurea calcitrapa), slender false brome (Brachypodium sylvaticum), and Harding grass (Phalaris aquatica) at multiple District open space preserves. The contractor is responsible for posting signs to advise the public and staff of the presence of herbicides during and after R-09-21 Page 2 herbicide treatment as directed by District staff. Signs will be put in place 48 hours prior to application and remain in place for 72 hours after treatment. Methods Specific project methods and locations will be determined on a quarterly basis. The methods that may be utilized in managing non-native vegetation and weeds under this contract will include the safe application of various herbicides and mechanical methods such as mowing and brush cutting. All application of herbicides will be in strict compliance with all applicable label requirements and regulations, as well as the pest control recommendations of the District's Pest Control Advisor. District staffwill insure that best management practices are employed in the field when developing and implementing control methods for each site. These may include: application of herbicides at concentrations suitable for the type of site, limitations on the amount of herbicide that may be applied per acre at a given site per year, establishment of adequate buffer areas around water bodies, selection of mechanical equipment such as backpack sprayers or spot sprayers suitable to the site, avoidance of areas in which a supervising District biologist has determined the potential presence of rare plants or their habitat, and insuring that mechanical removal avoids any potential presence of nesting birds. Process Staff released a Request for Bids on March 18, 2009. A pre-bid meeting was held on a representative site on March 27, 2009. Nine (9) contractors attended. Addenda clarifying certain issues that arose after release of the bid package were released on March 18 and April 2, 2009. The following sealed bids were received on April 8, 2009: Contractor Average Cost per Person-Hour of Methods (a) and (d) above (Basis of Contract Award) Go Native, Inc $37.50 Natures Image, Inc $42.15 Go Native Inc. submitted a responsive proposal with relevant experience and lowest costs. Go Native, Inc. is a habitat restoration company located on the central California coast with extensive experience in wildland weed management. Go Native Inc. satisfactorily conducted invasive plant control work for the District from 2005 through 2008 and has done similar work for the Peninsula Open Space Trust, and the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy. Having reviewed the bidder's qualifications, and the bid proposal, staff recommends awarding the contract to Go Native, Inc. FISCAL IMPACT The FY2009-10 Budget includes $57,400.00 for contract vegetation maintenance on District preserves. In FY201 0-11 and FY2011-12, staff anticipates expenditures at FY2009-10 level to continue invasive plant control. R-09-21 Page 3 PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice has been provided as required by the Brown Act. Notices were also sent to individuals on the Resource Management notification list. CEQA COMPLIANCE The District concludes that the District's annual maintenance herbicide spray program to control invasive plants is categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15304 (Class 4 Minor Alterations to Land). Cl'ass 4 covers minor public alterations of land, water, and/or vegetation that do not involve the removal of healthy, mature, scenic trees or grading on slopes greater than 10 percent. Removing invasive plants from the preserves to protect native plants and wildlife habitat is consistent with subsection (d) of this section regarding minor alteration of vegetation on wildlife management areas for improvement of habitat. CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.4 provides that public agencies shall list specific activities which fall within each exempt class and which are consistent with the intent of the classes as described in the state guidelines. Under the District's Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, the District has determined that certain day-to-day projects qualify for categorical exemptions from CEQA, including minor resource management projects (e.g., removal of exotic species and revegetation). Therefore, this program is consistent both with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15304 and the District's CEQA Guidelines. NEXT STEPS If approved by the Board, staff will finalize the contract with the contractor, and the contractor will begin weed control in May, 2009, following issuance of a Notice to Proceed. Later this summer, staff will begin the process of scoping a District-wide Integrated Pest Management program. It is anticipated that development of the IPM program will be a project in the District FY201 0-11 Action Plan. Prepared by: Cindy Roessler, Senior Resource Management Specialist Contact person: Cindy Roessler, Senior Resource Management Specialist t ' IMidpeninsula Regional Open Space District R-09-55 Meeting 09-14 May 13, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 7 i I AGENDA ITEM i Approval of proposed purchase of the Peninsula Open Space Trust (Moore) property as an addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, located near the end of Weaver Road in unincorporated Santa Clara County (Santa Clara County Assessor's Parcel Number 558-30-001). GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as set out in this Report. 2. Adopt the attached resolution authorizing purchase of the Peninsula Open Space Trust property. 3. Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan contained in this Report, and name the purchased property as an addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. DISCUSSION On May 28, 2008, the Board of Directors authorized the General Manager to enter into a License and S Management Agreement with the Peninsula Op Space ace Trust (POST), whereby the District g g assumed management of the 81.50-acre POST (Moore) property (see Report R-08-68). Under the terms of the License and Management Agreement,the District has been managing the property as an extension of the District's Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. POST received the property by donation in 2008 from Barbara Moore, a member of the Merrill family. The District purchased the nearby Merrill Trust property from the Merrill family on April 30, 2008 (see Report R-07-98). The donation by Barbara Moore to POST occurred at the time of the District's purchase of the Merrill Trust property. The eventual transfer of the POST (Moore) property to the District was contemplated at that time. R-09-55 Page 2 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (see attached map) The undeveloped 81.50-acre POST property is located east of Lexington Reservoir on the north- facing slopes above Hendrys Creek. Hendrys Creek flows from Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve into Lexington Reservoir to the west. The canyon surrounding Hendrys Creek is a natural extension of the Preserve because it is a relatively pristine watershed and a wildlife corridor. Much of the POST property lies within this canyon, which is comprised of oak bay woodland on the northeast facing slopes, and chaparral on the northwest facing slopes. The southern comer of the property sits above the crest of the Hendrys Creek canyon. This level ridge top portion of the property is vegetated with annual grasses, and was once the site of an unsurfaced private airstrip. A section of unmaintained roadbed formerly known as Airport Road crosses this southern corner of the property. There are no other improvements. The property abuts a 19.25-acre parcel of District land to the west that borders Hendrys Creek (former Trifilo property). Both the POST property and the District's former Trifilo property are bounded by private property on all sides. The District has a first right of refusal on an adjacent large parcel to the north and east that encompasses the upper portion of the Hendrys Creek watershed, and would serve to connect the POST property and the District's former Trifilo property to the existing preserve in the future. USE AND MANAGEMENT Planning Considerations The undeveloped property consists of two legal parcels, and is located in an unincorporated area of Santa Clara County and zoned HS (Hillside), requiring a 20- to 160-acre minimum lot size based upon a slope density formula. The property falls within the County General Plan designated Los Gatos Creek Watershed Area, which places additional constraints upon potential development. Most of the property is steeply sloping canyonside. There are no improvements on the property. Vehicular access to the property is across private sections of Weaver Road and former Airport Road. Staff will contact private property owners along these roads to coordinate District patrol access of the property. Preliminary Use and Management Plan The Preliminary Use and Management Plan will take effect at the close of escrow and remain effective until the Plan is amended or the property is incorporated into the Master Plan for the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. The property will be maintained in a natural condition, and no changes to land use are anticipated. If changes to land use are proposed in the future, the plan would be subject to further environmental review and public input. Public Access: Closed to public use. Patrol: Routinely patrol the property. Signs, Fences and Gates: Install private property and preserve boundary signs where the property is readily accessible from adjacent private property. Install minor segments of fencing or a gate at Airport Road to prevent unauthorized trespass. Name: Name the property as an addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. R-09-55 Page 3 Dedication: Withhold dedication of the property as public open space at this time. Site Safety Inspection: There are no known safety hazards on the site. CEQA COMPLIANCE Project Description The project consists of the acquisition of an 81.50-acre property as an addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, and the concurrent adoption of a Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the property. The land will be permanently preserved as open space and maintained in a natural condition. Ultimately, the property will be included in the Master Plan for the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. CEQA Determination The District concludes that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment. It is categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Sections 15316, 15317, 15325, and 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows: Section 15316 exempts the acquisition of land in order to create parks if the site is in a natural condition and the management plan proposes to keep the area in a natural condition. The use and management plan specifies that the land will not be developed and will remain in a natural condition. Section 15317 exempts the acceptance of fee interests in order to maintain the open space character of an area. The District will acquire fee interest and maintain the open space character of the area. No new development is proposed as part of this project. Section 15325 exempts transfers of ownership of interests in land in order to preserve open space. This acquisition will transfer fee ownership of the property to the District and ensure it will be preserved as public open space by incorporating it into the Cathedral Oaks Area of the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. This purchase qualifies under all three CEQA sections. The actions proposed in the Preliminary Use and Management Plan are also exempt under Section 15061, as there is no possibility the actions may have a significant effect on the environment. TERMS AND CONDITIONS The 81.50-acre POST (Moore) property has a fair market value of$250,000 determined by an independent appraisal commissioned by the Grantor. The property will be purchased from POST for$250,000 ($3,067 per acre) on an all cash basis, payable at the close of escrow. R-09-55 Page 4 FISCAL IMPACT Fiscal year 2009-2010 budget for new land purchases: New Land $20,000,000 Less: New land purchased this year to date $0 POST (Moore) property purchase $250,000 New Land purchase budget remaining $19,750,000 Controller M. Foster was consulted on this proposed purchase and has indicated that, considering cash flow and account balances, funds are available for this property purchase. PUBLIC NOTICE Property owners of land located adjacent to or surrounding the subject property have been mailed a copy of the agenda for the public meeting at which the Board of Directors will consider this purchase. NEXT STEPS Upon approval by the Board of Directors, staff will proceed with close of escrow for the purchase of the property. The District's Foothills Field Office will continue to manage the property as an addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Resolution Prepared by: Michael Reeves, Real Property Specialist Contact person: Michael Reeves, Real Property Specialist Graphics prepared by: Galli Basson, Planning Technician POST (Moore) Property - Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve Open, Azul v San_Jose Water Co. p , Space Preserve CC -- , � Re o POST.- rz .. G (Moore) P o � € ►rrxs �, '�' Y � . o Former Merrill ewer Road r t Proper W t /b017 - 0 f San Jose Waderco: = � .E , _mot .. _, •. _ ,. - d d Exhibit A- Location Map ® ° 0.25 0.5 ' Produced by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District,April 2009 Miss / / . / RESOLUTION W9-_ RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MIDPENUNS0LA � REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF i PURCHASE AGREEMENT,AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER OR � OTHER OFFICER TO EXECUTE CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT,AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OBK APPROPRIATE TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION(SIERRA AZ0L OPEN SPACE PRESERVE-LANDS OF PENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUST) The Board ofDirectors ofh4idpeniuuu|uRegional Open Space District does resolve as follows: Section , The Board of Directors ofMidpeuinuu|uRegional Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained in that certain Purchase Agreement between the Peninsula Open Space Trust and the � Midpeninsula Regional Open Space,District, a copy of which purchase agreement is attached hereto and � by reference made a part hereof, and authorizes the President or other appropriate officer to execute the � Agreement oo behalf of the District to acquire the real property described therein (^^tbe POST P,operty"). Section Two.i � The General Manager, President of the Board of Directors orother appropriateofficer ia authorized to execute Certificate o[Acceptance for the Grant Deed on behalf of the NiotricL Three.Section The General Manager or the General Manager's designee shall cause tohe given appropriate notice o[acceptance tothe seller and to extend cooro`v if necessary. � � Section Four. The General Manager is authorized to expend up to $2,500.00 to cover the cost of title insurance, escrow fees, and other miscellaneous costs related to this transaction. � Section Five. The General Manager and General Counsel are further authorized N approve any technical revisions to the attached Agreement and documents which do not involve any material change to any term of the Agreement or documents, which are necessary or appropriate to the closing or implementation of � this transaction. Section . The purpose ofthis Section isto enable the District toreimburse its general fund for the cost � uf certain land acquisitions. The District wishes to finance certain of these real property acquisitions and � expects to use tax-exempt debt, such as bonds, but a tax-exempt financing is not cost-justified for the District unless the principal amount ofthe financing is large enough 10 'umLifvthe related financing costs. � Consequently, it is the District's practice to buy property with its general funds and,when a tax-exempt financing io cost-justified bauedonthouggregatcvu|ueufucqubdiona,toimsuetas-exco`ptoh|iga1ioneto nrixoburac itself for previous expenditures of general funds. These general funds are needed for operating and other working capital needs of the District and are not intended to be used to finance property acquisitions ona long-term basis. U.S. Income Tax Regulation Section 1.150-2 requires an issuer of tax-exempt debt todeclare its intent to use a portion of tax-exempt debt proceeds for reirnbursement of expenditures prior to the payment of the expenditures. Accordingly, the Board of Directors hereby declares its intent to issue tax-exempt obligations in tile maximum principal amount of$250,000 and to use a portion of the proceeds of the obligations for reimbursement ofDistrict expenditures for acquisition of the POST Property that are paid before the date of issuance of the obligation. � � t Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District R-09-61 Meeting 09-14 May 13, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 8 � AGENDA ITEM Approve Amendments to the District's Open Space Use and Management Planning Process. USE AND MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached Amendments to the District's Open Space Use and Management Planning Process. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Use and Management Committee recommends that the Board approve revisions to the District's existing Open Space Use and Management Planning Process to correctly reflect and to streamline the District's current preserve planning practices. The principal recommended amendments are: 1. Clarify that although acquired lands are not immediately open for general public access, limited public access (e.g., docent-led hikes, neighbor permit uses)may occur while the site undergoes post-acquisition planning. 2. Revise the components of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan adopted when lands are acquired to reflect necessary components and delete obsolete components (e.g., immediate general public access provisions are deleted; components are added regarding resource and wildland fuel management, site safety, agriculture and Coastside Service Plan requirements). 3. Eliminate the mandate to hol d two public hearings for every Preliminary Use and j Management Plan and Plan Amendment; it is retained for more comprehensive preserve plans such as Master Plans. The Board has the discretion to hold additional hearings on any plan at any time. 4. Recognize that the Relative Site Emphasis Policy for prioritizing preserve planning and capital improvement projects has become part of the Board's annual Action Plan development; provide for future comprehensive revision of the manner in which the District plans for the use and management of its preserves. 5. Clarify that the Policy is guidance for planning and does not create a legal mandate; failure to comply will not result in invalidation of any action taken. R-09-61 Page 2 6. Delete the Policy's list of separate Board policies as unnecessary; in addition, some policies have been superseded or are obsolete (e.g., Open Space Management Budget Policy). DISCUSSION Attached for Board review are proposed revisions to the District's Open Space Use and Management Planning Process recommended for adoption by the Use and Management Committee. Background The District's process for developing Use and Management Plans for its preserves was originally adopted in 1977. It has been amended several times,the last amendment occurring in 1991. The Process has remained in substantially the same form since 1987. Over time, the District's policies and practices for developing Use and Management Plans for its preserves have evolved to reflect more effective and modern approaches to preserve planning, to incorporate appropriate practices based on experience gained over the years and because of the District's growth into a larger and more mature agency. As a result, in some areas, the current Process no longer reflects the policies and practices staff finds most appropriate for preserve planning. In addition, some Directors have expressed interest in exploring ways to streamline the preserve planning process. The need to update the entire preserve planning process is apparent. A wholesale revision of the preserve planning process may be a future project the Board would like staff to pursue in next year's Action Plan. Such a project may be an outcome of the Strategic Plan as well. In the interim, an update is needed now for the following reasons. The Process inaccurately describes the needed components of an effective Preliminary Use and Management Plan adopted at the time of land acquisition. Experience has lead to the expansion of the components needed in an initial Preliminary Plan for appropriate post-acquisition actions. In addition, experience has shown that certain existing components are not effective planning practices. The proposed revisions reflect staff s recommendations for an effective Preliminary Use and Management Plan. The proposed revisions recognize that, while most lands are not immediately open for general public use upon acquisition, limited public use such as docent-led hikes and neighbor permit use may occur depending on site conditions or conditions of sale from other entities, e.g., POST. The revisions expand the scope of the Preliminary Plan to address what the Board commonly sees in such Plans when it acquires land. Additional components are added to address agricultural resources, patrol, wildfire fuel management, Coastside Service Plan requirements for lands acquired on the coast, road and trail assessment and expanded site safety provisions. R-09-61 Page 3 The Process relies on Policies that have been superseded. The Process refers to the Relative Site Emphasis policy adopted in 1982 to guide the timing and priority of preserve planning. The last Relative Site Emphasis plan staff located was approved in 1988. The Relative Site Emphasis process has been replaced by the Board's adoption of its annual Action Plan. The Board may wish to adopt a new process to prioritize the development of use and management plans. Board direction to develop such a process may be an outgrowth of the Board's Strategic Planning Process. The Process doesn't accurately reflect current components of District plans. The description of the various types of plans is incorrect in certain respects. The proposed revisions correct this. For example, District Master Plans have a 30 year planning horizon, whereas the Process states it is 20 years. The Process mandates two public hearings for approval of any type of preserve plan resulting in a lengthier process than is needed for many plans. The requirement for two public hearings can result in a lengthy, duplicative and unnecessary process. The attached revision eliminates the mandate for two hearings for two types of plans: Preliminary Use and Management Plans and Amendments to previously adopted plans. Two hearings would still be required for major plans such as Master Plans. The District typically holds more than two hearings on such plans in practice. The General Manager Requires Authority to Approve Preliminary Use and Management Plans for Low-Value Property The District's Rules of Procedure authorize the General Manager to acquire or accept gifts of low-value real property, provided the fair market value is within the General Manager's contracting authority of$25,000. Small low value parcels in areas such as Hacienda Park, a paper subdivision within Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, are often gifted to the District. Their parcel size is typically 25 by 100 feet, although the grantor sometimes gifts multiple parcels. A similar situation occurs with respect to Redwood Park, a paper subdivision within Purisima Redwoods Open Space Preserve. While the General Manager is authorized to accept this type of gift and to make any necessary CEQA findings, there is no authority for the Manager to approve the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the acquisition. This plan is a short, status quo plan to retain the site in its current condition. This results in a somewhat cumbersome process in which the Board needs to approve a status quo plan as a Board agenda item. Staff has suggested that the Process include a provision authorizing the General Manager to approve such minor Preliminary Use and Management Plans. The Board of Directors would be notified in writing of any Preliminary Use and Management Plan approved by the General Manager under this policy at the next regular Board meeting following acquisition. The Committee supports this recommendation. R-09-61 Page 4 CONCLUSION The Committee has reviewed the proposed revisions with staff responsible for preparation of these plans. The Committee and staff believe these revisions will be effective in the interim period, pending the Board's direction on how and when it wishes to develop an entirely revamped preserve planning process. FISCAL IMPACT Approval of the requested amendments will have no additional fiscal impact. PUBLIC NOTICE Notice was provided as required under the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE The requested amendments are not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. NEXT STEPS If approved, the revised Open Space Use and Management Process will become effective upon adoption and integrated into District preserve planning. Attachments: I. Proposed Revisions to Use and Management Planning Process-Clean Copy 2. Proposed Revisions to Use and Management Planning Process-Strike-Out Copy Prepared by: Susan Schectman, General Counsel Contact person: Larry Hassett, Chair, Use and Management Committee Attachment 1:Proposed Revisions to Use and Management Planning Process-Clean copy OPEN SPACE USE AND MANAGEMENT PLANNING PROCESS May 13, 2009 Adopted by Board of Directors July 27, 1977 Amended August 13, 1980 Amended July 14, 1982 Amended March 23, 1983 Amended September 14, 1983 Amended February 25, 1987 A. Purpose and Scope of Plannini! Process MROSD lands are managed to promote the continued preservation of their natural, historical and cultural resources, and at the same time provide compatible public recreation, environmental education, and agricultural use where possible. The Open Space Use and Management Planning Process has been established to address these management goals. The process encompasses an ongoing comprehensive approach to management, designed to respond to the dynamic changes of the District's environmental resources and public needs. B. Description of Planning Process The Planning Process is comprised of five planning categories, which allow for a systematic approach to the development of management plans. The categories relate to various stages of site planning a preserve may be subject to during its course of development and use. 1. Preliminary Use and Management Plans Preliminary Use and Management Plans consist of use and management recommendations developed and approved at the time of acquisition or approval of a license or management agreement. These plans normally represent a status quo approach to use and management. Emphasis of the plan is typically on securing the site, specifying immediate site management needs, and establishing a timeline for providing general public access. Limited public use, such as docent hikes or neighbor use/permit use, may occur while the site undergoes post-acquisition planning, depending on site constraints. The Preliminary Use and Management Plan remains effective until 1) it is incorporated into an existing Comprehensive Use and Management Plan or Master Plan if the site is an addition to an existing preserve; 2) it is incorporated into an Interim, Comprehensive or Master Use and Management Plan when the site is an addition to a preserve not yet having a comprehensive plan; or 3) it is reviewed and expanded into an Interim Use and Management Plan when the site is not part of another preserve and is relatively small and isolated. Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 13, 2009 2. Interim Use and Management Plans The Interim Use and Management Plan is usually a refinement of a Preliminary Use and Management Plan, but in some instances is also an accumulation of preliminary plans for a number of acquisitions comprising a preserve. The Interim Plan is most commonly prepared for preserves that consist of non-contiguous parcels, have use limitations, or are anticipated to require boundary adjustments. The Interim Plan responds more to immediate versus long-range planning concerns and generally represent a continuation of existing levels of use and management. 3. Comprehensive Use and Management Plan The Comprehensive Use and Management Plan is a detailed plan addressing all aspects of use and management. It is prepared for preserves that have the potential for a substantial amount of public use, and/or have other critical land use issues which need attention. The comprehensive plan is based on a resource analysis and public input, and evaluates potential uses as well as cultural and existing uses. It represents both long term (5-15 years) goals and short term (1-5 years) goals with the focus of specific recommendations being the tasks to be completed within five years. The need and approximate timing for preparation of a Comprehensive Use and Management Plan may be determined when considering the Preliminary Use and Management Plan or when the Interim Use and Management Plan is adopted or reviewed. 4. Preserve Master Plan for Improvement, Use and Management The Preserve Master Plan is very broad in scope and is developed with the intent of providing a guideline for development of a preserve over a term of I to 30 years. Compared to the Comprehensive Use and Management Plan, the Preserve Master Plan involves more extensive site analysis, a higher level of public involvement, and in most cases, explores a wider range of improvements, resources, and land uses. The Master Plan is usually designed to be implemented in phases over a long time period. Master Plans are typically prepared for District lands that lend themselves to higher levels of recreational uses,resource issues, agriculture, improvements, and land uses, or have particularly complex planning issues to be resolved.. Upon completion, the Preserve Master Plan serves as a basis for the formulation of change to a preserve's Comprehensive Use and Management Plan, which reflects the more immediate phases of the Master Plan. The Master Plan is intended to be the guiding document when considering amendments to previous Use and Management Plans. 5. Use and Management Plan Reviews All Use and Management Plans are subject to the Board's review at its discretion or upon the General Manager's recommendation. The purpose of the review is to examine changes in site use, resolve use and management issues as they arise, and Page 2 of 9 Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 13, 2009 address the progress of implementing existing plans. The time period and schedule during which a plan is reviewed depends on level of use, and use and management issues requiring attention. A Policy for Relative Emphasis of Use, Development and Publicity of District sites i was adopted in 1982. to guide the District in prioritizing planning of preserves and in developing a five-year Capital Improvement Plan. Since adoption of this Policy, the process for prioritizing and planning the development of Use and Management Plans has become a component of the Board's annual review and adoption of the District's Action Plan. As part of the District's Strategic Plan, a goal will be to formulate a more current and effective process for prioritizing and planning the use and management of District Preserves. This revision of the District's Open Space Use and Management Planning Process is an interim policy to be in place until the development of a revised process which reflects the District's current approach to preserve use and management issues. C. Preliminary Use and Management Plan Elements The Preliminary Use and Management Plan contains a number of elements that focus on existing conditions and potential uses of the site. The elements typically include, but are not limited to: 1. Description of Site Discussion to describe size location boundaries, ra toP og P hY geology eolo and natural landscapes, and other significant site conditions. 2. Planning Considerations Discussion directed toward identifying jurisdictional and zoning factors influencing site planning. 3. Current Use and Development A description of current uses of the site including structures, roads,power lines, agriculture, water systems, and other significant uses. 4. Potential Use and Development A conceptual look at the potential uses, including potential uses of structures and improvements. 5. Site Protection and Immediate Site Needs These elements pertain to any immediate plans for the lands including limited public access, protection of the site's resources, and insuring public safety. a. Limited Public Access Discussion and plans concerning limited public access, if any, such as parking, trail, and road systems. Conceptual discussion of future access opportunities may be included. Page 3 of 9 Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 13, 2009 b. Signing Discussion and plans concerning signing for boundaries, regulations, safety and other immediate needs. c. Structures and Improvements Discussion of all structural-type improvements including residences, water systems, restrooms, barns, fences and gates. Policies regarding disposition of major structures (i.e., use, sale or demolition) is further addressed in Section E. d. Natural Resources Management Discussion related to immediate resource management needs such as restoration, inventories, and erosion control. e. Agricultural Resources Discussion of the current agricultural uses and agricultural preservation needs in the near term, such as grazing and continuation of agricultural activities. f. Patrol Discussion of proposed patrol plans and patrol and maintenance access. g. Wildfire Fuel Management Discussion of any immediate fuel management needs or fuel planning needs. Ii. Roads and Trails Discussion and preliminary assessment of existing road and trail systems. i. Service Plan for the Coastside Protection Program For lands in the Coastside Protection Area, discussion of the maintaining the site in compliance with the Service Plan. j. Site Safety Inspection Discussion of any immediate site safety needs to insure public and employee safety such as existing potential hazards, needed site clean-up or remediation, or other protective measures. 6. Compliance with CE0A Determination of project's potential impact in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. 7. Site Naming Discussion and plan for the naming of the site either as an addition to an existing preserve or formulation of a new preserve name. 8. Dedication Discussion of intention to dedicate the site as public open space. Page 4 of 9 Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 13, 2009 9. Fiscal Impact Information on immediate costs of use and management of the site may be included. The Interim, Comprehensive, and Preserve Master Use and Management Plans typically address the same elements as those contained in the Preliminary Use and Management Plan, but include more elements and a broader, more intensive analysis and plan for the preserve. Both the Interim and Comprehensive pPlans contain, in addition, a description of current public use including changing patterns of use and problematic uses. The degree of attention given to elements pertaining to public access and site protection is relative to the type of Use and Management Plan they are contained in, with the most detailed information available in the Preserve Master Use and Management Plan. D. Maior Structures and Improvements The disposition of major structures and other improvements is a primary concern throughout the planning process because of their potential resource value or deleterious impact. The process by which structures are disposed of is in accordance with Policies Regarding Improvements on District Lands. Preliminary use and management recommendations relating to existing structures and improvements will generally maintain the status quo, unless specific factors must be addressed because of negative site impacts or safety hazards requiring mitigation. For structures and improvements being retained during the further planning process, potential use categories will be identified, and a timeline for returning to the Board will be established. When feasible, the next decision point should coincide with the next consideration of the site's Use and Management Plan to ensure that the ultimate disposition is consistent with overall plans for the site. The Use and Management Plan will establish the parameters for improvements and use of structures that are compatible with all other elements of the plan. The plan will outline the procedure and timeline for the preparation of a specific proposal, whether it is confined to a staff proposal or possibly the solicitation of public proposals. In the case of public solicitation, it is imperative that the parameters are well defined and consistent with open space goals and site plans. E. Conservation Management Units Conservation Management Units (CMUs) are areas within preserves, or possibly entire preserves, which because of certain criteria limiting their use, are planned and subsequently managed primarily for preservation of natural resources and viewshed. The criteria used to determine if a particular area or preserve falls within this category are: Page 5 Of 9 Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 13, 2009 1. Severe public access limitations This occurs when the area is surrounded by private property and is not currently accessible by public roads or trails. 2. Remoteness causes management constraints The area's remoteness makes it difficult to provide a responsible level of visitor and site protection, similar to that which is offered on more accessible sites, in the foreseeable future. 3. Undesirable for public use in the foreseeable future This can be the result of site constraints which make the site currently not conducive to public use, such as site safety issues, size of the site, or other factors currently incompatible with general public use. 4. Significant environmental constraints The lands may contain highly sensitive areas with current environmental constraints on public use, such as presence of critical habitat for endangered or threatened species, the presence of those species, or other significant risk of natural resource damage. 5. Agriculture The presence of active agricultural uses makes the site currently inappropriate for general public use. Areas designated as Conservation Management Units (CMUs) will not be managed for general public recreation until use limitations can be sufficiently overcome. Public use will not be encouraged, patrol and maintenance will be the minimum necessary for resource protection and public safety, and site maps and signs (outside of the standard boundary signs) will not be available. Staff will monitor the resource as time permits and as conditions require. Maps contained in the acquisition report and available to the public only upon request will clearly outline access, limitations, and adjacent private properties. The CMU determination is commonly made at the time of acquisition, but may occur or be modified during the review process. In most cases, a CMU status is only temporary until limiting conditions improve, but it is conceivable that this status could remain indefinitely. Areas or preserves designated CMUs will not be reviewed on a regular basis, but at Board or General Manager discretion. Areas over which the District holds open space easements are usually CMUs unless the conditions of the easement permit public access. Although the level of planning for easements is similar to any other CMU, the management and method of monitoring may be different. In most cases, the District does not participate in the management of an open space easement area and is required to make special arrangements with the property owner for inspection of the easement conditions. Page 6 Of 9 Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 13, 2009 F. Site Naming When a site is acquired, it may be recommended that it become an addition to an existing preserve, a specific area within an existing preserve, or a new preserve. If the property under consideration is to become an addition to a preserve, that action should occur at the time of acquisition. If the site is to become a specific area within a preserve or a new preserve, suggested names should be considered at the time of acquisition, with a final decision to follow at the next Use and Management Plan review or amendment. Guidelines for site naming are contained in the Board's Site Naming and Gift Recognition Policies. As preserves grow in size and possibly merge with other District land, it may become necessary to modify existing preserve perimeter boundaries and names. Suggested changes in boundaries and names may occur at the time of acquisition, with a final decision to follow at the next review or amendment of the Use and Management Plan. G. Development Pro*ect Funded by a Grant A preserve's Use and Management Plan may include projects that are ideal for development under various grant programs. These projects usually significantly increase public access, have elements beyond the more traditional types of development on district land, and have potential budget impacts that could divert funds away from ongoing management of the District's Preserves, In these cases, grant funds are sought as a means to implement the development phase without seriously impacting the overall program. When applying for a development grant, it is advantageous to submit plans which have already been through the CEQA process,publicly reviewed, and adopted by the Board. This ensures the granting body that the project can be implemented expeditiously and with little modification. For this reason, every attempt is made to incorporate prospective grant projects into Use and Management Plans before the funding sources become available. When this is done, the elements are identified in the plan and in budget preparation as potential grant projects and, as such, are not anticipated to be developed solely with District funds. In some instances, grant opportunities arise unexpectedly, and a grant project may be formulated without prior inclusion in a Use and Management Plan, in order to take advantage of the funding opportunity. It is then imperative to incorporate the project into the Use and Management Plan as soon as possible to provide the necessary public review, Board adoption and CEQA compliance. H. Open Space Plannint! Areas within District Preserves Some District preserves contain differing ecological and geographical open space planning areas. This arrangement facilitates comprehensive site use planning and management. Use and Management Plans and reviews for individual sites within a Page 7 of 9 Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 13, 2009 given planning area are prepared within a short span of time so that the plans are consistent with each other. I. Public Review Public participation is an integral part of the planning process. Anyone inquiring about planning issues related to a preserve is encouraged to become involved by attending public workshops and hearings when the issues are discussed. Interested parties may subscribe to the District's agendas to keep informed of upcoming meetings. In addition, a notice of an upcoming meeting will be posted on the website to increase public awareness. All public notification is in accordance with the Public Notification Policy, the District's Good Neighbor Policy, and the Coastside Service Plan. Except for Preliminary Use and Management Plans and Plan Amendments, Use and Management Plans are considered by the Board at a minimum of two public hearings at which the public may comment. The initial hearing is for the purpose of tentatively adopting the Use and Management Plan recommendations. In most cases, these tentatively adopted recommendations will be returned to the Board for final approval at the next regularly scheduled meeting. This will typically allow at least a two-week period to receive public comment. There may be cases where additional time is required to resolve specific planning issues. When the General Manager is authorized to accept a gift of or acquire low value real property, the General Manager is also authorized to approve the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the property. The Board of Directors shall be notified in writing of any Preliminary Use and Management Plan so approved at the next regular Board meeting following the acquisition. When specific land use issues under consideration may lead to significant changes in an existing use and management of a site and generate a substantial amount of public interest or raise complex issues, the proposed plan may be first considered by the District's Use and Management Committee or a Board-authorized ad hoc committee. Public workshops are typically held. Public workshops may be informal meetings held before staff presents a plan to the Board for final approval or, at the Board's discretion, may be District board meetings. This will encourage public involvement in the development or modification of the Use and Management Plan. When special use and management issues arise, public workshops or neighborhood meetings may be held to resolve the issues and possible modify the existing Use and Management Plan. These workshops will be held on or near the preserve when possible, and announcements will be sent to subscribers of the District's agenda and local newspapers, as well as posted on the website. District-wide planning issues (e.g., dog usage, trail use conflicts) will be subject to the same planning procedures as site-specific issues. A mailing list of interested parties will be maintained and used for public notification when public workshops or hearings related to the matter are scheduled. Page 8 Of 9 Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 13, 2009 LEGAL NOTICE. The purpose of this policy is to assist the District in planning the use and management of its preserves to further the District's mission and best accomplish its planning goals. It is not the purpose of this Process to adopt legal notice, legal procedures, public meeting, or land management policies beyond those required by state law. No action taken by the District shall be invalid for failure to comply with j this policy. Page 9 Of 9 Attachment 2:Proposed Revisions to Use and Management Planning Process-Strike-Out Copy OPEN SPACE USE AND MANAGEMENT PLANNING PROCESS Mav 13, 2009 L\d( _1977 Amended August 13, 1980 Anleiided July_14. 19L2 Amended March 23, 1983 Amended September 14, 1983 Amended February 25, 1987 A. Purpose and Scope of Planning Process MROSD lands are managed to promote the continued preservation of their natural, historical and cultural resources, and at the same time provide compatible public recreation, environmental education, and agricultural use where possible. The Open Space Use and Management Planning Process has been established to address these management goals. The process encompasses an ongoing comprehensive approach to management, designed to respond to the dynamic changes of the District's environmental resources and public needs. B. Description of Planning Process The Planning Process is comprised of five planning categories, which allow for a systematic approach to the development of management plans. The categories relate to various stages of site planning a preserve may be subject to during its course of development and use. 1. Preliminary Use and Management Plans Preliminary Use and Management Plans consist of use and management recommendations developed and approved at the time of acquisition or approval of a license.or management agreement. These plans normally represent a status quo approach to use and management. Emphasis of the plan is typically on securing the site.s�iecif�in ,,immediate�sjte�niana �crncnt nceds and establishing a timeline for ding g���public access. A 14 ostsiles afe ( i providing —thotigh ni )pen to publie Wie Z:) I-Jinited public use, Such as docent hikes or neighbor use/ocri-nJt use may occur while the site under<,loes post-acquisition planniii�% dcoendlll(_r Oil site Coll stra I nts.z, it is 040ii neeessaiy to addi:ess speeiAe site I I Hblie use flifough publieity 1 1.1 11.11 ements aii"I flie—,.111!il-,PFI()f to and k1VH;k1b;1;l5, of maps. The site impfovement"i aFe El I Hild u."'i.H.,the The Preliminary Use and Management Plan remains effective until 1) it is incorporated into an existing Comprehensive Use and Management Plan or Master Plats if the site is an addition to an existing preserve; 2) it is incorporated into an Interim, Comprehensive or Master Use and Management Plan when the site is an Open Space Use and Management Plannina, Process MZ, -1�32009 addition to a preserve not yet having a comprehensive plan; or 3) it is reviewed and expanded into an Interim Use and Management Plan when the site is not part of another preserve and is relatively small and isolated. 2. Interim Use and Management Plans The Interim Use and Management Plan is usually a refinement of a Preliminary Use and Management Plan, but in some instances is also an accumulation of preliminary plans for a number of acquisitions comprising a preserve. The Interim Plan is most commonly prepared for preserves that consist of non-contiguous parcels, have use limitations, or are antipiptaWanticipated to requir.1likely to besubjeet to 4eqUent ela age�-nl boundary adiLlStillents-' ..... The Interim Plan responds more to immediate versus long-range planning concerns and generally represent a continuation of existing levels of use and management. 3. Comprehensive Use and Management Plan The Comprehensive Use and Management Plan is a detailed plan addressing all aspects of use and management. It is prepared for preserves that have the potential for a substantial amount of public use, and/or have other critical land use issues which need attention. The comprehensive plan is based on a resource analysis and public input, and evaluates potential uses as well as hiStOFiealcultural and existing uses. It represents both long term (5-150 years) goals and short term (1-5 years) goals with the focus of specific recommendations being the tasks to be completed within e-five years. The need and approximate timing for preparation of a Comprehensive Use and Management Plan may be determined when considering the Preliminary Use and Management Plan or when the Interim Use and Management Plan is adopted or reviewed. The speeifie timing F+)f the pr-epafa,"i'Off ofthe Gompi-ehensive Use and N4anagement Planwill be, addressed in the annual review of the Relative Site Emphasis Waii-. 4. Preserve Master Plan for DeN,e.!(.)I)meiitlniL)rovenient, Use and Management The Preserve Master Plan is very broad in scope and is developed with the intent of providing a guideline for development of a preserve over a term of I to-230 years. Compared to the Comprehensive Use and Management Plan, the Preserve Master Plan involves more extensive site analysis, a higher level of public involvement, and in most cases, explores a wider range of deN,ei(-)t)iiient.iiiiproveinents, resources, and land uses. The Master Plan is usually designed to be implemented in phases over a long time period. OHly a few seleet sitesMaster Plans are typically prepared fOr District lands that lend themselves to higher levels oft evelop recrcational use s. resource issues, ai-iriculture, improvements. and land uses, or have particularly complex planning issues to be resolved.- Upon completion, the Preserve Master Plan serves as a basis For-l-We in the formulation of change to a preserve's Comprehensive Use and Management Plan, which reflects the more immediate phases of the Master Plan. The Master Plan is Intended to be Page 2 Of I I � � . | || � Open Space Use and Manaj�),ernent Plaimim4 Process | . the and � 5. Use and Management Plan Reviews All Use and Management Plans are nu6icut to the Board's review at its discretion | The purpose of the review iuto examine changes in site use, resolve use and management issues as they arise, and address the progress of implementing existing plans. The time periodund schedule".dUrin-g which a plan is reviewed | ou level of use,and antieipaieduse and management issues requiring attention. | | A Policv 6or Relative Emphasis of Use, Development and Publicity of District sites was adopted in 1982 to guide the District in Prioritizing planning of preserves and in de,,elopm(-, a five-vear Capital Improvement Plan. Since adoption of this Policy, the process for prioritizing, and planning the development ofUse and Mana�),,cmcnt Plans has become a component ofthe Board's annual review and adoption of tile District's Actl on Plan,.,--As part of the District's Strategic Plan, a goal will be to formulate a more Current and effective process for prioritizing and planning the use � � District's � development ol'a revised process which reflects the District's current approach to Use and Management Planning Process is an...Int,erim policy to be in place until the � � S. _.p._-_-_ _-- -' -',----`= _=_.... � Is � ..-..~ `~ .~.~^.r^^^~. ...d -_`-_-' !hat are -' alld management `__fliall~ less em. 'Re�,iew k4plans k)F Conservation Nilanagement Units oeetiF even less 4eque*4Y � eleraled when a use and i ssue arises that FequiFe oi-e immediate � � ; established 44 the � I .. w-- .-�_'- 'ill- field - _ accelerated._ ---h '-'ustflie!*s to the sehedule eanaiid management plan at an eaflieF time by the Board. Tliis seliedule is r-evi ,ement Plan � and adopted by the boafd at the time the Anntial Review ofthe Relative Site Page of|| Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 1 22OOC ) -'Me--l'�alt -1Fa+ ela r t,.,e r;m ph as . TT ,zz art P)182) gnides !he Board an,,! staff.;n the pi arni i ng k)r short kind lon g Site F'Hlphasis Plan. Based oil th that it is neither desirable not- k?asible to a&Zk- .,,1 site hig IN, the Relative .c:+. Mi uri rra"rric-s-xr��',c zr,tc c�cr, "a'rttti., R)f4 rt fl ng--a El project-i rnp l e rn entat-1 c?i. 1 . T 1}e lip la t ,, . 1 Hj4'f thf 11 ''.c,i;-iii, } tll?Eldted1 deniphasis are Fe ON,alw le short term (one yeaF4 Pdridin& established for budgeting� purposes. This inA3rfflation is then r-efleeted in the individual Use and N4flnagernent Plans as they are prepared in tl year to e X. 11'reliminary Use and Management Plan Eor ~EElements The Preliminary Use and Management Plan contains a number of elements that focus on existing conditions and potential uses of the site. The elements typically include but are not limited to: I. Description of Site Discussion to describe size, location, boundaries, topography, geology and natural landscapes and other significant site conditions. 2. Planning Considerations Discussion directed toward g identif in jurisdictional and zoning factors influencing Y site planning. 3. Current Use and Development A description of current uses of the site including structures, roads, power lines, a_Oriculture, water systems, ettand other significant uses. 4. Potential Use and Development A conceptual look at the potential uses, including potential uses of structures and improvements. 5. p.,hl:e ^ec ss find Site Protection and Immediate sSite Needs These elements pertain to any immediate plans for the lands including limited to ii Eitfo oee-public access„ use Io a size, protection of the site's resources, and iensuritoe public safety. 111csE1« rt irlcltde lire>vicling ti;n >r a. Limited Public Access and Ci ,.l„t, Page 4 Of i l Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 1 3, 2009 Discussion and plans concerning limited public access, e if any, such as parking, trail, and road systems. Conceptual discussion of future access ot) tt►Ri4esopportianities may be included. b. Si nin r �b c-:---Discussion and plans concerning signing for boundaries,-e4• at' regulations,ettv—. safety and other immediate needs. July 4 19811 c. Structures and Improvements Discussion and plafis-f6i:of all structural-type improvements including-A" ihiiigs as,residences, water systems, restrooms,barns, fences and gates. Policies regarding disposition of major structures(i.e., use, sale or demolition) is further addressed in Section E. d. Natural Resources and ^e-ieulti,.,..,' Mana eg ment Discussion and platis to immediate resource management needs such as restoration inventories and erosion control.diseiiig, seeding, site „lean tips and e. Agricultul'aI Resouurces DtscuSSion of the current agricultural uses and a;7ricultural preservation needs in the near term such as grazin_ and continuation of agricultural activities. f. Patrol DISCUSS 1On of proposed patrol plans and patrol and maintenance access. g. Wildfire Fuel Management Discussion of any immediate fuel management needs or fuel planning needs. h. Roads and Trails Discussion and preliminary assessment of existing road and grailsystems. i. Service Plan for the Coastside Protection Program For lands in the Coastside Protection Area discussion of the maintaining the site in compliance with the Service Plan. j. Site Safety hIVection Discussion of any immediate site safety needs to insure public and employee Salct�5uch a�; existin�potenlial hazards needed site clean-up or remediation-, or other protective measures. Page 5 Of 11 Open Space Use and Management Planning Process May 13, 2009 6. Compliance with CEQA Determination of project's potential impact in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. 7. Site Naming Discussion and plan for the naming of the site either as an addition to an existing preserve or formulation of a new preserve name. 8. Dedication DISCLISSi011 Ol intentian to dedicate the site as public open space. of PuEeha-p 9. Fiscal Impact Information on immediate costs of use and management of the site maw included. The Interim,- Comprehensive and Preserve Master Use and Management Plans t L)icalIy address the same elements as those contained in the Preliminary Use and Management Plan, but include rnore elements and a broader, more intensive analysis and olaii for the t)rcsei-ve.v.,4I4 the exeeptioii Both the ilnterim and eComprehensive pPlans contain, in addition, a description of current public use including changing patterns of use and problematic uses. The degree of attention given to elements pertaining to public access and site protection is relative to the type of Use and Management Plan they are contained in, with the most detailed information available in the GompFel=, e Preserve Master Use and Management Plan. &.D. Maior Structures and Improvements The disposition of major structures and other improvements is a primary concern throughout the planning process because of their potential resource value or deleterious impact. The process by which structures are disposed of is in accordance with Policies Regarding Improvements on District Lands., initially , 1978. Preliminary use and management recommendations relating to existing structures and improvements will generally maintain the status quo, unless specific factors must be addressed because of negative site impacts or safety hazards requiring mitigation. For structures and improvements being retained during the further planning process, potential use categories will be identified, and a timeline for returning to the Board will be established. When feasible, the next decision point should coincide with the next consideration of the site's Use and Management Plan to ensure that the ultimate disposition is consistent with overall plans for the site. Page 6 Of I I Open Space Use and Management Planning Process The Use and Management Plan will establish the parameters for improvements and use of structures that arc compatible with all other elements of the plan. The plan will outline the procedure and timeline for the preparation of a specific proposal, whether it is confined to a staff proposal or possibly the solicitation of public proposals. In the case of public solicitation, it is imperative that the parameters are well defined and consistent with open space goals and site plans. ILF. Conservation Management Units Conservation Management Units(CMUs) are areas within preserves, or possibly entire preserves, which because of certain criteria limiting their use, are planned and subsequently managed primarily for eonservation preservation of natural resources and viewshed. The criteria used to determine if a particular area or preserve falls within this category are: 1. Severe public access limitations This occurs when the area is surrounded by private property and is not currently accessible by public roads or trails. 2. R e s(+Hfe e e o 11 4 ...... aFe Stable The emst;ng CORdi""Al h e landseape is eonsidefed stable and do 2. Remoteness causes inanayement constraints The Aarca's remoteness makes it difficult to provide a responsible level of visitor and site protection, similar to that which is offered on more accessible sites, in the foresccable fffltirc. 3. Undesirable for public use in the foreseeable future This can be the result of site constraints which make the site currently not conducive to public use, such as site safety issues, size of the site, or other factors currently incompatible with general public use.an area being too small OF Re t thelylt l- 4. Signitjcani environmental constraints The lands may contain h4,ylily sensitive areas with current environmental constraints on public use, such as presence of'critical habitat Im-endangered or threatened s ccles, the presence of those species. or other significant risk of natural resource LILtina ,c. 5. Agriculture The presence of active agricultural uses makes the site currently inappropriate for general DL1b11*C use. Areas designated as Conservation Management Units (CMUs) will not be managed for general public recreation until use limitations can be sufficiently overcome. Public use will not be encouraged, patrol and maintenance will be the minimum necessary for Page 7 Of I I Open Space Use and Management Planning Process resource protection and public safety, and site maps and signs (outside of the standard boundary signs) will not be available. Staff will monitor the resource as time permits and as conditions require. Maps contained in the acquisition report and available to the public only upon request will clearly outline access, limitations, and adjacent private properties. The CMU determination is commonly made at the time of acquisition, but may occur or be modified during the review process. In most cases, a CMU status is only temporary until limiting conditions improve, but it is conceivable that this status could remain indefinitely. Areas or preserves designated CMUs will not be reviewed on a regular basis, but at Board or 444-General Mann,discretion. Areas over which the District holds open space easements are usually CMUs unless the conditions of the easement permit public access. Although the level of planning for easements is similar to any other CMU, the management and method of monitoring may be different. In most cases, the District does not participate in the management of an open space casement area and is required to make special arrangements with the property owner for inspection of the easement conditions. F. Site Namini! When a site is acquired, it may be recommended that it become an addition to an existing preserve, a specific area within an existing preserve, or a new preserve. If the property under consideration is to become an addition to a preserve, that action should occur at the time of acquisition. If the site is to become a specific area within a preserve or a new preserve, suggested names should be considered at the time of acquisition, with a final decision to follow at the next Use and Management Plan rReview or amendment. Guidelines for site naming are contained in the Board's Site Naming and Gift Recognition Policies., adopied Febr-uary 8, 197.8-. As preserves grow in size and possibly merge with other District land, it may become necessary to modify existing preserve perimeter boundaries and names. Suggested changes in boundaries and names may occur at the time of acquisition, with a final decision to follow at the next review or arriendnicrit of the Use and Management Plan. G. Development Project Funded by a Grant A preserve's Use and Management Plan may include projects that are ideal for development under various grant programs. These projects usually significantly increase public access, have elements beyond the more traditional types of development on district land, and have potential budget impacts that could divert funds away from Gpe+1_1paee lkjaj,ja th�—ongomg qi,�uia ment offlie District's Preserves. liefit 140gFR14+7 -g� In these cases, grant funds are sought as a means to implement the development phase without seriously impacting the overall program. Page 8 Of 11 Open Space t'sc acid klatiat,)eiiieiit Plaimim-) Process May When applying for a development grant, it is advantageous to submit plans which have already been through the CEQA process, publicly reviewed, and adopted by the Board. This ensures the granting body that the project can be implemented expeditiously and with little modification. For this reason, every attempt is made to incorporate prospective grant projects into Use and Management Plans before the funding sources become available. When this is done, the elements are identified in the plan and in budget preparation as potential grant projects and, as such, are not anticipated to be developed solely with District funds. In some instances, grant opportunities arise unexpectedly, and a grant project may be formulated without prior inclusion in a Use and Management Plan, in order to take advantage of the funding opportunity. It is then imperative to incorporate the project into the Use and Management Plan as soon as possible to provide the necessary public review, Board adoption and CEQA compliance. H. Open Space Planning Areas within District Preserves 4i-Somc District preserves lies wifli"fl. 0-fle ot'iHicomain difficrim_Y ecologically and geographically-�- n+ open space planning areas. This arrangement facilitates comprehensive site use planning and management. Use and Management Plans and reviews for individual sites within a given planning area are prepared within a short span of time so that the plans are consistent with each other. I. Public Review Public participation is an integral part of the planning process. Anyone inquiring about planning issues related to a preserve is encouraged to become involved by attending public workshops and hearings when the issues are discussed. Interested parties may subscribe to the District's agendas to keep informed of upcoming meetings. In addition, a notice of an upcoming meeting wJ�Jltnay be posted on the website to increase public awareness. All public notification is in accordance with the Public Notification IA...... Policy, tlic District's Good Neighbor Policy,-crurypte" 26, 1981 atul-lit4 and the C Service rvice Plan. r f)rchiiiiiiary t.Jsc and Management Plans and Plan Amendments, 44e-Use and Management Plans, feviews, aw aniendmenti--are considered by the Board at a minimum Of two public hearings at which the public may comment. The initial hearing is for the purpose of tentatively adopting the Use and Management Plan recommendations. In most cases, these tentatively adopted recommendations will be returned to the Board for final approval at the next regularly scheduled meeting. This will typically allow at least a two-week period to receive public comment. There may be cases where additional time is required to resolve specific planning issues. 11'so, the 4�,+n,44efa6ow+)f4 Whets the General Manager is authorized to accept a gift of or acquire tow value real procrty, the General Manager is also authorized to approve the Preliminary Use and Page 9 of I I Open Space Use and Managenicni, Planning, Process May I.IZOQ� Management Plan for of any Preliminary Use and Management Plan so approved at the next regular Board meeting, followim-, the acquisition. When specific land use issues under consideration may lead to significant changes in an existing use and management of a site and generate a substantial amount of public interest,L)rraise complex iSSLICS, the proposed plaii may be first considered by tile District's L.Ise aiid c corninittee. a public works hops-n+avL �are typically held. 44+"Public workshops may be afe w4f­be-awin formal meetings held before staff presents a plan to the Board for final Approv, oryat the Board's discretion, may be District board meetings. This will encourage public involvement in the development or modification of the Use and Management Plan. When special use and management issues arise,public workshops or neighborhood meetings may be held to resolve the issues and possible modify the existing Use and Management Plan,,. These workshops will be held on or near the preserve when possible, and announcements will be sent to subscribers of the District's agenda and local newspapers, as well as posted on the website. District-wide planning issues (e.g., dog usage, trail use conflicts)will be subject to the same planning procedures as site-specific issues. A mailing list of interested parties will be maintained and used for public notification when public workshops or hearings related to the matter are scheduled. LEGAL NOTICE. The purpose of this Policy is to assist the District in planning the use and inaiiageincnt of its preserves to further the District's mission and best accomplish its planning goals. It is not the purpose of this Process to adopt legal notice, leg',11 10 L)Ublic inectipg or land management policies beyond those required bN/ state law. No action taken by the District shall be invalid for failtire to comply with has adopted the-tollowing- 1-11-cies Felated to the Opetl Space Use and g e,ii 1 e!i ss. T-he,-e poijejes aFe available Eipoti i, aest tit the Disffi ......... Ot'l lee . Title — ­-I­- 4­444w��+���has is of t4se, l_'_-v_1­Ifflentz N4ay 12, 1982 publ;e NotifieRtion po4eies August 26, 1991 Revised Septembef 14, 1983 Revised Sepiember- 10, 1986 3. Publieit�-Guidelifies Related to Site Emphasis Pefit--y 8, 1981 47-k)pen--Spaee Iufl­ 1 1 107 Q 5. 12 01 i C Y t-)F De l i eda s-i o,4.4. f*)j- Disti-ie! Lamh, 1979 978 1 6. Polic- improvepaenis ofi 144fiet 1 l­—, Page 10 of I I Open Space Use and Management Planning Process M y 1' 2009 Revised FebmaFy 2, 1978 , 1979 9. rcrricies-ciircviiGcssioir3 oir-Discrrcrbands May 10, 1979 August 23 1�?5? 1 a;1 r144ieies Ar„.,r,.,,bei- 1 n 1 non tat 1 t# e '�#t�.=«ireeters J�11� '7 1 0'7 7 TIT-fi�T77G'4"CI":7"� '�"a WfQ Amended —r-r, 19v... Amended March 1 Page 11 of 11 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District R-09-20 Meeting 09-14 May 13, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 9 AGENDA ITEM Continue Consideration of Bids for Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch and Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration to May 27, 2009 Regular Meeting. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Continue Consideration of Bids for Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch and Adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration to May 27, 2009 Regular Meeting. DISCUSSION In March and April 2009, District staff prepared an Initial Study, proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Technical Addendum evaluating the "Herbicide Application and Invasive .......... Species Control at Mindego Ranch project. The Cuesta La Honda Guild contacted the District and provided written comments on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration at the close of the public review period. In responding to Cuesta La Honda Guild comments and concerns, staff conducted a site tour with the Guild's Chief Water Operator, Mr. John Chapin and Public Works Operations Director, Mr. Terry Adams, on May 4, 2009, and attended the Cuesta La Honda Guild Board Meeting on May 5, 2009 to discuss the project and proposed practices to protect the water supply for the Guild. In order to respond to concerns raised by Cuesta La Honda Guild, h agenda item at the May 27 2009 Board o f Directors staff recommends the continuance of the g y � meeting. Staff released a Request for Bids on March 18, 2009 for control of purple starthistle and smooth distaff thistle on approximately 100 to 150 acres of the Mindego Ranch. A pre-bid meeting was held on site on March 27, 2009. Nine (9) contractors attended. Two sealed bids were received on April 8, 2009. FISCAL IMPACT The continuation of consideration of bids and the environmental evaluation will not result in any direct or immediate fiscal impacts. PUBLIC NOTICE All public noticing requirements of the Brown Act have been met. NEXT STEPS Once the comprehensive strategy for controlling invasive plants at Mindego is revised after consultation with the Cuesta La Honda Guild whose drinking water source is downstream of the project area, the environmental review will be completed and a bid package will be brought to the Board for consideration. Attachment: 1. Project Map Prepared by: Clayton Koopmann, Rangeland Ecologist Contact person: Clayton Koopmarm, Rangeland Ecologist Herbicide Application Map - Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve Mindego Ranch J 0-�, t �� Boundary Downstream Water �� ,` Diversions/Pumps tee -,--e No Herbicide Application M►rd 15 foot Cuest La H,onda No Spray Zone ( above highwater mark i uild�Pump� \ � ,•� L J Big .: r hosate hand application/ asp� GI YP r spot treatment only ' i� � —^— � � ✓ If IM 260 foot buffer Hand application only: _ _ Trd,7 backpack sprayers, wicks / Lake - n and daubers,and power wand (when allowable). � rx No Boom Zone E n' N \ m Biological monitor required. Use � ! precautionary � i / I i u measures when using mechanical equipment 0-660 foot (' �• Precautionary --'� -' - Y Zone l v � _ I City an County of 1 a San Fran isco Pump Map produced by — ti Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District �___� 04/15/2009 0 spa— soo 2,600 o • . I Feet77 U Attachment 1: Project Map ` � v � KAidDeOiOsUl8RegioDal � CjDeO Space District � � R-O9-5@ � Meeting 09-14 May 13, 2009 � AGENDA ITEM 10 AGENDA ITEM � � Authorization to Amend Contract with 800c Associates to Provide Conservation Grazing Planning Services. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS Authorize the General Manager to amend the contract with SuRo Associates for an additional $30,000 for utotal authorization amount not to exceed $69,000, for preparation and administration of grazing plans, training of District staff and related support ofconservation grazing activities on District lands. BACKGROUND Setting The District began using livestock grazing as a grassland management tool in 2006 through the reintroduction of cattle grazing tothe Big Dipper Ranch area ofSkyline Ridge Open 8puoc Preserve. At this mannc |inoe, the District also purchased Driscoll Ranch and the accompanying 50 year grazing |euuc. In ]u|y2U0h, the District issued o Request for Qualifications (RF()) to hire a consultant with extensive range management knowledge to uomixt in the development of the conservation grazing � program for District lands. Stnf[received qualifications from five individual experts and firms; on � Septcnobcr2O, 2008^ the District awarded o contract for$25,0O0to Sage Associates(Orrin and Cindy Sage, Principals) under the C]eucrui Manager's authority. On September 26, 2007, the District � extended the contract with Sage Auuocio1ca by $14,000 in an amount not to exceed $39,000 (see R.- U7-97). History � Sage Associates has prepared Grazing Management p|aou for the [brmnoc Big Dipper and Silva HLunrh � Properties (Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve), Mindego Hill Property (Russian Ridge Open Space � Preserve), La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve, and for the -[uniiam Creek Open Space Preserve, � conducted grasslands monitoring training for District staff, assisted in the drafting o[the grazing � |ouac and development of grazing policies for tile District and provided on-call support related to � these matters. � � � � ° 2 R-09-58 Page , DISCUSSION Parameter The work under the proposed amendment will fall within the previously established scope of work � for 8uQc��msociates andinc|udcs' oonnp|cdnnofoc000proheomivc (]rozing��auaAunnen1P|anfbrthr � ` . � four(4) properties proposed for purchase for Purisima to the Sea, assistance with grazing tenant � selection processes, support at public meetings, additional training in grazing and agricultural � management for District staff and assessment of new properties on an as-needed basis. Requirement The preparation of Grazing Management Plans for District grasslands is acridoa| foundation for the use of livestock uon resource management tool. The management objectives for grasslands within the District are to promote grassland biodivsroi1yand health, manage v/i1d)aud and agricultural weed populations, reduce v/i|d|undfinc risks and support agricultural components wf the local economy. The Grazing Management Plan for given Preserve or portion ofuPreserve includes the tools to inform adaptive rangeland management for years to come, including: documentation of the existing nniuns| resource conditions on site, assessment of the ranch cc|o1rd infrastructure, baseline photo documentation, analysis of soil and rangeland productivity, recommendations for distribution and movement of livestock and recommendations for improvements to key grazing-related infrastructure (fences,troughs, corrals, etc). In the [)iobic1`u Coustuids Protection Area, the Grazing Muoognnnou1 � P|oou will also serve as key elements of the agricultural production p|ou for Preserve Use and | Management Plans. Justification A Certified Rangeland Manager is required to develop a rangeland management plan and Orrin Sage u[Sage Associates isa Certified Rangeland Manager. As part of this contract, Orrin Sage will be training Clayton Kooponono,thc District's Rangeland Ecologist, to obtain the necessary experience to become u Certified Rangeland Manager in approximately three years. FISCAL IMPACT Funding for range|und/u&ricu|turu| services in the amount of$3O,000 was allocated in the Operations Department's annual budget. NEXT STEPS Sage Associates will begin preparation of the Grazing Management Plan upon completion and execution of the contract amendment in order to complete a draft of the Purisimoato the Sea{}nuziog Management Plan to support the purchase process for the Purisima to the Sea properties which � include Blue Brush Canyon (POST), Lobitos Ridge (POST), UC Elkus Ranch, and Purisima Creek � Uplands. Prepared by: Clayton ann Rangeland Ecologist � '-,_- .~.~'— , _�"� , Contact person: Clayton Koopmann, Rangeland Ecologist Midpeninsula Regional ' Open Space District To: Board of Directors From: Stephen E. Abbors Date: May 8, 2009 Re: FYI's i i ' Midpeninsula Regional Memorandum Open Space District To: Stephen E. Abbors, General Manager From: Meredith Manning, Open Space Planner II Copy: Ana Ruiz, Acting Planning Manager; David Sanguinetti, Operations Manager Date: May 1, 2009 Re: Bridle Trail Opening at Thornewood Open Space Preserve Bridle Trail Opening The newly constructed Bridle Trail opened to the public on May 9, 2009. The trail was constructed last summer by Maintenance and Construction staff �� :. ' F � r �jr" from the Skyline Field Office in partnership with Planning. Work was P j funded by a grant from the State n m ;¢, `, Water Resources Control Board under Proposition 50: Take Action for Clean Water. The trail was closed to all use during the first winter to allow settlingr � i and even compaction. No erosion was � r ; observed following the first rains, which is testament to the quality off construction by our staff. The trail is approximately 3,500 feet (0.7 miles) long. It will ultimately Picture 1: Lower end of Bridle Trail through redwoods connect with Old La Honda Road .,k a in a separate construction phase, which will increase its length. The trail is open to hikers, equestrians, and dogs on { w leash. It climbs in elevation through second-growth redwood ° and Douglas-fir forest near � Dennis Martin Creek (Picture 1) before emerging into drier madrone and oak canopy forest (Picture 2) to connect with the Schilling Lake Trail. Picture 2: Upper end of Bridle Trail near Schilling Lake Trail F 4, ' Midpeninsula Regional Memorandum• ' ( Open Space District Schilling Lake Trail The Schilling Lake Trail winds from the staging area off Highway 84 to Schilling Lake, and was the only designated trail in the preserve until construction of the Bridle Trail (Figure 1). However, it was never formally � named after construction. The trail � has been known and referred to Schilling internally as the Schilling Lake Trail Lake Trail for years. Staff will proceed with formalizing the Schilling Lake Trail name, consistent with past practice, and the District's Policy for Site Naming, Gift, and Special Recognition that allows trails to be __- named after geographic features and historical persons, uses, or events associated with a site. Staff will update the Preserve's GIS data, brochure and signboard maps, -— - -- and trail directional signs to reflect the new official trail names for both Bridle Trail the Schilling Lake and Bridle Trails. Trail Dedication Event Figure 1: Schilling Lake and Bridle Trails A public ribbon-cutting ceremony was originally scheduled for later this summer following completion of the remaining trail improvements; however, construction has been delayed due to a freeze of grant funds by the state. Grant funds are expected to resume by next construction season and the ceremony is scheduled for 2010. p aula Regional Open S • ' Open Space District Memorandum Schilling Lake Trail The Schilling Lake Trail winds from the staging area off Highway 84 to Schilling Lake, and was the only designated trail in the preserve until construction of the Bridle Trail (Figure 1). However, it was never formally named after construction. The trail has been known and referred to I Schilling internally as the Schilling Lake Trail Lake Trail for years. Staff will proceed with formalizing the Schilling Lake Trail name, consistent with past practice, f and the District's Policy for Site Naming, Gift, and Special Recognition that allows trails to be named after geographic features and historical persons, uses, or events associated with a site. Staff will update the Preserve's GIS I � data, brochure and signboard maps, and trail directional signs to reflect Bridle Trail the new official trail names for both the Schilling Lake and Bridle Trails. Trail Dedication Event Figure 1: Schilling Lake and Bridle Trails A, public ribbon-cutting ceremony was originally scheduled for later this summer following completion of the remaining trail improvements; however, construction has been delayed due to a freeze of grant funds by the state. Grant funds are expected to resume by next construction season and the ceremony is scheduled for 2010. COMPILATION OF PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE LA HONDA CREEK DRAFT MASTER PLAN (April 20, 2009— May 4, 2009) EMAIL RESPONSE Dear Thank you for your interest in the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Master Plan project and for taking the time to send in your comments on the Draft Plan. You input has been collected, is now part of the public comment record for the project, and has been forwarded to the District's Board of Directors for their review and consideration. Please feel free to send in any additional comments by May 13 so that we may be able to forward them to the Board of Directors prior to the May 19 first public hearing when the Board will consider tentative adoption of the Draft Master Plan. You are also welcome to attend this first hearing to provide oral comments. Details of this meeting are provided below: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 6:30 p.m. -9:00 p.m. Alvin S. Hatch Elementary School Multipurpose Room 490 Miramontes Avenue Half Moon Bay, CA 94019 Sincerely, Ana Ruiz Project Manager -----Original Message ----- From: JS To: lahondamasterplaii@openspace.org Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 7:43 AM Subject: Comment supporting Mt Bike access in Master plan Hi Ana, Thanx for sending me the computer disc w the La Honda creek Master plan on it. I'd like to congratulate the planning staff and the ad hoc committee. For considering the overwhelmingly positive feedback supporting mountain biking in La Honda Creek Open Space preserve. I support draft option 2. In addition please consider: i Allowing mountain biking on the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road. - Having good single track options for mountain bikers, perhaps a cycling route up+around Ray's peak. See you on the l9th, Thank You, Jim Sullivan 1212 Oak Wood ct i i i Pacifica, Ca 94044 -----Original Message ----- From: "George Rekouts" <grekouts c(�7i.yahoo.com> To: <lahondamasterplan(a)openspace.org> Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 1:42 AM Subject: La Honda Creek Open Space preserve > I'd like to congratulate the planning staff and the ad hoc committee > for considering the overwhelmingly positive feedback supporting > mountain biking in La Honda Creek Open Space preserve. >I support draft option 2. > In addition please consider: >-Allowing mountain biking on the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch > main access road. >- Having good single track options for mountain bikers, like a cycling > route up Ray's peak. >Thank you, >George Rekouts ----- Original Message ----- From: Elizabeth R. Crane To: lahondamasterplanCa2openspace.org Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2009 6:32 PM Subject: Open Space Dear Ms. Ruiz, I'd like to congratulate the planning staff and the ad hoc committee for considering the overwhelmingly positive feedback supporting mountain biking in La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve. I am writing today to express my support for Draft Option 2. In addition, I would ask you to please consider allowing mountain biking on the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road. I would also be interested in seeing good single track options for mountain bikers, like a cycling route up Ray's Peak. I think that the increased mountain biking opportunities will benefit not only the dedicated mountain bikers committed to this cause, but also the greater community as a whole. Biking is a fun, safe, and family-oriented activity that deserves more consideration in future planning and draft proposals. Thank you, Liz Crane lerane@coastside.net -- Origimd Message ----- From: Caren Pearlman � To: Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2V09 10:02 &M Subject: Lu Honda master plan feedback Dear Ana, Thank you so much to you and your committee for the hard work in creating the current master plan for the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve. I am a La Honda resident(and manager of The Mountain Terrace)and wish to show my support for biking trail option 2. Having bicycle acuuam directly from this community is uvvondcrfb| option for adults and kids. It would be great if you could also consider additional biking trails along the former Driscoll Ranch property. I also wish to express rny support for creating dog use areas. I understand the concerns expressed in the plan regarding dogs and cattle, but [Lc| it is still viable to create safe multi-access trails / where on leash dogs are oh|e to ouh:|y pass by ouU|e grazing areas without disruption to the cattle. We appreciate Your efforts\u work with the Driscoll grazing tenants to pvommote1hiy option near Sears Ranch Road. Thank you again for your efforts. Best Regards, Caren Pearlman Memory Lane La Honda ---OriAino| Message ----- From: Cindy Crowe:UM To: or-- Sent: Sunday, May U], 20O9g:22 &M Subject: Lu Honda Creek Open Space preserve bike access Dear Ana, /'d like tocongratulate tile planning staff and the ad hoc committee for considering the overwhelmingly positive feedback supporting mountain biking inLo Honda Creek Open Space preserve. | support draft option 2. ln addition please consider: - Allowing mountain biking on the entire length of the � Driscoll Ranch main access road. � ' Having good single track options for mountain bikers, like a cycling route up |luy'apeak. | believe this vx`u|d be a benefit for the Community as o whole. Thank you, Cin6vCm*e-Urgp | La Honda, C& 94020 | ' 650619-9054 � --- (}rizou ----- From: Delma Soult / To: Sent: May 03, 2UU90]3 /tM Subject: Lu Honda Creek Open Space I'd like hm congratulate the planning staff and the ad hoe committee for considering the overwhelmingly positive feedback supporting mountain biking inLa Honda Creek Open Space preserve. � l support draft option 2. { / � n addition please consider: ' Allowing mountain biking onthe entire length ofthe Driscoll Ruoob main access road. - Buving good single track options for mountain bikers, like u cycling route upRav'apeak. Thank you, De|nnuSou\t 650-747'9516 ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Ehrhardt" < /o: < Sent: Sunduv, May 03, 2009 1:33 AM Subject: comments oil Lu Honda Creek master plan > Dear Ms. Ruiz, � > Thanks for circulating the very detailed and thorough master plan for > Lu Honda Creek open space preserve. &ou neighbor of tile preserve and > resident ofCuestoLu Honda, lamovery pleased 1u see such on � � >extensive eff,bu(m manage this land and to provide u variety of � � � > public access. We bike and bike the trails io and around LuHonda i > every week and the prospect ofexploring further local trails i1ia > very exciting. | urge you io strongly consider option 2, which would > provide bike access Dnmn La Honda. l also would also love tosee � > aooexo for dogs on leash from 8cazm Ranch Road. This preserve � >promises toheon excellent and popular addition to the open space > system. � � � ) � >Thunko > David � > David Ehrhardt > Staff Member J > Dept. o[Plant Biology > Carnegie Insiikkimn for Science � > Assistant Professor bv Courtesy appointment � " > Dept. u[Biology � � > Stanford University � > 260 Panama St. > Stanford, CAA4305 >(65O) 325-)52lx26| -----Original Message ----- From: ' To: Cc: Crane, David Sent: Saturday, May 02, 200g4:l69M Subject: Comments re La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Master Plan Project Hello Ana: Mv last message might have been terse,though l feel hio well justified. Having worked so hard to get MROSD the input it needed to understand the size of the biking demography,the options presented are very disappointing. Bovvevcc |do want recognize the hard work the MROSD staff made to accommodate bikers and would thus like to congratulate the planning staff and the ad hoc committee. |vvou|d like the staff and directors however iorecognize that the overwhelmingly positive feedback supporting mountain biking in La Honda Creek Open 8puoc preserve was only marginally in the proposed options. | would thus like to request that &XRD8D u||ov mountain biking on the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road. � This is u multi-use road and it would be clearly unfair to u||o* equestrians but not bikers uccoem � to this route. l think the K3R[)SD should also consider creating with tile resources oftile mountain bike community itself good single track options for mountain bikers, e.g. ucyc|iog route upRuv'speak. Bike'on|yming|e tracks would bo consistent with the comparative demographics and umc-dcmnandof tile biking community. Thank you. Bill McMillan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barbara Costa" To: Scut: Saturday, May 02, 20U92:26PK4 � Subject: La Honda Creek preserve � � > B6\w, > l would like to ucc the area retained as it is with hiking and horses o|kovv*d but no bicycles, � motor cycles or dogs. | p/uu|d want it to remain u preserve open to people for quiet pursuits aod � �b arcurca1ion ur�u� not become . � � > Barbara Costa � � � � � ` ` j > La Honda CA | ----- Original Message ----- From: Clark Codiga To: Sent: Thursday, April 3O` 20090:05 &M Subject: la Honda Creek Open Spuce-bUkeacceso |am an avid outdoor enthusiast and mountain biker. l fee) strongly that option 2 is the best for all concerned. Public land ia for all of the publics use. No particular group should he discriminated against or only elitist policy put forth. Nor should public policy be swayed by | larger more focused lobbying bodies with deeper pockets(hikers and equestrians). i / ° biking along the entire length of Driscoll Ranch will have no significant impact � ° cyclist enjoy trails and views ma much as any other group, allow access to 12und 13 � ° allow rntn biking on all trails including redwood cabin loop, easy access loop and vista point trail These will be destination trails. Thank you in representing the entire public base, not just the most vocal or most members. Best regarils, Clark Codiga | Redwood0��� ' 10 7McPherson' Symcet � Santa Cruz, Cu9506n � 831-400-1711ext. 117 � � 888-545-171/ yaz831-46K-171Z www.red woodcapi,ta,l.net � ---(}r inu Message ----- From: Laura MetrUlas � To: � Sent: Tuesday, /kpri| 28, 2O098S4PM � � Subject: Lu Honda Creek Open Space Bike Access � Dear Ana Ruiz, My name isLaura Metru\as and l have been aLa Honda resident for the past thirteen years. As � teen in the community l believe b would bn greatly beneficial to allow more outdoor activities by allowing mountain bike uooeuo in the Lu Honda Creek Open Space Preserve(as illustrated in � option2). It would be a great opportunity to open this beautiful land to the public with new � access abilities. � Thank You, Laura Metru|us � � --- ()h inu| Meaoo&e ----- From: Lars Thomsen To: � � � Sent: Sunday, Aor | 26, 20092:30P�4 i ' Subjm�: h support nf draft 2 ^ � Good day, &aulife long resident of the Bay Area and owner of Trail Head 0mleryl would like to speak in favor of draft two for my family and all ofmy outdoor loving customers. l have read the excellently written letter from Joshua Moore who so eloquently stated the reasons for supporting draft two of the Lu Honda Master Plan. Please help encourage a healthy lifestyle by allowing mountain bike use in the areas outlined by Moore. | be|icve htoheu very responsible balance o[preservation and the enjoyment of our | incredible back country. By offering multiple loops and levels of difficulty for mountain bikers, � trail users will be spread out more while new stewards of the outdoors are welcomed to this � lifestyle. As we grow the numbers of residents who value their open spaces we secure the future of keeping such spaces free from development. Thank You, Lars Thomsen Trail I{eadCyo|e[y --- Oci8ina| Mcanu&e ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, April 25, 200q 10:14 /\M I'd like to congratulate the planning staff and the ad hoc committee for taking into account the overwhelmingly positive feedback regarding allowing mountain biking in La Honda Creek Open Space preserve. l feel strongly this is the right decision and unu excited to see that there will be cycling related, light recreational opportunities for l.0 Honda residents and inhabitants ofthe entire bay area. |'d |ike to commend the District on a bold move toclose perhaps 1/4 of the preserve to the public � to protect Red Legged Frog and San Francisco Garter Snake habitat. Wc appreciate and respect � the District's mission to preserve protect and restore open space. � Finally, I recommend draft two which permits cyclists access to the Bay Area Ridge Trail ! Segment through La Honda Creek Open Space without a docent. This is imperative to the success of the RidgeTnai|'a mission tucreate u multi-use trail that circumnavigates the Boy. Pevv people � get{u enjoy iheSFvva1eraeutionufRidge1[rui| noMbnf92bcoauaeoftbedocenton|yrcotriction � and this iaoahunoo. / ! � � ! i i i I support draft option 2 with the following addenda: I 1. Permit biking along the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road(trail 1). It's a fire road used by heavy trucks, hikers and equestrians. Adding Cycling to the use of this road would not be a significant impact to the environment, Driscoll Ranch, or the surrounding neighborhoods. 2. Cyclists enjoy a good view as much as anyone else. Permit cycling on trails 12 and 13 up to "Ray's Peak". This would add another loop to the region near the town of La Honda and would spread the cycling use out, creating more positive user experiences for everyone. 3. Allow mountain biking on some or all of the flatter trails for the neighborhood behind Alice's Restaurant such as the Redwood Cabin Loop Trail (7),Vista Point Loop trail (3),and the Easy Access Loop"Trail. The cycling and outdoor recreation needs of the residents in the Skywood Keber neighborhoods have not been addressed. 4. Allow for reconsideration of the No Public Access in the northwest portion of the preserve in the event that a future preferred alignment of the Bay Area Ridge Trail falls within that corridor. Thank you for your time and consideration. Dermott Corr 305 Mountain View Road Santa Cruz CA 95065 ----- Original Message----- From: "Mike Vandeman" <mjvande wpacbell.net> To: <lahondamasterplanLi)open space.or > Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 8:46 AM Subject: La Honda Creek Master Plan > Bicycles should not be allowed in any natural area. They are > inanimate objects and have no rights. There is also no right to > mountain bike. That was settled in federal court in 1994: > http://ho►r►e.pacbe11.net/m*vande/mtb10 . It's dishonest of mountain > bikers to say that they don't have access to trails closed to bikes. >They have EXACTLY the same access as everyone else --ON FOOT! Why > isn't that good enough for mountain bikers?They are all capable of walking.... > A favorite myth of mountain bikers is that mountain biking is no more >harmful to wildlife, people, and the environment than hiking,and >that science supports that view. Of course, it's not true. To settle >the matter once and for all, I read all of the research they cited, > and wrote a review of the research on mountain biking impacts(see >http:Hhome.pacbell.net/mjvande/scb7 ). I found that of the seven > studies they cited, (1)all were written by mountain bikers, and(2) > in every case,the authors misinterpreted their own data, in order to > come to the conclusion that they favored. They also studiously > avoided mentioning another scientific study(Wisdom et al)which did > not favor mountain biking, and came to the opposite conclusions. >Those were all experimental studies. Two other studies(by White et >al and by Jeff Marion) used a survey design, which is inherently > incapable of answering that question(comparing hiking with mountain > biking). I only mention them because mountain bikers often cite them, > but scientifically, they are worthless. >Mountain biking accelerates erosion,creates V-shaped ruts, kills > small animals and plants on and next to the trail, drives wildlife >and other trail users out of the > area, and (worst of all)teaches kids that the rough treatment of > nature is okay(it's NOT!). What's good about THAT? > For more information: http://hone.pacbell.net/njvande/nitbfag . > > I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to > humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8 >years fighting auto dependence and road construction.) > Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you > are fond of. > http://homet)acbell.net/njvande > ----- Original Message----- From: Henry Pastorelli To: lahondanasterplati(cz),openspace.org Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 12:47 PM Subject: La Honda Creek input Greetings MROSD, It's great to see that there may be some mountain biking within La Honda Creek but Option I appears to be overly restrictive based on the size, openness and remoteness of this preserve. It makes no sense to restrict mountain bikers to one docent lead fire road Bay Area Ridge Trail segment. Option 2 is better but being able to ride the entire Driscoll Ranch road, loop options, and access to Ray's Peak are highly desirable. I hope this plan can be revised to allow for these requests. While I can't afford a horse I am looking forward to hiking and biking this preserve. Thank you for acquiring and preserving these beautiful lands and thank you for your consideration, HcnrvPamkoreUi ---Original Message --- From: "ntbbmad" /o: < Sent: Friday, April 24, 2OOg 12:19PM Subject: LHC Master Plan Thank You tnthe planning staff and the ad hoc committee for taking into account the overwhelmingly positive feedback regarding allowing mountain biking in Lu Honda Creek Open Space preserve. l often mountain bike in the open space preserves along highway 35, and l occasionally take my two young moum with me(and my wife as well, on curc occasions), exposing them to the amazing open spaces and beautiful natural environments that we { are fortunate to have access to. � lum writing to state that l support draft 2oftchLRC Master Plan,with the following addenda: � � |. Permit biking along the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main � access road (trail |). It's u fire road used bv heavy trucks, hikers � and equestrians. Adding Cycling to the use of this road would not be � u significant impact to the environment, Driscoll Ranch, orthe surrounding neighborhoods. 2. Cyclists enjoy u8oudvicvvosmuchueuuyooce|ue. permuitcyo|ing on trails l2 and |3upto "Rny'mPcuk" This would add another loop to the region near the town ofLa Honda and would spread the cycling use out, creating more positive user experiences for everyone. 3. &||uvv mountain biking on some or all of the flatter trails for the neighborhood behind Alice's Restaurant such um the Redwood Cabin Loop Trail (7), Vista Point Loop trail (3), and the Easy Access Loop Trail. The cycling and outdoor recreation needs of the residents inthe Skyw'oodKeber neighborhoods have not been addressed. 4. Allow for reconsideration of the NoPublic /kcoeaa in the northwest portion of the preserve in the event that ufuture preferred alignment of the Bay Area Ridge Trail falls within that corridor. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you, Scott, Sbanoy. Riley, and Liam 8ch|acbtcr l7O5MussidduCourt � San Jose, C/\ u5[|8 � --- Originx| McyeuAc --' � � In support of ROMP, Joshua Moore`uletter below, and from MBOSC, I'd like to echo the recommendation for Draft 2. Regards, 8cbayticnPnuh/ � MB(lSC—Gquestrimn Liaison Officer. ! � On behalf ofmyself, &OMPa3O0+current members,and the more than \0OJXX) mountain bikers we represent, lU like to congratulate the planning staff and the ad hoc committee for taking into account the overwhelmingly positive feedback regarding allowing mountain biking in La Honda Creek Open Space prmycn/c. We feel strongly this in the right decision and are excited to see that there will bc cycling related, light recreational opportunities for La Honda residents and inhabitants o[the entire bay area. � We'd like to commend the District oil mbo|d move oa close perhaps 1/4 of the preserve to the i public to protect Red Legged Frog and Sun Francisco Garter Snake habitat. We appreciate and i respect the District's mission to preserve protect and restore open space. | Finally, uuu Director of the Bay Area Ridge Trail, l recommend draft two which permits cyclists � access to the Bay Area Ridge Trail Segment through La Honda Creek Open Space without a docent. This is imperative to the success of the Ridge Troi|'o mission to create a multi-use trail � that ciroumnnuvi gates the Bay. Few people get toenjoy the SF water section of Ridge Trail north of92 because of tile docent only restriction and this iuushame. We support draft option 2 with the following addenda: � l. Permit biking along the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road (trail l). It's ufire road used by heavy trucks, hikers and equestrians. Adding Cycling to the use of this road would not bca significant impact tothe environment, Driscoll Ranch, ur the surrounding neighborhoods. � 2 {��u|iuta� 'oy u good vie as onuch ue unyoo� c|u� Pcnnit cyo|in�oo�ui|u |� and i3 upt� � 'y ' � "Ruv'sPeuk" This would add another loop to tile region near the town of La Honda and would spread tile cycling use out, creating more positive user experiences for everyone. � 3. /\||ov/ mountain biking on yonne or all of tile flatter trails for the neighborhood behind Alice's � Restaurant Such as tile Redwood Cabin Loop Trail (7), Vista Point Loop trail (3), and the Easy � Access Loop Trail. Tile cycling and Outdoor recreation needs of the residents in the Skywood Keber neighborhoods have not been addressed. � 4. Allow for reconsideration of the Nu Public /\coema in the northwest portion ofthe preserve in the event that ufuture preferred alignment ofthe Ray Area Ridge Trail falls within that corridor. � Thank You for your time and consideration. � � ! � Joshua Moore / President, Responsible Organized Mountain Pedalers Director at Large, Bay Area Ridge Trail Council � � / From: frank mcmillan ryan@cartlicareland.com ; 'Ted Fong' Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 11:04 AM Subject: meeting`"' "the ^'"' ^e draft""°"^ plan for ~~^°p � � � ! Thmnkomonouohforkeeoingusinthek000—.Aouhiker hiker and rider l prefer Option 2. IwiU � � attend the meeting as | am interested iuwhy certain parts of many loops are indicated as open to � horses, but not bikers. As u regular user o[the Tahoe Ridge trail, lhuve seen instances where � � there are hikers only and no other use for trail protection, but do not reou|| seeing horses and bikcoundnothikcre��.��.00rnciiouou�h��u||ovvbik�ro-bomcmnnnppomi�oduyu, (nncaoinghikcrm � . � on even days, horses oil odd duyo). This can bcu solution uowell. l will not oosunme that this cunow up previously so l would be cenniaa not to mention it Regardless to how this moves ahead I personally want to thank all of you involved ill this for the � efforts and keeping our input iu the mix. � See You un tile lgm Frank | Frank McMillan � Warranty Concepts \6O4 Dell Court � � San Jose, C& 95| \8 . 4\5652gO56mobile 400979 |U]6offioe/fax --- Originm| Message----- From: To: Cc: Crane, David Sent: Monday, April 20, 2OO9 12:16PK4 � 8obNeo�: )�c� �prin�2O0�y��vvu|��cc L.aRoudu[oc�k0pno Space Preserve Master Project � ( ^ � Hi Ana, Thank you no much for sending the notice. The nntn bike community has been waiting | expectantly for something good to hear, and it looks like there was some give bvthe MR(}SDto | address the needs and concerns of Our group. Hov/ever, uft*rlooking a1 the options, lvvi|\ point � | | ' out tn You asxd| uaa1 tile upcoming hearing that itim unfair and unacceptable to allow the equestrian group, which is considerably smaller demographic group than bicyc|iotmtound who � cause a much greater impact to trails than hikers or bikers,io have umany-fold greater access thanbikcru | �uotdonotundu,ntundhovv&�|�08Dthinku�hioistuir short of political influence � � � , � o,just biased disregard for the biking community. Thanks. Bill McMillan � � � . � � From: Sean T. BUMS To: Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 12]3 PM Subject: Support for Draft 2of the Lu Honda Creek Master Plan Un behalf ofmyself, ROMPs30O+current nmmbers,and the more than 10000mouctain bikers � we represent, 1\J like to congratulate the p|uuoiug staff and the ad hoc committee for taking into � account the overwhelmingly positive feedback r�uur6ingallowing ouountunbiking inLuHonda � -�_- Creek Open Space preserve. We feel strongly this is the right decision and are excited to see that � there will he cycling related, light recreational opportunities for La Honda residents and inhabitants o[the entire bay area. We'd like tm commend the District uno bold move to close perhaps 1/4of the preserve tothe public toprotect Red Legged Frog and San Francisco Garter Snake habitat. VVc appreciate and respect the District's mission to preserve protect and restore open space. � � Finally, | nccoxunncnd draft two which permits cyclists access botile Bay Area Ridge Trail Segment through La Honda Creek Open Space without a docent. This is imperative to the success | of the Ridge Trui|'e mission to create onuu1d'uectrail that circumnavigates the Buy. Pcv/people ! get to enjoy the SF water section of Ridge Trail north of 92 because of the docent only restriction ' and this imushame. We support draft option 2 with the following addenda: >. Permit biking along the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road(trail |). It's ufire road used byheavy trucks, hikers and equestrians. Adding Cycling to the use of this road would not be a significant impact to the environment, Driscoll Ranch, or the surrounding neighborhoods. 2. Cyclists enjoy a good view um much as anyone else. Permit cycling on trails 12 and 13 up to "Ray's Peak". This would add another loop to the region near the town of La Honda and would spread the cycling use out, creating more positive user experiences for everyone. 3. Allow mountain biking oil some or all of the flatter trails for the neighborhood behind Alice's | Restaurant such as tile Redwood Cabin Loop Trail (7), Vista Point Loop trail (3), and the Easy Access Loop Trail. The cycling and outdoor recreation needs of the residents in the Skywood � ({ebcr neighborhoods have not been addressed. � 4. Allow for reconsideration of the No Public Access in the northwest portion of the preserve in the event that a future preferred alignment ofthe Bay Area Ridge Trail falls within that corridor. � Thank You for your time and consideration. | � Sean 7[. Burns Ph.D. � | --' ()riginu| K4uasugc--- � ! From: � To: | Sent: Friday, &or | 34, ZOO9 |l1U/\M � Subject: [u Honda Creek Master Plan � � | � WK-15-t009 10:387iM----BROW-COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL T-341 P.001/001 F-809 Nick Goddard 20 Bayview Ave Los Gatos, CA 95030 David Sang uinetti Mid Peninsula Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 4/15/2008 Dear Sir, I find it somewhat ironic to be composing this letter on day when thousands of people are expected to gather across the country and protest wasteful government spending. I write,of course, in reference to the ridiculous"speeding"ticket I received on St Joseph's Hill on 9/25/2008. As I'm sure you'll recall we exchanged some correspondence and telephone calls in October and November,where I pointed out the various constitutional flaws in the allegation, not to mention the technical ones_ I urged you repeatedly to drop the action,which you declined to do,forcing me to appear in court a total of three times and engage the services of an attorney to prepare my defense. Yesterday I had my opportunity to answer these charges and as was confidently predicted,the ruling was issued in my favor without my defense being presented as the charges were completely without merit. Now of course, I have been exonerated, but as a taxpayer, I am perturbed that your organization had to pay for the costs of a District Attorney and a Park Ranger to appear in court to press a case that had a zero percent chance of success. I am out of pocket considerably but have been vindicated and will always vigorously defend myself against tyrannical charges. However, I feel that others without schooling in law will just have to accept invidious charges levied against them and as a citizen I am saddened. I sincerely hope that your policies are changed to reflect that we the people have,and always will have rights afforded to us by the U.S Constitution and the laws of the Great State of California. I have resisted the urge to include a tea bag with this letter. Yours Sincerely Nick Goddard Regional 0penSpace ( Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District May 8, 2009 Mr. Nick Goddard 20 Bayview AVE. Los Gatos, CA 95030 Dear Mr. Goddard, I received your letter of April 15, 2009, regarding the speeding citation you received on September 25, 2008, at St. Joseph's Hill Open Space Preserve. I understand that a Santa Clara County Court Commissioner heard your case and found in your favor. It is, of course,the prerogative of the Commissioner to rule as they see fit in a case, but I must inform you the District has been successful in the vast majority of these cases, because we have shown the law to be well founded. Although you may disagree that a law which prevents excessive bicycle speed on District Preserves is valid, our elected Board of Directors does not. In addition, members of the public who share the trails with you regularly express their concern for their safety because of speeding bicyclists. Further, our rangers do respond to a considerable number of bicycle accidents each year, many of which are caused by excessive speed. A number of these have resulted in serious injuries and, sadly, even death. Therefore, please be advised that our staff will continue to rigorously enforce the District's bicycle speed ordinance, and we strongly encourage you to abide by all regulations while on District lands. Sincerely, Y I David T. Sanguinett Operations Manager o Distel Circle L as Altar,('A r()4022 s 6,o 6qi i2oo > 6,[o.09,t O48 y www openspace_org Midpeninsula Regional ' Open Space District To: Board of Directors From: Stephen E. Abbors Date: May 13, 2009 i Re: Late FYI s i i Midpeninsula Regional .� Memorandum Open Space District r y TO: MROSD Board of Directors From: Tina Rugg , Copy: _ Date: May 13, 2009 Re: Update on the Administrative Office Remodel Project This update is being provided to the Board regarding the current status of the Administrative Office remodel project as of May 8, 2009. • Tannerhecht formalized their response to the City of Los Altos' last minute comments received regarding the ramp and accessible parking spaces near the front entrance. Two sheets documenting the response will be submitted to the City this afternoon. • The Bid Opening occurred on April 24, 2009. Six bids were received. Staff is still reviewing the bid proposals. • A Board Report is being prepared in anticipation of awarding the contract at the May 27`1' Board Meeting. • Monster Mechanical returned to replace a malfunctioning thermostat in the lobby and to diagnose a loud whining issuing from the HVAC vents. An adjustment was made to the air flow and the noise has gone away. This is only a temporary fix and Monster Mechanical intends to return and determine if there is a problem inside the VAV box itself. • Data loggers placed in the General Manager's office were retrieved by Monster Mechanical. The temperature fluctuations have been noted to be less noticeable and extreme after Monster Mechanical replaced a velocity sensor in one of that zone's VAV boxes. Next Steps: Staff will continue to working on: • Determining further mid-to long-term HVAC improvements for the entire AO building • Preparing for award of contract for the second phase of the Basic Improvements remodel project (the kitchen remodel and IT server room upgrade work) An update will be provided through an informational memorandum to the Board at the next meeting. i Midpeninsula Regional Memorandum Open Space District r � To: MROSD Board of Directors I From: Tina Hugg C7 Copy: - Date: May 13, 2009 Re: Update on the Skyline Field Office Remodel Project This update is being provided to the Board regarding the current status of the Skyline Field Office remodel project as of May 8, 2009. • Planning staff met with Operations staff to discuss projected facility expansion, staff growth, priorities, and timelines. • Staff has received a rough draft of Tannerhecht's proposed scope of work to prepare a presentation of costs, sustainable practices, concepts,and ideas to consider for a new SFO building. At this time, this work will be placed on hold pending the outcome of the staff facilities strategic planning effort. Next Steps: • Compile and gather additional information on projected facility expansion, staff growth, priorities, and timelines in preparation for the next Ad Hoc Committee meeting, to be scheduled. An update will be provided through an informational memorandum to the Board at the next meeting. ` ` COMPILATION OFPUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE LAHONDA CREEK DRAFT KAASTERPLAN (K8oy4, 2009— K8ayl3, 2009) EMAIL RESPONSE � Uaor � Thank you for your interest in the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Master Plan projectond for taking the time to send in your comments on the Draft Plan. You input has been collected, is now part of the public comment record for the project, and has been forwarded to the District's Board of Directors for their review and consideration. Please feel free to send in any additional comments by May 13 so that we may be able to forward them hothe Board of Directors prior to the May 19 first public hearing when the Board will consider tentative adoption of the Draft Master Plan, You are also welcome to attend this first � hearing to provide oral comments. Details of this meeting are provided below: Tuesday, May 1Q. 2OOQ � 6:30p.m. - 9:00p.m. � Alvin S. Hatch Elementary School � Multipurpose Room � 490 Minemonbes Avenue � Half Moon Bay, CA 94010 Sinmana|y. Ana Ruiz � Project Manager -----Original Message----- From: Frank Crossman To: MROSD Ruiz Ana Co: Crossman Chip Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:40 AM Subject: Comments for Board on La Honda Creek Preserve Master Plan � Ana: Please pass on these written comments to the Board. I have attached a pdf of the comments and the trail map that I created to illustrate moycomments. I will also include the written corucocutu bc{ovv with an attached 'pg of the trail rnuy. Excellent work ou the master plan! PraukCvoaanzou ll May 200g Mid»coinacla Regional Open Space District Board Members: } have read the l.n Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Master Plan Z)caft March 2009. The master plan is comprehensive and well done. It has taken 4 1/2 years after acquisition to reach the point where the board is now able to allocate funds to implement the plan's recommendations. I have a suggestion that would alter the funding priorities proposed in the plan. The MROSD mission statement stresses acquiring and preserving open space before that of providing of opportunities for public enjoyment of these lands, but the public provides district funding to MROSD through taxes. The public expects to have access to these recently acquired lands within a reasonable period of time. The evaluation of natural resources and the planning of improvements to La Honda Creek Preserves to meet all MROSD missions has been completed with the publication of this draft, but that planning has taken 4.5 years and the full implementation of all the improvements in the plan is projected to require an additional 30 years. I urge the board to place higher priority on funding those improvements that enhance the public access to these lands. These are related to Master Plan Objective PA-3.1: Provide loop trails and trail connections to parking areas, key destination sites, and newly opened areas of the Preserve. In the accompanying map, I have highlighted in black the proposed trails that are to be improved and opened to the public in the next 5 years under the proposed Phase I funding. With reference to the map, you will see that there is planned a loop trail (designated Trail 1) that runs from Driscoll Ranch parking area to the Sears Ranch parking area. The only other trail improvement proposed for Phase I is the Trail 2 loop enhancement at the far northern end of La Honda Creek Preserve, but that trail already is open to the public from the permit parking area on Allen Road. As you can see from the map there is no public access planned for the middle 2/3 of La Honda Creek Preserve until sometime after 2014. Personally I've waited the 4.5 years it has taken so far to establish this comprehensive master plan. As a member of the public I can understand the reasons for this. But surely the master plan could have proposed to build a minimal set of trails that extend from top to bottom in this preserve and are opened to the public by 2014. Let me show how that can be done. In addition to the proposed Phase I trail projects 3.1 a, b, c (p. 117), provide funding in Phase I for additional trail projects described on pages 118 and 119 - 3.1 d (trail 3), 3.1 e (trail 4), 3.1 f(trail 5), a portion of 3.1 g (trail 6 from trail I to trail 5 only), and a portion of 3.1 i (trail 8 from trail 4 to Red Barn only) These additional trails are represented by red in the accompanying map. Combined with Trails 1 and 2 in black, they provide public access to the entire length of La Honda Creek Preserve. However, none of these added trails are planned for design/completion until Phase 2 in years 2015-2020. Full funding of these additional five trail projects is estimated in the master plan to be between $430,000 to $560,000. However, as shown in the accompanying map, only a portion of trail 6 and 8 are needed to complete access from one end of the preserve to the other, so the cost the trails outlined in this suggestion should be approximately $360,000- $490,000. Why should you consider this? What you get for this funding is a full set of trails that can be opened to the public in 1-5 years from today. These trails run from both southern parking locations at Driscoll and Sears Ranch entrances to Red Barn near La Honda and then to the Allen Rd permit parking area. They offer a wide range and level of difficulty in trails over a geographically and biologically unique portion of the Midpeninsula as currently represented by MROSD preserves open to the public. In summary if you fund these trail projects now, the public will have access to the entire length of the preserve in 1-5 years rather than in 6-10 years as proposed in this draft. For the amount of public support the district receives in taxes, this would be an appropriate way for MROSD to thank the public for its support. Frank W. Crossman 788 Florales Dr. Palo Alto, CA 94306 MROSD Volunteer with Trail Patrol, Conservation Easement Monitor, Community Outreach and Special Projects Driscoll Ranch Slain Access Road 5.6 Easy Access Loop Trail 0.9 j � '�u'' �•` Tj Vista Point Loop Trail Trail Connection to Red Barn Area 6.3 S Trail Connect�n to Driscoll Ranch 1.5 • :.a Honda Crnrk Loop Trait 4.8 � Redwood Cabin Loop Trail 2.3 � inlereor Loo{s'Trail 2.4 ..�.._ t 9 Rest Barn Loop Trail 2.0 iolger Ranch Loop Trail 3.9 Harrington Creek Trail 1.6 Sean Ranch to*Trail 1.9 ter ".K.1 rum Trail to Rav's Peak 0.1 a<tiw ax,a�w m xyl b � r l�auu+=., i •� t 4.F �F�♦Q La Honda Creek figure 11A: Public Access (with Option 1) Open Space Preseme i..I!. fairRep P,atfa;iatiar arM,xx rkf;t+'tc fys..�'wv � f..n�ak;nab Urtte�*.��_ q. ^h.'w.P,rfrc'ete hMm r.�°xi�q+.rw,� ........,.�« fumf.q 3sm0ix.nwl Y.rtag+st^n9^n' «s�s«.xr,ea..+,ixha �... p„ 'w+Twsia.•s.crw. ----- Original Message ----- From: Plankhaus To: lahondamasterplanCcDopenspace.org Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 6:32 PM Subject: La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Master Plan Hello, As a long time hiker and frequent user of MROSD trails, I am happy to see the above referenced preserve may be open for regular use, not just by permit. It is a lovely and very diverse space and I will look forward to hiking there often. My concerns are for the degree of permitted uses, that is I sincerely hope the La Honda Creek Open Space will not be changed to allow unlimited use by bicycles and dogs. If not a total ban of bicycles, then at least not allowed on all trails. I suppose there are speed limits, but on other trails where bicycles are allowed, often the bicycle riders are less than courteous of hikers. Please consider use restrictions carefully, Sincerely, Sybil Plank 1274 Tunitas Creek Road Woodside, CA 94062 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth Waldhauer" <ruth waldhauer((-� .,yahoo.com> To: <Iahondarnasterplan&)opens pace.org> Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 6:01 PM Subject: Multi-use Trails > Attn: Ana Ruiz > I am a hiker clocking about 8 miles a week on MROSD trails. I do not > hike on weekend because of rogue bicyclists. > Most of the bicyclists are polite, but the exceptions threaten my > safety. Is it possible to limit bicyclists to having access to the > La Honda Creek OSP only on Saturdays? During the week there are few > bicyclists. A fair plan might be to share the weekend, Saturdays for > bicyclists with Sundays for hikers and equestrians. Exceptions might > be made by having docent-lead bicycle rides during the week. > La Honda Creek OPS is gorgeous land. It would be a pity to see it > destroyed by carelessness. * Sincerely, * Ruth Waldhauer * 22400 Skyline Blvd. Box 35 * La Honda CA 94020 -----Original Message ----- From: Kate FitzGerald To: la hondamasterpla n CcDo pen space.o rq Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 4:24 PM Subject: Comments on La Honda Master plan -what, no bicycles!? Hi, I wanted to provide some comments on the draft master plan for La Honda Open Space Preserve. I am very unhappy to see that the proposed plan has only token access allowed to mountain biking. As a 51 year old woman who loves to mountain bike with her husband, I think it is unfortunate that the Master Plan committee has taken such a negative view of bicyclists. I have donated some money in the past to POST to preserve some of these lands, and to find that I am being denied reasonable use of these areas on my bicycle is very upsetting. I am very familiar with the pros and cons of the impact of hiking, horseback riding, and mountain biking on the open space, and I know that mountain biking is no worse, and likely less damaging to the trails and environment than horseback riding. The red herring that you have put in about the San Francisco Garter Snake (SFGS) habitat is offensive. Given that you have not found evidence of SFGS in the Preserve, this is clearly just a convenient ploy to justify the Plan committees continued unreasonable dislike of mountain bikes. If you don't want bicyclists on the same trails as hikers or horses (which is acceptable), then let the mountain bikers in to do supervised trail work to create bicycle-only trails. If history is any guide, you will find more bicyclist volunteers willing to do this work than you are likely to find among hikers or equestrians. This would allow some new trails to be added at low cost and impact, and would give bicyclists who love the outdoors and nature the same recreational access you give to hikers and equestrians. There is no logical reason to ban mountain bikes, except the prejudices of people who are not educated or who can't accept change, and entrenched close-minded Plan committee members. We love the open space, we love nature, and we would like to be able to enjoy it. Why are you so intent on denying us this reasonable access? ^ � � � & ^\docot-|o{, tour ia not access, and neither iao "ranch road ^—you might as well put down pavement for all the enjoymentve will get out ofthis. Please re-think this plan with regard Lo bicycle use. � Kate FitzGero|d � � � � --' Origina| Message----- From: Kristen PEtersen � To: 'Kristen Petersen' � Sent: Friday, May O8. 2000G:17AM � Subject: La Honda Open Space � � DeorAnna— | know that you are interested in receiving comments about proposed usage nfthe � � Lo Honda Open Space. | fully support opening the land for human use. Bikers, hikers and equestrians should be able bo share the trails and still be able topreserve the land. As a hiker and equestrian, I have found that when there are problems out on the trails it is largely due ho^speed^ issues. Let noe give you and example. Last year upon Skyline Ridge, | was riding � uphill with several friends. Aawe come uptoa curve, four bikers came barreling down out ofa blind curve. Needless h» say, my horse hit the panic button which sent the other two horses into panic. The lead biker skidded too stop almost under nny rearing horse. Everyone was very upset. Fortunately no one was hurt. /t could have ended up with injured riders and bikers with � loose horses running out nfcontrol. � We went on to ride for two more hours but we ended up calling "horses on the trail" every time we � hit acurve. It took nne four months bo get my horse calm out on the trail. | have never returned to � Skyline. The ride in way too stressful when you have tobmon red alert for the next encounter with fast bikes! � This isn't just o biker/hdarissue. This also applied ho hikers too. Fast bikers and slower hikers � encounter the same problems. � When you design thebai|s. vvnu|dthensbeavvoybomanagetheuphi|VdovvnhiUb|indopot so we � can minimize accidents and increase the enjoyment of this spectacular property? � � | oma long term resident of Palo Alto and LaHonda. Thank you for preserving this wonder land � and allowing we humans toenjoy h| � � Thank you, Kristen Petersen � P.S. One last question. Will the property have any service roads that could be used for carriage driving? There are u number ofcarriage driving equestrians that are finding drivable roods � increasingly rare to use. If there was a road like the Old Haul Road over in K8arnoha| Park that � . could b� available, THAT would be great! Old service or logging roads are great. � � � � � -----Original Message----- From: Drew Phillips To: lahondamasterplan(3-openspace.org Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 7:53 PM Subject: La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Draft Master Plan I'd like to congratulate the planning staff and the ad hoc committee for considering the overwhelmingly positive feedback supporting mountain biking in La Honda Creek Open Space preserve. I support draft option 2. In addition please consider: - Allowing mountain biking on the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road. - Having good single track options for mountain bikers, like a cycling route up Ray's peak. Thank you, Drew W Phillips ROMP Member San Jose, CA -----Original Message ----- From: balica(a-),comcast.net To: lahondamasterplan(a)-openspace.org Sent:Wednesday, May 06, 2009 4:33 PM Subject: Comment on La Honda Open Space Preserve Draft Master Plan Hi Ana, I appreciate the opportunity MROSD has provided to comment on the La Honda Open Space Preserve Draft Master Plan and I was also impressed with the thoroughness of the report. I did have a couple of questions about the plan and the upcoming meeting on May 19. It seems the plan has only two options at this time for bicycling in the preserve (Option 1 - Access only to Bay Area Ridge Trail [once established] and Option 2 - Broader preserve access down to La Honda). Maybe I missed it in the long report but I didn't see the process the district will use to assess and select between these options. Is this something that is defined and/or will it be a topic for the meeting on May 19? If it's still in the formative stages and if it is an agenda item at the meeting, what means do I and other bicyclists have to advocate the broadest bicycle access possible within the preserve (written comment by 5/13, meeting attendance, etc.)? Thanks for any information you can provide, Craig Ball San Carlos Homeowner Avid Outdoor Enthusiast (Biking, Hiking) Regular Financial Contributor to Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST) -----Original Message ----- From: Dayton Crites To: lahondamasterplan(a-)-openspace.org Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 9:46 AM III Subject: Com ments on La Honda Open s ace plan To whom it may concern, 1 into h committee for taking I d like to congratulate the planning staff and the ad hoc c g b P account the overwhelmingly positive feedback regarding allowing mountain biking in La Honda Creek Open Space preserve. I feel strongly this is the right decision and am excited to see that there will be cycling related, light recreational opportunities for La Honda residents and inhabitants of the entire bay area. I'd like to commend the District on a bold move to close perhaps 1/4 of the preserve to the public to protect Red Legged Frog and San Francisco Garter Snake habitat. I appreciate and respect the District's mission to preserve protect and restore open space. I support draft option 2 with the following addenda: 1. Permit biking along the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road (trail 1). It's a fire road used by heavy trucks, hikers and equestrians. Adding Cycling to the use of this road would not be a significant impact to the environment, Driscoll Ranch, or the surrounding neighborhoods. 2. Cyclists enjoy a good view as much as anyone else. Permit cycling on trails 12 and 13 up to "Ray's Peak". This would add another loop to the region near the town of La Honda and would spread the cycling use out, creating more positive user experiences for everyone. 3. Please permit mountain biking on many of the flatter trails for the neighborhood behind Alice's Restaurant such as the Redwood Cabin Loop Trail (7), Vista Point Loop trail (3), and the Easy Access Loop Trail. The cycling and outdoor recreation needs of the residents in the Skywood Keber neighborhoods have not been addressed. 4. Allow for reconsideration of the No Public Access in the northwest portion of the preserve in the event that a future preferred alignment of the Bay Area Ridge Trail falls within that corridor. Thank you for your time and consideration. Dayton Crites 156 2nd Ave San Francisco, CA 94118 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Will Aldrich" <will a)willaldrich.com> To: <lahondamasterplan(a)openspace.org> Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 9:57 PM Subject: La Honda Creek OSP Master Plan Comment To whom it may concern, > I'd like to congratulate the planning staff and the ad hoc committee > for taking into account the overwhelmingly positive feedback regarding > allowing mountain biking in La Honda Creek Open Space preserve. I feel > strongly this is the right decision and am excited to see that there > will be cycling related, light recreational opportunities for La Honda > residents and inhabitants of the entire bay area. > > I'd like to commend the District on a bold move to close perhaps 1/4 > of the preserve to the public to protect Red Legged Frog and San > Francisco Garter Snake habitat. I appreciate and respect the > District's mission to preserve protect and restore open space. > I support draft option 2 with the following addenda: > > 1. Permit biking along the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main > access road (trail 1). It's a fire road used by heavy trucks, hikers > and equestrians. Adding Cycling to the use of this road would not be a > significant impact to the environment, Driscoll Ranch, or the > surrounding neighborhoods. > 2. Cyclists enjoy a good view as much as anyone else. Permit cycling > on trails 12 and 13 up to "Ray's Peak". This would add another loop to > the region near the town of La Honda and would spread the cycling use > out, creating more positive user experiences for everyone. > > 3. Allow mountain biking on some or all of the flatter trails for the > neighborhood behind Alice's Restaurant such as the Redwood Cabin Loop > Trail (7), Vista Point Loop trail (3), and the Easy Access Loop Trail. > The cycling and outdoor recreation needs of the residents in the > Skywood Keber neighborhoods have not been addressed. > 4. Allow for reconsideration of the No Public Access in the northwest > portion of the preserve in the event that a future preferred alignment > of the Bay Area Ridge Trail falls within that corridor. > Thank Y you for our time and consideration. Y > Will Aldrich > 2517 Harrison Street > San Francisco, CA 94110 > VP Product, TripIt, Inc. http://www.tripit.com/ > Board Member, Mammoth Lakes Trails & Public Access http://www.mltpa,org/ > Volunteer, SF Urban Riders http://www.sfurbanriders� ----- Original Message ----- From: <jol­inL&evil-penius.com> To: <lahondamasterplan i?openspace.or > Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:34 PM Subject: Comments on the La Honda Creek Draft Master Plan > Dear Ana: > (I hope this is the correct place to send my comments on the LHC > Draft Master Plan. If not, please advise.) > I am glad to see that public access will finally become a reality > for La Honda Creek, and am in support of leaving parts of the park > solely for wildlife. > However, there is one major issue with the plan as currently > implemented. Despite the fact that 80% of the people at last years' > public meeting were bicyclists advocating greater bicycle access, both > Option A and Option B treat people on bicycles as second-class citizens > who do not deserve access to their own public lands. > It has been well-established by multiple published studies that > bicycles have no more trail impact than hikers, and far less than > horses. For example: > Wilson, J.P. and Seney, J.P. 1994. Erosional Impact of Hikers, > Horses, Motorcycles and Off-road Bicycles on Mountain Trails in Montana. > Mountain Research and Development 14(1): 77-88. > Thurston, Eden and Reader, Richard J. 2001. Impacts of > Experimentally Applied Mountain Biking and Hiking on Vegetation and Soil > of a Deciduous Forest. Environmental Management 27(3):397 -409. > Cessford, Gordon R. Off-Road Impacts of Mountain Bikes, a Review and > Discussion. New Zealand Department of Conservation. ISSN 0113-3713, ISBN > 0-478-01739-1. > Also available online at: > http://www.mountainbike.co.nz/politics/doc/impacts/index.htm > I > Furthermore, people on bicycles outnumber people on horses by over > 30:1, and are the second largest group of park users in the area, second I > only to hikers and ahead of dog walkers. In fact, since trail > bicyclists take more trips than hikers, there are more trail cycling > trips each year (900 million) than hiking trips (844 million)! > Source: 2006 Outdoor Industry Foundation Participation Survey > http://www.outdoorindustry.orjx/images/researchfiles/ParticipationStudv2006.t)di' • Finally, as a bicycle commuter and strong environmentalist, I find • it bizarre that I am lauded as a wonderful, carbon-footprint-reducing, • planet-saving person -- until the moment I cross a park boundary, at • which point I am instantly called a destructive yahoo and a lawbreaker. • Yet equestrians driving 12 MPG trucks or SUVs (necessary to tow their • horse trailers to and from the trailhead) are welcomed with open arms, • while their half-ton horses drop tons of smelly feces on the trail and • churn it into sand and mud bogs. > Despite this destruction, horses are allowed on the entire LHC trail > network, while people on bicycles are prohibited from all but a tiny > fraction. Since we've already established that there is no ecological > reason for banning bicycles, we are left with simple dislike. > Apparently the board, and a vocal and persistent minority of park users, > simply dislikes people on bicycles. > There are words for this. "Selfishness", "prejudice", and > "segregation". > Demanding that the public be banned from public land because you > want it to yourself is simple selfishness. Demanding that a specific > group of people be banned because you don't like them is prejudice. > When institutionalized, it is segregation. > We outlawed segregation decades ago for good reason, and it is now > socially and politically unacceptable to segregate based on race, sex, > physical handicap, etc. Yet it is still acceptable to segregate people > on bicycles, without even paying lip service to "separate but > equal"...the attitude of the Board is apparently "separate and > unequal." So while I obviously prefer option B to option A, I cannot > support either, because both assume that I am a second-class citizen. > It's like asking me "Do you want the colored bathroom to have one stall > or two?" > You will notice from my address that, despite attending several of > the previous LHC and MidPen meetings and having enjoyed many Bay Area > parks over the 15+ years I lived here, I no longer live in the Bay > Area. One of the main reasons I left was the segregation and > discrimination I experienced from the MROSD, as well as the EBRPD and > other parks districts. I am simply tired of being told that 1, a strong > environmentalist and bicycle commuter of 15+years, cannot enjoy my own > public lands. > So I've left. > For the sake of those that remain, I hope that you will reconsider > your discriminatory policies, and add another option to the plan that > respects the right of humans to enjoy their open space in a sustainable, > ecologically sound, human-powered way...by bicycle. > Thank you for your time. > John Grigsby > POB 10897 > Zephyr Cove, NV 89448 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Martin, Theresa M." <martin@smccd.edu> To: <info@openspace.org> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 9:41 PM Subject: Comment on La Honda Open Space Master Plan Dear Open Space District, Please forward to correct address since your email link for La Honda Open Space is broken. I am writing to support option 2 of your trail plan for La Honda Open Space Preserve. I am a resident of La Honda and have been involved in the planning process for this open space since its inception. At every step, I and other La Hondans have expressed our interest in having multi-use trails that include access for bikes from the Sears Ranch Rd. entrance. Option 2 best reflects the wishes of the La Honda community in this matter. I would also like to remind the board of the two hundred signatures on a neighborhood petition submitted to the Open Space District that specifically requests bicycle access for the La Honda community. Remember that we are a small community, and two hundred signatures represents a large percentage of the community. I also want to remind the board of their obligation to be good neighbors and fair representatives of the people they serve. Limiting bike access to the Bay Area Ridge trail and docent led rides does a disservice to our La Honda wishes and our community. Please choose option 2 when considering trail access for La Honda. Thank You, Theresa Martin La Honda Homeowner -----Original Message ----- From: Brian Simon To: info(c)-openspace.org Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 10:00 PM Subject: Comment on La Honda Open Space Master Plan Dear Open Space District, Please forward to correct address since your email link for La Honda Open Space is broken. I am writing to support option 2 of your trail plan for La Honda Open Space Preserve. I am a resident of La Honda and have been involved in the planning process for this open space since its inception. At every step, I and other La Hondans have expressed our interest in having multi-use trails that include access for bikes from the Sears Ranch Rd. entrance. Option 2 best reflects the wishes of the La Honda community in this matter. I would also like to remind the board of the two hundred signatures on a neighborhood petition submitted to the Open Space District that specifically requests bicycle access for the La Honda community. Remember that we are a small community, and two hundred signatures represents a large percentage of the community. I also want to remind the board of their obligation to be good neighbors and fair representatives of the people they serve. Limiting bike access to the Bay Area Ridge trail and docent led rides does a disservice to our La Honda wishes and our community. I support draft option 2 and furthermore suggest the following addenda: 1. Permit biking along the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road (trail 1). It's a fire road used by heavy trucks, hikers and equestrians. Adding Cycling to the use of this road would not be a significant impact to the environment, Driscoll Ranch, or the surrounding neighborhoods. 2. Cyclists enjoy a good view as much as anyone else. Permit cycling on trails 12 and 13 up to "Ray's Peak". This would add another loop to the region near the town of La Honda and would spread the cycling use out, creating more positive user experiences for everyone. 3. Allow mountain biking on some or all of the flatter trails for the neighborhood behind Alice's Restaurant such as the Redwood Cabin Loop Trail (7), Vista Point Loop trail (3), and the Easy Access Loop Trail. The cycling and outdoor recreation needs of the residents in the Skywood Keber neighborhoods have not been addressed. 4. Allow for reconsideration of the No Public Access in the northwest portion of the preserve in the event that a future preferred alignment of the Bay Area Ridge Trail falls within that corridor. Please choose option 2 when considering trail access for La Honda. Thank You, Brian Simon La Honda Homeowner -----Original Message ----- From: Erik and Mei Strom To: lahondamasterplan(-a),openspace.org Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 10:57 PM Subject: Re: La Honda Creek OSP master plan Dear Ms. Ruiz and La Honda Creek OSP Planning Board, We are residents of La Honda writing with regards to the La Honda Creek OSP master plan that is to be reviewed at the public hearing on May 19th, 2009. We first would like to congratulate you on the great progress made in the planning effort; you've come a long way. We also would like to express our concerns over the current draft master plan. We take special interest in the section regarding Bicycle Use (Pages 64-69) because bicycling is our main form of exercise that keeps us healthy and fit. Both being independant and disciplined individuals, we found Option One -- docent led bicycle rides only on OSP -- unacceptable. Option Two is better than Option One; however, we support following addenda proposed by ROMP president Joshua Moore: 1. Permit biking along the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road (trail 1). It's a fire road used by heavy trucks, hikers and equestrians. Adding Cycling to the use of this road would not be a significant impact to the environment, Driscoll Ranch, or the surrounding neighborhoods. 2. Cyclists enjoy a good view as much as anyone else. Permit cycling on trails 12 and 13 up to "Ray's Peak". This would add another loop to the region near the town of La Ilonda and would spread the cycling use out, creating more positive user experiences for everyone. 3. Allow mountain biking on some or all of the flatter trails for the neighborhood behind Alice's Restaurant such as the Redwood Cabin Loop Trail (7), Vista Point Loop trail (3), and the Easy Access Loop Trail. The cycling and outdoor recreation needs of the residents in the Skywood Keber neighborhoods have not been addressed. 4. Allow for reconsideration of the No Public Access in the northwest portion of the preserve in the event that a future preferred alignment of the Bay Area Ridge Trail falls within that corridor. Thank you for your time and consideration. -Erik and Mei Strom PO BOX 28 La Honda, CA 94020 -----Original Message----- From: BarbTHooper(a)aol.com To: lahondamasterplanCa),openspace.org Cc: BarbTHooper aol.com Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 10:07 PM Subject: feedback on La Honda Creek Master Plan Dear Mid-Peninsula Open Space District: As a La Honda resident I am excited about the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve that will be accessible from our town in the future. I am an avid hiker and look forward to having more beautiful trails available for my family and friends. I am also a cyclist who enjoys road and mountain biking. Please consider and support Public Access Option 2 which includes mountain bike trails in the preserve. The trails will provide additional recreation options for La Honda residents and their children. Sincerely, Barbara Hooper 205 Cuesta Real La Honda -----Original Message ----- From: kathy crane To: lahondamasterplan(o)openspace,org Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 7:51 PM Subject: La Honda Creek Open Space Ana, Thank you for all the effort put into the two proposals for the La Honda Creek Open Space. I look forward to someday hiking, mountain biking, and riding horses there. I like the second option because it gives more access to mountain bikes. There are not enough opportunities for the kids in La Honda and biking in the Open Space directly from home gives them a new area to explore. I believe the trails can be shared by all and enjoyed. Thank you, Kathy Crane La Honda Resident La Honda Pescadero Unified School District School Board Trustee ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Nelson" <tknelson 2cslac.stanford.edu> To: <Iahondamasterplanro),openspace.or > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 6:13 PM Subject: On the importance of bicycle access for La Honda families. > Greetings, > As a member of the community of La Honda, it is with great excitement > that I read the draft plan for the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve. > In any case, it will be enjoyed greatly by many. However, I have some > strong feelings about the plans for bicycle access that I believe are > worthy of your attention. • Although I am an avid road cyclist, you might be surprised to know • that I am much more likely to go hiking than cycling in Open Space. • While I do own a mountain bike, I generally like to enjoy our trails • at a much slower pace. Furthermore, as a hiker, I am sympathetic with • those who would severely limit bicycle access and I am much more • likely to be annoyed by disrespectful bicyclists on trail than I am to • be denied bicycle access to a trail. } > However, as a parent, I have a very different viewpoint. I have a 4- > year-old who loves to ride her little bicycle: she is very excited to > have taken off the training wheels last weekend! Meanwhile, it is > sadly ironic that although La Honda is heaven for a serious cyclist, > our roads are no place for children or beginners: they are either very > steep, carry dangerous traffic, or both. As a result, it is with some > sadness that I take my daughter to the parking lot at the La Honda > elementary school to ride her bicycle and I cannot even imagine a time > when I might be comfortable with her riding on our roads. With so > many families in La Honda, it is clear that we are not alone. } > For this reason, I urge you to implement Bicycle Use Option 2 which > includes bicycle access from the Sears Ranch Road trailhead to the Red > Barn. The section in question is relatively easy and quite suitable > for families and children who have nowhere else to ride. Meanwhile, > those same attributes will make these trails much less attractive to > the serious mountain bikers that might compromise the peace and quiet > of the preserve. } > The thought of taking my children on a ride up to the Red Barn fills > me with a real joy. If this option becomes a reality, we will thank > you with each and every smile along the way. > Best Regards, > Tim Nelson > 526 Cuesta Real > La Honda } > --------------------------------------------------------- > Dr. Timothy K. Nelson > Stanford Linear Accelerator Center > office: 650.926.2274 cell: 650.201.2431 > --------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message ----- From: Chris Kangas To: lahondamasterp Ian(a')open space.org Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:35 PM Subject: La Honda Open Space Master Plan Hi There, I'm writing with regard to the La Honda Open Space Master planning process. Specifically, I'd like to support draft option number two, with the following additions: 1. Permit biking along the entire length of the Driscoll Ranch main access road (trail 1). It's a fire road used by heavy trucks, hikers and equestrians. Adding Cycling to the use of this road would not be a significant impact to the environment, Driscoll Ranch, or the surrounding neighborhoods. 2. Cyclists enjoy a good view as much as anyone else. Permit cycling on trails 12 and 13 up to "Ray's Peak". This would add another loop to the region near the town of La Honda and would spread the cycling use out, creating more positive user experiences for everyone. 3. Allow mountain biking on some or all of the flatter trails for the neighborhood behind Alice's Restaurant such as the Redwood Cabin Loop Trail (7), Vista Point Loop trail (3), and the Easy Access Loop Trail. The cycling and outdoor recreation needs of the residents in the Sk wood Keber neighborhoods have not been addressed. Y g 4. Allow for reconsideration of the No Public Access in the northwest portion of the preserve in the event that a future preferred alignment of the Bay Area Ridge Trail falls within that corridor. Thank you for taking the time to reach out to the user community for feedback, Sincerely, Chris Kangas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Engovatov" <dengovatov@hytrust.com> To: <lahondamasterplan&penspaee.org> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:48 AM Subject: Comment on master plan > Dear Sir/Madam > I am writing to comment on the proposed master plan for the La Honda > OSP. I would like to thank you for the work you have done. > I do think that both versions of the proposed trail access are > inadequate in providing opportunities for low impact recreation for > those of us who are not fortunate enough to be able to afford to > participate in equestrian activities - especially in light of the > situation that neighboring state parks exclude cycling altogether. > In general think that all mutlipurpose trails should provide cycling > access to allow all of us who own this beautiful land an opportunity > to enjoy it. Unfortunately, not everything can be accessible by > hiking only. > > I would like to propose to add cycling access to all fire roads, such > as Driscol ranch access road and to provide cycling access to Ray's > peak. > Thank you, > Daniel Engovatov. > 437 Beaume ct > Mountain View CA 94043 > (650) 906 3176 > > en 7ovatov gmail.com