HomeMy Public PortalAbout19800528 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) Meeting 80-10
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
Regular Meeting
Board of Directors
M I N U T E S
May 28, 1980 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos, California
I. ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order by President Barbara Green at
7: 03 P.M.
Members Present: Daniel Wendin, Barbara Green, Edward Shelley,
Nonette Hanko, Harry Turner, and Richard Bishop.
Member Absent: Katherine Duffy.
Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Craig Britton, Steve Sessions,
Charlotte MacDonald, Pat Starrett, Susan Bayerd, Michael Foster,
Stanley Norton, and Jean Fiddes.
II. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Board recessed to an Executive Session dealing with personnel
matters at 7 : 04 P.M.
The Board reconvened for the public meeting at 7: 30 P.M.
III. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
J. Fiddes indicated that there were no written communications.
IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
H. Grench requested that Item 2, Use and Management Plan Fallow-Up
for Williams Property Acquisition, and Item 3, Presentation of
Preliminary Budget for Fiscal Year 1980-81, be interchanged since
S. Norton would not he able to attend the first part of the meeting.
B. Green noted that it might be necessary to continue the meeting's
Executive Session to another time since two Board members would
be leaving the meeting to attend the Palo Alto Planning Commission
meeting. She stated the Board's consensus that, if necessary, the
meeting would be continued to 8:00 P.M. , Thursday, May 29, 1980.
The revised agenda was adopted by consensus.
Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,Nonette G.Hanko,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin
Meeting 80-10 Page Two
V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
B. Green informed the Board that she had been contacted by
Brad Stamper, Mayor of East Palo Alto, regarding a possible
tour of the Cooley Landing area and a discussion with members
of the East Palo Alto Municipal Council regarding recent
developments involving Cooley Landing. Since Mayor Stamper was
not able to attend the meeting, he had suggested the dates of
June 3 or 5 for the tour to B. Green.
Discussion centered on possible dates for the tour and what
type of action might be required of the Board.
B. Green noted that she would formalize the date and time of the
tour and would inform Board members and staff members so that the
tour, which would constitute a Special Meeting of the Board, could
be noticed appropriately.
VI . SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
C. Britton introduced Susan Bayerd, the District's legal intern
for the summer.
R. Bishop introduced newly-elected San Carlos Councilman Victor
Stoltz .
VII. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Public Hearing on Hassler Health Home Buildings
S. Sessions reviewed memorandum M-80-39 , dated May 21, 1980 , and
noted that the American Youth Hostel had not submitted to date
a formal proposal to use the Hassler Health Home buildings for
recreational purposes and that a representative from the organi-
zation was not in attendance at the meeting. He noted that Jean
Rusmore, a member of the Board of Directors of the American Youth
Hostels Golden Gate Council, and Mark Ahalt, Hostel Development
Manager, had been notified of the Public Hearing by letter.
B. Green declared the Public Hearing open at 7:40 P.M.
J. Fiddes noted that Joe Rick, 135 Leslie Drive, San Carlos, a
resident of the Brittan Heights area, had telephoned the District's
office and asked that his comments be read at the meeting since
he could not be in attendance. She stated that Mr. Rick was
opposed to the establishment of a youth hostel on the Hassler
property. It was his understanding that the property would be
maintained as open space and the buildings would be destroyed,
and he did not wish to increase his taxes to support a youth
hostel.
She also noted that Mr. Richard Lynam, 3375 Brittan Avenue, No. 12,
San Carlos , had called the office and stated that he and his wife
were definitely not in favor of a youth hostel at the Hassler site.
He felt this would not be in keeping with the idea of open space
and said that noise would be a problem, as well as potential fire
hazards.
Meeting 80-10 .age Three
Judy Wahn, 3331 Brittan Avenue,No. 8,San Carlos, secretary of the
Brittan Heights Condominium Association, stated that she was
unofficially representing the association at the meeting. She
had polled the five members of the association's board and
one member was definitely opposed to a youth hostel and four
members were interested in going along with the youth hostel
idea, but needed more information about the operation. She
said that the association' s board was not familiar enough with
the concept of a youth hostel to discuss it with other Brittan
Heights residents and noted that they were under the impression
that all the buildings would be demolished, save one which
would be used for a ranger residence. She stated that since
the association had not been notified in time of the Public
Hearing, it had not been possible to discuss the hostel with
local residents, and she requested as much information as
available on the hostel.
S. Sessions reviewed the general concept of youth hostels, but
noted that the District's staff had not received the formal
American Youth Hostel proposal ,and therefore he could not
specifically state how their hostel would operate. He noted
that the ultimate plan was to have youth hostels spread ten
miles apart up and down the coast.
Celia Hartnett, 3443 Brittan Avenue, San Carlos, asked how many
people could be accomodated in a hostel at one time and where
other hostels were located in the area.
S. Sessions responded that he thought the hostel at the Hassler
site might have about twelve beds and that hostels were located
at Sanborn Park and Hidden Villa Ranch.
Judy Wahn asked if there was a limit to the amount of time a
person could stay at the hostel, if people would be bused to the
hostel, and if motorcycles would be allowed.
S. Sessions responded that he did not know how long a person could
stay at the hostel and noted that the District does not permit
motorcycles on its preserves. He felt that people would use
public transportation to reach the hostel.
D. Wendin noted that the question of vehicular access would
have to be reviewed as a part of a hostel proposal.
Celia Hartnett asked what the specifications of the Federal grant were
with regard to the demolition of the buildings.
R. Bishop noted that the grant stated that any buildings on the
property have to be related to recreational and open space
type of use.
Don Hartnett, 3443 Brittan Avenue, San Carlos, noted that people
had not been made aware of the Public Hearing and said that he
did not feel that it was realistic to think that people would
be in favor of using one of the large buildings for a hostel.
He thought there might be an overflow problem if there was only
room for twelve people.
Meeting 80-10 Page Four
Judy Wahn noted that the Brittan Heights Condominium Association
had not been informed of the Public Hearing and noted that
future meeting announcements could be distributed directly to
condimunium owners by the association.
H. Turner stated that he had just contacted Jean Rusmore by
telephone and that she said it was her understanding that the
letter that had previously been sent to the District was
sufficient for their response at the Public Hearing. She
noted that the American Youth Hostel 's staff person would work
up a detailed proposal in July which would first be presented to
the hostel ' s board before being forwarded- to the District. She
had said that she thought August was the District's cutoff date.
He noted that she was very interested in the Hassler site, but
that other members of the American Youth Hostel Executive Board
were "cool" on the idea.
Discussion centered on a timetable to present to the American
Youth Hostel staff outlining when appropriate information and a
formal proposal must be presented to the District.
B. Green declared the Public Hearing closed at 8 :28 P.M.
The Board directed staff to communicate with the American Youth
Hostel staff that a proposal on the use of the Hassler Health
Home buildings must be presented at the first meeting of July.
Information contained in the proposal should include the details
of what the hostel project includes and that the American Youth
Hostel had made the decision to go ahead and participate in the
cost of an Environmental Impact Report on the retention of the
buildings.
Directors N. Hanko and D. Wendin and staff member S. Sessions left
the meeting to attend the Palo Alto Planning Commission meeting.
VIII. NEW BUSINESS WITH NO ACTION REQUESTED
A. Presentation of Preliminary Budget for Fiscal Year 1980-81
H. Grench reviewed report R-80-24 , dated May 22, 1980, regarding
the preliminary budget for fiscal year 1980-81 and noted that
over 90� of each expenditure dollar was allocated to the Open
Space Acquisition Program and thatthe new land purchases budget was
$2 .5 million, of which $500,000 was designated for opportunity
(bargain) purchases. He stated that the budget had been prepared
under the assumption that Proposition 9 would not pass.
C. Britton reviewed the Open Space Acquisition Program's portion
of the budget, noting that funds available for new open space
acquisition projects in 1980-81 had been increased over the
1979-80 budget by approximately $500,000 . He reviewed the projects
for which land acquisition funds had been previously committed
and noted that his budget included $12 ,000 in contingency funds
in the event it was necessary to continue the land acquisition
representative position for an additional six months.
Meeting 80-10 Page Five
H. Grench reviewed the Open Space Managment Program' s portion
of the budget, focusing on recommended clarifications for the
Open Space Management funding guidelines. He stated that these
policies had been reviewed with the Budget Committee to determine
where refinement or interpretation was needed. He reviewed the
method for determining Open Space Management's budget limit
base and the policy pertaining to major site development
capital improvements.
C. MacDonald stated that the items contained in the Public
Communications and Governmental Liaison Program's budget were
essentially the same as last year and noted that major increases
were for the production of an updated Master Plan and for the
increase of her hours from 2/3 to 3/4 time. Two new budget
categories for her program were computer services and office
furniture.
J. Fiddes reviewed the General Management and Program Support
budget, noting that the budget categories of elections expenses,
rents and leases, and other professional services accounted
for a large portion of this activity area's increased budget.
H. Grench noted that the Budget Committee had had some discussion
on the question of whether to build a permanent office building or
continue to rent office space and would be including the topic
in the budget report at the next meeting.
R. Bishop noted that he felt the entire Board should be included
in the decision process involving the question of building or
leasing office space and requested that, as a matter of record,
he be included in any discussions on the subject.
B. Green received the preliminary budget on behalf of the Board.
IX. OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
A. Use and Management Plan Follow-Up for Williams Property
Acquisition
H. Grench reviewed report R-80-21, dated May 2, 1980, regarding
the question of dedication of the former Williams property on
Mt. Melville which had first been discussed at the meeting of
March 26, 1980 and was tabled at that time. He noted that
possible ways to dedicate a portion of the property included
creating a lot split on one or both of the parcels, dedicating
a portion of the property without a lot split, or conveying an
easement to another agency. He felt that none of the options
were worth pursuing because of staff time involved and possible
pitfalls and recommended that the property remain in an un-
dedicated status.
B. Green noted that the property represented an important trail
link and that she was uncomfortable with the concept of lot
splitting.
E. Shelley asked if it was possible to dedicate an open space
easement that was "floating" in character.
F_
Meeting 80-10 .,age Six
S. Norton responded that clarification from San Mateo County
would be needed to make sure that such an action would not
effect density trade-off factors .
C. Britton noted that one of the main options to consider was
the fact that this was a valuable piece of property and the
Board, at some time, may want to make a trade of a portion of it
for other larger acreage.
Motion: E. Shelley moved that the Board adopt a motion of intent
stating that if all or part of the former Williams
property is ever released for private development or
ownership, the District at that time shall reserve an
open space easement of other assurances against develop-
ment with respect to the undeveloped portion of the
property from Skyline Boulevard to the top of the
ridge. H. Turner seconded the motion. The motion passed
unanimously.
H. Grench reviewed report R-80-20 , dated May 1, 1980 , from
S. Sessions regarding the recommendations for disposition of
the Williams House. He noted that staff was recommending that
the buildings be secured and that space be rented at the site
for a trailer house. The rental of space for the trailer would
also allow on-site presence near the structures.
Motion: E. Shelley moved that after the previous owner vacates
the premises, the buildings should be secured and a
rental of a trailer house space be made available
until the end of 1980 to provide on-site presence near
the structures. R. Bishop seconded the motion. The
motion passed unanimously.
X. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
H. Grench reported on S. Sessions ' memorandum of May 28, 1980
regarding the proposed fire management plan for the Monte
Bello Open Space Preserve. He noted that an educational meeting
would be held for Upper Page Mill Road residents and neighbors
of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve on fire hazard control
and that the Board had not made a decision as to whether an
on-going controlled burning program would be implemented.
XI. CLAIMS
Motion: R. Bishop moved the approval of the Revised Claims
C-80-9, dated May 28, 1980 . B. Green seconded the
motion.
Discussion: C. Britton explained Claim 1065, noting
that the Lindhs had moved to another house on the
former Stanford property and that they were now
post-acquisition tenants. H. Grench noted that Claim
1060 for $8 . 51 fell into a "gray" area since Board
members were normally not reimbursed for private
vehicle expenses. Discussion centered on the appropriate-
ness of approving such a claim and whether the Board
would be setting a precedent whereby Board members
would expect to be reimbursed for expenses incurred that
had not been authorized in advance by the Board. H. Turner
Meeting 80-10 ige Seven
called the question. The motion failed by the following
vote:
AYES: H. Turner, R. Bishop, and B. Green.
NOES: E. Shelley.
S. Norton noted that a majority vote of the full Board
was needed to approve the claims.
Motion: H. Turner moved that the Revised Claims C-80-9
with the exception of Claim 1060 be approved. B. Green
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
XII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Board recessed at 9 :20 P.M. to an Executive Session which was
scheduled for 8 :00 P.M on Thursday, May 29, 1980 .
The Board convened for the Executive Session at 8 :00 P.M. on
Thursday, May 29, 1980 , at the District office.
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
The Board adjourned at 11:20 P.M. on May 29, 1980 .
Jean H. Fiddes
District Clerk