HomeMy Public PortalAbout19740410 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) AA.
Meeting 74-7
A]CM 9(MM
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
Regular Meeting
Board of Directors
M I N U T E S
April 10, 1974 745 Distel Drive
Los Altos
I. ROLL CALL
President Peters called the meeting to order at 7 :45 p.m.
Members present: Daniel Condron, Katherine Duffy, Nonette Hanko,
William Peters, and Daniel Wendin
Personnel present: Herbert Grench, Carroll Harrington, Edward
Jaynes. Stanley Norton arrived at 8:45 p.m.
Audience of 3 persons
II . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - March 27, 1974
Motion: D. Wendin moved acceptance of the minutes of the March 27 ,
1974, meeting as presented. D. Condron seconded.
Amendment: D. Wendin moved to amend the minutes by making the
following changes:
Page 2, V. , B. , paragraph 2 , line 3 , add: thereby
establishing policy at the Board level. "
Page 2, Objective 1, Land Acquisition Program, line 5,
add: "Development of a master plan should also be included
in this program. "
Page 3, Objective 3, Open Space Resources Program, paragraph
1, line 2 , after the words "a land manager" add: "to
determine whether and when a land manager should be hired. "
Page 3, Objective 3, Open Space Resources Program, paragraph
1, line 6 : Delete sentence beginning "D. Wendin asked. . . . "
Page 3, objective 4, Public Communications Program: The
Board discussed whether or not a new halftime position for
the Public Communications Program had been authorized. After
discussion it was agreed that the minutes were accurate as
written.
Page 3, third line from the bottom: "Objective 5" should be
be corrected to read "Objective 4. 11
Page 4, VI. , B. , : Change the agenda item title to read
"Saratoga Union School District--Potential Gift of Surplus
Land. "
K. Duffy seconded. The amendment passed unanimously.
B. April 10, 1974
N. Hanko asked that the following change be made:
Page 1, 11 . , line 7 of the amendment: In amendments to the
March 27, 1974, minutes, page 3, Objective 3, Open Space
Resources Program, paragraph 1, . line 2: Strike the words
"before hiring a land manager" before adding "to determine
whether and when a land manager should be hired. "
Motion: N. Hanko moved that the following sentence be added on
17 page 5, after line 5: "Mr. Sperry volunteered to study
the Possible future use of revenue bonds by the District,
and would notify us as to his findings. " D. Wendin
seconded. The motion passed. Ayes: Condron, Duffy,
Hanko, Wendin. Absent: Peters.
Motion: K. Duffy moved acceptance of the minutes of the April 10,
1974, meeting as amended including N. Hanko' s requested
change. N. Hanko seconded. The motion passed. Ayes:
Condron, Duffy, Hanko, Wendin. Absent: Peters.
ating 74-7 . . . page 2
Motion: W. Peters moved that the minutes of the March 27 , 1974 ,
meeting be tabled until the April 24 , 1974 , meeting.
D. Condron seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
i III. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The Board agreed to adopt the agenda as prepared.
IV. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND PUBLIC HEARINGS
Interim Master Plan of the Midpeninsula Regional Park District
H. Grench referred to his report (R-74-10) dated April 2 , 1974 ,
regarding the Interim Master Plan for the MRPD. In this report he
discussed the adoption of the Open Space Element of the General Plan
of the County of Santa Clara as an Interim Master Plan for the MRPD
with the exception that the Kaiser-Permanente lands be placed in the
Long Term Open Space category. The Board discussed the various
designations on the map of Santa Clara County prepared by the County
Planning Department. There was no one in the audience who wished to
speak on this matter.
I
V. ORAL COMMUNCATIONS
There were no oral communications.
VI. OLD BUSINESS REQUIRING ACTION
Land Acquisition Procedures
f H. Grench referred to his report (R-74-7) dated March 20, 1974, regard-
ing Land Acquisition Procedures. This item was continued from the
March 27, 1974, meeting. E. Jaynes described the various steps
f involved in land acquisition. These included: (1) initiation of
a specific parcel to be considered for acquisition; (2) acquisition
strategy developed by staff for a specific parcel; (3) first contact
for purposes of pursuing acquisition; (4) results of contact;
(5) continued contacts; (6) disposition of contacts; and (7) final
property disposition. In response to a question from D. Condron
h about how these procedures compare with other public agencies, E. Jaynes
replied that the difference between the MRPD and other public agencies
is that land acquisition is not the primary business of most agencies;
therefore, their boards delegate to staff practically everything
regarding land acquisition. Because land acquisition is one of the
major functions of the MRPD, the Board has to be more involved in
the acquisitions as they progress.
Motion: D. Wendin moved acceptance of the Land Acquisition Procedures
as Board policy with the amendment that item II. , B. , read:
"May decide Board involvement desirable at this point. "
W. Peters seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
sting 74-7 . . . page 3
VII. OLD BUSINESS NOT REQUIRING ACTION
Stevens Creek Park Chain
W. Peters reported that informal conversations had been held with
city council members in Cupertino and Los Altos, John T. O'Halloran
(General Manager, Santa Clara Valley Water District) , and James J.
Lenihan (Representative, District 5, Santa Clara Valley Water District)
about the possibility of multi-agency planning for the Stevens Creek
Park Chain. He proposed that the MRPD initiate an effort to encourage
the four cities (Mountain View, Cupertino, Sunnyvale, and Los Altos) ,
the Water District, the MRPD, and possibly the County to engage in a
multi-agency planning study which would be designed to address several
problems: (a) how should the land be landscaped, (b) what type of
trail system should be installed, (c) what kind of neighborhood parks
should be available along such a system, and (d) which additional
properties should be acquired so as to make the trail links and the
Park Chain more viable. After discussion about the role of the MRPD
Board and staff in this matter, the following motions were made:
Motion: W. Peters moved that the Board authorize D. Wendin, D. Condron,
and W. Peters to select a person to represent the District
in the formation of a multi-agency group to consider the
establishment of a multi-agency planning study for the
Stevens Creek Park Chain and that those three Directors be
empowered to employ that person in that consulting task and
initiate the actions to begin that group. The motion died
for lack of a second.
Motion: D. Wendin moved that W. Peters and D. Wendin with D. Condron
as an alternate be directed to prepare a proposal for the
Board for presentation at the next meeting on the leadership
the Midpeninsula Regional Park District could provide for
the establishment of the Stevens Creek Park Chain. W. Peters
seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
D. Wendin added that his making and voting for the motion does
not in any way imply his support of the MRPD providing this
leadership if it requires a significant amount of staff time.
The meeting recessed from 9 : 20 p.m. - 9 : 45 p.m. D. Condron and D. Wendin
left the meeting due to illness.
VIII. NEW BUSINESS REQUIRING ACTION
Affirmative Action Program Requirements
H. Grench referred to his memorandum (M-74-49) dated April 5, 1974 ,
regarding Affirmative Action Program requirements. He stated his
recommendation that the Board of Directors direct the General
Manager to prepare an Affirmative Action Program and a resolution of
adoption for Board consideration at the April 24 , 1974, meeting.
ting 74-7 . . . page 4
Motion: W. Peters moved acceptance of this recommendation. N. Hanko
seconded. The motion passed. Ayes: Duffy, Hanko, Peters.
Absent: Condron, Wendin.
IX. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
A. Resolution Adopting Interim Master Plan of the Midpeninsula
Regional Park District (Resolution 74-5)
Motion: W. Peters moved acceptance of Resolution 74-5, Resolution
Adopting Interim Master Plan of the Midpeninsula Regional
Park District with the following addition: line 6 , after
"Permanente" add "and vacant urban land (map designation
white) outside of the Urban Service Area. " N. Hanko
seconded.
Discussion: N. Hanko asked S. Norton' s opinion on why
the MRPD is not required to have an Environmental Impact
Report when adopting an Interim Master Plan. S. Norton
replied that unlike cities and counties, the District is
not required to have a general plan, and that any plan
or study is done of the District's own accord and not
required by law, therefore, the MRPD is exempt from
filing an EIR.
The motion passed. Ayes: Duffy, Hanko, Peters. Absent:
Condron, Wendin.
B. Resolution Adopting Guidelines Pursuant to California Environmental
Quality Act (Resolution 74-6)
S. Norton referred to his memorandum which described the proposed
Guidelines under the California Environmental Quality Act. He
introduced Samuel Sperry of Nichols, Rogers & Schreiner, San
Francisco, who worked as a volunteer for the District in developing
information on this subject. Mr. Sperry and S. Norton summarized
the proposed Guidelines and accompanying memoranda.
H. Grench commented about about the administration of EIA' s and
EII?s and how he would interpret paragraph (c) on page 6 of the
proposed Guidelines. He said that presently there are no parcels
under negotiation that he would consider to be projects under the
definition of paragraph (c) and would require an Environmental
Impact Assessment. In the future he would take into account
the kind of development planned by the Board for a parcel and
would then determine whether or not it would be classified as a
project. When it is a close question, he stated that he would be
inclined to make an EIA for Board consideration and perhaps
recommend that only a Negative Declaration is required. He
mentioned the examples from S. Norton' s memorandum, which were
as follows: A Vasona-type park would require an EIA and most
likely an EIR, a Mount Madonna Park kind of development would not
be considered a project and not require an EIA, and a Lower
Stevens Creek kind of development would require evaluation about
whether or not an EIA and/or EIA would be required. The Board
concurred in his interpretation.
ating 74-7 . . . page 5
Motion: N. Hanko moved acceptance of Resolution 74-6 , Resolution
Adopting Guidelines Pursuant to California Environmental
Quality Act. K. Duffy seconded. The motion passed.
Ayes: Duffy, Hanko, Peters. Absent: Condron, Wendin.
S. Norton and the Board thanked Mr. Sperry for his assistance.
C. Resolution Adopting Relocation Assistance Program and Rules and
Regulations to Implement Payments Pursuant Thereto (Resolution
74-7)
H. Grench referred to his report (R-74-11) dated April 3, 1974,
II
regarding the Relocation Assistance Program and Rules and Regula-
tions to Implement Payments. E. Jaynes explained the background
of Relocation Assistance and the need for Rules and Regulations
to administer the kinds of relocation the District is likely to
encounter.
Motion: N. Hanko moved the adoption of Resolution 74-7 ,
Resolution Adopting Relocation Assistance Program and
Rules and Regulations to Implement Payments Pursuant
Thereto. K. Duffy seconded. The motion passed.
Ayes: Duffy, Hanko, Peters. Absent: Condron, Wendin.
X. CLAIMS
Motion: W. Peters moved acceptance of the revised claims list
(C-74-7) (see attached) as presented. K. Duffy seconded.
The motion passed. Ayes: Duffy, Hanko, Peters. Absent:
Condron, Wendin.
XI . WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
There were no written communications.
XII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Board recessed to Executive Session to discuss personnel matters
and land negotiations at 11:10 p.m.
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
The Board reconvened to adjourn at 12: 05 p.m.
Carroll Harrington
Secretary