HomeMy Public PortalAbout19730425 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 73-09 r
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
Board of Directors
Agenda
Regular Meeting
April 25, 1973 7 : 30 p.m.
Sunnyvale Community Center, Room 109
550 E. Remington Avenue
Sunnyvale i
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 21, 1973 and APRIL 11, 1973
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
1. Introduction of General Manager, Herbert Grench
Approval of Contract - L. Klein
2. Skyline Scenic Recreation Route - Art Ogilvie and
George Miller
REPORTS
3. Finances - Savings Account - Peters
4. Policy for Public Distribution of Attorney' s Report
on Brown Act with Respect to Land Acquisition
5. UD OS CA
TALOG E PRESERVATION TOOLS
L G OF OPEN SPACE
Communication to UD/OS Subcommittee - Hanko
6. District Name Change - Peters and Norton
7. Montebello Ridge Study - Zoning Policy - Duffy and Hanko
8. Review of El Retiro Suit - Peters and Norton
I
RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
9. Resolution 73-11 Accepting Insurance Policy
10. Resolution 73-12 Retaining Lawrence Klein to Prepare
Contract for the Position of General Manager
NEW BUSINESS
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - Letter from Lexington Hills Association
concerning San Jose Water Works property.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
CLAIMS
ADJOURNMENT
RESOLUTION NO. 73-13
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT AND HERBERT GRENCH AS GENERAL MANAGER
AND AUTHORIZING THE PRESIDENT TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF
OF THE DISTRICT.
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK
DISTRICT DOES RESOLVE that the agreement between the Midpenin-
sula Regional Park District and Herbert Grench as General Mana-
ger is approved and that the President is authorized to execute
the agreement on behalf of the District.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Eoard of Directors of the Mid-
peninsula Regional Park District on - April _25 1973 , at
a regular meeting thereof, by the following vote:
AYES, and in favor thereof:
Directors Daniel Wendin
Nonette Hanko
Daniel Condron
NOES: None Katherine Duffy
ABSENT: None William Peters
ATTEST: President-Board of DiiF—ectors
Secretary
EMPLOYYENIT AGRFFMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of
April, 1973 , by and between MIDPENIN,S'ULA REG1011-LU PARE
DISTRICT, a Regional Park District formed under the laws of
the State of California ("District" herein) , and HERBEERT
GRENCH ("Grench" herein) , provides as follows :
1. Grench shall be employed by District as its General
Manager on the terms and conditions contained in this Agree-
ment.
2 . Grench' s powers and duties shall be as specified in
Sections 5538 and 5549 of the Public Resources Code of the
State of California and as otherwise specified from time to
tiTe by District' s Board of Directors .
3. District shall pay Grench during the term of this
Agreement a salary of $2166 .66 per month. There shall be an
initial review of Grench ' s salary six (6) months from the
dace hereof. Thereafter, there shall be an annual review of
Grench' s salary at the anniversary date of this Agreement.
4. As further compensation to Grench, District shall
furnish him with fringe benefits , including, but not limited
to, health insurance, sick leave , and contributions to an
appropriate retirement plan (such as the County Officers and
Ein-oloyees Retirement System) , at a level not less than that
received by employees of Santa Clara County whose salary and
years of service are comparable to that of Grench and, in
addition, District shall furnish certain benefits offered
but not paid for by Santa Clara County , to wit: medical
insurance for dependents and term life insurance .
5 . During the period of his employment, Grench will
be reimbursed for his reasonable expenses incurred with res-
pect to the activities of District. Such expenses shall
include , but not be limited to, transportation expenses ,
entertainment and promotional expenses , home telephone bills ,
and expenses of membership in civic groups and business
associations whose activities are relevant to those of District.
6 . Grench shall receive three (3) weeks of Paid vacation
-annually during the first three (3) years of his employment
with District and four (4) weeks of paid vacation thereafter.
7. Grench shall devote his full time and energy to his
employment with District. Grench may, however, engage in
teaching and -participate in workshops and seminars so long as
such activities do not interfere with the performance of his
duties as General Manager. Grench may also engage in such
other activities as the Board of Directors of District may
from time to time approve.
8. This Agreement is terminable at will by either party.
In the event Grench ' s employment is terminated by District,
-2-
for reasons other than cause, Grench ' s salary and fringe bene-
fits shall be paid by District through the end of the second
calendar month subsequent to the date in which such termination
occurs . Such payments shall be a complete liquidati,,)n of any
and all claims Grench may have against District for such termi-
nation.
. In the event Grench ' s employment is terminated for cause ,
his salary and fringe benefits shall cease as of the date of
such termination.
If Grench should die during the term of this Agreement,
his compensation shall end as of the last day of the month in
which his death shall occur.
In the event Grench voluntarily terminates his employment,
his compensation shall cease as of the date of such voluntary
termination.
9 . Grench shall cooperate fully with District in the '
obtaining of a surety bond on his employment in the event
District decides such surety bond is desirable . The premiums
on such bond shall be paid by District.
10 . This instrument contains the entire agreement of the
parties and may be changed only by an agreement in writing
signed by the parties .
IN WITNESS TATHEREOF, District and Grench have executed
-3-
I
I
this Agreement the day and year first above written.
i
I
I
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRTC '
i
i
B I
Y
President I
HERBERT GRENCH
I
I
I
1
- _ I
-4-
M (
EPAETH, C LASE., VALENTINE KLEIN
A PROF ESSIONA.L CORPORATION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
GUY BLASE
C.GRANT SPAFTH 400 CHAtd PIING AVt-NVE
PAUL C.VALENTME POST OFFICE VOX 132E
LAWRENCE A.KLEIN PALO AL10,CALIFORNIA 94302
PETER A.WHITMAN ^� (y^}ry
GEORGE C.VISHE:R April 23, 1° 1 J AREA CODE 4t5
W.JAMES WARE TELEPHONE 327-6700
To the Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Park District
Dear Directors:
Enclosed is my draft of the proposed Employment Agreement
with Herb Grench. I have reviewed the Agreement with Here and
it has his approval.
If you have any questions or comments , I would be pleased
to discuss them with you.
Sincerely yours ,
WRENCE A. KLEIN
LAK/11
t/ - -�� - � � ---��---- ---- ------ -- -----
��
� ��� ����
`~-~~ ~ �
�
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT J�ETWEE0 THE COUNTY
OF SAN MATEO AND CITY AND COUNTY OF 5AN FRAHC| SCO,
COUNTY OF S,�''NTA CL8RA' [QUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ,
CITY OF DALY CITY, CITY OF PAC| F|CA, CITY OF
SAN 8RUN0, TOWN OF WOODS}DE, TOWN OF P0RTOLA VALLEY,
AND CITY OF PALO ALTO, FOR CREATION AND
DEVELOPMENT OF SKYLINE SCENIC RECREATION ROUTE
THIS AGREEMENT entered into the day of ,
1971 , by and between the COUNTY OF SAN MATED, hereinafter referred to
as "County", and the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANC|SCO, COUNTY OF 5ANTA
CLARA, COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ' CITY OF DALY CITY, CITY OF PAC| F|CA, CITY
OF SAN BRUNO, TOWN OF WOODS|UE, TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY, and CITY OF
PALO ALTO, hereinafter referred to as "Participants":
^
WHEREAS, both County and Participants are authorized to zone
� for, develop, oznstruct^and maintain recreation facilities for and on
behalf of the taxpayers and residents of their respective jurisdictions;
and
` WHEREAS, the Skyline Highway, a State Scenic Hi8hw�y' traverses
through the jurisdictions of both County and Participants; �oo
WHEREAS, it is both necessary and desirable that County and
Participants unite in developing this high potential recrezrioo area:
�
� NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY THE PARTIES HERETO
�
. . as follows:
l ° PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT AND METHOD BY WHICH IT WILL BE
- `
ACCOMPLISHED. The purpose of this agreement is to 9rovioa for �ha
establishment and development of the Skyline Scenic Recrmazion Rou�c
and for the establishment of o Joint Committee composed Of onL-
- -
from each jurisdiction which is a party to this agreement. Tha oo��od
`
.' �. � by which this will be accomplished is that each party to chIs agr~`��nc
'
hereby aqre�,s zV designate that por-ion of the Sk, . ine
vers:nc through its jurisdiction to ba a portion �f the Skv) io,� Scenic
v� suJ|
/
|�
| ^ |
| |
|
' Recreation Route and further, h ^
| r mr^ each party to this agreement agrees to
. appoint one supervisor or councilman to be its representative on a
Joint Conmittae for' UevalPpment of the Skyline Scenic Highway, which
Committee shall be the governing agency for said Skyline Smanic
Recreation Rout' ^
2. LENGTH OF AGREEMENT. This agreement shall remain in full
force and effect until term/nation by the parties hereto~
3. COMMITTEE ORGANIZATION. The Joint Committee shall establish
the following committees:
/a\ Technical Advisory Committee, consisting of one representa-
tive from each part to this agreement who is the Director
�
� of Planning or equivalent, one representative from each
party who is Director of Perks and Recreation or equivalent
. and one representative from each party who is Director of
Public Works, or County or City Engineer or equivalent.
� The ex-offlcyo Technical Committee members shall be a
� representative from the State Division of Highways and a
� representative from the San Francisco Public Utilities
�
� Commission. `
� (b) Citizens' Advisory Committee, consisting of a number of
� citizen representatives, to be determined by the Joint
� Committee, from each jurisdiction.
4° DUTIES OF JOINT COMMITTEE. The Joint Committee shall ,
immediately upon its first convening, undertake to fulfill the purposes
of this agreement by developing a plan for a Skyline Scenic Recreation
Route to preserve the scenic qualities of the Skyline region and to
realize its full recreation potential . This will be accomplished by:
(o) Estcbl7shing and designating as the Skyline Scenic
� Recreation Route a marked route from the Golden Gate |
|
| 8r/dge. toyecker pass (State Highway 152) , |
| �
| (b) Planning for development of the roadway as necessary to �
| allow for slowspeed, safe, leisurely pleasure driving,
�
�
| |
�
� 2
| ' ^ �
^ ~
'
| with sufficient right-of-way in non-urban areas to accom-
modate view turnouts, where appropriate, roadside rusts and
� contiguous bicycle and riding-hiking trails, where possible.
(c) Recommending appropriate zoning and building controls to
� ^ ins.'re preservation of the natural character of the hills and
�
� the beauty of the countryside as seen from the roadway,
(d) Designating a system of recreation roads and loop trails
� linking the Skyline Route with existing State and County parks
� on or near the route, in accordance with Public Resources
�
. Code, Section 5070 et seq. providing for multiple use of
� highway rights-of-way.
/e\ Planning for and encouraging additions to existing parks and
�
� the establishment of new parks in areas of especially high
�
recreation potential , to complete a Skyline mountain park
� system eastly accessible from any part of the Skyline Route.
�
(f) Endeavoring to establish feeder trails linking the Route to
� urban areas in the lowlands.
�
� /g\ Recommending protection of key areas of high scenic quality
along the Route by acquisition of fee title or scenic
� easement.
�
(h) Endeavoring to acquire and develop new roadways west of
�
� Crystal Springs Lakes and south of Hecker Pass to the P ^aro
� _'
�
� River (at State Highway 129) to by-pass urban areas and
complete the route along the crest of the Santa Cruz Mountains
to the P 'arm River Valley.
(i) Doing all other things as are lawful , necessary and proper
to promote the ands of this agreement.
5^ INCORPORATION OF JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS ACT, This o9roonmot
`
shall be sub/act to all of the provisions of the Joint Exercise of Powers
�Ct (commencing at Sect/on 6500 etseq. of the C«x.urnment Code) which m:y bc�
| applicable thereto and such statutory provisions are hereby inmorparaLc,�
|
�
|� 3^ �
| �
|
�
by reference herein and made a part of this agreement as if fully Set
forth herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their
hands the day and year first hereinabove written.
COUNTY OF SAN MATED
By
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors,
County of San Mateo
CITY AND
N COUNT
Y OF SAN FRANGISCO
By
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA,
� r
By ', ry.�
hIAR (,--l971
COUNTY OP SANTA CRUZ
By
CITY OF DALY CITY
By
CITY OF PACIFICA
By
CITY OF SAN BRUNO
By
(
TOWN OF WOODSIDE
(
BY
I
TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY
I
By
I
I CITY OF PALO .ALTO
By
4.
(
August 10, 1972
SKY1.4h. SCENIC RECREATION ROWE COMMIS`. _S
Iecreta!j to the ,foist Powers-Committee
rrwi r benr rmnrr.Mmr.srr.rwrrwrrr
Lavon Henderson, c/o San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, County Government Center,
Redwood City, CA 94063 Phone: (415) 369-1441
QjY and.foun4r of_Sgn ,Franc!scp
Mr. Robert F. Gonzales, City Hail , San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone, (415) 558-3184
Mr. Gerald day (Chairman), County Government Canter, Redwood City, CA 94063
Phone-. (415) 369-1441
County of Santa Clara
Mr. Victor Calvo, 70 West Hedding Street, San Jose, CA 95110
Phone: (408) 2 2323
C
'gunty of Santa Crut
Mr. George Cress, 701 Ocean Street, Roam 500, Santa Cruz, CA 9500
Phone- ) 425-2201
ity,gf, EjjgjAI1Lo
Mrs. Enid Pearson, 1200 Bryant Street, Palo Alto, CA 94301
Phone: (415) 326.4615
cit,�y, of Portols Va11ex
Mrs. Eleanor Boushey, 235 Golden Oak Drive, Portola Valley, CA 94025
Phoned (415) 851-0674
City Pf Pacifica
Ms. Grace L. McCarthy, 170 Santa Maria Avenue, Pacifica, CA 94044
Phone-, (415) 355-4151
gity pfDa ix
Mr. McRobert Stewart, City Hall, 333 90th Street, Defy City, CA 94015
(415) 992-4500
cC l ty of 2M Drym
( .. Ms. Margaret Kozkowskl, San Bruno Civic Center, San Bruno, CA 94066
Phone: (415) 589-9562
I
*Chairman, Skyline Scenic Recreation Route, Supervisors and City Council Camittee
I
I
I
I
I
of Laos 192
I
Ms. Suzanne Weeks, Town Hall , P. 0. Box 4005, Woodside, CA 94062
Phone$ (415) 851-7764
,m f rancl sg2 C i tv and County
Alan B. Jacobs, Director
Edward R. Murphy, Assistant Director
Samuel Jung, Planner IV
Ail; San Francisco City Planning Department, 100 Larkin Street,
San Francisco, CA 94102 ; (415) 558-4656
John D. Crowley, General Manager
James J. Finn, Assistant General Manager
All; Public Utilities Commission, City Hall, 400 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102 Phow (415) 558-4986
Arthur Frye, Jr. , General Manager, San Francisco Water Dept. , 425 Mason Street,
San Francisco, CA 94102 Phone: (415) 558-4101
S. Myron Tatarian, Director of Public Works, Room 260 City iiali, Civic Center,
San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 558-6161
Robert C. Levy, City Engineer, Room 359, City Hall, Civic Center,
Son Francisco, CA 94102 Phone: (415) 558-36M
Joseph
M. Caverly, General Manager
Jack Spring, Assistant Superintendent
Tom Malloy, Mini-Park Coordinator
All® Recreation and Parks Commission, McLerren Lodge. Golden Cate Park,
San Fr isco, CA e; (415) 558-3706
San Mateyo County
Mr. Donald A. Woolfe, Director. County Planning Department
Mr. Jack Brook, Director, Parks and Recreation Department
Mr. Cid Cantwell, County Engineer
All: County Government Center, Redwood City, CA 9W3
Ph .G (415) 369-1441
-2_
Santa, Clara ,Ct mu
.r+.rir .�...a.n. r.r�
Roy S. Cameron* (Committee Chairman) , Director, County Planning Department,
74 West Nodding Street, San Jose, CA 95110 Phoney: (408} 299-2 1
52
S. V. Amyx, Director, County Parks and Recreation Department, 300 Garden Hill Drive
(Vasona Lake), Los Gatos, CA 95030 6 1
} 35 -1 1
5 Jams T. Pott, Director, Public Works Dept. , 20 West Nodding street
San Jose, CA 95110 Phone: ) 2"-2884
Santa S Cow l
I
Walter Mianash, Director, County Planning Department
I
Jerry Hughes, Director, County Parks. Department
Don Porath, Director, Department of Public Works
All: County Civic Center, 701 Ocean Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95060
) 425-2032
U1 cif
John Walker, City Planner
Charles E. Vincent, Director, Recreation, Parks and Maintenance
David Mocabee. City Engineer
All: Civic Center, Sullivan Avenue = 9Dth Streets, Daly City, CA 94105
Phone-. (415) 992-4500
tom :a
Robert A. Morrow, Planning Administrator
Richard Burton, Director of Parks and Recreation
Dwight *ranch, Director of Public Works
All: 170 Santa Maria Avenue, Pacifica, CA 94044
Phone: (415) 355-4151
nBruno
Leo D. Van Dusan, City Engineer, Civic Center, 567 E1 Camino Real,
San Brum, CA 94066 Phones: (415) 588-1145
*Chairman, Technical Advisory Committee
..3
i
I
1
I
� William is, Teen Planner, Woodside Road at Whiskey Hill, P.O. arc 4tN?5,
Woodside,, CA ; (415) $51-7764
� s
I
WI Val lei►
George C. Mader, Planning Consultant. 3220 Alpine Road, Portals Valley, CA 9405
Phone: (415) 8544WI
,PA12 611g
Naphtil H. Knm, Director, Planning and Community Dovelopeent
329k-2441
K. K. $rvns, Director of Recreation Phonet ) 329-2418
H. K. Witbeckv City fogineer E ) 329-2151
All: City Bell, 250 Hamilton Street, Polo Alta, CA 94383
I
i
i
I
August 28, 1972
i
i
SKYLINE REGIONAL SCENIC RECREATION ROUTE
i
Citizens Advisory Committee
of Santa Clara County
Mr. Bruce Franks
20915 Old Santa Cruz Highway, Los Gatos 95030 353-1343
Mrs. Edward Ginzton
28014 Natoma Road, Los Altos Hills 94022 948-5362
Dr. R. Maurice Tripp
15231 Quito Road, Saratoga 95070 354-1916
Mr. John Gilliland
P. 0, Box 11 , Menlo Park 94025 851-09 81
Ms. Ursula Shepherd
671 Josina, Palo Alto 94303 493-1779
Mrs, Gordon Stewart, Chairman
12621 Quinnhili Rd. , Los Altos 94022 941-0461
Mr. Ben Lelkowitz ,
3468 Greer Road, Palo Alto 94303 326-6148
Mr. Fadlo Mousalam
. , Palo Alto 943 328-4183
1031 Grp cv,w+sue1ve
Mr. George Bechtel
458 Lowell , Palo Alto 94301 493-7372
Mrs. Marcel Vinokur
919 Channing Avenue, Palo Alto 94301 327-0759
—Russell—H. Varian, Honorary Member — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mrs.10114 Crescent Road, Cupertino 95014 967-6110
Citizens Advisory Committee
of Santa Cruz County
Mr Pl t r R Loicar Vire rtl=i —an r.
-R:--0. Be;* 185 --L- -fi. teS-95030 ----366 ? nn
r� Mr. Irving Atkinson
332 Hihn, Ben Lomond 95005 336-8278
I
i
Mr. Homer Marian
3736 Valera Dr, , Soquel 95060 475-9720
,-+ b
Staff:
I
i Mr. Arthur Ogilvie, Associate Planner
Santa Clara County Planning Department
70 west Hedding Street, San Jose 95110 299-2521
d--B Sir. Planner
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 425-2194
County Government Center, Santa Cruz 95060
I
I
I
I
� � � � ----- -- - ---- - - - - -|
^ �
^ �
�
�
|
SKYLINE SCENIC RECREATION ROUTE |
/
� DESCRIPTION OF WORK ITEMS IN SCHEDULE /
� |
FOR SEPTEMBER 1971 - FEBRUARY 1972
|
� |
� |
l . IDENTIFICATION OF ROUTE
|
� |
� Agreement has been reached on choice of alternates /n northern section. /
� Map final alignment after adoption by Supervisors Committee in December, /
Southern section: reach agreement on inclusion or exclusion of route^ !
south of Mount Madonna with committees.
3. DESIGN GUIDELINES
�
Work finished except for revisions requested by committees. Use for .
reference in design work.
\
� �
�. DELINEATION OF ���N|C CORRIDOR
.
)
Indicate on map area bordering road which is critical in protecting road's >
scenic quality. Use State Division of Highways/ corridor where it has |
been detennlned. Corridor can usually be generalized from map rather |
than from detailed field reconnaissance. |
|
4, LOOP ROAD AND TRAIL SYSTEM �
|
Show on map all good possibilities for )mmp roads and trails leaving |
Skyline and returning to same point or another point on road. Use public
domain lands for loop-trail system where possible. Rate loops shown as
to their relative desirability by each section of Skyline (north counties-
south counties)--for recreation potential , scenic quality, etc.
| Discuss possibilities with Technical Committee. Agree on priorities.
�
| Discuss with Citizens! Committees the priorities recommended by Technical
� Committee,
�
|
FEEDER ROAD AND TRAIL SYSTEM
|
| �
Show on map all good possibilities for feeder roads and trails leading �
' to the Skyline from the urban area. Portion of loop roads and trails may �
' be utilized. In locating trails, public domain lands, and in some cases �
|
right of way of little traveled roads should be utilized for trails, in
|
preference to cutting through private |ands. Rate feeder roads and trails
as to relative desirability in same way as for loop system.
Discuss feeder road and trail priorities with Technical Committee and
Citizens! Committees as with loop trails.
�
'
6. VIEW TURNOUT PLAN
�
|
� Select and map superior view points, where there are expansive views and |
� where the terrain will accommodate pull-off and parking requirements. Rank '
� in order of priority. Discuss with Technical Cmonn[tL�� �nd C/�Yo�ns/ !
�
Comm ttee.
|
7. ROADSIDE, REST PLAN !
|
Consider existing parks along route as well as other sites with high land- '
|
scape qua| ity. Rank in order of relative desirability, considering quality
of setting as well as spacing. Discuss with Technical and Citizens' Com-
mittees. �
�
�
� 8' PARK SYSTEM PLAN �
�
Map existing parks in Skyline region, studying their relationship t� Skyline
'
� �, ^ 'v� '��v) �
Scenic Recreation Route. Evaluate additional possible park sites along
route. Make plan for an ultimate Skyline park system that supplements �
� existing parks, considering the best available park resources and the |
� desired distribution of parks along the route. Include desirable additions
�
�
to existing parks to improve their relationship to Skyline route.
�
�
9. ZONING PLAN
�
� Map existing zoning where it is adequate to meet the standards of the Design �
� Guidelines. Propose and map new zoning to meet (preferably) the "desirable" �
standards of the Guidelines. �
�
� |O. INTEGRATION OF PLAN
�
�
Review the plan elements completed in | to 9 above and combine them into
an integrated plan which can be proposed for adoption by the Supervisors
� Committee,
�
�
| | ' IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS
List implementation strategies including (1) actions needed by each county'
(2) funding to be sought from state and federal governments, /]\ considera-
tion of extension of state highway system south of Route 17, (4) legislation
� needed to secure state or national parkway status.
12. REVIEW CURRENT PROPOSALS
Review any proposals made for development along route as needed. Report
to committees for action needed,
/
|
|
. - — -- -- -- -- -- - - -- - -- -- - -- -� — ��-��� �-�� -�-�- -- - -�-- -- --�
` County of Santa Clara
• `= Planning Department
July 30, 1971 IW,AO
Revised Sept. 14, 1971
Revised October 22, 1971
SKYLINE SCENIC RECREATION ROUTE
GENERA. DESIGN GU I,DEL i NES
PURPOSE AND ASSUMPTIONS
The purpose of the attached "General Design Guidelines" is to aid the jurisdictions
of the four counties along the Skyline route in establishing the kind of plans and
regulations which will accomplish the basic goal of the study and the second of the
listed minimum essential objectives.
The adopted basic goal was "the establishment of a 'Skyline Scenic Recreation Route'
which will preserve the scenic qualities of the Skyline region and realize its
recreation potential ." The second stated "minimum essential objective" was: "A
scenic corridor along the route protected by zoning and other local controls to
insure preservation of the natural character of the hills and the beauty of the
countryside as seen from the roadway."
It is acknowledged that the character of the route varies in different segments
and that the design guidelines should also vary. San Francisco and Daly City are
• already built up as high density, urban areas. Pacifica is partly built up to
more suburban densities. In some of these areas an interesting and, hopefully,
orderly urbanscape will serve as a contrast to the natural landscape of the rural
portions of the route. South of Pacifica the route is rural in character, and should
be encouraged to remain essentially rural in order to accomplish the goal of pre-
serving the scenic qualities of the Skyline region scenic corridor.
The population of the 10-county Bay Area (including Santa Cruz County) is now
4,970,000 and is projected to row to 2 0 P 773 b l 0, If r 'j 9 � ,79 y 99 �s projection comes
true, there is bound to be increasing pressure to develop homesites in foothill and
mountain areas. There are, however, good reasons for discouraging intensive
development in the mountains. It is an area of extreme ecological frailty, where
man-made developments can cause serious erosion and environmental degradation. It
is an area of potential geologic hazard, laced as it is with earthquake faults and
unstable slopes. An even more important -
p i po taut reason for discouraging intensive develop j
ment in the Skyline region is that i '
Y t is scen�cand arecreatian resource which
9 es ce h�ch will
i
be increasingly important
to the people
of the region as time goes on and our growing
population has an even greater need of scenic open space and recreational opportunities.
P
P
. �
t i s assumed therefore, that local jurisdictions J ris actions will seek by their policies to i
limit and control development along the Skyline in such a way as to minimize its impact
and to preserve the region's scenic and recreational resources. The general design
guidelines are meant as suggestions for tools to implemer* such a policy.
These guidelines should be considered to be subject to revisions as planning for
the Skyline progresses. it is important, however, for the jurisdictions along the
route to take immediate (as soon as possible) action to ensure that their ordinances
provide at least "minimum" (or better, "undesirable") protection. By such action the
Skyline roadside can have a reasonably uniform degree of protection on at least an
interim basis, pending adoption of final plans and implementation recommendations.
This will assure that, all segments of the route in the state highway system are
eligible for official designation as a State Scenic Highway.
FURTHER EXPLANATION OF CHART
A. DENSITY. Densities along the Skyline should be low enough so that man's
developments do not drastically modify the natural qualities of the landscape.
Since the impact of development on the landscape is often greater on steep
slopes, It is recommended that a slope/density formula (problem: ridge tops
would be most settled and most visible) be used In calculating the allowable
number of dwelling units for any given property. By such a formula steep
lands will yield fewer dwelling units than lands of gentler slope. It is
further recommended that development be planned on the cluster principle, with
houses grouped on flatter land, and, where possible, out of sight of the road-
way. Density should be in relation to visibility from the road.
B. SETBACKS. Generous setbacks can help to minimize the impact of man-made
development by allowing for screening them from view behind natural vegetation
or planted landscaping. Flexibility is required for setbacks. It is recog-
nized that topographic conditions or other factors may'make it inadvisable or
impossible to adhere to the setback standard set. Such cases, however, can
usually be taken care of through a variance procedure.
C. ROADSIDE CONTROL. No billboards (off-site advertising) should be allovied on
the Skyline. No transmission lines should be allowed to parallel the Skyline
within the Scenic corridor. Transmission lines crossing the Skyline should
be kept to a minimum and, where possible, be placed underground. New distri-
bution lines paralleling the Skyline and within viewing distance should be
placed underground. Existing distribution lines should be replaced underground
as a high priority for P.U.C. funds allocated annually for this purpose. The
location of roadside rests should be based primarily on landscape and scenic
values or recreation potential rather than on specified intervals. The intervals
listed, therefore, are only a general guide to spacing.
D. FREQUENCY OF COMMERCIAL SERVICES. Commercial services should be mainly as
needed by travelers along the road or local residents. The consideration of
traveler and resident convenience should be modified by consideration of pre-
serving the rural atmosphere of the road.
E. DESIGN REVIEW. Each development plan should be very carefully drawn and
reviewed with effect on the scenic and physical environment in mind. Architec-
tural and site approval , including geological review procedures, should be
mandatory. (San Mateo County special grading for the Skyline scenic corridor--
should be considered by each jurisdiction.)
F. ROADWAY'. The roadway should be safe and should encourage a leisurely, pleasant
drive. It should discourage use for point-to-point travel. It should by its
design discourage high speed travel .
G. TRAILS. Trails for hiking, horseback riding, and bicycling, should be provided
separately where possible, although a combination hiking and horseback trail is
possible where right of way width is limited. Any traits paralleling the highway
should be separated physically from the roadway by a 20-30 foot strip of land,
preferably with tree and shrub cover. Trails paralleling the highway may not
need to be continuous where a good system of loop trails is available.
H. OTHER. Planned unit development and cluster zoning procedures should be
encouraged to promote quality of design and to allow flexibility to accommodate
good design. The density of population will be controlled by the slope density
formulation In "All of the table.
K Y L I N E S C E N I C R E C R E A 3 N R 0 U T E — GENERAL, DES 1 GN GUI 4l I NES
THE GENERAL DESIGN GUIOCLINES ARC CONSIDERED AS MINIMUM. ANY JURISDICTION CAN ADOPT
STRICTCA RCQU/NCMCNTS THAN THOSE BELOW. '..
j
i (SF AND
f
BUR N BUILT UP DALY CITY) uOCVtLOPIN/ N (PACI►ICA)
MINIMUM DESIRABLE MINIMUM OCSIRASL( MINIMUM
A DENSITY SLOPE DENSITY
DWELLING UNITS PER MET ACRE 15 4 2 — 4. 1 1 UNIT ♦ER 1 A
00,
SKS
FROMAEOG( Or CSLASLISHCO AN 0' iN SOME AREAS Of �51 35' 50' — 100' � 1-4
SF $ OAIY CITY ALSO STAGGEREQ REFER TO TEXS
C RGADSIDE C0%TRCL NO BILLBOARDS NO {ILLBOARSS NO BILLBOARDS NO BILLBOARDS NO BILLBOARDS
Sit-AS — BILLBOARD, SERVICF DIRECTIONAL ONSITE 01NECYIONAL ONSITE DIRECTIONAL ONSITE DIRECTIONAL ONSITC DIRECTIONAL DNS/
DIRECTORY, 0N31TE ARCH'L. {ITC REVIEW ARCM'L. SITE REVIEW ARCH'L• SITE REVIEW ARCH'L. SITE REVIEW AACM'L. SITE RE1
ROADSIDE REST INTERVALI NONE AS EXISTS 5 MIS• 10 MIS•
UTILITY LINES — OISTRIBU— NONE NON[ E: NON[
T104 LINES PARALLEL TO Mont NON
ROACJAY CROSSING ROADWAY CROSSING ONLY CROSSING ONLY CROSSING ONLY
TRANSMISSION LINES UNDERGROUND UM.DCRCRQUND SINGLE POLE UNDERGROUNw—
At SINGLE POLE
D CC1:1ER:,AL SERVICES
[%%RVAL WHERE NEEDED)
HIGHWAY FACILITIES — GAS. 4 nit. 5 "IS. 5 MIS• 10 MIS.
r 000. LODGING OUTSIDE THE OORR�
E -qc•r!� T{�y1Fy R60UIRE ARCHI ACQUIRE REQUIRE REQUIRE REQUIRE REQUIRE YtE�+fist t IPPRBY PROCroun& T
bfrE;;l DESIGN Review Design REVIEW DESIGN Review DESIGN REVIEW DESIGN RCVtC
r_r nL,ygl Gai PRE YFe s Xx_S yCC
"EIGHT PLACEMENT Or BLOC.
IN RELATION TO TERRAIN & PROTECT VICWS PROTECT VIEWS PROTECT VIEWS PROTECT VIEWS {LEND j
VIEW
SPECIAL GRADING RCOUfAtM'TS YES YES Yes YES Yes
LANDSCAPE SCREENING — YCS YES Y[i Y[{
YES OR NO
EROSION CONTROL PLANTINB Y[S YES YES ,YES Vts
LOGGING O►ERAIION — DIST. N.A. N.A. NONE IN SCENIC ZONE MONF IN SCENIC ZONE 500'
ROAD R W
F Ru A:JAAY WIDT"j NO. LANES LNS• MAX. 4 LNS. MAX. LNS• MAX. 4 LNS. MAX. 2 Los. MAX.
'.PrED 80'R/W 35 MPN MAX• 120'R/W 45 MPH MAX. 00'R/w 35 M►H MAX. 140-150'R/v45M►H MAX. 150'01/W 45 MPH
SEPARATED R W — MAX. ALLOY ------q--��
ABLC DIST. OCT. DIRECT. Rome 14 LANDSCAPED MEDIAN 8' LANDSCAPED REBORN 14' LANDSCAPED MEOI*N NON[
Or TRAVCL LANES
I
G TRAILS IN PARK AREAS IN PARK AREA{
01STAlCE FROM ROADWAY 201 251 OR MORE 201
S J R F A C C
HIRING i NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL CROONd]
NORSC NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUnq
B ICTCIL CONCRETE OR ASPHALT ASPHALT ASPHALT ASPHALT
MAIL WIDTH AS PARK`ACQUIRES As PARK A[OUIRCS 4' — U► TO 10' ___ _ _
M k CLUSTER an OAOA Pug ��CLU{TER 011�hlO ClU{TEN O DD CLUSTER OR CLU3TCR OR PU
1 ♦ACILITICS WOULD BY TO FIT PARTICULAR ITE MIN. Of A) PICNI TABLE & TRASH RE CEPT CLCL B) SAME AS A). WI M WATER. C) SAME
2 ADDITIONAL S[LtCT YE CLEARING MAY Be OC3IRAGL[ FOR VISTA POINT 8i FIBe HAZARD AREAS.
3 OCSIRA{LC� MAY VARY DEPENDING On ECONOMICS Of ACQUISITION. SCV[RANCC DAMAGE{ FACTOR IN SECURING INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES.
4 35.�5 N/M ARt MAX. SPEEDS 0[►tM0[NT ON LOCAL CONDITIONS.R ECOMMENDED UNDER SPEED IfMITS PERTAINING TO NEW ROADS AND
5 ODES NOT APPLY T6 EXI3I ROADS•
IN AREAS WMCRC PRESENT ROAD i{ SINGLE LANE OR VERY NARROW TERRAIN MAY DICTATE Ap01T/ORAL SEPARATION Of LANES BR DIVIDED ROAD.
6 DCNSITY WILL B[ CONTROLLED UNDER "A DENSITY" (se[ Asoy[) '
7 ENCOURAGE SHARING DRIVEWAYS TO LIMIT ACCESS ROADS IN SAM MATEO COUNTY CAN BE DONE UNDER SITE APPROVAL PROCEOURES.
AilOPT_3 ?Y Tmr J:l%T rP: _ {
CU^111 TTEE
i
i
R U R A L
Des IRAfL1
SLOPE DENSITY
• UNIT PCR 20 ACS.
200'
flfKiRi 1fr IN IFTAACK
REFER TO TEXT
CCUTRALISED DIRCCTCAY
TE NO INDIVIDUAL SIGNS
IEW
green In TEXT
NONE
AT UNOCRGROUND
Ly
1 NONE IN THE CORRIDOR
DOR '
REOUIRC
DESIGN REVIEW
lu
*LEND WITH LANDSCAPE,
AVOID GUILDING ON
R10GE LINE
YES
E YES
2WO'
k
LKS MAX.
AX. 300'Alw 35 NPN MAY.
NONC5
25' OR MORE
NATURAL GROUND
NATURAL GROUND
UP TO
CLUSTCR DR P
f f WITH TDOLETI ►A %"a.
i
I
1
i
i
A
S.
BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
OF THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION NO,
On the mati6o of Supervisor
duly seconded by Supervisor
the following resolution is adopted:
RESOLUTION ADOPTING PORTIONS OF THE SKYLINE SCENIC RECREATIONAL
ROUTE AS A COUM SCMC RLC ION ROUTE
WHEREAS, the establishment of a "Skyline Scenic Recreation
Route" under the joint powers agreement by San Francisco, San
Mateo, Santa Clara, and Santa Crux Counties seeks to preserve the
scenic qualities of the Skyline region and realize its recreation
potential; and
i I
WHEREAS, a portion of the Skyline Scenic Recreation Route
45State Route 36) in San Mateo County has been designated as an
fficial State Scenic Highway' and a second portion of State
Route 35, lying in Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties, from the
San Mateo-Santa Cruz County line to State Route 17, is under con-
sideration for the designation "Official State Scenic Highway;
and
WHEREAS, on March 23, 1972, the Skyline Scenic Recreation
Route Citizens' Advisory Committee, Southern Section, adopted a
Resolution urging the Boards of Supervisors of Santa Crux. and
Santa Clara Counties to declare that portion of the Skyline
Scenic Recreation Road from State Route 17 to Mount Madonna Park
a County Scenic Highway and to adopt standards to protect the
route and to ensure the preservation of both the natural character
of the hills and the beauty of the countryside as seen from the
roadway; and
WHEREAS, this resolution was adopted on May 1$9 19720 by the
Joint Powers Committee of the Four County Skyline Scenic Recreation
Route;
BE IT, THEREFORE, RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of
the County of Santa Cruz as foliowss
1) That portion of the Skyline Scenic Recreation Route from
State Route 17 to Moun
t Mado
nna Park be designated
County Skyline Scenic Recreation Route, and as the
Z) That the scenic corridor along the route will be protected
by local zoning and other local controls as deemed proper
by the Board of Supervisors, and
3) That the extent of improvement of the existing road and
roadway will remain under the jurisel,ction of the Board
of Supervisors.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors of the County
of Santa Cruz, State of California, this � ;; day of �;�;;;;; ,
19720 by the following vote:
AYES: SUPERVI
F.
' I
i E
I
9
i
NOES: SUPERVISORS
ABSENT: SUPERVISORS
i
wII
« , CKILMM a sa a j
ATTEST:
OR of saLd B64M
Approved as to form:
C A. CARLSON .
« A. CARLSON,, ChLef
Deputy County Counsel
DISTRIBUTION: Planning Depar t•AlMi Myron• Jacobs
Supervisor Cress
County Counsel
or
• y
}
t
" T
• 4
' f
I
COUNT O MGMDERS OF THIC BOARD
SAN MATEO JAMES V. FITZGCAALD
IIODCAT 6.UT.CLAIA
• WILLIAM M.WCNOCq
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MRS.JCANFA..LCq
GERALD R. DAY
COYNYY OOVCANMCNT C INTCII IICDWRypD CITY. CAU"MNIA i4oeS CNAISOM
i4i.14+ii.r7CT.iip'Y
I
February 3, 1972
To: Signatories to the Joint Powers Agreement for the
Skyline Scenic Recreation Route
Pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement for the Skyline Scenic Recreation
Route, the Joint Committee, at its meeting of January 7, 1972, adopted t
two elements of the Plan for the Recreation Route. These elements are
(1) the Route Alignment, and (2) General Design Guidelines.
1. The adopted alignment for the Skyline Scenic Recreation Route is as
follows: Starting at the Golden Gate Bridge, it would skirt the ocean along*
Lincoln. Boulevard and El Camino del Mar. to Lincoln Park at Legion of
Honor Drive
Here
it would tur
n south to
Clemente
Street and continue on �
to 42nd Avenue, go one block south to Point Lobos Avenue and on to the
Great Highway. It would follow the Great Highway south of Fleishhacker
Zoo where it joins Skyline Boulevard, and then continue on Skyline south
through Daly City and Pacifica to where it intersects Sharp Park Road.
Here the route would follow Sharp Park Road for approximately one-half
mile west. Then it would run south on a proposed alignment along the
crest of Sweeney Ridge, run past the Portola Discovery Site, then continue
along the western ridge of the Sari Francisco Watershed down to Half Moon
Bay Road (State Route 92). The route would then continue easterly on
Half Moon Bay Road to its junction with Skyline Boulevard. (State Route # 35) 1'
,and then follow Skyline Boulevard through-San Mateo County to State Highway
# 17 in Santa Clara County. At this point it would follow the alignment of a
County road through Mt. Madonna County Park and t6n follow a mountain
ridge to its terminus at the Pajaro River.
t
The Committee agreed that the segment between Mt. Madonna Park and the
Pajaro River should be for pedestrian and equestrian rather than vehicular
traffic. Hecker Pass Road between Mt. Madonna Park and Watsonville can I'
provide vehicular access between Coast Highway (State Route #1) and the
Skyline Scenic Recreation Route.
I
2. General Design Guidelines: The attached guidelines were adopted as an I
aid to assist the various jurisdictions in establishing regulations which will
accomplish the basic goals and protection needed for the Skyline Scenic
Recreation Route.
""Tines I4"A Cvsav TIfte"T I
's
• Skyline Scenic Recreation Route February 3, 1972
The Joint Committee will study and evaluate other elements of the Skyline
Scenic Recreation Route within the coming months. These include: t
Delineation of a Scenic Corridor, Loop Road and Trail System, Feeder
Road and Trail System, View Turnout Plan, Park System Plan, Zoning
Plan, Integration of Plans and Implementation of Recommendations.
`Your continued 000peration will be appreciated as the plan for the Skyline
Scenic Recreation Lute progresses. i
- Very truly yours, 3
10
' - GERALD F. DAY, Chair n
' Skyline•Sceriic Recreation Route f
GFD/lh `
Encl.
cc: Board of Supervisors.? City & Co. of"San Francisco
County of San Mateo €
County'of Santa ;Clara; ,: t
."d
County of Sarsta°Cxu� �
City Council, City of Daly City
City of Pacifica
City of San Bruno" •+
City of Palo AltoA,
Town Council, Town of Woodside' '..r....••.w �l �
Town of Portola��Ta4l'd a
San Mateo County Legislators
William Penn Mott i
State Division of Highways
• i
• r
3
s
• t
i
tTNtu,N raw-, ,.1%
. I f
O
G01��"I'1/ V ■
• +
ItrrsN+�t•rR Eoo �l..AA.AA1rlwd- TS
n.r nin„m^ "1 EAN r TOCO t/ 11V��.' ��
STATE?Art y1, r. +� (� A 7; ,/�1 1 / . •-i
p.....•.,.n NARNM ♦I�LrJ •,:! i1 , :%-.AT10, �041
SYIMNION►ttd \�►ARK /
STATE MR 'rN_ ` 46 r r r
t• y��; rr LEG EN0
!r d'�, r ROADWAY •.
TEMPORARY ALTERWATE
• PARK
IUN,rr t 1 "L ONLY •,• �., 1
•'
CWNT . . /•
' •. •.� PARK ,Iaa�.teAicie,.Bo�y. ' 7•�•
.�•u . ti�
i .• � 4
i �� ADOPTCa JAN.1,1972 '
'•i tv T + •• , '
wl MAT[* '.
t. ,•S NOTE: Duo t0 the sma I 1 scale of
�[ oz K ARTMr of this map the route alignment iVAN S
• + > ' somewhat schematic in certain
N. areas. As th
► � ti e stud on t
MAT . his ,
.EAr,KE ,G•sA+1 ro ,.. + y .
project continues, a more de— %'
1• r tailed•.• map wi
ll be
prepared,
..%'j. '" '� ��' .�•! Detailed maps of the Route are '•�
F•' • VAT( : , 1 • ���. available at the County Planning
;~✓J• T . 4 to . Offices of San Mateo and Santa
_ ;.0; r �_ ~;. Clara Counties.TOM At"
PAR. \ .''• .,rooTTINE.E ` •.1 T' •; ; i•r•� .
• ``OAM Me00N140 ►ARK ;.` :_ / , S �,'A•• ti ••• �•
MIT PAN
WI MATIO w'.'.`.'M /\ FROM(Tl ,�, �, 1t •••• ,7
EcuNrt �_% r( 3 ,, r
.TNMNECII r 1 t •ti •�'
�MIATouq�/ ^'t. cW rt Jam. 1A11�A r . , /,
PARK ! '`Js ►RO►OSU PARR ''� G , , .1 , ,�rr•rL.A.
rnsuuRo 1' i {�Irmo
✓' .1,... '?.
SYANO�Anu• IARK '•tiSl[Y[M MIN[K /. , • .
IOw000s ,w•'� �;i,�/.) �i.fWNrt PARK ��. • `, �' .; Y,,
STATE N - ►OOtOSl •/�/ .I M•�.•.•Nn4(M�r , t ;�' \ + , '-'.`./
IARK .� rlAltt J
STEVCNS Ann
%,FAAN *�CWNr►PARK i •,. ) •'A �`•
OAun. � STATE rCOE2t ';•,
�,A/ CASR[110C11I` 4•WIWKN COUNTY : ' J . l
YY ,,�� C, • MATpr v ` i•'•W1lA N 01 tAt00 �. • •I •.I �•. , \.r'X. ...
^fir,. AG M[O C.0 .��f h •• ,.
KM Is ATM 1 r {YNNryW MWT M CWIM PAOR .t - t.• .:1• :•� •�• j •� . • •�
TIHM ■ M.UNTC
O 1Aura Q.M•.Lr,• , , _ • T •i + t t :+7 ,r :•
■ A .%J ►Ms
. YASONA+AK[ 't �•`w 1 •"' I ` '�• .'t '•'�'. �1
COUNTY ti rt: ,n•;;i �� \ r a Al ,� �.-
• �Tn ;^ PARKT P •fi •'• 'l / +� ,
> 34P.AA•' ►
1 1
rat
/
d RES(VTOIN AND
OttxtATMN AMA EAN MSC A ••~' 'J _ �. ' � •7 E� ` ', ��_
' ddP
M
1G WORKS t•
/ •li�afliw■•A. f^!t`�' . �`� r A i� , ;�,�. •.0 ( j ii / r. , kt
�I�LCw.GuQ�I..r■I•"' .'.rl « t V .. j. Fix.
t
• NEMT COrgtE ME" *
, •,.� f •. lir.w>A. •r V • A, , . . ..�,•... i
•vNTxssm N l su ins 1� p , Cart rT ► '•` ,." f A)
curroRRut., ' tt' %MIA CARE ��'PARK
• , \ OI•r.y,M 2 .RA,
• .�' Ot UY[ACA ... •��• WAS
,'`•'•r?CAa.IO► • �' •t, - •/�J. ;'
J . YbITESt f�4O� ,, CANTON
►A•A 7 31 r •./ i
`. ,IlrwK MAW brAicPat
1.`0001111 y ,'.r • • �:1 1 • .
.WAVE '' PARK �/�•-� ••• • , . : i'.. ,,`:.�.;� t.•1 •.:'',� .�
1 •. 0�'
41
ir
• • ^'/•- • �1.�mot_ Sa.��Jl. - �'ti� � �
S K Y L I N E S C E N I C R E C R E A T I O N R 0 U T E — GENERAL DESIGN GU1DEllNES ADOPTED BY THE J01%T P;._;S
COUMI TTEE JANUARY 1r-72
THE GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES ARE CONSIDERED AS MINIMUM. ANY JURISDICTION CAN ADOPT
STRICTER REQUIREMENTS THAN THOSE BELOW.
ITY)
U RBAN (SF AND U R 8 A N RU RAL
BUILT U1 DALY C DEVELOPING (PACIIICA)
MINIMUM DESIRABLE MINIMUM DESIRABLE MINIMUM D[SIRABLE
ILOPL OEMSITT }10PL DENSITY
A DENSITY
*WELLING UNITS PER MLT ACRE 15 4 2 - 4. 1 _ 1 UNIT PER 1 AC. 1 UNIT ►ER 2O ACS.
100' 200'
`
B SETBACKS 01 1N SOME AREAS OF , — 100' cirylgIlITY r rL[TIR LL ITV IV TL7IlACX
FROM [DC[ Of ESTABLISHED ROW SF & DALY CITY ALS�5, 35/ O STAGGERED — REFER TO TEXT REFER TO TEXT
C ROADSIDE CONTROL NO BILLBOARDS NO BILLBOARDS NO BILLBOARDS NO BILLBOARDS NO BILLBOARDS CENTRALIZED DIRECTORY
SIC,,$ — BILLBOARD, SERVICE DIRECTIONAL ONSIT[ OIR::CTIONAL ONSITE DIRECTIONAL ONSITL DIRECTIONAL ONSIT[ DIRECTIONAL ONSITE NO INOIVIOVAL SIGNS
DIRECTORY, ONSITE ANCHIL. SITE REVIEW ARCH'L. SITE REVIEW ARCN'L. SITE REVIEW ARCH'L. SITE REVIEW AACM'L. SITE REVIEW
ROADSIDE REST INTERVALI NONE AS EXISTS 5 MIS- 10 MIS.
UTILITY LINES — DISTRIBU— NONE NONE NONE NONE
C ROSSINO ONLY TION LINES PARALLEL TO CROSSING ONLY
NONE NONE CROSSING ONLY
ROADWAY CROSSING ROADWAP
TRANSMISSION LINES UNDERGROUND UNDERGROUND SINGLE POLE u SINGLE POLE UCROSSINC ONLY
NDERGROUND
D COt-Yi RCIAL SERVICES WHERE NEEDED
INTERVAL 10 • NON[ IN THE COARIOOR
HIGHWAY FACILITIES — GAS, 4 MIS. 5 N{f. 5 NIB• MIS OUTSIDE THE CORRIDOR
FOOD, LOOGING
E �}cSSII�; g:ylCt� REQUIRE ARCM REQUIRE REQUIRE REOu1RE -REQUIRE REQUIRE REQUIRE
T[G'T.s217'� xpPRDy.IRDGFDUAE Z
DESIGN REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW DESIGN REVIEW
ACCr;;7 ii
r rn+nrlr-, PROCLLIALl VrYrs Vr s: Yfl
N[IONT Ps PLACEMENT OF BLOC. BLEND WITH LANDSCAPE,
IN RELATION TO TERRAIN Bc PROTECT VIEWS PROTECT VIEWS PROTECT VIEWS PROTECT VIEWS BLIND AVOID BUILDING ON
VIEW RIDGE LIME
SPECIAL CRA3ING REOUIREM'TS YES TES YES YES YES YES
LANDSCAPE SCREENING — YES YES Y[S YES — —
YES CR NO
EROSION CONTROL PLANTING YES TIES YES YES YES YES
YES OR NO
LOGGING OPERATION — DIST. N.A. H.A. NONE IN SCENIC ZONE NONE IN SCERIC ZONE SOON 20�'
N ROAC R V
ENS. MAX. LNS. MAX. LNS. MAX. LNS. MAX. LNS. MAX. LNS• MAX.
F ,L5iG-Y WIDTH, NO. LANES, , 7 , I 300'
:ESIG•+ :I'EED� SO'R/W 35 "PH MAX. 1201R/V 45 MPH MAX. OO R/W )5 MPN MAX..140-150 R/V�LSMPH MAX. 150 R/W 45 Now MAX. ,Ivv R/W 35 MPN
SEPARATED R W — MAX. ALLOW
LOLL DIST. BET. DIRECT- l NONE 14' LANDSCAPED MEDIAN S' LANDSCAPED MEDIAN 14' LANDSCAPED MEDIAN NONE S NONE
Or TRAVEL LANES I I
G TRAILS IN PARK AREAS IN PARK AREAS 20' 25' OR NOR[ 20' �51 OR MORE
DISTAUCE FROM ROADWAY --
SUR/ACC
HIKING NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND
•
MORSE NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL GROUND NATURAL CROUND
_ BICYCLE _ COHERE T_C OR ASPHALT ASPHALT _ ASPHALT _ _ ASPHALT
TRAIL WIDTH A3 PARK REQUIRES AS PARK REQUIRES _41 UP TO 1O' U► TO
M H CLUSTER OR POD CLV&iiR O�UO OLUSTCR 0>�-U CLUSTER OR CLUSTER OR PUD CLUSTER I PJO b
1 FACILITIES WOULD RV TO r1T PARTICULAR ITE — 111N. Or A) PICNI TABLE P. TRASH RECEPT CLC; B) SAME AS A), VI N WATER( C) SAME AS f , WITH TOIILT, /AAKINL-
2 ADDITIONAL S[LECTIV[ CLEARING MAY BE DESIRABLE FDA VISTA POINTS BI FIRE HAZARD AREAS.
3 DESIRABLE, MAY VARY DE/ENDING ON ECONOMICS OF ACQUISITICN. SEVERANCE DAMAGES FACTOR IN SECURING INOIVIOUAL PROPERTIES.
# MPN AMCMAX. i►[[Dt DEPENDENT ON LOCAL CONDITIONS.RECOMMENOEO UIIDEA SPLLD LIMIT{ PLATAIMING TO NEW ROAD$ AND
35-45 DOES NOT AP►LY TO EXISTING ROAD{.
5 IN AREAS WMLAE PRESENT ROAD IS SINOLC LANE OR VERY NARROW TERRAIN MAY DICTATE ADDITIONAL SEPARATION 01 LANES GR DIVIDED ROAD.
6 DENSITY WILL BL CONTROLLED UNDER "A DENSITY" (SEE ABOVE)
7 ENCOURAGE SNARING DRIVEWAYS TO LIMIT ACCESS ROADS IN SAN MATED COUNTY CAN BE DONE UNDER SITE APPROVAL PROCEDURES.
i
_T County of Santa Clara
Planning D(!pijrLm(,nt
July 30, 1971 LW,AO
Revised Sept. 14, )971
Revised October 22, 1971
SKYLINE SCENIC RECREATION ROUTE
GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
PURPOSE AND ASSUMPTIONS
The purpose of the attached "General Design Guidelines" is to aid the jurisdictions
of the four counties along the Skyline route in establishing the kind of plans and
regulations which will accomplish the basic goal of the study and the second of the
listed minimum essential objectives.
The adopted basic goal was "the establishment of a 'Skyline Scenic Recreation Route'
which will preserve the scenic qualities of the Skyline region and realize its
recreation potential . " The second stated "minimum essential objective" was: "A
scenic corridor along the route protected by zoning and other local controls to
insure preservation of the natural character of the hills and the beauty of the
countryside as seen from the roadway."
It is acknowledged that the character of the route varies in different segments
and that the design guidelines should also vary. San Francisco and Daly City are
already built up as high density, urban areas. Pacifica is partly built up to
more suburban densities. In some of these areas an interesting and, hopefully,
orderly urbanscape will serve as a contrast to the natural landscape of the rural
portions of the route. South of Pacifica the route is rural in character, and should
be encouraged to remain essentially rural in order to accomplish the goal of pre-
serving the scenic qualities of the Skyline region scenic corridor.
The population of the 10-county Bay Area (including Santa Cruz County) is now
4,970,000 and is projected to grow to 7,723,790 by 1990. If this projection comes
true, there is bound to be increasing pressure to develop homesites in foothill and
mountain areas. There are, however, good reasons for discouraging intensive
development in the mountains. It is an area of extreme ecological frailty, where
man-made developments can cause serious erosion and environmental degradation. It
is an area of potential geologic hazard, laced as it is with earthquake faults and
unstable slopes. An even more important reason for discouraging intensive develop-
ment in the Skyline region is that it is scenic and arecreation resource which will
be increasingly important to the people of the region as time goes on and our growing
population has an even greater need of scenic open space and recreational opportunities.
it is assumed, therefore, that local jurisdictions will seek by their policies to
limit and control development along the Skyline in such a way as to minimize its impact
and to preserve the region' s scenic and recreational resources. The general design
guidelines are meant as suggestions for tools to implement such a policy.
These guidelines should be considered to be subject to revisions as planning for
the Skyline progresses. It is important, however, for the jurisdictions along the
route to take immediate (as soon as possible) action to ensure that their ordinances
provide at least "minimum" (or better, "undesirable") protection. By such action the
Skyline roadside can have a reasonably uniform degree of protection on at least an
interim basis, pending adoption of final plans and implementation recommendations.
This will assure that all segments of the route in the state highway system are
eligible for official designation as a State Scenic Highway.
'
'
FURTHER EXPLANATION OF CHART
A. DENSITY. Densities along the Skyline should be low enough so that man's
developments do not drastically modify the natural qualities of the Yandscape
Since the impact of development on the landscape is often greater on steep ^
slopes, it is recommended that a slope/densitvformula (problem: ridge tops
would be most settled and most in calculating the allowable
number of dwelling units for any - -- property. By such a formula steep
lands will yield fewer dwelling units than lands of gentler slope. it is
further recommended that development be planned on the cluster principle, with
houses grouped on flatter land, and, where possible, out of sight of the road-
way. Density should be in relation to visibility from the road,
B. SETBACKS. Generous setbacks can help to minimize the impact of man-made
development by allowing for screening them from view behind natural vegetation
or planted landscaping. Flexibility / s required for setbacks. It is recog-
nized that topographic conditions or other factors may make it inadvisable or
impossible to adhere to the setback standard set~ Such cases, however, can
usually be taken care of through a variance procedure.
C. ROADSIDE CONTROL. No billboards (off-site advertising) should be allowed on
the Skyline. No transmission lines should be allowed to parallel the Skyline
within the Scenic corridor. Transmission lines crossing the Skyline should
be kept to a minimum and, where possible, be placed underground. New distri-
bution lines paralleling the Skyline and within viewing distance should be
placed underground. Existing distribution lines should be replaced underground
as a high priority for P. U.C. funds allocated annually for this purpose. The
location of roadside rests should be based primarily on landscape and scenic
values or recreation potential rather than on specified interva| s. The intervals
listed, therefore, are only a general guide to spacing.
O FREQ
UENCY Commercial services should be mainly as
./eeueu by travelers along the road or local residents. The consideration of
traveler and resident convenience should be modified by consideration of pre-
serving the rural atmosphere of the road.
E. DESIGN ^ Each development plan should be vary carefully drawn and
reviewed with effect on the scenic and physical environment in mind. Architec-
tural and site approval , including geological review procedures, should be
mandatory. (San Mateo County special grading for the Skyline scenic corridor-
should be considered by each jurisdiction.)
-
F. ROADWAY. The roadway should be safe and should encourage a leisurely, pleasant
drive. It should discourage use for point-to-point travel . It should by its
design discourage high speed travel .
G. TRAILS. Trails for hiking, horseback riding, and bicycling' should be provided
separately whore possible, although a combination hiking and horseback trail /s
possible where right of way width is limited. Any trails paralleling the highway
should be separated physically from the roadway by a 20-30 foot strip of land
preferably with tree and shrub cover. Trails paralleling the highway may not
need to be continuous where a good system of loop trails is available.
H. OTHE], Planned unit development and cluster zoning procedures should be
encouraged to promote quality of design and to allow flexibility to acconmxodatm
Good design. The density of population will be controlled by the slope density
�ormuiation in /'A/' of the table.
�
/
i
Parks and Recreation Commission
624 County Administration Building
70 West Heading Street
Count �c 1 S-anta Clara lara San Jose, nia 95110
299.2323 C Area rCode 408
California
April 16, 1973
t
,
Honorable Board of Supervisors
524 Administration Building
70 West Hedding Street
San Jose, California 95110
Subject: Acquisition of Property along' Skyline Boulevard
Gentlemen:
The Parks and Recreation Commission, at their meeting
of April 4, 1973 , considered a Skyline Scenic Recreation
Route Citizens Advisory Committee resolution which proposed
acquisition of parcels of property along Skyline Boulevard
in Santa Clara County.
This is to advise that the Commission reacted favorably
to the proposal and does herewith submit a resolution recom-
mending the acquisition by Santa Clara County of certain
specific land areas along or adjacent to Skyline Boulevard,
Summit Road and Loma Prieta Avenue for view sites, roadside
rests, day use areas, and additions to existing County parks
along with a list of acquisitions, projected uses for each
site and a rating chart on each site.
Very truly yours,
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION'
AnthonyY�JRizzo
Chairman
mf
CC: Director of Parks & Recreation Department
Skyline Scenic Recreation Route Citizens
Advisory Committee
Attachments
i
t
RESOLUTION
UT N BY THE
SANTA CLARA COUNTY PARRS & RECREATION COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY PARKS & RECREATION
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE ACQUISITION BY SANTA CLARA
COUNTY OF CERTAIN SPECIFIC LAND AREAS ALONG OR ADJACENT
TO SKYLINE BOULEVARD, SUMMIT ROAD AND LOMA PRIETA AVENUE
FOR VIEW SITES, ROADSIDE RESTS, DAY USE AREAS, AND
ADDITIONS TQ PXISTING COUNTY PARKS
WHEREAS, San Mateo County, the City and County of San Francisco,
Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz County, and the City of Daly City,
City of Pacifica, City of San Bruno, Town of Woodside, Town of
Portola Valley, and the City of Palo Alto entered into a Joint
Powers Agreement on the 30th day of June 1970 for the purpose of
"Creation and Development of Skyline Scenic Recreation Route"; and
WHEREAS, the four counties and the six cities and towns "are
authori.-ed to zone for, develop, construct and maintain recreation
facilities for and on behalf of the taxpayers and residents of their
respective jurisdictions"; and
WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Committee, the Technical Advisory
Committee and the Northern Section (San Francisco City and County,
and San Mateo County) , and the Southern Section (Santa Clara and
Santa Cruz Counties) , Skyline Citizens Advisory Committee have their
respective meetings to carry out the charge as detailed ' in the Joint
Powers Agreement; and
WHEREAS Santa Clara County g
Santa
Planning Commission and the a a
Tara t f r C County Board o Supervisors have agreed to the Skyline Scenic
Recreation Route and the General Designs Guidelines as adopted by
the Joint Powers Committee on October 22, 1971; and
WHEREAS, on February 9, 1972, the Santa Clara County Board of
Supervisors approved a Parks and Open Space Element to the County
General Plan including the Skyline Scenic Rer-eation Route; and
WHEREAS, in June 1972 , the voters of Santa Clara County approvca
a ten-year. funding for Parks and Recreation acquisition and develop-
I nient; and
WHEREAS, the Skyline Scenic Recreation Route Citizens Advisory
Committee, Southern Section, the Technical Advisory Committee, and
members of Skyline Scenic Recreation Route Joint Powers Committee
have made, a study of areas along and/or adjacent to the Skyline for
trails and proposed acquisition in Santa Clara County for view sites,
rest stops, turnouts, day use areas and lands for additions to
existing county parks; and
WHEREAS, the Skyline Scenic Recreation Route Citizens Advisory
Committee, Southern Section, has prepared a priority list for 1
acquisition for Santa Clara County of areas for view sites, rest
stops, day use lands and lands for additions to existing county
parks; and 1
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Santa Clara County Parks
and Recreation Commission does hereby endorse the list for inclusion
i
in the Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation acquisition program;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Chairman of the Santa Clara
. County Parks and Recreation Commission does hereby submit to the
Santa Clara County Board' of Supervisors copies of this Resolution
along with the priority list of areas for acquisition and maps
showing the location of the areas for adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation
Commission on April 4, 1973 by unanimous decision.
v
Anthony J. ,.Rizzo, Chairman
Santa Clara County- Parks and
Recreation Commission
i
� I
I �
I �
I
{
County of Santa Clara
f Planning Department
March 16, 1973 AD
MINDEGO HILL ,9,UA_D SHEET
A -- 1st view site.
Proposed view site and day use parkette.
5± acres, approximately 1 mile southerly of Page Mill Road.
10 to 12 car parking in highway right-of-way.
Possible rest stop.
USC -- Upper Stevens Creek
Proposed addition to the Upper Stevens Creek Park.
Some car parking in highway right-of-way, both sides.
Rest stop.
CUPERTINO QUAD SHEET
8 -• 2nd view site.
View point and small day. use park at the intersection of Route A
and Skyline.
Parking for 50+ cars on south easterly quadrant in right-of-way.
Suggest 20+ acres.
Possible rest stop.
CASTLE ROCK RIDGE QUAD SHEET
SR -- Summit Rock Property
Hilgard property, 40+ acres plus Hilgard 6 Houck property, 120'♦'acres.
Proposed additional acquisition to be added to the Sanborn Skyline
Park.
SSP -• Sanborn Skyline Park Addition View Site at southerly tip of Sanborn
Skyline Park.
Rest stop. Limited parking in road R/W.
C -- 3rd view site.
View site and small day park. Suggest possible water well be
developed if feasible. Suggest 15+ acres.
Rest stop.
PRA -- Possible Roadside Rest Acquisition.
Proposed new acquisition, 20+ acres.
Variety of terrain and lands including pasture, forest, hills--goad
views. There are some outstanding large Madrones, Redwoods and
Douglas Fir. Approximately 2 miles to State Route 17.
LAUREL QUAD SHEET
53 -- Historic area and view site.
Proposed day use.
Outstanding man planted Monterey Cypress and Redwoods. 2 old houses
in area lotted. Approximately -10 acres.P PP Y 5 r s.
Possible rest stop.
F -- bth view site.
Proposed view site. Would need a minimum of an acre or two.
i
i
t
1-A� UAO SHEET (continued)
*100' Strip Acquisition from F easterly on Santa Clara County side to
Montgomery Road intersection and to the end of pavement.
Due to some existing development, perhaps acquisition of 50' to
100' strip would be sufficient for a future hiking and riding
trail , and possible bike trail later.
LOMA PR 1 ETA QUAD-SHEET
*100' Strip Acquisition from end of pavement easterly to opposite Uvas
Canyon County Park and on to the end of the pavement north westerly
of Mt. Madonna County Park.
UCC Uvas Canyon County Park Additions
1. Recommended acquisition of "island" of land Within the existing
Uvas County Park.
2. Recommended that lands be acquired between present Park land and
Skyline so there wound be continuity with the Skyline and possible
access.
MT. MADONNA 2UAD SHEET
H -- Historic and view site.
Former Manzanita School site and view site.
Propose acquisition of 10 to 12 acres for view site and day use park,
especially if there could be a joint effort with Santa Cruz County.
Proposal for Santa Cruz County to acquire 4 to 8 acres.
I Mt a. Madonna County
Park
r Addition
Proposed that some 20 '- 25 acres be acquired for view site, rest
stop and addition to Mr. Madonna County Park.
*Proposed that the County Department of Public Works and/or Parks and
Recreation start earl ac uisitian about 1 -1 O acres.
: rae
March 50, a�?
Revised 3/15/73
b adopted Skyline
PROPOSED SKYLINE ACQUISITACQUISITIONSIrd SAPrTA CLARA COU Citizens' AdvisoryNTY Committee
50'-100'
A USC B SR SSP C PPA53 F —Strip 1 . 100' Stri 2 UCC M 1
dside view
Lte Yes Yes Excellent ? Yes Yes Yes Only Fair YES;Some
Yes Some Some Some wl S Cruz Some
t Stop -- Yes Maybe across Yes Yes Could be Yes ? -- Possibly Possibly Could be Yes Yes
kincL in R/W Yes Yes Across Road Some Limited No No No No No — Limited Some Son
'ark Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ? ? Yes Yes Yes
scent Water -- Well would ? Well would May be ? Could be Could be -- ? ? ? Some at Yes -
be avail , be avail. avail ,
resent
ition to
ark -- Yes -- Yes Yes -- -- -- -- Linear Linear Yes -- Yes
r to
vuiation Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair
ra Open Could be Continue Good Excellent Outstand- Historical Good Needed Needed Could be Historic Protect
jalities Space Part of Skyline View View ing Trees Trees and View for Trails For Valuable, School Park
--X-rd.Complex Frontage Buildings Trails Addition Building Entranco
Se,,_ra 1 Several Several Close to 2 m i.to I m i .Man t- Several Seve ra 1 ,Seve ra 1 Seve ra 1
•rsection I mi .* miles Present miles miles Gist Road Route l omer Rd. Miles Miles Miles Miles 11 miles Yes
3n -
ressure ? Some Can be Yes Can be Yes Yes Some ? ? ? ? ? Some
jisition
-iority loth 2nd bth 1st 4th 3rd 8th 5th lIth 7th 7th 9th 1 th 12th
2. - 145 - 180± Acres
mnnend that the strip be acquired by County Department of Public Works and/or County Parks and Recreation.
J
STANLEY R. NOPTON
ATTORNEY AT LAW
407 SHERMAN AVENUE
PALO ALTO,CALIFORNIA 94306
TELEPHONE 324-1366
March 23, 1973.
Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Regional Park District
270 Grant Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94306
Members of the Board:
The Board of Directors has asked my legal opinion on under
what circumstances the Board may discuss acquisition strategy
respecting a particular parcel of land in executive session,
from which the public is excluded.
In the consideration of any such subject, it is important
to recognize that a main purpose of the District is to preserve
the maximum amount of open space land for the least amount of
money. The Board will develop a policy of acquisition priorities, ro
which among other things will take into account location and
suitability of the parcel to district' s purposes, cost, and the
effect of acquisition or potential acquisition on other parcels
of land. obviously, in many instances a mere showing of interest
in a particular parcel by the district board expressed publicly
could drive up acquisition cost. Also, purchaseby the district
may well include interests in land short of full fee title,
affecting cost and acquisition strategy.
Moreover, the board will almost always wish to proceed in
a way that will avoid litigation, or exercise of its powers of
condemnation.
The law governing the subject at hand is the Ralph M. Brown
Act (Government Code Section 54950 and following) . The general
rule is that meetings of public agencies must be open and public.
Section 54957 spells out certain exceptions where executive
sessions (closed meetings) are permitted: discussions with law
enforcement authorities on matters posing a threat to the security
of public buildings or the public ' s right of access to facilities,
discussions regarding negotiations with employee organizations,
and "personnel sessions. "
It should be noted that there is no express provision for
discussions about "acquisition of land. " Attempts have been made
to add such a provision to the Brown Act, but have failed.
Another exception, however, has been engrafted onto the
Act by court decision and opinion of the Attorney General to add
the so-called "attorney-client privilege. " Sacramento Newspaper
Guild vs. Sacramento Board Of Supervisors (1968) , 263 Cal App.2d
41, 69 Cal Rptr 480, stated at some length that the attorney-
client privilege under proper circumstances justified the holding
of non-public meetings. The following language from the decision
is pertinent :
"Public agencies face the same hard realities as other
civil litigants. An attorney who cannot confer with his
client outside his opponent's presence may be under insur-
mountable handicaps. A panoply of constitutional,
statutory, administrative and fiscal arrangements
covering state and local government expresses a policy
that litigating public agencies strive with their legal
adversaries on fairly even terms. We need not pause
for citations to demonstrate the obvious. There is a
public entitlement to the effective aid of counsel in
civil litigation. Effective aid is impossible if
opportunity for confidential legal advice is banned. "
The court went on to state that the privilege would include
discussions about settlement and avoidance of litigation, as well
as discussions about litigation itself,
"In settlement advice, the attorneyls professional task
is to provide his client a frank appraisal of strengths
and weaknesses, gains and risks, hopes and fears. If
the public's 'right to know' compelled admission of an
audience, the ringside seats would be occupied by the
government's adversary, delighted to capitalize on every
revelation of weakness. "
On the other hand, the court recognizes the privilege
"permits an undeniable quantum of secrecy and, in overreaching
hands, a potential tool of evasion. . . Neither the attorney's
presence nor the happenstance of some kind of lawsuit may serve
as the pretext for secret consultations whose revelation will
not injure the public interest. To attempt a generalization
embracing the occasion for genuine confidentiality would be
rash. " (pp. 56-58) .
To the same effect is an opinion of the Attorney General at
36 OAG 175 (1960) .
There is no other authority in California casting light on
the situation. The authorities make clear, however, that the
principal test for invoking the attorney-client privilege in
justification for holding executive sessions is whether the dis-
cussion would entail the release of information to an adversary
or potential adversary and thereby "injure the public interest. "
2
It is my conclusion that the Board of Directors may hold
executive sessions with its attorney when the subject under
discussion is whether the acquisition of a particular parcel of
land is strategic to the implementation of the Board's land
acquisition scheme or plan and is to formulate specific strategy
for any such acquisition, when the public disclosure of such
strategy and the ingredients thereof (e.g. , consideration of
appraisals, the amount the Board is willing to pay for property,
etc.) would give a significant advantage to the District's
adversary or potential adversary (the landowner) and thus be
contrary to the public interest.
You will undoubtedly wish advice for concrete application
of this opinion to specific situations as they arise.
Very truly yours,
Stanley Q Norton
SRN/vk
cc Mr. Daniel Wendin, President
3
3172 Emerson Street
Palo Alto, California
April 4, 1973
Members of the Board
Midpeninsula Regional Park District
Dear Colleagues
In January we received from the county planning department a draft
of the first part of the " Catalog of Open Space Preservation Tools " titled
Public Acquisition ( A-D, 23 pages) . Attached to this letter is the remainder
of that chapter in draft form ( E-F, pages 24-33 ). I
Contained in section E is a definition of Regional Park Districts and
also a list of other new type agencies ( pages 28-32 ) which the draft suggests
might be created to perform various open space functions. I am of the opinion
that the particular functions mentioned to be performed by such new agencies
can and should be performed by us. The fact that the Park District law permits
such flexibility to the board of directors was an important reason, in our init-
ial meetings , that the District concept was selected over some other form of
legislation.
I wish to recommend , therefore , that we communicate to the UD/OS
Subcommittee the following policy ( subject to whatever changes you desire).
The Midpeninsula Regional Park District intends to function as an
open space agency to work to preserve all forms of open space resources.
Whereas the county is expected to provide a system of public parks and rec-
reation areas and facilities, the District expects to make use of a wide variety
of tools and techniques for open space preservation not commonly employed by
existing parks and recreation departments.
It may be actively involved in resource conservation planning and man-
agement programs not necessarily related to public recreation. It would also
serve as an advocate for the protection of the community's environmental resourr
ces . It would work to encourage donations of important open space lands to the
public. And it would acquire and manage a system of ecological or open space
preserves.
The District can perform the function of a conservation commission in
serving as advocates on behalf of the environment, watching to see that local
environmental protection ordinances and state laws are enforced and enlisting
citizen involvement in local resource conservation efforts.
In selected cases and on a limited basis, the District could function
as a land bank, as a means of preventing urban sprawl and controlling the timing,
location, type and scale of urban development in cooperation with local govern-
ment. For example, the District may find it advantageous to acquire a parcel for
open space purposes where a portion is suitable for residential development.
The latter portion could be returned to private ownership on a controlled basis.
In the area of inter-qovernmental relations , the District may work with
other governmental agencies in planning and acquiring certain open space lands.
The District can perform the functions of a land trust. In cases where
potential donors of open space lands want assurance that their land will be kept
in its undeveloped condition , the District can grant this assurance by agreement.
Donations of land or money to the District are tax deductable.
Since the District is not limited to projects within a single jurisdiction,
it can work to preserve natural areas or resource systems which transcend local
government boundaries. The District can negotiate with landowners privately, in
dealing with landowners who wish to avoid publicity regarding their land donations.
Sincerely,
PLANNING POLICY COMMITTEE OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY
Room 314.County Administration BuIldIaL 70 west HaddiftS Street,SIM J"O.C81it.95110(406)299-2521
March 20, 1973
M E M 0 R A N D U M
TO: Urban Development/Open Space Subcommittee Members and Others
FROM: Don Weden, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:"CATALOG OF OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION TOOLS" (Preliminary Draft of Part 1)
Attached is a draft of the remainder of Part I of the "Catalog of Open Space
Preservation Tools" which was sent to the Urban Development/Open Space
Subcommittee in December.
The tentative outline for the completed Catalog is as follows:
Part 1 : Public Acquisition
Part 11 : Regulation of Land Use
Part III : Controlling the Urban Development Process
Part IV: Incentives to Private Owners
Appendix: Open Space Preservation Tools Bibliography
Open Space Law Bibliography
California Open Space Statute Citations
Your comments and suggestions are invited.
DW:bb
CAMPBELL CUPERTINO GILROY LOS ALTOS LOS ALTOS HILLS LOS GATOS MILPITAS MONTE SERENO
MORGAN HILL MOUNTAIN VIEW PALO ALTO SAN joSE SANTA CLARA SARATOGA SUNNYVALE SANTA CLARA COUNTY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paqe
I . PUBLIC ACQUISITION (continued)
E. Local Agencies for Open Space Acquisition
I . City and County Agencies 24
a. Parks and Recreation Departments 24
b. Public Works Departments 25
c. Redevelopment Agencies 25
2. Special Districts 25
a. Municipal Park Improvement Districts 26
b Community Services Districts 26
c. County Service Areas
26
d. Recreation and Park Districts 27
e. Regional Park Districts 27
f. Water and Flood Control Districts 28
3. Other Agencies for Consideration 28
a. Open Space Agencies 28
b. Conservation Commissions 29
c. Land Banks 30
4. Joint Agency Multi-Purpose Projects 30
5. Non-Governmental Agencies 31
a. Land Trusts 31
F. Ext raterri torial I ty 33
E . LOCAL AGENCIES FOR
OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION
The following sections describe a number of different types of
local agencies which could play a role in open space acquisition
efforts. Some of these agencies already exist; others could be es-
tablished under existing state laws; and a few would require passage
of special state r enabl "ng legislation before the
in California. y could be established
i. City and County Agencies
Various city and County agencies can acquire land which could be
used for open
p space purposes. Parks and recreation departments are,
of cou
rse, p
the agencies most often involved in open space acquisition
efforts by .local governments. Several other agencies could also be
involved in such efforts however. They are described in the following
sections and in the sections describing special districts,
a. Parks and Recreation Departments
City and County parks and recreation departments have been the
principal local government agencies responsible for open space preser-
vation. Their primary responsibility has been to provide a system of
publically-owned areas and facilities for public recreation.
In general , County parks and recreation departments have been re-
sponsible for providing large "regional" parks which serve a sizeable.
geographic area. These parks have usually been located outside the
urban area on lands of high natural resource value. In most instances,
they have been maintained to a considerable extent in their natural or
semi-natural condition.
City parks and recreation departments, on the other hand, have
generally been responsible for providing smaller, more intensively de-
veloped parks and recreation facilities serving smaller geographic
areas within the urbanized portions of the County.
With some notable exceptions, most parks and recreation departments
have not been actively involved in open space preservation efforts other
than those directly involving areas to be used for public recreation.
-24-
b. Public Works Departments
Public works departments plan, construct, and maintain a wide variety
of public facilities, many of which could be designed to serve open space
functions in addition to their primary function. Projects involving the
design and construction of roads and highways in particular offer a number
of opportunities to incorporate open space features. Acquisition of ex-
cess lands in conjunction with such projects can make possible the pro-
vision of roadside hiking and bicycling trails, picnic areas, turnouts
affording scenic vistas, etc. It can also provide a means for protecting
scenic streamsides and other areas immediately adjacent to the roadway.
Planning and implementing these types of projects frequently requires
inter-agency cooperation between public works departments and other depart-
ments which can assist in the funding of the open space features of the
project or assume maintenance responsibilities once the project is completed.
c. Redevelopment Agencies
Open space can sometimes be provided in conjunction with the urban re-
newal process carried out by redevelopment agencies. Since such agencies
can only carry out projects in areas designated as "blighted", the amount
of open space which could be acquired or created would generally be quite
limited.
In most instances, there would be no particular advantage to a city
acquiring open space through a redevelopment agency since they could
accomplish essentially the same objectives through the parks and recrea-
tion department. There are some instances, however, in which redevelopment
agencies would be used because federal funds might be available or special
tax increment financing could be used to help pay the costs of the open
space aspects of the project. (Tax increment financing allows open space
aspects of a redevelopment project to be paid for with the increase in tax
revenues resulting from the renewal of the area. It general] would be
feasible only in conjunction with extensive renewal projects.T
2. Special Districts
There are a number of different kinds of special districts which can
be created under California law for the purpose of acquiring parks and open
space. Some of these are autonomous governmental units with specific pow-
ers and their own elected governing body. Others are simply administrative
entities established within the framework of existing governmental units
for the purpose of assessing the cost of acquiring and developing open space
lands to those who benefit most directly from them.
The following sections describe some of the various types of special
districts which could play a part in local open space acquisition efforts.
-25-
Each of the districts described is funded primarily by property taxes on
property located within the district's boundaries.
a. Municipal Park Improvement Districts
Municipal park improvement districts are a form of assessment district
which can be established within a portion of a city to acquire and develop
park lands through the issuance of bonds. They are established for taxa-
tion purposes only and do not involve creation of a separate governing body.
Establishment of such a district requires first a petition signed by
10% of the electors within the proposed district, and then an election in
which a 2/3 majority must be obtained in favor of creating the assessment
district.
This is a common type of district used by residents of an area to
acquire parks and recreation facilities when the city is unable or unwill-
ing to provide them from citywide tax revenues.
b. Community Services District
Community services districts are a type of special district which can
be used in unincorporated areas to provide public recreation facilities,
including parks, playgrounds, harbors, golf courses, and swimming pools
(as well as a wide range of other municipal facilities) . Although limited
to unincorporated areas, they can include portions of more than one county.
They can be governed either by an independently-elected board of
directors or by the County Board of Supervisors.
Community services districts have the power of eminent domain as well
as the power to issue bonds and levy taxes and assessments.
Establishment of acommunity services district is initiated by peti-
tion of residents in the proposed district and must be approved by a
majority vote of the residents.
Because of their autonomy and the broad range of functions they can
perform, community services districts have been criticized on the grounds
that they are, in effect, a limited form of municipal government and thus
their formation contributes to the further fragmentation of local govern-
ment responsibility.
c. County Service Areas
County service areas are a form of special district which can be es-
tablished to provide local park, recreation, and parkway facilities (as
well as a number of other community services and facilities). Although
they normally include only unincorporated areas with considerable popula-
tion or development, they can also include all or a portion of a city, if
the city council gives its approval . They are administered by the County
Board of Supervisors.
-26-
The Board of Supervisors has the power to create a County service area
either on its own initiative or in response to citizen petition. Although
no vote of the public is required to establish such a district, petition by
residents of the area can either terminate formation proceedings or force
a referendum on the issue.
d. Recreation and Park Districts
Recreation and park districts are a type of special district which can
be established to provide parks and recreation areas and facilities. Their
boundaries can be drawn to include incorporated and/or unincorporated areas
within a single county.-
The powers of a recreation and park district normally include the power
of eminent domain. (There is other enabling legislation which allows forma-
tion of such districts without eminent domain power.)
Recreation and park districts have the power to tax, to borrow money,
and to issue bonds, (issuance of bonds must be approved by a 2/3 majority
of the voters in the district) . Property tax assessments to fund the dis-
trict cannot exceed 50C per $100 assessed valuation (a lower ceiling can
be established at the time of the election to form the district) .
The board of directors of a recreation and park district can be se-
lected in a variety of ways, depending primarily on what areas are included
in the district. The board of directors can be either 1 . the County-Board of
Supervisors, 2. persons appointed.by the Board of Supervisors and the mayors
of any cities in the district, 3. persons appointed by the mayors of the
cities in the district (if no unincorporated areas are included) , or 4. per-
sons directly elected by the residents of the district.
Establishment of a recreation and park district requires a majority
vote of the residents within the proposed district. Election proceedings
can be initiated by citizen petition, by the Board of Supervisors, or (if
no unincorporated areas are included) by the city council of the largest
city included in the proposed district.
a. Regional Park Districts
Regional park districts can be established for the purpose of acquiring
lands for park and recreation areas and facilities, as well as trails,
natural areas, and ecological and open space preserves. Their boundaries
can be drawn to include two or more cities, plus additional unincorporated
areas, and can include lands in more than one county. All territory in
the district must be contiguous however.
A regional park district has the power of condemnation, as well as
the power to levy taxes, borrow money, and issue bonds (issuance of bonds
must be approved by a 2/3 majority of the xters in the district). Property
tax assessments to fund the district cannot exceed lOt per $100 assessed
valuation.
The district is governed by an independently elected board of directors'.
-27-
Establishment of a regional park district requires a majority vote of
the residents of the district. Proceedings to establish such a district
must be initiated by petition of residents within the proposed district.
The petition is reviewed by the Board of Supervisors of the County(s) in-
volved, which has the power to decide whether the issue will be submitted
to the voters. The board of supervisors also has the power to delete
areas from the proposed boundaries of the district.
f. Water and Flood Control Districts
A large number of special districts have been created in California
which have responsibilities relating either to flood control or the con-
servation, importation, or distribution of water. Since water resources
are directly or indirectly related to nearly all open space functions and
resources, these various special districts can play important roles in
open space preservation efforts.
Lands acquired by these districts frequently are suitable for multiple
purpose open space uses. In addition to their water supply function, for
example, watershed lands can provide habitat for wildlife as well as scenic
and recreational enjoyment for the public.
Facilities constructed by water and flood control agencies can in
many cases also be used for recreational open space uses. Some examples
would include (1) reservoirs used for boating, swimming, and fishing, and
(2) levees, canals, and aqueduct rights-of-way used as hiking, bicycling,
and riding trails.
Some of these special districts are expressly authorized by law to
provide public recreational facilities in conjunction with their projects.
Most others can enter into joint projects with other agencies. This
could include projects in which the other agency is responsible for the
recreational or other open space related aspects of the project. ,(Joint
agency, multi-purpose projects are discussed further in a subsequent sec-
tion of this catalog.)
3. Other Agencies for Consideration
There are several other kinds of local government agencies which
could play important roles in open space preservation efforts. Some of
these already exist in other states where they have proven to be effective.
Establishment of similar agencies in California might require passage of
special enabling legislation by the state legislature. Descriptions of
these agencies are included in this catalog to suggest other ways in which
local open space preservation efforts could be organized.
a. Open Space Agencies
An open space agency, if such a thing existed, would be a local govern-
-28-
went agency with broad responsibilities to work to preserve all forms of
open space resources, its scope of concern and activities would be much
more comprehensive than those of existing parks and recreation departments.
In operation, it might perform the combined functions of a parks and
recreation department, a conservation commission, and a land trust (these
latter two agencies are described in subsequent sections of this catalog) .
Thus, in addition to providing a system of public parks and recreation areas
and facilities, it would also be actively involved in resource conservation
planning and management programs not necessarily related to public recrea-
tion. It would also serve as an advocate for the protection of the communi-
ty' s environmental resources. It would work to encourage donations of im-
portant open space lands to the public. And it would manage a system of
ecological or open space preserves.
The broad responsibilities of an open space agency would make it a
focal point for local environmental resource concerns. They would also
require that the agency make creative use of a wide variety of tools and
techniques for open space preservation not commonly employed by existing
parks and -recreation departments in conjunction With their more limited
responsibilities.
b. Conservation Commissions
Until recently, local conservation commissions were a governmental
institution limited almost exclusively to the New England states where
they have existed for a number of years under special state enabling legis-
lation. Some local governments in California have recently created en-
vironmental commissions which perform some of the functions of their New
England counterparts. Passage of special state enabling legislation would
probably be required, however, to establish commissions in California cap-
able of performing all their functions. The following paragraphs describe
conservation commissions as they exist in Massachusetts.
Essentially, conservation commissions are advisory commissions estab-
lished by local governments for the purpose of providing a focal point
for local resource conservation concerns and programs. The need for such
commissions arises primarily from the fact that very few local governments
have departments or commissions exclusively responsible for dealing with
the various environmental resource problems which confront them.
The Massachusetts low allowing the establishment of local conservation
commissions is quite general and open-ended regarding the functions they
may perform. Furthermore, it makes the commissions somewhat autonomous
from local governments. Although their members are appointed by local
governments, the commissions are allowed for the most part to determine
for themselves the types of programs and projects they will undertake.
Basically, conservation commissions serve as advocates on behalf of
the environment. Some of the functions which they perform include serving
as the formal point of coordination foe the resource activities of other
local agencies, watching to see that local environmental protection ord-
inances are enforced, and enlisting citizen involvement in local resource
conservation efforts.
-29-
Specifically with regard to open space, the commissions inventory and
map local environmental resources, encourage and act as recipients for pri-
vate gifts of open space lands, and in some instances, purchase open space
lands. Lands which the commissions obtain by gift or purchase however are
limited almost exclusively to lands which are to be kept essentially in
their natural undeveloped state, possibly for use as nature preserves. In
this regard, they function very similarly to the land trusts described in
a subsequent section of this catalog.
c. Land Banks
A land bank, in the formal sense, would be a local agency which would
acquire large undeveloped areas on the urban fringe, prepare a plan for
these lands, and then lease or sell them to private developers, subject to
conditions that would assure that they were used in accordance with the
plan. (In an informal sense, the term land bank is frequently used to re-
fer to the supply of land acquired and held by such an agency for future
development.)
Basically, a land bank would function like a redevelopment agency ex-
cept that it would operate in undeveloped areas to prevent inappropriate
future development rather than to correct problems within existing urban
areas.
Land banks are most often proposed as a means of preventing urban
sprawl and controlling the timing, location, type, and scale of urban de-
velopment. They can also, however, be used to preserve permanent open
space. As indicated in the section regarding "Revolving Funds", the
appreciation in the value of lands which are eventually sold or ]eased
for development would probably more than cover the costs of acquisition
of the lands which were kept as Permanent open space. Thus the land
bank's activities have the Potential over a period of time to become
self-supporting.
A land bank might be established as an agency of local government or
as a separate corporation under the control of local government. The
latter approach could have the advantage of avoiding the state-imposed
ceiling on the amount of Indebtedness which a local government can incur.
Since there is currently no state enabling legislation in California
expressly authorizing creation of land banks, it is uncertain whether they
could be established by local governments at the present time. Even if
such legislation were passed, however, large-scale land acquisition by
land bank agencies would be possible only if special funding were avail-
able to supply the large amounts of money these land acquisition programs
would require. Long-term, low-interest federal loans to local governments
have been suggested as one possible source for such funds.
4. Joint Agency Multi-Purpose Projects
Acquisition of open space lands and provision of certain open space I
-30-
functions can sometimes be achieved most economically when they are done
in conjunction with other public projects. This may simply involve
allowing open space uses of some lands already acquired for other purposes.
Or it may require advance planning to incorporate open space uses into
the plans for future public land acquisitions and facilities.
In either event, the division of governmental functions among various
agencies may make inter-agency cooperation necessary in order to carry out
such projects. In some instances, cooperation between two or more govern-
mental jurisdictions may also be acquired.
Planning to include open space functions in other public projects can
generally be achieved through inter-agency planning or coordinating
committees established on either a formal or an informal basis. Imple-
mentation of such inter-agency projects, however, may require more formal
arrangements, particularly if more than one governmental jurisdiction is
involved. Various types of legal agreements such as leases and joint exer-
cise of power agreements may be necessary.
5. Non-Governmental Agencies
Certain non-governmental agencies could also be instrumental in
local open space preservation efforts. Land trusts, in particular, have
considerable potential as open space preservation agencies.
a. Land Trusts
Land trusts are private, non-profit corporations established for the
purpose of encouraging, receiving, and in some instances managing gifts
of open space land in the public interest. The primary emphasis of their
efforts is generally focused upon preservation of lands in their natural ,
undeveloped state.
Potential donors of open space lands usually want assurance that their
lands will be kept in their undeveloped condition. They commonly find, how-
ever, that local governments are not interested in accepting gifts of land
which must be left in its natural state, or they find that there is no
assurance that future officials will abide by post agreement regarding the
land.
Land trusts provide means by which donors of open space lands can be
assured that their wishes regarding the land will be respected. In situ-
ations where local agencies will not accept donations of land the donor
insists be kept undeveloped, the land trust might accept and manage the land.
If, however, local agencies will accept such land, they can be given first to
the trust which will write a reverter clause into the deed before giving it
to the local agency. Then, in the event that the local agency attempts to
develop it, the trust can step in and reclaim the land. In this way, the
land trust serves as a watchdog to assure that the wishes of the donor are
observed.
Donations of land or money to land trusts are tax deductible.
Land trusts have the advantage of not being limited to projects
within a single jurisdiction. Thus they can work to preserve natural
areas or resource systems which transcend local government boundaries.
Furthermore, since they are not subject to some of the constraints of
public agencies, they can conduct their negotiations with landowners
with somewhat greater freedom and privacy. This can be particularly
important in dealing with landowners who wish to avoid publicity re-
garding their land donation.
By focusing on encouraging contributions of open space lands, most
of which will be preserved in their natural state, land trusts can fill
what is currently a significant gap in most local open space programs.
-32-
F . EXTRATERR I TOR I AL I TY
The term "extraterritoriality" simply refers to the powers which a
governmental agency may have to perform certain functions beyond its
jurisdictional boundaries. With regard to open space acquisition, it
refers to the fact that cities, counties, and certain special districts
in California can acquire parks and open space lands which lie outside
the boundaries of their actual jurisdiction.
Unlike lands which they held inside their own boundaries, local
governments would generally have to pay taxes or some other form of pay-
ment in lieu of taxes on these lands acquired outside their boundaries.
Under certain circumstances, cities can annex and thus avoid taxes on
non-contiguous unincorporated lands they own which are to be used for
municipal purposes. In order to carry out such non-contiguous annexations
however the lands involved would have to be located within 5 miles of the
city limits (and presumably within the city's sphere of influence) , unin-
habited, and less than 100 acres in area. Non-contiguous annexations of
city-owned park lands of up to 400 acres can be carried out if, in addi-
tion to meeting the preceding criteria, the land was purchased with the
aid of federal contributions under the Open Space Act and is not re-
stricted to use by residents of the city.
Despite these tax considerations, there are various reasons why local
governments might choose to acquire parks and open space lands beyond
their jurisdictional boundaries. One such reason might simply be that the
lands were offered to them as a gift by one of their residents, or as a
bequest in that person's will . Under such circumstances, and if the land
had high potential for recreational use by its residents, the local govern-
ment might be willing to accept the lands even though it had to pay taxes
on them. (if these lands were kept essentially undeveloped, the taxes on
them might not be very high anyway.)
Another potential reason for extraterritorial open space acquisitions
would be to prevent certain lands in adjacent jurisdictions from being
developed. A city, for example, which prized very highly the nearby hill-
sides which provide its scenic backdrop might conceivably want to acquire
title to or interests in these hillside lands to keep them open if it
feared that the adjacent jurisdictions with land use control over them
might allow development which would destroy their natural beauty.
-33-
3172 Emerson Street
Palo Alto, California
April 23 , 1973
Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Regional Park District
Dear Members of the Board ;
If you recall the County's presentation of the Monte Bello Ridge
Study to us on February 28, we agreed to respond to the County at a later
date. It is now apparent to me that the District's interests would be best
served by some revision of the plan. Attached is a copy of Alternate A
( the best of the alternatives ) and the Legend .
One revision should be a change in the Long Term Open Space
catagory which calls for 5-20 acre parcels depending on the steepness of
slope. Palo Alto has already established a 10 acre zone district on the part
of Monte Bello Ridge in its jurisdiction, and I believe that the remainder
of Monte Bello Ridge and its slopes should receive comparable protection.
The catagory should be changed to read 10-20 acres etc.
Such a change has been discussed with the county planning staff and
has received favorable review by the Hillside Subcommittee. The new proposed
10-20 acre catagory would include all of the Palo Alto lands which are current-
ly listed as " proposed open space to be held in public or quasi public owner-
ship. . . " ( which is contrary to the zoning policy of the city,) , and those
lands listed under " For agriculture, grazing, wildlife habitat, etc. " .
The most significant impact on the District's interests is the Residential
catagory calling for Low Density 1-5 acres which depicts:lands located along the
eastern fringe of the study area near Interstate 280. This area includes much
of the close-in land the District would be considering in its early years. The
present zoning for some of these lands is Exclusive Agricultural ( A ) which is
a 10 acre minimum lot size. If the Monte Bello Ridge Study recommendations are
not changed and adopted by the Board of Supervisors, it would constitute a
definite policy of up-zoning. I have asked a member of the county staff to be
present at our Wednesday meeting with a map which shows the present zoning,
You can see for yourselves the impact of such a zoning policy.
It should be recognized that no cost benefit analysis has been done by
the County for the Monte Bello Ridge Study to assertain the cost of development
to the loAand taxpayer. Nor has there been any consideration of the visual im-
pact if the cities' backdrop is scarred by the construction of roads and buildings.
` I wish to recommend, therefore, that we communicate our concerns to
the cities in the study area, to the Hillside Subcomittee, County Planning Com-
mission, and the Board of Supervisors by the following position
The Midpeninsula Regional Park District recommends the following
changes in the Monte Bello Ridge Study
1. Establishment of a 10-20 acre zone catagory based on the steepness of
slope , for-,aH--oUAlonte-,Bell-o--Ridge-end4ts---&lope-&.
A,c -t Pew
2. Exclude all parcels zoned Exclusive Agricultural (A) from the low density
1-5 acre residential catagory.
3. Initiate a cost benefit analysis to determine costs of hillside. development',-
to the lov*and taxpayers.
4. Consider the visual loss of the cities' hillside backdrop by the construction
of roads and buildings on Monte Bello Ridge and its slopes.
Sincerely,
( ALTERMATE StwfTCH PLANS FOh rHE MONTE BELLO RIDGE.
FOOTHILL COLLEGE ROAD * LE(
LOS
` 10$ALTOS �'f ALTOS a
0
7 F
s . .
HILLS
t
6' a
s
a
t
iRT.210)
&Ir'f C { e�
♦t -- eJc . t�fi t• CUPERTINO
♦ ♦ --— —-— -� d`aNfMt r STEVENS CREEK BLVD.
� 1♦ ♦ 4J -pt`4 � �''r.�. ���Q.�P f ROAD
iZY�: °°* ♦°♦1 r O yl i O Y KAISER PERMANENTE ` r R 9
r1�Sjr� r �♦ � ♦♦t f j r <S BLACK \` w�Y a
z j„n`rt e�'y ♦� MOUNTAIN i �. o «
d ' ft'< :.°♦° is♦♦® G \�—�,�.�—«�—� Content Plrit pe-Cr IT. s
of ♦ . �� .r
- �ly0 lA♦Stanford .� r ��rj; m ,�'- s
r.
♦r t°♦ ]{yi O \ 'Y+Srro t�4 iL s
' ' ♦}i. ♦° rl a.r z 41° e...,\ {� if M •1�L' ROAD
• .s ! Quarry. 5 r•
BELLO
UPPER
♦ 1nk
STEVENS;♦ :�•� - ♦ ".: it!$ R+ tit
CREEK. ♦� t_ flf0 < .t♦♦ (�
< o� •f ', s Yrt��♦ STEYENS;•
drry. C1O�UNTY�• ti` C ��"G i! CREEK L %�
�e •�,.T'� �tqe +:arli°•yt�` 'y'oN1S COUNTY
MARK . � ..� r. .r PARK
{���++•, �� � � '� �. �cif"`� ♦off:� 1 f;l':�iy+l + MT �,.. '►�..�
10.
g '4 SARATOGA.`
:OAPSARATOGA sy
1 („ '-'a. � $ •ri,�• � IOC 4 :i
ALTERNATE A
Maximum Permanent Open Space; ; n''yf ♦9O+o�; E `:'' ! s°'IOJ 3
Minimum Residential Development �• °`� ° `°` 9°+0
I
DuE AREA, SANTA UARA, CO
LEGEND
i
RESIDENTIAL
Maximum opportunity for flexibility in residential
density;provision for accommodating a variety of
income groups through planned unit development.
Low Density: 1 to 5 Acres per dwelling unit de-
pending on steepness of slope.
Very Low Density 5:ngle Family: 21/2 to 10 Acres
per dwelling unit depending on steepness of slope.
PERMANENT OPEN SPACE
Existing parks and recreation areas (including
- ' lands owned by the Santa Clara Valley Water Dis-
trict).
d�
Proposed park and recreation a as.
}+ Proposed open space to be held in public or quasi-r
public ownership through gift or purchase of fee
title or development rights.
f __71 6
LONG TERM OPEN SPACE
For private park and recreation areas.
For agriculture,grazing,wildlife habitat,and pre
-
nervation of such natural resources as minerals,
watershed, vegetation, and scenic beauty. Re-
sidential density of 5 to 20acres perdwelling unit
depending on steepness of slope.
NOTE:Most roads shown within the study area are proposed
scenic roads, including the possible extension of Monte Bello
Road toconnectwith Page Mill Road. Exceptions are: Pros-
pect Road,Regnart Road, Pierce Road north of Mt.Eden Road,
Permanente Road, and Magdalena Ave. Scenic roads should
i
rot
be given special roadside p ection:
•
RESOLUTION NO. 73-11
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF INSURANCE POLICY
FROM UN-L"'ED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY COMPANY
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the MIdpenisula
Regional Park District by motion duly adopted at its
meeting of March 28, 1973 accepted the offer of
United States Fidelity and Guaranty to provide insur-
ance for the District;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENIN-
SULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT DOES RESOLVE that the
Board accept the Policy of Liability INsurance offered
by United States Fidelity and Guaranty through its agent
Alburger--deGrosz , Inc. , effective March 1, 1973 for one
year at a cost of $75. 00 and that payment be made in
that amount to Alburger-deGrosz, Inc.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Park District on
1973, at a regular meeting thereof, by the following vote:
AYES, and in favor thereof :
Directors:
Noes :
ABSENT:
President-Board o Directors
ATTEST:
Secretary
RESOLUTION NO. 73-12
RESOLUTION RETAINING LAWRENCE KLEIN TO PREPARE A CON-
TRACT FO'_: RETENTION OF A GENERAL MANAGER BY THE BOARD
OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT.
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA RE-
GIONAL PARK DISTRICT DOES RESOLVE that Lawrence Klein,
Attorney-at-Law, be reatined by the Board, at standard
attorney rates for such work, to prepare a contract
between Herbert Grench and the Midpeninsula Regional
Park District covering services as a General Manager.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors
of the Midpeninsula Regional Park District on
1973, at a regular meeting thereof, by the following
vote:
AYES, and in favor thereof:
Directors :
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
F—resident-Board of—Directors
Secretary
is�,,;0/993
r
i
i
�-
,
i
,
,
,
-z-od
Of-
,
,
r
3
E
I
i
i
40
11,7
s
19'>
20075 G-
Los Gatos, 95030
i
i
1
,
1
s
J
SEMINAR VI: ' MANAGEMENT AUDIT ACCOMMODATIONS
Methods and systems of appraising the effectiveness of operational management will be the theme of this $43.00 is the price for double occupancy at Asilomar
seminar. The importance of establishing goals and measuring operations in terms of these goals will be Conference Grounds. This includes room Friday and
covered. The importance of board involvement in review and evaluation of management functions will be Saturday nights,breakfast, lunch and dinner Saturday
and breakfast Sunday and is payable upon arrival.
emphasized. Short-term and long-range aspects of performance evaluation will be discussed also. Single occupancy is available upon request for $53.00. Please make inquiries and reservations with:
d SEMINAR LEADER Some rooms that house three or four persons are
7 available at $39.00. (Due to the intensive nature of Barbara Fraser
the program Asilomar residence is recommended.) Presidents' & Board Members' Institute
William Rasmussen, B.A., is a Certified Park and Recreation Administrator and General Manager for the Family accommodations are available. University Extension
North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District. He has long been active as an officer and board member Santa Barbara
in Park and Recreation organizations in California and is a frequent contributor of articles to professional FEES Santa Barbara,University of Ci California,ali 93106
magazines in the field. He has served as a recreation planning consultant to various local and district
governments and has lectured in administration for Fresno State and Bakersfield Colleges. He is currently The fee is $50 and includes cost of all required texts, Telephone: (805)961-4162
Vice-President of the CSDA, notes,reference materials and Friday evening banquet.
No provision can be made for reduced or partial fees
l for less than full participation. The fee does not in-
clude lodging or meals other than Friday dinner.
SEMINARVII: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
o
� This seminar will survey special district finance and discuss advanced techniques of financial management. APPLICATION FOR ENROLLMENT AND ACCOMMODATION RESERVATION
1 Areas of examination to be considered will include: types of sources of revenue; planning near-term Enroll now by mail. Mail to: University of California Extension
financial needs; capital budgeting factors;selecting from alternative proposals;cost control;cash manage- Santa Barbara, California 93106'
ment and measuring return. The purpose of this seminar is to insure that your district is maximizing its 1973 PRESIDENTS'& BOARD MEMBER SINS TITUTE
ys
financial resources and has considered all of the possibilities for doing so. Social Security Number First Name Middle Name Last Name
SEMINAR LEADER
! Glenn Reiter, B.S.C.E., hydraulic-sanitary engineer, is currently General Manager and District Engineer Please check box for preferred mailing address.
[ ]for the Clay Municipal Water District. He has been actively serving in professional societies and Special Home Address Street
District affairs throughout Southern California for such organizations as the Water Pollution Control
Association, the American Water Works Association, American Society of Civil Engineering, Society of City State Zip Code Daytime-Plione
American Military Engineers, and California Special Districts Association. He holds an Engineering Con-
tractor's license and is currently teaching college engineering classes in the San Diego Junior College sys-
tem. [ ] District Address Street
1i He recently presented a paper entitled"A 3-Dimensional View of Special Districts."
City State Zip Code Daytime Phone
DATES
Friday Evening, April 27 — Saturday, April 2$ -- Sunday Morning, April 29, 1973 1973 Presidents'&Board Members'Institute — Fee$50.00
Payment by check,purchase order authorization or authorizing signature for BankAmericard must accompany
enrollment.Make check payable to the Regents of the University of California.
1 LOCATION
[ J Check enclosed. [ J Purchase Order. [ J BankArnericard No.
Asilomar Conference Grounds, 800 Asilomar Blvd., Pacific Grove, California
f Signature Title
PARTICIPANTS *If more than one person is attending,please provide the appropriate information on a separate sheet.
Application for enrollment may be made by individuals or by districts on behalf of their participating NOTE: Fee does not include food and lodging.To reserve accommodations at Asilomar Conference Grounds,
check below:
members. Districts are encouraged to send teams composed of board members and operating managers. [ ] Double Occupancy
ATTENDANCE [ J Single Occupancy
[ ] 3 or 4 persons per room Accommodations cost is payable on arrival.
Because of the intensive nature of this institute, enrollees are expected to attend all sessions.
r
5� �•1 IW���lyrllS uJi. �t,)r a `r r.1_ ''71PAT
+, s' r �,I ',r.x�F{FrJ•}•r� l Irk; r rr ri-vt '`,•Z11 v,}41rr r r Y
y NtJKb�.Yk,r,.' �:aG li4'Iti: �% '.t�i,�vil �SF1•,}!� ,n r,S if_�1fJJuy'J ,�f,�{f.If:1 Ir,��+:itiY:. r `•�'L•if�l�'� ��P.'��l r�7 ,'or1i�}`u•�'i/r�l"�I:'�it �1-.�''��ii,ll !•Y.J a Ir'F� «�:t�r•t I�!, `Cr%A'rri�'
O ? � y f filat�' �f��.''(, SV�II��.!��►'l��riCP]Cii�17.�'t[�f �_:IS,A�+ r?c::( �I��r I�t::1j� {�.Fl^.'`�Xi.0 ! rn�;y,�1�r�C G uZ,i'_��. ii�C` ��r•kJ'Ytr ':l, i� �.r4';}7K•Yi'{G
� I� YMn, Yr V - i3'd �u-,;�L _ �",r.; ��;f"171 r ; •71 nl. 0Pi_";�impi3" ti t� tl u•n
. r � ` � t,•'IiCI 7i i' �•d�r:I �1:fdi��lrnxT
�. : I,�a..rr lr�� , ; h'L i.IFir , II !:¢� 11 �Ok3r1►J, SJ ' U�u,i!;!1 Ifl �!:?r11lr� ilViCFi' 5., °.r,'' ram']r` `''ll rPIS,C�tP]., �•Uhi Jr�,'�a; r X"�; t' },mot±*:•l rl�l.l ,
'+ • • _ +Yrl t'm�•k ,' i•r�tt r!t U��triU��kr<J��} f }v}:xr.J•�I T; Y�i' p �afr.1� a • Ull > ��� �d's-rr�r�r�:�yuH t } • y ,, ray {��J P•�ilx r USf1
A f�1 y.l rYIF� 4C� 1 �iI�I ��l Ir! i�{� J I� Stir v7i y l ,. ,�r�F{'�i.1 7• Ir.! r'1 •7',CYy I { <J 44 r art r3 td �}G I a r�r P •� f LL
� � � � tr.�.�,/ Irr��i"��'� '' I'�r�i7Llkr�•V[.0 ?�X ro-v ' "� �rFljt.'�',Jr,rr; % t'>,��S�=3'i7a�)F �tT]ti ' rde?I •p�rr' ���,1•rl ,r^• il,(1� ?' 'I�tae.nPr;+ I] r 'r�Jfnl�,�
rflrn, 'r �� •�"�yfK►^ ; r�air,•ir�a 7G�r.• �;r '1�^[9[` ri aP'�, j G. r I'�r•[ry.�l1r'k•li"U r, f '"1r 'A}•+ W
7.`)f-'] '' �['�7tF�fNl►�'1' I C�1in{,}J► I Haiti; r`vr a,Criti� •�,xl i I��li �M1�t}rl��,r iFYI�]IT F' I �sT]R n r�t ' 'r r_ • 1 � t}I jl IG �±trirNT'iC�'i IS} T:
"�} "� � � ^ `- "(r- ,..°`. ' 1..-� _ } _ �J �x�J N:�.�.Ilf r� 11��r �'±.�� -,. �L,J-ti` .��} o..ti _. _�r,._ 'I�, "rr C _. �.• _'�1Xl'
,M r r _e s� !� �Clth�l��.la �iM Jr'6 _ ,��l{ rl
ll �� rr Mil t ut•S+'� .�fit � _Iw�r 7 c'[ • � ���� ��: s � �I Irl•u,aa� I <.F I r r
n •
....., - - ,.. -..... .. _ . ...�.;,. �J Irk; it tiCo �.,. • 1 hsf��i}'
� O� � l � � ,�`,.�. k � � �'v r � s r 11F#A?
rp -. �lfl r ��ut 1;�,�1i`?..,r1s�i l,l' rio iiq iVrfwI r {altl •-n' l rri3Ut.�rl 1�7 G r*A digk la r.1 l,r ✓_I,'I `;�, rla ri l!.y ., , " r, � �' ti
:,,:-t r ! 1 - 'r 1 1 rn — 1 7 'MIW r.r
1C'�IiY�}Ir < C.i�,� f (GJ'"rs l' a. �P%; �1 ri.,�k� M ( ••K•F.7 TJ r , r�[Ji , pia�Jfn�L•�IYJ -��rlirll�.�•� -?r , .-_.r�, • l? "/Fl
A A ry
Z
O c'C c •�I]y r t xU i• r•ti `•L• a�Y} {13 i -• rtp,Al i? t r•tlJ;tt b UYjl ill;;7s t r Cai�Yrul r jl{l..ii �.,�iYnnrtlf JiC' r r Jfi l �innfll
S�`"A'� /�1 '11 %G IrXLl•� f;Ill,.,���l�l.�`a ��. Cl_r�1�t�1�1i f I�/ WI Ul i-If "+�tYLifi�l� �r._rl�.�rti,! 4FY �r�3ill�±� • Iri(�r• �•"�.[g Ir 11 1,:. : 1i I �a►Y�.i7 r-��
� Z'A`N � • ►� llwrrilr'r .G,iXu�I i >z��1tp�C}► w�:• � � r r irL ��Ill�lllll�}J i � Ir f� � �R I� I iK Ji] it r7 T'i'1 Ir•rl�•rrT }ti/)L'ii•r
J
n "�Y�"'� O � ;.•y.n.� r,.aAx`t�lr>�!''irivJ`i]Cr ,
, . , l :_ 6 YJ
; rTr fil 1 r" I ' G _
G�n� � • ,l 1�1�� u�rs h��.+,Yt `�`r��{nr I �I� �� r �li$ L�I r � ��' S Frar Yji�.rid}r�}l�l�l7•�x� , i �i / i •,.;r r r �'�1'i�•'1?��
p A A w I�'ry��i�•�Ptt LI ,�trrl'���.'r�a'.;C{ .r<`�?;,+ '•r'n�fifr _y".t[cJr ; �YIhT•lr t'?. n, ./�li 'i"... IL o�
17r3, ? "IR{`} ,r' (' •t01' , J I± •73innCi{ • {.' ', dl :' nl•aL r�i4 rrpn S
R A � � .J�".�• r 4;' r r ` �" F�.��� n l''I 4l1" _.-r 1ti F, ._ r I r,' 'r :Y• � _ • i �' C �}.a I :{��,{��, '�`
y 5 N �Idl_F 1� i I�.�I' , eJis r tdG{lki rrC•`r�e. �,,..'1.+ � ]ail , � �r,:1 .�"t.�PI rjrAJr'J, YJr �r l rn:,. I r l:'',; -..{'�' , • �tr,r r.
p b � � l r�l;,ll!t� L,i,1.•l•� ;;�l�f� �i5r�•1P1 r� .,,r•�nJ��, �r�rr tkrs • �r�l) 1sr�tk• .r:�r y�r.r��,Ir•,,� ��l •rr Ir, f- 1 �rV I_�, i,:ii I� 'L:"��
m� }IPI �r I � " s
^p �n `Ita'nl r' h %`�[UI��> "'' r •'•1 fn um r r Ik �[I.I•X, A±l•� • I ° xv;;' f �4 f{r�•ful>r 7 :lv.,��X ll1 �7 rf• rlr t: �7•l'If,Yjj • 1:}
ai{�.�kn�![r `�l�hl��" 1� r��i r r '(aT �• r �irrx ••� •alb ir�'� n .�;I_.Nr r h_ku1G II L���}:�- �� r rl" rw
• T kJ • '7U took I jn n,l
uJrI�:I"r,�I ri]�� } �.:..�'?' ' !,; rlir"{�1 4 )Jr eiYlil'N, r ( Ydu, 11nrr.;Ti , "zip] Dili �'..:I ��rt Irrl •�..�� 7rlr6�.
A�.O Cli>`�. rl Y'k .V•i tr pill7,{�.{I CI r rl 7?r-.r I .ill Ir t��+ �!lfl I`C•�'�knxi r �r��;�2�.'I.` tJ.`:•1 f "1 I'1`f'I L I a.lp'^ .. •irr1F9
O 5 A � � �C"'f�l�t'l,rrt 1 r4 '�J^F�Y:;Ir'• Ohl; •�.i, :1i •li i-tai a C,C';� }{ _-�,ev l I '�t.X'rl"li 'r r I III '�+�Yr r !Ij i tF lr.;:. r.:, ' ±�yr it.��:•1 '.ICE I 1 1 ii:•'
� a Q
Q•y N(f'i?j A�',.�; ��,J"c, na, it ,!•.ttiP:i 1 IL•7 r" •1 ,:1Mri,'elf I '1^drr•a Il�ill J Ir r11 i Irrl nrpu •,S� :r�r L r r it�l -.i,9 ` ,fy I(q if •1r l�ii 1�
�j !�ih•�"q I�i�.� ii,�i!t r�,l}'vr��l rr� 1� i•1 Ir Jil ��L+x .�I;,t tl .�I rri'•V' I v• F 4':r I` ir•fi �r`L, • { ai'I•,J•{ I!ti�J• .� •� ��
jj
In] 1�-K.Y•F• l.;r�nj�r l • i 1"t r -i IJ i7(i'1 , • '�i`.x 11� [J19� l ��li)�1fT JPJL ,L'�' •, . ❑r .,IIZrI .I -
�V �! Ir={±'J11.1•n ✓'� ,1 t I 1 f h t � _F— r � i � r 1" r� I 1,f•�� — r.. i
fir'''!i C s `'t n }�,• : irl��k�u J ', •
1((r91) 1
t �`�.`l, • z� � Dill s 7 v irr , z. I �•��.� X fit I�Y`( II If�J{ I� o i �; •}.�I± 'll •� J J.�I rI• , ��
iYt17ri l.a•t a nd�.J��qv , �trti r {.:���wLl C ><•�,1��'� {f�i�iAi 3 'U";:,�Ylr n rr �l,rita-JI ; !:M•r�I7rrM�r, ,.YY hpnl ..tkK'ilr C r'LTTCf � ' j wv} �. I��,��m•j n:,
�bl-l�ii � •.l�a:�� � � �' � .�I{�'.� IF��•�r I� ��'TY�•YJIi .ii I �JJIJ�� �,���`_>`iJ� • 1` 7 YYt,Y t Ali � �''�'.dr}jL , !I •!C•'i;f i I �
7
c C �til� r. v1 • iJ �.wi+ r ` ,
r�l f1v �.J 1 FL.•7 'I � `�r r��',� l _ II ±�±J�til.! rr�:I C'a,' {'± •. ti��Yi�� r I± 1��1 l9.�'7 r rrr tjl `��' �I C II I� r,'} I r I L I Ilr"
r,rT � ' • V� no { t�C;;•r }Crl" �JJ. ;rl r
aA lk�J , I.�'If�llyJ.y G' L •f i' r '�tal t)� r -4�?:i.fJ:}� ���� � ltlkJ f � n i• ri I r r :g•iui �:7 •�
111 % •1 1.1,.
The 1973 SpeciaI Districts "�rzJ{�.x `�•..{
,l r��4iEu}I.;� 111ra{ }•vr?•�9:I(t IF.YS�
f.i1'srr ,I •fY ���� Presidents' & B oard Members' _
CCtu I l rl r5 1'
�` ' "�• • Presented April 27-29, 1973
by University of California Extension, Santa Barbara
Inst1tUt e in cooperation with the California Special Districts Association ' '11+r �:,,I
at Asilomar Conference Grounds, Monterey, California. :
o {
r. c s' b O o �ti�'.`,�'7ri 9 .t1�lnF'(nN;l,'�r'`��.lrn•X�•` rL��., t�'��11 k•,},? ,I'r'1,��rC �r'�.Y�, j� �t�rh:�k i I L�?�i{ I �.Nfi�i ,' tr��r.>'"'r w t;n�l "l�'' '•�'G•� I I�•a 1 .. ,17i.
rk l 4 �. n f I '•p nnrli yr� �'� `r � ]i`:a±C �.C�%.�• � ,h:�.r, , J al Irk, t.�'r If•'I •rill} 1 ,� '.AI•)•?• ]l{ ! S `�1 I �TI'l�. •�..ll r� I[:; � m• - I�
O Q ..y
]'kr , rC )�,. r r r� l�u irr��+ y�• ,rl,�.,,r,, r' t'��CII�{}],I �F': `mot 1•�; 1, r II`1F_.ft'?Y 3 r !A+i'7tt'1' Ft +,1,•+r5lnii ti .��.a;"I, rr.����t!'.I, `1 �� t U iJl2•IJ�rrr+gl:,
� sAcr�� _
if Ir•C, r7 ;i,y,�l '-=a•rdJrf•rs.'.,
F �y,�,l r �qlr]``` 11 Ir{Yi !C• , xr�cJt l�r'tr•r[ �?,S }�}��IPt�'I I f)r�,r �"fIS Il;�l g r }}rY>`�t'In•)`'(• `�Jr?•i I�
i,�i'r......,.r..., ., ;2 .t:: fir,.-,...h l..r7�,.a„n,...>,i f.,, • �,�2;�„�� J!"��,-al_ r.k..:o.��..,.- !�,:.-y1: ,: �. ���r�.. ,d4.CLIo.Lfl,.....f_,�.�1.�. r. .:r..:
PROGRAMOESIGN
The Presidents' & Board Members' Institute is a
program of intensive professional education in a PROGRAM SCHEDULE
relaxed setting away from interruptions. Partici-
pants will be in residence at Asilomar Conference
a Grounds at the ocean's edge on beautiful Monterey
Peninsula.
There are no formal educational requirements for
participation in the course. A desire to contribute
to and benefit from an exchange of knowledge, Presidents' & Board Members' Institute
ideas and experience is considered to be more im- April 27-29, 1973.
portant than formal training. The fundamentals, Asilomar Conference Grounds
techniques and practices offered in the Presidents'
k and Board Members' Institute are applicable to FEE Pacific Grove, California
both large and small districts.
$5G includes tuition, texts, class materials, and
coffee break refreshments. The full fee, purchase Friday, April 27
order, or authorization to bill must accompany 3:00 -5:30 pm Check-in and Registration
applications. BankAmericard may be used for pay-
:00 pm Social Hour,Heather Room at North Woods
ment of fee. 6
PROGRAM PURPOSES 7:00 pm Banquet,Heather Room at North Woods
8:30 - 10:00 pm Introduction by Ralph W. Chapman,President,CSDA
To help the Special District trustee, commissioner, or director maximize his board's effectiveness in SEMINAR I: Decision Making in Local Government
planning and policy-making.
To assist the newly-elected member gain a comprehensive view of his duties and responsibilities. Saturday, April 28
To upgrade the board level management skills of the Special District director. 7:30 am Breakfast
To increase the effectiveness of communication between the Special District and other government
8:30 - 10:00 am SEMINAR II: Special Districts Government—A Perspective
agencies. 10:00 - 10:30 am Coffee
To serve as a refresher for the experienced board member. 10:30 - 12:00 am SEMINAR III: Law and the Director12:00 noon Lunch
To improve working relationships and the interchange of ideas in board operations. 1:30- 3:00 pm SEMINAR IV: Conflict of Interests
3:00 - 3:30 pm Coffee
3:30 - 5:00 pm SEMINAR V: Board Level Management
PROGRAM FORMAT 6:00 pm Dinner
The Presidents' & Board Members' Institute: Sunday, April 29
1) is an intensive week-end seminar conducted in residence April 27-29, 1973 at Asilomar 7:30 am Breakfast
Conference Grounds, Monterey. 8:30 - 10:00 am SEMINAR VI: The Management Audit
2) consists of seven lecture-discussion workshops, directed by noted authorities in board 10:00 - 10:30 am Coffee
level management responsibilities. 10:30 - 11:50 am SEMINAR VII: Financial Management
3) is conducted by faculty from the academic staff of the University of California and
11:50 - 12:00 noon Closing Remarks and Adjournment
practicing management specialists, qualified Special District managers, and experi-
enced Special District counselors. (All seminars will be held in the Nautilus Room at Sea Galaxy.)
This program is made possible, in part, by a grant from the Intergovernmental Personnel Act administered
by the U.S. Civil Service Commission.
SEMINAR III: LAW AND TH, ZECTOR
How the law affects Board Members will be the focus of this seminar. Legal foundations of Special Dis-
trict government for both general law and special act districts and the doctrine of limited jurisdiction
will be discussed. Board procedures and organization as they relate to the law will be covered (the Brown
PROGRAM DETAILS Act, quorum and voting requirements, ordinances, violations, etc.). Other areas to be studied include:
express and implied powers, latent powers; one man—one vote; taxation; special purpose revenues and
expenditures;bonds and liability for individual actions.
SEMINAR 1: DECISION MAKING IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT SEMINAR LEADER
Our first presentation will focus on the management decisions every board member faces. The discussion Arthur L. Littleworth, L.L.B., M.A., a partner in the law firm of Best, Best, and Krieger of Riverside,
will include specific suggestions for effective planning, organizing,directing and controlling.This seminar California, is past President of the Riverside County Bar Association. He received his B.A. and
will also examine the decision making process: how decisions are made; the factors which influence L.L.B. degrees from Yale University and did graduate work at Stanford, where he attained an M.A. As
boards in making them; and the means by which to improve the process. In addition, this session will a member of the Riverside Board of Education, which he joined in 1958, he served as its President for
include the mechanisms of control, and criteria for sound decision-making. nine years. In addition, he formerly served as President of the Citizens University Committee. Special
awards which he has received for his positive contributions to the community include the Distinguished
Service Award from Riverside Junior Chamber of Commerce, the 1955 Young Man of the Year, the
SEMINAR LEADER Riverside Civic League Award as the Outstanding Elected Official of 1966,and recognition as the River-
side County Lay Citizen of the Year in 1969. Currently, he is a member of the Resolutions Committee
Joseph D. Carrabino, Ph.D., is Professor of Management for the Graduate School of Management on the of the State Bar, and a member of the State Education Commission on Inn6vation and Planning.
UCLA campus, where he formerly acted as Assistant Dean for Executive Education.He has served in the
Fillbright Division of the U.S. Department of State and has been a consultant to domestic and foreign
government on all levels. As a member of the Los Angeles City Board of Harbor Commissioners from SEMINAR IV: CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
196 1-65, which he presided over during the 1961-62 year,he has had intensive exposure to the problems (SEMINAR LEADER, Arthur L. Littleworth)
of decision-making at the local government level. He brings invaluable insights into the interactions be- Increasing public attention on "conflict of interest" makes this seminar one of the most important and
tween elected and appointed officials and career administrators. In addition,he co-authored a pioneering stimulating of the conference. A thorough examination of the definitions and implications of govern-
article on "The Systems Approach to the Management of Public Works Projects" which was featured in mental statutes and various civic and state codes will be presented. Current attempts by the legislature
the April, 1971 issue of the American Public Works Association's APWA Reporter. and the courts to limit conflict of interests will be presented. Other topics to be studied will include:
contracts, the handling of personal services, the "remote" conflict, the "rule of necessity"and gifts and
compensation. A sample code of ethics and conflict of interest standard will be presented for discussion.
SEMINAR 11: SPECIAL DISTRICT GOVERNMENT SEMINAR V: BOARD LEVEL MANAGEMENT
This seminar will present an overview of Special District organization and its historical development as This seminar presents an explanation of the basic authority and functions of boards. Special emphasis
well as the relationship of Special Districts to local and regional government. Emphasis will be placed will be placed on board-level management concepts as applied to the primary managerial processes, inclu-
upon the unique functions and characteristics of Special Districts including their size and diversity and
sive of planning, organizing, staffing, directing and controlling. Board operations, decisions,and control
the special and general powers they possess. An examination of revenue and expenditure requirements criteria will be considered in terms of their contributions toward effective board level management. Par-
and a discussion of emerging trends in local government will also be covered. ticular emphasis will be placed on questions concerning responsibility and authority of board members as
it relates to line manager authority and responsibility.
SEMINAR LEADER SEMINAR LEADER
John C. Bollens, Ph.D., is a UCLA Professor of Political Science and a recognized authority on local gov-
ernment. In addition to other works, he is author of Special District Governments in the United States,California Government and Politics, and Local Government Boundaries and Areas: New Policies for at UCLA,is a foremost authority in the field of board-level management. He has served as consultant for California. A number of the ideas contained in the last named publication, particularly factors to be con- Ventura County in California, was a member and Vice-President of the Los Angeles Airport Commission,and is currently a consultant on Management and Management Development to various organizations
sidered in reviewing formation or annexation proposals, became elements of the Knox-Nisbet Act. Dr.
throughout the United States. In addition, he is honored as the recipient of a Distinguished Service
Bollens has served as consultant to the California legislature as well as numerous other local and
Award from the Society for Advancement of Management. Some of his more recent publications national organizations. He directed, for the National Governor's Conference,the initial nation-wide study in-
clude: The Board of Directors and Effective Management, which was an Academy of Management award-
of the roles of the states in metropolitan activities, and has been active as a research analyst, writer and
lecturer on local government for more than a quarter century. winner; Principles of Management, in its fourth edition; and Management: A Book of Readings, now in
its second edition.
r
SKYLINE SCEN IC RECREAT ION ROUTE — GEN .nAL. DESIGN GUIDELINES
THE GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES ARE CONSIDERED AS MINIMUM. ANY JURISDICTION CAN ADOPT
STRICTER REQUIREMENTS THAN THOSE BEL",
71
AD_.'TED 11-18-71 BY BOTH
NORTHERN & SOUTHERN SEC—
TIONS OF THE SKYLINE
RECREATION ROUTE CITIZENS
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
U R B A N (SF AND
BUILT UP DALY CITY)
U R
DEVELOPING
B A N (PACIFICA)
RURAL
MINIMUM
DESIRABLE
MINIMUM
DESIRABLE
MINIMUM
DESIRABLE
A
DENSITY
DWELLING UNITS PER NET ACRE
15
4
2 — 4
1 1
,g LOPE DENSITY
1 UNIT PER 1 AC.
SLOPE DENSITY
1 UNIT PER 20 ACS.
B
SETBACKS
FROM EDGE OF ESTABLISHED R/W
0' IN SOME AREAS OF
SF & DALY CITY
25'
35'
' — 100'
�" ALSO STAGGERED
t
f)EXIRILIT,Y iL SETBACK
REFER TO TEXT
�
FLEXIB1LITM; SETBACK
REFER TO TEXT
C
ROADSIDE CONTROL
SIGNS— BILLBOARD, SERVICE
DIRECTORY, ONSITE
NO BILLBOARDS
DIRECTIONAL ONSITE
ARCH/L. SITE REVIEW
NO BILLBOARDS
DIRECTIONAL ONSITE
ARCH'L. SITE REVIEW
N) BILLBOARDS
DIRE:TIONAL ONSITE
ARCH'L. SITE REVIEW
NO BILLBOARDS
DIRECTIONAL ONSITE
ARCH'L. SITE REVIEW
NO BILLBOARDS
DIRECTIONAL ONSITE
ARCH'L. SITE REVIEW
CENTRALIZED DIRECTORY
NO INDIVIDUAL SIGNS
ROADSIDE REST INTERVAL
NONE
AS EXISTS
5 MIS.
10 MIS.
RfFFR TO TEX/
BEEER TC TFXT
UTILITY LINES — DISTRIBU—
TION LINES PARALLEL TO
ROADWAY, CROSSING ROADWAY,
NNE
CROSSONG ONLY
NONE
N NE
CROSSONG ONLY
NONE
NONE
CROSSING ONLY.
NONE
TRANSMISSION LINES
UNDERGROUND
UNDERGROUND
TINGLE POLE
UNDERGROUND
A
10 MIS.
WHERE NEEDED
THE CORRIDOR
NONE IN THE CORRIDOR
E
T IGticSRI1 IXrPROVUPR(SCF.DURET?
CO\,TP�1 I -D Are'rSS('
_aFnt nt; I CAL PROCF0UREB?
REQUIRE
DESIGN REVIEW
YFS
REQUIRE
DESIGN REVIEW
YES
REQUIRE
IESIGN REVIEW
.YES
REQUIRE
DESIGN REVIEW
XL
REQUIRE
DESIGN REVIEW
YES
REQUIRE
DESIGN REVIEW
Ill.
HEIGHT & PLACEMENT OF BLDG.
IN RELATION TO TERRAIN Sc
VIEW
PROTECT VIEWS
PROTECT VIEWS
vROTECT VIEWS
PROTECT VIEWS
BLEND
BLEND WITH LANDSCAPE,
AVOID BUILDING ON
RIDGE LINE
SPECIAL GRADING REQUIREM'TS
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
LANDSCAPE SCREENING —
YES OR NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
—
EROSION CONTROL PLANTING
YES OR NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
LOGGING OPERATION — DIST.
FM, ROAD R/W
N.A.
N.A.
NON: IN SCENIC ZONE
NONE IN SCENIC ZONE
500'2
2000'2
F
ROADWAY WIDTH, NO. LANES,
,,t MN ?EE:
4 LNS. MAX.,I
80'R/w 35 MPH MAX.
—4 LNS. MAX.4 4
120/R/W 45 MPH MAX.
LNS. MAX.
100'RIW 35 MPH MAX.
4 LNS. MAX.4
140-150'R/W45MPH MAX.
2 LNS. MAX.4
15O'R/W 45 MPH MAX.
2 LNS. MAX.4
300/R/W 35 MPH MAX.
SEPARATED R/W — MAX. ALLOW—
ABLE 01ST. BET. DIRECT.
OF TRAVEL LANES
NONE
14' LANDSCAPED MEDIAN
8' LANDSCAPED MEDIAN
14' LANDSCAPED MEDIAN
NONE5
NONE5
G
TRAILS
DISTANCE FROM ROADWAY
IN PARK AREAS
IN PARK AREAS
20'
25' OR MORE
20'
25' OR MORE
SURFACE
HIKING
HORSE
BICYCLE
NATURAL GROUND
NATURAL GROUND
CONCRETE OR ASPHALT
NATURAL GROUND
NATURAL GROUND
ASPHALT
AS PARK REQUIRES
,
NATURAL GROUND
NATURAL GROUND
ASPHALT
NATURAL GROUND
NATURAL GROUND
ASPHALT
NATURAL GROUND
NATURAL GROUND
NATURAL GROUND
NATURAL GROUND
y�c&.Y.E.� i�csrc
UP TO "IU'
TRAIL WIDTH
AS PARK REQUIRES
4'
UP TO 10'
H
OTHER
1 FACILITIES WOULD
2 ..... ._._.... --•---...—
VARY
CLUSTER OR PUD
TO FIT PARTICULAR SITE
.... .. .... a ... .. . . — -- --—-—
CLUSTER OR PUD
— MIN. OF A) PICNIC
—
CLUSTER OR PUD
TABLE & TRASH RECEPTACLE;
CLUSTER OR PUD
B) SAME AS A), WITH
~
CLUSTER OR PUD6
WATER; C) SAME AS B),
CLUSTER OR PUO6
WITH TOILET, PARKING
A POINTS Sc FIRE HAZARD AREAS.
3 DESIRABLE, MAY VARY DEPENDING ON ECONOMICS OF ACQUISITION* SEVERANCE DAMAGES FACTOR IN SECURING INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES.
4 35-45 MPH ARE MAX. SPEEDS DEPENDENT ON LOCAL CONDITIONS.RECOMMENDED UNDER SPEED LIMITS PERTAINING TO NEW ROADS AND
5 iN AREAS WHERE PRESENT ROAD IS SINGLE LANE OR VERY NARROW TERRAIN MAY DICTATE ADDITIONAL SEPARATION OF LANES •R DIVIDED ROAD.
DOES NOT APPLY TO EXISTING ROADS.
6 DENSITY WILL BE CONTROLLED UNDER "A DENSITY" (sEE ABOVE)
7 ENCOURAGE SHARING DRIVEWAYS TO LIMIT ACCESS ROADS IN SAN MATEO COUNTY CAN BE DONE UNDER SITE APPROVAL PROCEDURES.