Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19810325 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) ing 81-8 AW OU, 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 March 25 , 1981 I. ROLL CALL President Richard Bishop called the meeting to order at 7 : 36 P.M. Members Present: Daniel Wendin, Barbara Green, Edward Shelley, Harry Turner, and Richard Bishop. Members Absent: Katherine Duffy and Nonette Hanko. Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Craig Britton, Steven Sessions , Stanley Norton, Charlotte MacDonald, and Jean Fiddes. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. February 25, 19_81 Motion: E. Shelley moved the approval of the minutes of February 25, 1981. B. Green seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. B. March 11, 1981 J. Fiddes stated the third paragraph under the California Parklands Act of 1980 - Skyline Recreation/Open Space Corridor - Hassler Project should be corrected to read "C. Britton responded that specific sites had not been identified, but were contained within a 1000 foot band on either side of Skyline running between State highwals 92 and 9 ." Motion: B. Green moved the approval of the corrected minutes of March 11, 1981. R. Bishop seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously , with E. Shelley abstaining from the vote. III . WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS J_. Fiddes stated there were three written communications : 1) a letter, dated March 11, 1981, from Michael Carlin, President, and George Paige, Vice President, South Bay Soaring Society, P. 0. Box 2012 , Sunnyvale, requesting a place on the agenda of the March 24 , 1981 meeting to seek a permit to use the Windy Hill site to fly radio- controlled model soaring aircraft; 2) a letter, dated March 13, 1981, from Gary Giacomini, President of the Board of Directors , Marin County Open Space District, stating his Board unanimously supported the concepts embodied in AB 597; and 3) a letter, dated March 11,1981, from Naomi Schalit, Office Manager, People for Open Space, 46 Kearny, San Francisco, announcing the fourth annual People for Open Space retreat during the weekend of May 8-10 . S. Sessions stated staff had been in contact with the representatives of the South Bay Soaring Society, noting they had attended the March 16 , 1981 Windy Hill fact-finding workshop and were planning to attend the on-site workshop on March 29 . He said the Society ' s representativeswere willing to wait until the Windy Hill use and management recommedations were presented to address the Board. Herbert A Grench.General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,NonetteG Hanko,Richard S.Bishop,EdwardG Shelley,Harry A Turner,Daniel G.Wendin Meeting 81-8 Page Two R. Bishop requested that staff publicize the meeting at which the Windy Hill use and management plan would be presented to the Board so all interested persons could attend the meeting. He requested that C. MacDonald issue a press release announcing the meeting. IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA D. Wendin requested that an item be placed on the agenda so the Board could discuss the Special Meeting of April 11, 1981 with the representatives of American Youth Hostels , Inc. - Golden Gate Council . R. Bishop added item 10 , Meeting of April 11, 1981, to Old Business with Action Requested. H. Grench noted K. Duffy, the Board's Secretary, was not present and said the Board needed to appoint a Secretary pro-tempore. Motion: D. Wendin moved that H. Turner be appointed Secretary pro-tempore for the evening. B. Green seconded the motion. The motion passed uanimously. R. Bishop stated the Board's consensus that the agenda was adopted as modified. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Robert Mark, 725 Cowper, Palo Alto, stated the California Senate' s Natural Resources Committee had approved Senator Maddy 's bill , which,in effect, at least temporarily blocked the addition of the Gill Mustang Ranch acquisition to Henry Coe State Park. R. Mark suggested that District staff place signs at the Rancho San Antonio County Park that indicated how to get to Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve from the park' s parking lots . S. Session responded that staff had met with County officials to discuss signing at the park, but had not received any final signing plans from the County. He said District staff was working on some directional signs for the public. VI. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY A. Resolution of Appreciation for Assemblyman Byron Sher Motion: B. Green moved the adoption of Resolution 81-22 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Commending and Thanking Assemblyman Byron Sher for His Assistance to the Midpenin- sula Regional Open Space District and the Regional Parks of the State of California. D. Wendin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Kip Lipper, a member of Assemblyman Sher's staff, thanked the Board for their action and extended Assemblyman Sher ' s appreciation and best wishes . Meeting 81-8 y Page Three VII . NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED A. Preliminary Action Plan for the Implementation of the Basic Policy of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District for Fiscal Year 1981-1982 H. Grench introduced report R-81-12 , dated March 18 , 1981, outlined the process staff followed in preparing the proposed Action Plan, and noted the report included any changes made by staff in the key projects and activities discussed at the February program evaluation workshop. C. Britton and J. Fiddes stated that there were no changes in the key projects and activities for the Open Space Acquisition Program and for General Management and Program Support. S. Sessions stated that staff had included the provision of pre-acquisition planning necessary for acquisition decisions as a key project and activity for the Planning, Design, and Development Subprogram since this was a critical planning activity. He noted that the third key project and activity in that same subprogram had been reworded to read "Prepare compre- hensive use and development general plan consistent with adopted site emphasis guidelines" to incorporate Board directives from the recent site emphasis discussions. S . Sessions stated that three possible staffing changes were being reviewed and said the changes involved the possible addition of one Ranger and the restructruing of the Ranger staff to incorporate Senior Rangers , the Coordinator of Volunteers position, and the environmental writer/analyst skills staffing requirement. He said that staff was also in the process of reviewing enterprise program' s administration. C. MacDonald outlined the changes in the key projects and activities for the Public Participation and Education Subprogram and for the Public and Private Liaison Subprogram, noting that the telephone survey relating to the Openspace newsletter had been deleted as a key project and activity and that the key project and activity relating to public presentations had been divided between the two subprograms to more accurately reflect the different types of presentations and audience groups. D. Wendin requested that staff carefully review the proposed Action Plan and refine any statements that refer to projects or activities that require Board approval . He noted that the wording "subject to subsequent Board approval" could be used in these cases. Motion: E. Shelley moved that the Board tentatively adopt the proposed Action Plan for the 1981-1982 fiscal year. H. Turner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. A. NEW BUSI14ESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED a Meeting 81-8 Page Four B. Stevens Creek Shoreline Nature Study Area (Crittenden Marsh) - Acceptance of Easement for Public Access C. Britton reviewed memorandum M-81-37, dated March 19 , 1981, noting that staff had secured the necessary agreement from the Santa Clara Valley Water District for the granting of public access across Crittenden Lane Bridge and along the eastern levee of the Stevens Creek flood control channel to the Crittenden Marsh property. He said this public access would allow for the reimbursement of Land and Water Conservation Fund grant monies . Motion: E. Shelley moved the adoption of Resolution 81-23, a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District AuthDrizing Acceptance of Easement Deed and Agreement and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Stevens Creek Shoreline Nature Study Area) . R. Bishop seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. C. Elimination of Land and Water Conservation Fund State Assistance H. Grench reviewed memorandum M-81-33, dated March 17, 1981, noting that the elimination of the state assistance portion of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, as ordered by Department of Interior officials , would impact the District. He noted that the resolution, if approved by the Board, would be sent to President Reagan and the District's legislators in Washington with a cover letter from R. Bishop. Motion: B. Green moved the adoption of Resolution 81-24 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Urging Full Federal Funding for the Portion of Land and Water Conservation Fund Grants Directed to the States and Territories of the United States . H. Turner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. D. Wendin said he thought it would be appropriate for any Board member to send a cover letter and the resolution to a particular District legislator, as opposed to having all the letters signed by R. - Bishop. B. Green indicated she would be willing to convey the resolution to Representative McCloskey. D. Proposed Urban Forestry Grant Application S. Sessions reviewed memorandum M- 1- 6 dated March 19 , 1981, regarding the resubmission of an application to the California Department of Forestry soliciting grant funds for the second year of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve controlled burn program. He noted Phase I of the controlled burn had been successful and the Phase II grant request was an extension of the Phase I grant. B. Green asked what the effect would be on the controlled burn program if the grant was denied, and S. Session responded that funds needed to carry out the program would be included as a contingency item in Land Management's budget. Meeting 81-8 age Five Motion: B. Green moved the adoption of Resolution 81-25 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Approving the Application for Urban Forestry Funds - Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Controlled Burning Project. D. Wendin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: B. Green moved that the Board authorize the General Manager to enter into the necessary grant contracts for Phase II of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Fire Management Plan scheduled to be implemented in the fall and winter of 1981-82 if implementation is approved. D. Wendin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. VIII.OLD BUSINESS WITH NO ACTION REQUESTED A. Progress Report on Use and Management Planning for Planning Area I (Hassler Area) S. Sessions reviewed report R-81-11, dated March 25, 1981 , reporting that, since the District had not acquired the Hassler property and did not own any land west of Skyline, there was no formal use and management review for the Board to consider at this time. He stated staff had contracted with an engineering firm to prepare an Initial Study for the demolition of the Hassler Health Home buidlings, briefly reviewed some of the findings of the Study, and said the Study would be forwarded to the Board at a later time. In response to a question from H. Turner regarding the possibility of burying the demolition debris , S. Sessions said the engineering firm considered burial of the debris a favorable approach, in light of the problems associated with available disposal sites . B. Skyline Signs Progress Report S. Sessions reviewed memorandum M-81-34 , dated March 18 , 1981, noting the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo County would have to adopt a resolution designating certain areas along Skyline Boulevard as limited parking before the sign replacement project could be completed. He noted that there had been some opposition from local residents toward the signing change. Sam Jones , 16891 Stevens Canyon Road. Cupertino, asked what was meant by limited parking and Robert Mark asked when the project might be completed. S. Sessions responded that limited parking meant no parking from 9 P.M. to 6 A.M. and that he hoped San Mateo County would have acted on the project by the first of May. The Board recessed for a break at 8 :30 P.M. and reconvened for the public meeting at 8:40 P.M. Meeting 81-8 .)age Six IX. OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED A. Issues and Questions from Site Emphasis and Program Evaluation Workshops R. Bishop, referring to memorandum M-81-35 , dated March 17, 1981, opened the discussion, noting that the next question to consider from memorandum M-80-93 was question seven which asked if the Board wished to adopt guidelines which addressed the following subjects : a) restrooms, b) drinking water, c) level of trail development, d) provision of maps , e)parking areas , f) signs, g) provision of camping facilities , and h) transportation (shuttle bus) . He stated he felt it would be very difficult for the Board to adopt a general guideline for all these items and stated his approach was to consider these items on a site by site basis , allowing the most natural possible situation on each site to continue until there was a demonstrated need for one of the listed items , particularly restrooms. E. Shelley stated the Committee had included this question since they felt that, if the Board determined that it did want to have emphasized and unemphasized sites , the Board might then also want to determine what the level of development might be on an emphasized site. He said he preferred not to adopt a policy relating to these items unless there was a need for one. D. Wendin said the Board needed to set guidelines for staff to use in the preparation of use and management plans for emphasized sites and that he would answer yes to the question of providing guideline standards for a) restrooms , b) drinking water, c) level of trail development, e)parking areas, and f) signs. He felt the provision of maps could be discussed under publicity and that parking areas and transportation were unique items that should be addressed individually as they came up for a site. He noted the level of statement made by R. Bishop was the type of guide- line the Board should adopt. H. Turner noted there could be potential for differing opinions on the Board to leave the staff unsure as to what approach should be taken on these items and said there should be some guidelines on the five items mentioned by D. Wendin. H. Grench said lie thought the staff might come back to the Board with some very strict guidelines , such as no drinking water provided except to the extent it is already available on a site and pure for drinking. Motion: E. Shelley moved that the Board request staff to return to the Board with a suggested set of guidelines for items a, b, c, d, e, and f for further discussion by the Board. D. Wendin seconded the motion. Discussion: D. Wendin stated he included the inclusion of provision of maps in his second with the under- standing that this referred to the provision of on-site maps . R. Bishop clarified that the staff would be making recommendations to the Board which the Board could change or refer to a committee, if required. The motion passed unanimously. Meeting 81-8 re Seven Motion : D. Wendin moved that the Board not adopt guidelines for items 7g and 7h, provision of camping facilities and transportation (shuttle bus) , but leave them to a case by case consideration in use and management plans . E. Shelley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. R. Bishop stated question eight relating to a master land management plan had been discussed at the previous meeting. C . MacDonald reviewed her memorandum M-91-32, dated March 16, 1981, to H. Grench in which she outlined suggested publicity guidelines related to site emphasis policy. E . Shelley noted that the distribution of information, specifically brochures and maps , was not spelled out in the suggested guidelines and that there was no recommended policy on the level on distri- bution. He said that if the Board was going to adopt a set of policies on site emphasis,then the Board must, at the same time, adopt some policy on the level of distribution of site emphasis materials . H. Grench stated that the use and management plans should include a publicity element. R. Bishop asked if C. MacDonald was proposing to have a separate brochure to explain site emphasis policies . C. MacDonald res- ponded that she was not recommending a separate site emphasis brochure, rather the type of brochure that discussed District sites and policies , including site emphasis . E. Shelley noted that if a map shows all District sites and if the Board is not willing to emphasize all sites , then there needs to be a careful distribution of this general map so as not to emphasize every site in the District. Motion: D. Wendin moved that,in response to question nine (i.e. should the District adopt publicity guidelines related to site emphasis policy) , the Board tentatively adopt the guidelines in memorandum M-81-32 and ask staff to return to the Board with a restatement of the guidelines in the form of a policy statement. H. Turner seconded the motion. Discussion: D. Wendin noted that his motion referred to the internally-generated publicity (items a through e) in C. MacDonald' s memorandum. He asked staff to include a recommendation on directional signs as a method of attracting people to sites . The motion passed unanimously. C. MacDonald, referring to question ten regarding a policy to influence the level of external publicity given to sites , stated there was basically no way to control such publicity. D. Wendin stated he thought the Board's policy should be worded to indicate that the District would do nothing to generate external publicity. He said the Board should not take any steps to encourage or discourage externally-generated publicity, other than external publicity being generated by internal publicity. Meeting 81-8 Page Eight He said, for example, that the District should not solicit an article in $unset magazine. S. Sessions noted that staff should respond to requests concerning external publicity at a level consistent with the level of emphasis a site has . D. Wendin stated that he now did not think it necessary to have a specific policy on the issue, but thought staff should include a statement in the material being prepared along the lines of S. Sessions' statement, thus reflecting the fact that the District would respond to external publicity requests at a level consistent with the emphasis of a site. Motion: D. Wendin moved that the Board answer question ten (should there be a policy to influence the level of external publicity given to sites) as no and direct staff to include a statement in response to the questions relating to externally-generated publicity in the material being prepared for question nine. D. Wendin withdrew his motion which was not seconded. Motion: E. Shelley recommended that the Board adopt a policy on externally-generated publicity that stated the degrees to which the District would encourage or discourage such publicity so as to be consistent with the level of emphasis for a site. D. Wendin seconded the motion. Discussion: R. Bishop and C. MacDonald stated they did not favor having the word "discourage" in the motion. D. Wendin suggested the words "or discourage" be dropped from the motion and E. Shelley agreed to the change. D. Wendin reiterated that staff should include the proposed policy with the other material being prepared for the Board to consider. The motion passed unanimously. D. Wendin noted that it was premature to consider question eleven until an emphasis plan for District sites was prepared by staff and approved by the Board. Motion: D. Wendin moved that the Board adopt no policy for question eleven. E. Shelley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. E. Shelley and R. Bishop stated they felt the District's Basic Policy adequately addressed the question of site stewardship. S. Sessions noted the Board had reaffirmed the land management budget guideline policy and, within that constraint, staff would then develop a maintenance, patrol, and operations program that, in essence, would establish the level of stewardship for District lands . He stated he needed to know if the Board felt staff was providing adequate stewardship of the land. Meeting 81-8 Pi Nine H. Grench stated that staff wanted the Board to be aware of the level that District sites are patrolled and maintained. E. Shelley noted that if staff felt they could not properly patrol the lands under the existing budget guidelines , they should make the Board aware of this fact. Motion: D. Wendin moved that questions one and two under site stewardship be answered no and that question three be handled in the same manner as question eleven (none at this time) . B. Green seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: D. Wendin moved that the Board table the consideration of Ranger Ride-Along until a meeting with full Board attendance. E. Shelley seconded the motion. Discussion: R. Bishop said this item would be scheduled for a meeting in the future when there was sufficient time on the agenda to discuss the matter. The motion passed unanimously. D. Wendin noted that the consolidation of open space management policies had been included in that program' s proposed Action Plan for 1981/1982 . B. Schedule for Preparing a General Plan for Emphasized Sites S. Sessions reviewed memorandum M-81-38 , dated March 25 , 1981, regarding a schedule for preparing a general plan for the number and general location of emphasized sites within the District. He noted staff was proposing a starting date of July 1981 for the project, and staff would return to the Board no later than August, 1981 with an outline of scheduled activities for developing the plan, as well as an explanation of the nature of the planning document. He stated he did not know at this time what the total amount of staff time would be to accomplish this project. Motion: D. Wendin moved that the Board approve the schedule proposed in memorandum M-81-38 by staff. H. Turner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. C. Meeting of April 11, 1981 D. Wendin stated he had asked for this item to be placed on the agenda to make certain there would be a quorum at the April 11, 1981 Special Meeting with the representatives from the Golden Gate Council of American Youth Hostel Inc. N. Hanko and R. Bishop said they would not be able to attend the meeting. B. Green and H. Turner indicated they could attend a portion of the meeting. D. Wendin and E. Shelley stated they could attend the entire morning session. The Board decided the meeting should continue as planned since it appeared that there would be a quorum. X. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS S. Sessions reported there had been a Windy Hill fact-finding workshop in preparation for the development of the Windy Hill use and management plan on March 16 , 1981 and said there would be an on-site working session on March 21, 1981. Meeting 81-8 ge Ten S. Sessions stated he and D. Wendin had attended the Los Altos City Council meeting the previous evening. The Council had discussed parking problems faced by residents on St. Joseph's Avenue, and City staff had presented five possible alternatives for the Council to consider. He stated the Council decided to implement an interim scheme involving signing and notification on the weekends that there was no public parking on the street and decided to work with Santa Clara County officials to get one side of the curb from the underpass out into the residential area painted red. He said there would be a public meeting on April 21, 1980 at Montclair School with the neighbors to discuss the parking situation and possible solutions and that the District staff would make a presentation at that meeting. S. Sessions said neighbors of the Long Ridge Open Space Preserve had held a community meeting on March 22 , 1981 to discuss parking problems in the area. He sa.--d District staff and representatives from the San Mateo County Sheriff ' s Office had attended the meeting. S . Sessions reported that a group of concerned equestrians and hikers had formed their own trails committee which will identify what their needs are and relay their needs to the District. Discussion centered on how the District would interact with this group and R. Bishop stated that the Board should take no action on requests from this trails committee without very good communication with other groups interested in trails, as well as with official county trails and pathways committees. S . Sessions , reporting on the mutual assistance agreement with Santa Clara County, said that District rangers had responded several times to calls from County rangers for assistance and that County rangers had assisted District staff on a couple occasions . S. Session reported that staff had met with representatives of an environmental consultant firm working with Moffett Field and NASA to provide information for an environmental assessment document that may lead to the establishment of a Bayfront Trail connection. H. Turner reported that members of the Thornewood Committee had been meeting in working sessions to work out the financial attributes of the five Thornewood proposals. R. Bishop stated the Picchetti Committee had met on March 18, 1981 and would be reporting to the Board in the near future on the three final proposals the Committee considered, as well as on the public input the Committee had received. C. Britton noted the District's wall map had been updated to show the District' s acquisitions , which now numbered more than 10,000 acres. J. Fiddes reported on the April 22, 1981 Los Altos Board of Realtors luncheon, noting that the person who would receive the Community Service Award had not yet been selected. B. Green suggested that a District representAtive attend the luncheon if the recipient were being honored for work relating to the environment or the parksand recreation field. Meeting 81-8 -age Eleven H. Grench stated that the members of the Board had received copies of the District' s financial statements for the Year ended June 30 , 1980 and the auditor's report. XI. CLAIMS Motion: B. Green moved the approval of the revised claims, C-81-7, dated March 25, 1981. E. Shelley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. XII. CLOSED SESSION The Board recessed to Closed Session at 10 : 20 P.M. XIII . ADJOURNMENT The Board reconvened to adjourn at 11:02 P.M. Jean H. Fiddes District Clerk