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