Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19730425 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) Meeting 73-9 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT Board of Directors April 25, 1973 Sunnyvale Community Center I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL President Wendin called the meeting to order at 7 :45 p.m. Members present: Daniel Condron, Katherine Duffy, Nonette Hanko, William Peters, Daniel Wendin. Also attending: Herbert Grench, Stanley Norton, Don Weden (Santa Clara County Planning Department) and audience of about 6 persons . II. President Wendin introduced Herbert Grench the newly appointed General Manager of the District. He stated that since Mr. L. Klein had not yet arrived discussion of the contract would be delayed until later in the agenda. III. MINUTES OF MARCH 21 K. Duffy corrected page 5 , second paragraph from bottom, last sentence; should read: "The maximum day-use would be 800 per- sons. " W. Peters made the following corrections: Page 1, item I. , under Also attending, Arthur Ogilvie was atten- ding as a private citizen, not as a representative from the County Planning Department. Page 2 , item d. , second sentence should read "Two a2praisals are required when applying for State and Federal funds. ir Page 2, item 7, first sentence should read "Wildlife Refuge lines have not been firmly drawn but will include acquisi- tion Page 3, item B. , correct spelling is Kelley, not Kiely. Page 3, item B. , first paragraph, should read "Joint State, County and City costs will be I.Page 3, item D. , strike "Sanborn Park and" , begin sentence with "The San Jose . . . Page 4, item F. , last two sentences struck, insert "The State has condemnation rights for trail purposes which the County does not. It is anticipated that the State will cooperate by use of these rights with County funds scheduled for this Skyline acquisition. " Motion: D Wendin moved that the Minutes of March 21 be approved as corrected. Second by W. Peters. Passed unanimously. President Wendin requested the secretary to send the corrected minutes to Mr. Robert Amyx with a note encourag q - any comment he might have. MINUTES OF APRIL 11 D. Wendin asked that Page 3, IV. NEW BUSINESS, paragraph 3 be struck. While this announce was made the checks were not issued at that time. Motion: D. Wendin moved that the minutes of April 11 be approved as corrected. Second by N. Hanko. Passed unanimously. Meeting 9 . . . page 2 IV. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY President Wendin introduced Art Ogilvie of the Santa Clara County Planning Department. Mr. Ogilvie introduced Mrs. Gordon Stewart, Chairman of the Citi- zens Advisory Committee (Southern Section) , Skyline Scenic Recrea- tion Route. Mr. Stewart thanked the Directors for the opportunity to describe the work of her Committee. She reported that on April 24 the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors had accepted the concept of the Committee' s resolution recommending acquisition of certain lands along Skyline Boulevard, Summit Road and Loma Prieta Avenue for view sites, roadside rests, day-use areas and park additions. Mr. Ogilvie explained that the Joint Powers Agreement for develop- ment of the Skyline Scenic Recreation Route was formed with four counties (San Mateo, San Francisco, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz) and six cities. He introduced Mr. George Miller of the San Mateo County Planning Department who is the staff representative to the Citizens Advisory Committee (Northern Section) ; this area includes the route from Golden Gate Bridge to the San Mateo-Santa Clara County line. Mr. Miller described the route with the use of a strip map showing the proposal for the Northern Section. He pointed out that the major characteristic of the Northern Section was urban, unlike the character of the route in Santa Clara County and south. The route alignment follows existing roadways from Golden Gate to Skyline Junior College. At this point the route would pro- ceed into the San Francisco Watershed lands past the Portola Dis- covery Site (an historical site of about 17 acres) following a trail based on a 1967 study. The route would again join Skyline Boulevard at Highway 92. From this point to Santa Clara County line Skyline Boulevard is a designated State Scenic Highway. Mr. Miller explained that Proposition A of San Mateo County (Novem- ber 1972) provided funds for acquisition, some of which is desig- nated for lands bordering Skyline Boulevard. N. Hanko asked how the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors have agreed to use the Proposition A funds. Mr. Miller said that there are about 17 sites planned for acquisition with coastal and San Bruno Mountain areas given top priority. Mr. Miller stated that the scenic corridor along Skyline Scenic Recreation Route varies from 500 feet to 2000 feet with a 100-foot setback and architectural and site review required. D. Wendin asked what the time schedule is for the acquisition of the ridge route. Mr. Miller stated that the financing of a project of this magnitude would have to be federal, since neither the State nor the County would have sufficient funds. He pointed out that there is an alternate route alignment along Sawyer Camp Road; and that there is some resistence in the County to the ridge route con- cept. He explained that the ridge route roadway is presently en- visioned as a low-use, low-speed route which will be winding and twisting through the watershed , lands. N. Hanko asked how the Meeting 9 . . . page 3 County could prohibit tie-ins with the ridge route road. Mr. Miller said that this is a problem and that pressure has been exerted by both Pacifica and Half Moon Bay for such tie-ins. President Wendin thanked Mr. Miller. Mr. Ogilvie gave a brief history of what lead to the Joint Powers Agreement. In 1966 the Santa Clara County Planning Department and interested citizens suggested the following alternatives for a parkway plan: 1) West Coast National Parkway from Puget Sound to Tijuana. 2) Gold BeachIn Oregon to Carmel-Monterey in California 3) Sonoma County to the Pajaro River 4) the Four County Parkway Out of alternative 4) came the Joint Powers Agreement of San Mateo, San Francisco, Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties and the cities of Daly City, Pacifica, San Bruno, Woodside, Portola Valley, and Palo Alto. Actions taken by this Committee have been the adoption of the route, designation of the road as County Scenic Route in Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Acounties, and proposal of the resolu- tion adopted, in principle, by the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors on April 24. Mr. Ogilvie presented slides of the route from the San Mateo- Santa Clara County line to Mt. Madonna County Park. Mr. Ogilvie pointed out that a stretch of unpaved road (about 15 miles long) along the route is officially only a fire route. However, the owners have lost right to keep public off since they had not ex- ercised that right over a long period of time. Mr. Ogilvie then outlined the Southern Section of the route on a strip map, pointing out lands along the route which are held in public lands or are recommended by the Citizens Advisory Com- mittee for acquisition. The County Parks and Recreation Depart- ment is currently studying hiking and riding trails along the route. The State Highways Department has stated that bike trails would require an 8-foot setback from the roadway. This poses problems when one considers the terrain of the area. An alterna- tive which the State has proposed is a one-way 5-foot strip abut- ting each side of the pavement. This would involve Santa Cruz County lands and would require working out the agreement with them. Mr. Ogilvie expressed concern about the public rights over the 100-foot setback along the area of the fire road. President Wendin thanked Mr. Ogilvie for his presentation. The meeting was recessed from 9: 30 p.m. to 9 :45 p.m. President Wendin returned to the first agenda item - Approval of the Contract with the General Manager. He asked Mr. Grench if he had any questions. Mr. Grench said no. President Wendin asked if any of the Directors had questions. Meeting 7 . . . page 4 N. Hanko pointed out that the contract calls for three weeks vacation and asked Mr. Grench if he would intend to take it all at one time. Mr. Grench replied that he felt it would be worked out at the time with consideration given to the work load. K. Duffy asked if the contract called for review in six months, then a second review six months after that and then yearly. President Wendin said yes. N. Hanko asked if a resolution was required to appoint Mr. Grench. President Wendin said he felt that the agreement was sufficient. Stanley Norton stated that there should be a resolution authoriz- ing the President to execute the agreement on behalf of the Board. Motion: N. Hanko moved Resolution 73-13 approving the agreement between MRPD and Herbert Grench as General Manager and authorizing the President to execute the agreement on be- half of the District. Second by K. Duffy. W. Peters pointed out that this contract was basically a two month contract since it was not written for a 1 or 2 year period. He felt that perhaps consideration should be given to extending the time period. President Wendin asked for permission of the Directors to hold further discussion and consideration of the contract to an executive session at the end of the meeting. It was so agreed. V. REPORTS A. Finances - Savings Account W. Peters stated that the checking account has been established, but the savings account has not. He would like to turn the responsibility for these accounts over to the General Manager. D. Wendin asked that Mr. Grench present his recommendation at the next meeting. B. Policy for Public Distribution of Attorney' s Report on Brown Act with Respect to Land Acquisition Mr. Norton provided a revised page 1 for the report for public distribution. Motion: D. Wendin moved that the report of March 23, 1973 on the Brown Act with Respect to Land Acquisition be made available to the public. Second by N. Hanko. Mrs. Gordon Stewart asked what kind of public notice would be given. Mr. Norton replied that any meeting (private or public) of the Board must be reported to the newspapers at least 24 hours in advance. He ex- plained that no special notice need be given for exe- cutive session held in conjunction with a regularly scheduled meeting. Mrs. Stewart indicated that she is very concerned with the citizen' s right to know. Motion passed unanimously. Meeting i . . . page 5 C. UD/OS - CATALOG OF OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION TOOLS N. Hanko presented her recommendations for presentation to the UD/OS subcommittee considering the catalog. She read the proposed statement: "The Midpeninsula Regional Park District intends to function as an open space agency to work to preserve all forms of open space resources. Whereas the county is expected to provide a system of public parks and recreation areas and facilities, the District expects to make use of a wide variety of tools and techniques for open space preservation not commonly employed by existing parks and recreation departments. "It may be actively involved in resource conservation planning and management programs not necessarily related to public re- creation. It would also serve as an advocate for the protection of the community' s environmental resources. It would work to encourage donations of important open space lands to the public. And it would acquire and manage a system of ecolo§ical or open space preserves. "The District can perform the function of a conservation com- mission in serving as advocates on behalf of the environment, watching to see that local environmental protection ordinances and state laws are enforced and enlisting citizen involvement in local resource conservation efforts. "In selected cases and on a limited basis, the District could function as a land bank, as a means of preventing urban sprawl and controlling the timing, location, . type and scale of urban development in cooperation with local government. For example, the District may find it advantageous to acquire a parcel for open space purposes where a portion is suitable for residential development. The latter portion could be returned to private ownership on a controlled basis. "In the area of inter-governmental relations , the District may work with other governmental agencies in planning and ac- quiring certain open space lands. "The District can perform the functions of a land trust. In cases where potential donors of open space lands want assur- ance that their land will be kept in its undeveloped condition, the District can grant this assurance by agreement. Donations of land or money to the District are tax deductable. "Since the District is not limited to projects within a single jurisdiction, it can work to preserve natural areas or resource systems which transcend local government boundaries. The Dis- trict can negotiate with landowners privately, in dealing with landowners who whish to avoid publicity regarding their land donations. " N. Hanko and Don Weden pointed out that while the Catalog pro- bably would not be revised to include these recommendations they would give the subcommittee information which would be useful when considering the "action plan" . Meeting -9 . . . page 6 D. Wendin suggested that the word "may"be changed to "will" in the statement. He would like to see it expanded to become a statement of general policy for the District. W. Peters agreed that this statement along with other documents and positions be considered in formulating a general statement. W. Peters stated that he would like the first sentence of the second paragraph to read "It may be actively involved in resource conservation planning and management programs not necessarily related to intensive public recreation. " K. Duffy pointed out that the first paragraph should include the word acquisition. N. Hanko suggested that the sentence read "The Midpeninsula Regional Park District intends to func- tion as an open space agency to work to 'acquire and preserve all forms of open space resources. " D. Wendin said he would like to see two things come out of the discussion, 1) that N. Hanko direct this letter to the UD/OS subcommittee and 2) an instruction to Mr. Grench to use the letter as a beginning point for recommended policy statement. Motion: W. Peters moved that the letter be revised to reflect the discussion and sent by N. Hanko to the UD/OS sub- committee. Second by K. Duffy. Passed unanimously. D. District Name Change W. Peters referred this question to Mr. Norton. Mr. Norton stated that his initial reaction was that a public vote would be required since the only reference to the District name was the one that appeared on the ballot when the District was formed. County Counsel expressed the opinion that there is nothing in the law that permits a procedure for changing the name of the District; therefore, a State statute would be re- quired to provide this procedure. Mr. Norton said this may be a conservative point of view, but it is still his feeling that at least a public vote would be required to change the name. K. Duffy asked what the official spelling is for the District name. Mr. Norton said that it appeared on the ballot as one word, "Midpeninsula" . E. Monte Bello Ridge Study - Zoning Policy N. Hanko described the study' s proposals using a map; and then presented her recommendations for the following changes : 1. Establishment of a 10!-20 acre zone category based on the steepness of slope, for all of Monte Bello Ridge and its slopes. 2. Exclude all parcels zoned Exclusive Agricultural (A) from the low density 1-5 acre residential category. 3. Initiate a cost benefit analysis to determine costs of hill- side development to the low land taxpayers. 4. Consider the visual loss of the cities ' hillside backdrop by construction of roads and buildings on Monte Bello Ridge and its slopes. Meeting 1 . . . page 7 N. Hanko pointed out that the Planning and Policy Committee has scheduled a public hearing on the Monte Bello Ridge Study for May 1. Final consideration of public recommendations is scheduled by the Committee for May 15. This timing would allow the Directors to consider further recommendations at its May 9 meeting. Motion: W. Peters moved that the recommendations be endorsed by the MRPD and that N. Hanko represent the Board at the May 1 public hearing. Second by D. Wendin. After discussion the Directors agreed to word Recom- mendation 1. as follows: "Establishment of a 10-20 acre zone category based on the steepness of slope for all areas shown as Permanent Open Space and Long Term Open Space on Alternate A. " Recommendation 2. to be worded: "Exclude all parcels currently zoned Exclusive Agricultural (A) for the low density 1-5 acre residential category. " These changes were accepted by the maker of the mo- tion and by the second. Don Weden pointed out that the staff members who have been working on this study do not see it as a zoning plan. N. Hanko and K. Duffy pointed out that other groups are treating the plan as proposed zoning and that there was apparently confusion on this point. Tom Brown, citizen member of the Hillside Subcommittee, described some of the procedures used in designing the plan and pointed out some of the confusing aspects. He expressed the hope that the Subcommittee would spend time discussing the purpose of the plan. Motion passed unanimously. F. Review of El Retiro Suit W. Peters reported that a referendum petition is being circu- lated which would halt the zoning change and unofficially it is reported that enough signatures have been acquired to vali- date the referendum for the ballot. In addition, he reported that the Town of Los Altos Hills has filed a second suit. This suit contains issues which may be of concern to MRPD. D. Wendin explained that at this time the Board of Directors have not taken a position on the El Retiro suits and that there would be full discussion before taking any position. He pointed out that as a "Friend of the Court" the MRPD could address only those issues pertinent to it and need not address the whole suit. Stanley Norton explained the basis of the suits. Suit #1 questions the validity of the annexation of the land by the City of Los Altos. Suit #2 raises three questions : 1) Los Altos lacked jurisdiction to zone the land because the annexa- tion was invalid, 2) Los Altos has not adopted an open space Meeting 72 . . . page 8 element to its general plan, 3) Los Altos has not complied with the Environmental Quality Act. It was agreed that further discussion would be scheduled for the May 9 meeting. N. Hanko asked that the Directors be sent copies of the suit in advance of the meeting. VI. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES A. Resolution 73-11 Accepting Insurance Policy Motion: N. Hanko moved the adoption of Resolution 73-11 accep- ting the insurance policy with United States Fidelity and Guaranty. Second by W. Peters. Passed unanimously. B. Resolution 73-12 Retaining Lawrence Klein to Prepare Contract for the Position of General Manager. Motion: D. Wendin moved adoption of Resolution 73-12. Second by W. Peters. Passed unanimously. VII. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS President Wendin acknowledged a letter from the Lexington Hills Association concerning the San Jose Water Works property and asked Mr. Leon Milburn, Lexington Hills Association representa- tive, to make his presentation. Mr. Milburn discussed the property and some of the problems now faced by the residents of the area. He pointed out that the land- owners prefer low usage of the property and that they feel that acquisition by Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation would not assure this kind of usage. In summary, what the Association is asking is that no action be taken by the Parks and Recreation Commission until MRPD has the opportunity to explore any interest it might have in acquiring the property. K. Duffy pointed out that an additional concern for MRPD is the Trout Creek Area of the Water Works property. The Directors asked that Mr. Grench investigate the issue further with Mr. Amyx and with the San Jose Water Works personnel. Motion: N. Hanko moved that this matter be continued to the May 23 meeting, that Mr. Grench look into the situation, and that the Directors agree to visit the property with in the month. Second by D. Condron. Passed unanimously. K. Duffy reported that the person to contact in order to visit the property is Mr. Anderson (295-3205) who lives at Howell Re- servoir and has the key to the property. VIII . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Jerry Grow expressed his concern about the apparent plans of the Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department to dredge 3 to 5 feet from the bottom of salt pond #1, and asked that MRPD give consideration to the remaining baylands. W. Peters reported that Mountain View has been contacted and they have agreed to send a representative to the May 23 meeting when the baylands are scheduled for consideration. He has also asked Meeting J . . . page 9 a member of Save Our Sloughs Committee to attend. IX. OLD BUSINESS W. Peters requested that a further report be made on SB-90 since it is of prime importance to the District to be placed on the tax rolls. It was agreed that D. Wendin, H. Grench and S. Norton would make a report at the May 9 meeting. X. NEW BUSINESS President Wendin announced the Special Districts Presidents ' and Board Members' Institute and the Advanced Studies Program in Special Districts Management (for Staff Members) sponsored by the University of California Extension at Asilomar (April 27-29 and April 29 - May 3, respectively) . He also announced that Mr. Grench would be attending the Staff program. Mr. Grench stated that the program was the first of two planned institutes , the second would be held in Santa Barbara during the summer. Motion: N. Hanko moved that W. Peters be directed to attend the 1973 Special Districts Presidents' and Board Members ' Institute. Second by D. Condron. Passed unanimously. The meeting was recessed to executive session for purposes of dis- cussing the employment contract with the General Manager at 12 :15 a.m. XI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned At 12 :45 a.m. No Grench Secretary