Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19760428 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) ti meting 76-13 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT Regular Meeting Board of Directors M I N U T E S April 28, 1976 745 Distel Drive Los Altos, CA I. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order by President Hanko at 7 : 40 P.M. Members Present: Katherine Duffy, Nonette Hanko, Barbara Green and Daniel Wendin. Member Absent: Edward Shelley Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Edward Jaynes, Jon Olson, Anne Crosley, Carroll Harrington, Bradley Clifford, Jennie George, Phyllis Lee, Del Woods and Stanley Norton. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes of April 14 , 1976 . N. Hanko stated the consensus that the minutes of April 14 , 1976 be approved as presented. III . ADOPTION OF AGENDA N. Hanko stated the consensus that the agenda be adopted without change. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no oral communications at this time. V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS A. Crosley advised that there were three written communications to the Board: (1) a letter from Director Shelley stating he was unable to attend the April 28 Board meeting and encouraging other Board members to support the proposed Fremont Older open Space Preserve Addition, Unit No. 2; (2) a letter from the Sempervirens Fund inviting the Board to their annual sponsors ' outing to be held at Castle Rock State Park on June 6 , 1976; and (3) a letter from the Special Districts Association of Santa Clara County regarding proposed consolidation of several resource conservation districts. i A. Minutes of Argil 28 , 1976 N. Hanko said she did not recall making the statement in the C last sentence of the second paragraph on page five of the minutes, and asked that it be removed. I i N. Hanko referred to the Motion to Amend on page seven of the minutes and suggested the words "and County" be inserted between fthe words "city" and "officials" in that paragraph. j N. Hanko stated the consensus that the minutes of April 28 , 1976 be approved with the above changes. I I Meeting 76-13 Page two VI. PUBLIC HEARING A. Proposed Addition to the Fremont Older Open Space Preserve, Unit No. 2. H. Grench introduced his report (R-76-11) dated April 27, 1976 regarding the Proposed Fremont Older Open Space Preserve Addi- tion, Unit No. 2 . He advised that earlier this month the District had been offered an option to purchase a 75-acre parcel of land located west of the existing Fremont Older Open Space Preserve for a price of $75, 000 . J. Olson described the site as rectangular in shape, with a north/ south ridgeline, and including a portion of a tributary of Stevens Creek. The vegetation includes woodland, chaparral and grass- land areas, as well as a few fruit trees which are no longer productive. There are no structures on the site, but there are hiking and equestrian trails leading through the property. Access to the site is from a 20-foot right-of-way leading from the end of Regnart Canyon to the southwest portion of the property. Automobile access is not feasible now or in the future due to the limited development of the road and the potential impact on the neighborhood. The proposed 75-acre addition provides a scenic backdrop for the existing Preserve and offers the potential for maintaining a viable trail system in the area which would link the Fremont Older Open Space Pre- serve, Regnart Canyon and Lower Stevens Creek County Park. The interim use and management recommendation for the site would be to allow the current level of use by hikers and equestrians to continue; to sign or fence parcel boundaries at points where recreational users might stray onto adjacent private property; and to install motorcycle barriers at entrances to the site. He further recommended that long-range planning for the 75 acres be incorporated with planning for the existing Preserve. H. Grench advised that the District ' s interim Master Plan shows the proposed 75-acre addition as scoring high in open space values. All of the site is within the Sphere of Influence of the City of Cupertino, and half lies within the unincorporated area of Santa Clara County. The acquisition of the site for open space has been found to be in conformity with the County's General Plan. He said the Cupertino Planning Commission had considered the site at its meeting on April 26 , but declined to make a decision on whether the site was compatible with Cupertino' s General Plan because it felt it didn't have enough information about the District' s acquisition plans for the area, and since the Cupertino City Council had not yet made a decision on the City' s proposed Hillside Plan. It was the position of the District' s staff that the 75 acre parcel was very similar to the 68 acre addition that was considered by the Cupertino Planning Commission in October, 1975 . Both are in the Urban Meeting 76-13 Page three Service Area of Cupertino and in the area designated as "agricul- ture/open space" in the 1964 General Plan. Both are shown in the Cupertino 1972 Open Space and Conservation Element of the Cuper- tino General Plan as "residential/recreational" areas. The only difference in the two sites is that the 75 acres is not quite contiguous to the existing Preserve. At the time the Cupertino Planning Commission considered the 68 acres, it was decided that open space within the Urban Service Area was an appropriate under- lying use, but that it would like to consider each proposal individually. There appears to be no question that open space outside the Urban Service Area is a compatible use. H. Grench referred the Board to a letter dated April 28 , 1976 from Mr. James Sisk, Cupertino Planning Director, regarding his reasons for questioning more open space acquisition within the Urban Service Area. H. Grench recommended that the Board adopt Resolution No. 76-9 to exercise the option to purchase the 75 acres for $75,000, and that it adopt the interim use and management plans set forth in the report. He further recommended that the Board pursue joint planning with the City of Cupertino, and that a presentation of the District' s draft Master Plan be made to Cupertino as soon as possible after the Plan has been printed. N. Hanko opened the Public Hearing at 8:10 P.M. Mr. William McGuire, 10421 Phar Lap Drive, Cupertino, said the proposed acquisition is contiguous to his property, and that access to the 75 acre site is by a private easement crossing his property. He expressed concern about increasing the use along the road easement, since he felt the geography of the area did not lend itself to greater use. He said the road could not be widened without damaging the steep slope, and pointed out there was no area appropriate for parking facilities. J. Olson replied that the access road was considered to be a primitive one, and the District staff was not recommending its use by automobiles. The level of use, which was basically hiking and equestrian, would essentially remain unchanged. Mr. McGuire said the road easment was private, and could not be used by the public. E. Jaynes replied that there was suf- ficient recorded evidence to show that the owner of the 75-acre parcel would succeed to access rights from an easement established in about 1915 . S. Norton advised that it was his opinion, based on his knowledge of the site, that the District would succeed to access rights, but that he had no opinion at this time as to whether the private easement could be extended to the public. Mrs. Kathy Nellis, 22322 Regnart Road, Cupertino, said she also felt the easement was a private one, and her attorney interprets it as such. She added that the road, which is gravel, is not suitable for public use. She noted that a nearby horse stable Meeting 76-13 Page four continues to send equestrians onto her property without permis- sion, but that her family has allowed special group activities on their property from time to time. She objected that there had not been sufficient notice of this meeting to nearby property owners. She said she had been supportive of the District in the past and favored open space, but felt the District was fostering a poor relationship with the residents of Regnart Canyon. It appeared to her the District must be planning to acquire her mother-in-law' s property in order to connect the existing Preserve with the proposed 75-acre addition. Mrs. Nellis said she and her husband believed they had a valid contract on this property, not the District, and that a settlement with the present owner had been reached with respect to the suit brought against the owner by the Nellis ' . She pointed out that her husband had approached the owner some time ago about purchasing the property. At that time the owner said the District had displayed no interest in purchasing the property. The owner and the Nellises signed a contract, she said, and litigation began when the owner declined to close the deal . She added that title to the property was to pass to the Nellises next week. N. Hanko, asked Mrs. Nellis what her plans for the 75-acre parcel would be. Mrs. Nellis replied that she and her husband planned to develop the land into five-acre sites (low-density residential) . She said they were willing to work with the District in allowing trails, or in donating a portion of the site for a trail link. She said they wanted to keep as much of the property as possible in family ownership. She pointed out that the 75 acres was not contiguous to the existing Preserve, and that it did not complete a topographical feature, as the 68 acres did. She added that according to a questionnaire, Cupertino residents will use available public property, and it would therefore be difficult for the District to control use. A. Crosley advised that Mr. and Mrs. Tannenbaum, 19056 Tilson Avenue, Cupertino, had called to express their support for the acquisition of the 75-acre parcel. Mrs. Linda Stuckey, P.O. Box 1115, Cupertino, said she was con- cerned about the route by which the District would allow public access. D. Wendin said the word "Park" in the District ' s title was mis- leading, because the District is essentially an open space agency. Proponents of the District ' s formation in 1972 stressed that its purpose was to acquire and preserve land in the foothills and baylands, and that land use, including access, would be allowed only as appropriate to an individual site 's ecology and the surrounding neighborhood. He reminded Regnart Canyon residents that additional homes in the area would likely bring more traffic into the neighborhood than a small increase in the number of hikers and equestrians. Meeting 76-13 Page five H. Grench said the opportunity to purchase the property was presented to the District unexpectedly earlier in the month, and the option was to expire on April 30. The District then discovered there were potential legal problems involved with the site. The first notice to area residents came in connection with the Cupertino Planning Commission meeting agenda, and the Regnart Canyon homeowners received notice of this evening 's meeting one working day after Board members received notice. Because of the timing of the Cupertino Planning Commission meeting, the staff could not complete its report until Tuesday, and copies of the report were hand-delivered that evening for distribution to homeowners. He added that there was sub- stantial news publicity about the matter in local newspapers. He agreed it would be desirable to have more communication with neighborhood property owners. N. Hanko suggested the Board could discuss a policy on notifi- cation to the public when an option is received at a future meeting. She said the access road to the 75-acre parcel was sufficient for District patrol and for providing fire protection, and the District's interest in acquiring the site was mainly to protect it. The District did not have any "grand strategy" for acquisition in the area, she stated. B. Green said she was in favor of exercising the option, and hoped the legal matters would be resolved. K. Duffy said the property under consideration was very beauti- ful and was valuable as an open space area by itself and in relation to the existing Preserve. She said she believed the District had acted in good faith in accepting an option offered to it, and the District should not be used by other people to further their efforts to sell their property to someone else. She added that a joint planning effort between the District and the City of Cupertino would be a very good idea. Motion: N. Hanko moved that it is the District ' s intention to attend the first Cupertino City Council meeting at which the proposed Hillside Plan is considered in order to discuss Cupertino' s plans and the District' s plans with respect to the Regnart Canyon area. D. Wendin seconded the motion. Discussion: N. Hanko pointed out that the Subcommittee formed by the District to study the Cupertino Hillside Plan concluded that the Urban Service Area boundary was too large, and that the District wanted to be in- volved in subdivision plans in the area. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: N. Hanko moved that staff be authorized to meet with the Regnart Canyon Citizens Committee to jointly plan for the use of public and private lands in the Regnart Canyon area. K. Duffy seconded the motion. Meeting 76-13 Page six Discussion: Mr. Gordon Jennings, 441 East Meadow, Palo Alto, said there was already a representative from the Regnart Canyon area on the Citizens Advisory Group for the Fremont Older Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan. J. Olson responded that the Citizens Advisory Group was a short-term group being consulted by staff for neighborhood input on the use and management plan for the Preserve. K. Duffy said she felt communications between the District and the area's residents needed improvement, and she said she would help in any way she could to clarify the goals of the District with respect to this area. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: N. Hanko moved that the District place highest priority on presenting the District ' s draft Master Plan to the City of Cupertino. B. Green seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: K. Duffy moved adoption of Resolution No. 76-9 , a Reso- lution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Park District Authorizing Exercise of option to Purchase Real Property, Authorizing officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Conveyance to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Fremont Older Open Space Preserve Addition, Unit No. 2) . B. Green seconded the motion. Discussion: Dr. Robert Mark, 725 Cowper, Palo Alto, said he felt the proposed acquisition was an important visual aspect of the existing Preserve, and that the potential trail corridors through the site were also important. He agreed that public vehicular access was probably not appropriate. K. Duffy said she did not feel the District should commit itself to opening trails until everyone has been involved in the planning pro- cess. N. Hanko said she felt the property was important in terms of its scenic value and trail link possibili- ties. S . Norton said he hoped to meet with the Nellises and their attorney, and possibly with Phillips and his attorney, as soon as next week to discuss the matter openly. Mrs. Stuckey said she felt the District ' s agenda titles should be more clear, because she could not tell from the title of this item what property it concerned. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: B. Green moved adoption of the interim use and manage- ment recommendations for Unit No. 2 of the Fremont Older Open Space Preserve Addition contained in report No. R-76-11 . D. Wendin seconded the motion. Amendment to Motion: N. Hanko moved to amend the motion by adding a paragraph (c) to page 5 of the report which Meeting 76-13 Page seven states that vehicle access on the property will be limited to official patrol and fire protection. K. Duffy seconded the motion to amend. Discussion: Mr. Gordon Jennings said he did not think the access road would support vehicles. He added that he felt current patrol of the existing Preserve was excessive. Mr. William McGuire said he did not think a fire truck would be able to use the road. N. Hanko said the District 's purpose in acquiring the site was to oversee its protection better than it has been cared for in the past. Mrs. Thomas Learned, 22005 Regnart Road, Cupertino, said she was concerned both with the access question and with the possibility of condemnation by the District. D. Wendin pointed out that the interim use and management plan does not change the current use of the site, and the long term plan will be formulated with citizen input. Mrs. Kathy Nellis said people would come to the site whether or not the District encourages use. J. Olson replied that it was not the District' s intention to allow public use of the access road. He pointed out that District patrol vehicles with firefighting equipment could get up the road. If necessary, "No Parking" signs will be posted or gates will be installed to discourage such use. The motion to amend passed unanimously. Motion to Amend: N. Hanko moved to amend the motion by adding a paragraph stating that in order to discourage vehicle access from Regnart Road, the District will be prepared to participate in traffic controls in appro- priate places if needed, after consultation with area residents and city officials. B. Green seconded the motion. Discussion: Mrs. Linda Stuckey asked how the District could protect adjacent property owners from trespassers. J. Olson said the District could enforce its regulatory ordinance with respect to proper patrol and maintenance of District lands. He said his interpretation was that the police powers of District rangers could therefore be extended to cover that type of circumstance. S. Norton said he felt that was an arguable point which deserved some study. Mr. Richard Childress, 22025 Regnart Road , Cupertino, advised the Board that area residents were concerned about the placement and use of any connecting trail between the Preserve and Stevens Creek Park. N. Hanko replied that trails would be considered, with citizen input, during the planning process. Mrs. Kathy Nellis said she felt it was most important to involve the property owner in planning for the site. The motion to amend passed unanimously. The motion to adopt the interim use and management recommendations, as amended above, passed unanimously. Meeting 76-13 Page eight Motion: N. Hanko moved that to the extent any planning agency may be deemed to have disapproved the location, pur- pose or extent of the acquisition (pursuant to Govern- ment Code Section 65402 or otherwise) , such disapproval is hereby overruled. D. Wendin seconded the motion. Discussion: N. Hanko said she made the above motion on advice of the District 's Legal Counsel . The motion passed unanimously. The Board recessed at 9 :28 P.M. and reconvened at 9 : 50 P.M. VII. OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED A. Land Use Workshop Follow-Up. 1. Policy Regarding Phasing of Implementation of Site Use and Management Plans. D. Wendin introduced a memorandum (M-76-69) dated April 22 , 1976, from the Land Use Workshop Subcommittee suggesting a proposed Policy Regarding Phasing of Implementation of Site Use and Management Plans. The Subcommittee met with the General Manager and Land Manager to prepare such a policy as the result of Board direction given at its April 14 , 1976 meeting. D. Wendin said that the phasing was given further consideration by the Subcommittee, resulting in the policy statement below: "Staff shall prepare site-specific plans which allow for open public access as soon as possible after approval of the site plans. For each site, the plan shall include the phasing neces- sary to protect the environment as the use increases, including protection of both the site ' s ecology and of the neighborhood, and to measure the impact of such use. The plan shall detail how all aspects of public access will be handled, including signing, patrol and parking. The phasing shall be consistent with the limita- tions of open space management budget, workloads and priorities. " The Subcommittee further recommended a policy on permits as follows: "A permit system may be used as a tool to control access to environmentally sensitive sites and to keep track of group usage. Otherwise, permits for individuals will not be required. On sites where a permit is required, permits will be given out on site unless the individual is having an adverse impact on the site or on others using the site. " Meeting 76-13 Page nine Motion: D. Wendin moved adoption of the Policy Regarding Phasing of Implementation of Site Use and Manage- ment Plans as set forth in memorandum M-76-69, dated April 22, 1976. N. Hanko seconded the motion. Motion to Amend: N. Hanko moved to amend the proposed Policy by inserting the words " , use as as tool for education" in between the words "site" and "and" in the third line of the second para- graph. K. Duffy seconded the motion. Discussion: H. Grench advised that, without the proposed amendment, the policy would be inter- preted that permits would not be required except in special situations. D. Wendin said the words "environmentally sensitive" include situations such as neighborhood considerations, and that the para- graph on permits should be kept directly following the paragraph on phasing. The motion to amend failed on the following vote: AYES - B. Green and N. Hanko; NOES - K. Duffy and D. Wendin. The motion to adopt the Policy Regarding Phasing of Implementation of Site Use and Management Plans passed unanimously. 2 . Policy Regarding Trails on District Lands. N. Hanko introduced her memorandum (M-76-70) dated April 22, 1976, suggesting proposed Policy Regarding Trails on District Lands. She said she prepared a General Use policy and a Development, Maintenance and Patrol Policy as follows, based on her interpretation of Board views expressed in the March 17 Preference Poll: "General Use. Provision of use for hikers (and equestrians where feasible) will be available for each District site unless ecological considerations are determined by the Board to dictate otherwise. "Development, Maintenance and Patrol. The development of new trails and the—mainten- ance of trails (including litter clean-up) will be accomplished where feasible through a staff initiated volunteer program approved by the Board on a site specific basis. " Motion: N. Hanko moved adoption of the General Use Policy Regarding Trails on District Lands as set forth in her memorandum M-76-70, dated April 22 , 1976. K. Duffy seconded the motion. Discussion: D. Wendin said he felt a trails policy was inappropriate, and should be considered on a site specific basis. The motion failed on the following vote: AYES - B. Green and N . Hanko; NOES - D. Wendin and K. Duffy. Meeting 76-13 Page ten Motion: N. Hanko moved adoption of the Development, Main- tenance and Patrol Policy Regarding Trails on District Lands as set forth in her memorandum M-76-70, dated April 22 , 1976. K. Duffy seconded the motion. Discussion: N. Hanko said she felt it was neces- sary to summarize the "loose ends" from the Land Use Workshop held in February, in order to give direction to staff in budget planning. D. Wendin said his view of the Land Use Workshop was for discussion purposes only, not for policy formula- tion. The motion failed on the following vote: AYES - N. Hanko; NOES - D. Wendin, K. Duffy and B. Green. VIII-. OLD BUSINESS WITH NO ACTION REQUESTED A. Docent Program. E. Huggins, Coordinator of Volunteers, advised that the docents who are involved in training to lead groups on District sites are currently in the middle of their training program. They will be learning about the history, ecology, flora and birds on Black Mountain Open Space Preserve, as well as about Dis- trict policies. She said the docents are learning to interpret natural phenomena on the site and are eager to apply their knowledge. The next phase will involve taking groups of people on the site for an environmental education experience. E. Huggins said there may be a need for a brochure about the District sites, and she said she would like some direction from the Board regarding the amount of advertising for the docent program. She advised that there were numerous requests for docent tours already, even without advertising. E. Huggins invited Board and staff and their families to a picnic with the docents to be held on May 14 , 1976 at 6: 00 P.M. on Black Mountain. She said each participant should bring a cup and utensils, and let her know by May 10 who will be attending . A lecture on the San Andreas Fault by Tim Hall is scheduled for June 19, she added, and Board and staff were invited to attend. IX. NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED A. Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Park District in Support of Ballot Measures J and K Appearing on the-City of Saratoga Ballot in the June 8, 1976 Election. K. Duffy recommended that the Board adopt Resolution No. 76-10 in support of the City of Saratoga ballot measures Meeting 76-13 Page eleven J and K appearing in the June 8, 1976 election. Ballot measure J is a bond issue which would authorize the City of Saratoga to incur a bonded indebtedness in the principal amount of $2 million for park and recreation facilities involved in the acquisition of approximately 400 acres of Saratoga hillside open space located from Hakone Gardens north to the Parker Ranch. Ballot measure K would increase the maximum tax rate of the City of Saratoga by $1. 30 for each $100 assessed valuation, to be effective for either the 1976-1977 or the 1977-1978 fiscal year, the revenues of which would be used to acquire approximately 400 acres of open space land in the Saratoga hillside located from Hakone Gardens north to the Parker Ranch. Motion: K. Duffy moved adoption of Resolution No. 76-10, a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Mid- peninsula Regional Park District in Support of Ballot Measures J and K Appearing on the City of Saratoga Ballot in the June 8, 1976 Election. N. Hanko seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. B. Possible Scheduling of Meeting with Trails Task Force. N. Hanko introduced her memorandum (M-76-71) dated April 22, 1976, regarding the scheduling of a Possible Meeting with the Trails Task Force. She advised that the Trails Task Force was interested in meeting with the Board to discuss the tasks which were included in their original charge, as well as any other tasks the Board would like them to perform. Attached to the memorandum was a tentative agenda with topics that could be discussed at such a meet- ing. She suggested a Special Meeting be scheduled for Thursday, June 3, 1976 for this purpose. D. Wendin said he felt the order of paragraphs 1 and 2 of the discussion outline should be reversed, because the discussion items in paragraph 1 would be irrelevant if the Board came to the conclusion that the Trails Task Force in its present status as a Board-appointed group should no longer continue. N. Hanko said she felt it was important to establish if the original charge of the Trails Task Force had been completed. Motion: D. Wendin moved adoption of the agenda set forth in memorandum M-76-71, with paragraphs 1 and 2 reversed, for the proposed Special Meeting. K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES - D. Wendin, B. Green and K. Duffy; NOES - N. Hanko. Meeting 76-13 Page twelve Motion: N. Hankc, moved that a Special Meeting of the Board of Directors be held on Thursday, June 3 , 1976 , from 12 : 00 Noon to 2 : 00 P.M. for the purpose of discussing the role of the Trails Task Force. B. Green seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. C. Special Districts Forum. H. Grench advised the Board that they had previously received copies of a letter from East Bay Regional Park District inviting one Board and one staff member to attend their Special Districts Forum to be held from May 22 through May 25. He pointed out that the Open Space Conference co-sponsored by the District on May 22 conflicts with one of the Forum dates. B. Green said she would plan to attend the Forum on Tuesday, May 25, and K. Duffy said she would plan to attend on Monday, May 24 . N. Hanko stated the consensus that a letter be sent to East Bay Regional Park District accepting their invitation for Monday and Tuesday, and advising them of the weekend conflict with the Open Space Conference. X. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS There were no informational reports. XI. CLAIMS Motion: B. Green moved adoption of ,the revised claims (C-76-8) dated April 28, 1976, as presented. K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed on the following vote: AYES - B. Green, K. Duffy and D. Wendin; ABSTAIN - N. Hanko. XII. EXECUTIVE SESSION The Board recessed to Executive Session at 10 : 38 P.M. to discuss land negotiations. XIII . ADJOURNMENT The Board reconvened to adjourn at 11: 58 P.M. Anne Cathcart Crosley District Clerk