HomeMy Public PortalAbout19750625 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 75-14 A. AL
Meeting 75-14
AIM= Mm
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
Regular Meeting
Board of Directors
A G E N D A
June 25 , 1975 7 :30 P.M.
Midpeninsula Regional Park District
745 Distel Drive
Los Altos, CA
(7 :30) ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES June 11 , 1975
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
OLD BUSINESS REQUIRING ACTION
(7 : 45) 1. Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Park District Providing for a System of Permits
for the Use of District Lands ( "Permit Standards") - H.
Grench
NEW BUSINESS REQUIRING ACTION
(7 :55) 2. Site Planning Procedures - J. Olson
CLAIMS
(8 :55) EXECUTIVE SESSION Land Negotiations and Personnel Matters
ADJOURNMENT
XL T
CITY OF LOS ALTOS
ONE NORTH SAN ANTONIO ROAD LOS ALTOS, CALIFORNIA 94022
TELEPHONE(415)948-1491
CITY COUNCIL
RICHARD G. HANSEN, Mayor
ROY E. LAVE, Jr., Mayor pro tem
AUDREY H. FISHER
RUTH H. KOEHLE
WILLIAM SAGAN
June 12 , 1975
Mr. Herbert Grench
General Manager
Regional Park District
745 Distel Drive
Los Altos , California 94022
Dear Mr. Grench:
Indications are that assessed valuations within the City of Los
Altos will be increased substantially in the new fiscal year.
The City Council of the City of Los Altos believes that this
will present an excellent opportunity for the various taxing
jurisdictions which affect Los Altos citizens to lower their
respective tax rates in an effort to relieve at least part of
the ever-increasing burden of taxation by governmental agencies .
Accordingly, we invite you to join in a concerted effort to effect
this tax rate reduction. If you believe this to be a feasible
action on the part of your agency, we would appreciate being
notified.
VeAOToCru y you
chard G. ans
ayor
RGH: ab
COMMITTEE FOR GREEN FOOTHILLS
1176 Emerson, Palo Alto, California 94301
Phone 328-5313
HONORARY PRESIDENT
Wallace Stegner
PRESIDENT
Betsy Bechtel
VICE PRESIDENTS
Mary Davey June 13, 1975
Barbara Eastman
Nils Nilsson
Mike Zimmerman Midpeninsula Regional Park District
SECRETARY 745 Distel Drive
Vicki Kojola Los Altos, California 94022
TREASURER
Lennie Roberts Dear Mr. Grench and Members of the Board:
MEMBERSHIP CHAIRMAN
Eleanor Huggins The Committee for Green Foothills Board of Directors
DIRECTORS AT LARGE voted at its June In meeting to urge the Park
Penny Bale District to retain its present tax rate. We do
Thomas B.Brown not feel that the residents of your District want
J.William Dawson Kent Dedrick any cut-backs in funding for purchase of open space.
William D. Esselstein
Robert Girard Yours truly,
Elizabeth Kniss
Fred Lyon
Michael D. McCracken
William D. McKee, M.D.
Elizabeth Ross Nils Nilsson
Meredith Smith
Charlotte Trainor President
James Wheeler
ADVISORY COUNCIL
Pat Barrentine
James Bjorken
Eleanor Boushey
Ted Carlstrom
Claire Dedrick
Mary Gordon
Herbert Grench
Nonette Hanko
Lois Hogle
Martha B. Hopkins
Thomas S. Jordan,Jr.
Sidney Liebes,Jr.
Roger McConnell
Norman McKee
George H. Norton
Barbara Ramsay
Pat Shelton
Paul Bruce Smith
Frances Spangle
Gerry Steinberg
Georg Treichel
FOOTHILL COUNCIL FOR
PLANNING RESEARCH
Kathryn Stedman
OFFICE MANAGER
Ciddy Wordell
A REGIONAL GROUP WORKING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
R E C E I`V IED :7 IM
Cum of Cuperti"o
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino,California 95014
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
June 9, 1975
Mrs. Katherine Duffy
President,, Board of Directors
Mid-Peninsula Regional Park District
745 Distel Drive
Los Altos, California 94022
PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT INCREASES AND PROPERTY TAX RATES
The City Council is concerned about the financial pinch in which many of our
residents find themselves, and therefore transmits the attached for your con-
sideration.
JAMES E. JACKSON'
MAYOR
rw
attachment
e' (^'
TO: ALL TAXING AGENCIES AFFECTING
CUPERTINO RESIDENTS DATE: June 9, 1975
FROW CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: PROPERTY TAX AVESSMENT INCREASES AND PROPERTY TAX RATES
Dear Board Members:
As all of you are aware, the County Assessor has reviewed approximately 85% of
the residential property in the ,County, and as mandated by law, has reassessed
those properties by a significant amount, averaging; greater than 1.5% according
to the Assessor's office.
If we retained our present City tax rate of 31, per hundred, we mould receive
a substauial increase in revenue. We feel this is definitely not the time to
enact a disguised tax increase. Accordingly, the Cupertino City Council has
gone on record that it will reduce its tax rate by an amounts which will be equi-
valent to the potential gain in revenue from the unexpected and abnormal- growth
in proprrty values as reflect_eJ by the Assessor's office.
This commitment is being made in the face of City budget: pre>ssuzes calling for
additional expenditures since in our minds we feel that the citizens are best
served by a reduction in tax rate rather than additional expenditures at the City
level.
Additionally, the Council is asking each agency whose taxes affect Cupertino
residents to consider a similar approach when setting its budget and tax rate.
Sire.e the City Council realizes that only the individual agency boards best know
their own fiscal positions, we cannot say that tax rates should be reduced. How-
ever, ww do request that each agency give serious cons:idc:rat:i_on to a tag: rate
reduction to compensate for any unexpected abnormal increase; in assessment.
While we recognize that the additional_ revenue brought about: by the asser~sme~nt in-
crease would be helpful to each agency and would be used for desirable puKposes,
we bali.eva that all agencies must recoSni-za the plight of the taxpayer and should
provide an element of relief.
I
M-75-86
(Meeting 75-14 ,
Agenda item No. 1)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
June 18 , 1975
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Permit Standards
Discussion: At its meeting of June 11, 1975, the Board
considered a memorandum (M-75-82) dated June 6 , 1975,
regarding Permit Standards and a resolution to adopt the
proposed Permit Standards. Following discussion, the
Board directed staff to return with an addition to the
proposed Permit Standards which would allow the District
to terminate or suspend an entry permit for reasons other
than misuse of the permit privilege (e.g. , overuse of a
portion of the District' s lands) . Attached is the revision
of the proposed Permit Standards prepared by the staff.
You will note that a new Section, 70 .5, has been added.
No other changes were made.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board adopt
the attached Resolution of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Park District Providing for a System
of Permits for the Use of District Lands ( "Permit Standards") .
HG:acc
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
PROVIDING FOR A SYSTEM OF PERMITS FOR THE
USE OF DISTRICT LANDS ("PERMIT STANDARDS")
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Park District does resolve as follows:
Section 1. This resolution is adopted pursuant to
"Regulations for Use of Midpeninsula Regional Park
District Lands" (Ordinance No. 75-1) wherein it is
provided in Section 200. 1 that "The Board may by
resolution, regulation or rule provide for a system
of permits and the issuance thereof, the exemption
of certain lands and classifications of persons there-
from, and establishing other policies in connection
with the administration of a permit system. "
Section 2. The rules and regulations contained in
the document captioned "Permit Standards, Midpeninsula
Regional Park District" dated June 25, 1975, a copy
of which is affixed hereto and by reference made a
part hereof, are hereby adopted. Said rules and reg-
ulations and any amendments thereto may be referred
to as "Permit Standards. "
PERMIT STANDARDS
Midneninsula Regional Park District
June 25, 1975
10. 1 Short Title. The rules and regulations contained herein,
including any amendments hereto, may be referred to as
"Permit Standards. "
20. 0 Purpose. These Permit Standards are adopted pursuant to
"Regulations for Use of Midpeninsula Regional Park District
Lands" (Ordinance No. 75-1) to provide for a system of
permits for the entry on or use of District lands and the
issuance thereof, the exemption of certain lands or classi-
fications of persons therefrom, and establishing other
policies in connection with the administration of a permit
system.
30 . 0 Exempt Lands. No permit is required for the entry upon or
use of the following District lands, or portions thereof,
provided that District Land Regulations, the regulations
or provisions of any sign or posted notice and the orders
and instructions of any District ranger or other author-
ized employee shall be obeyed:
a. North Foothills Open Space Preserve
b. Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve
C. Congress Springs Open Space Preserve
40. 0 Exempt Classes of Persons. No permit is required for the
entry upon or use of District lands by the following classi-
fications of persons:
a. officers and employees of federal, State, County, city
and other local public agencies while acting in the
course of their official duties .
b. Any person entering upon District lands in an emergency
for the immediate preservation of the life, health or
safety of persons or wildlife or for the protection of
property.
C. Persons crossing District lands on an easement, when
they are legally entitled to use of that easement.
50. 0 Permits; Classifications . The General Manager is authorized
to provide for the issuance of permits in the following
classifications and for the administration of such permit
system:
a. Permits of Limited Purpose or Duration.
b. Permits of Long-Term Duration, up to one (1) year.
C. Permits by telephone request.
d. Permits for Board Members.
60. 0 Permits; Conditions . Reasonable conditions may be attached
to any permit limiting the use of same as to time, dura-
tion, land area, purpose, number of persons and other mat-
ters necessary or appropriate to the responsible management
or use of District lands.
70. 0 Permits; Revocation. Any District ranger or other authorized
employee may summarily revoke or suspend any permit as to
any person who commits a violation in the presence of such
ranger or employee of the Regulations for Use of District
Lands, or any federal, State, County or municipal law or
ordinance.
70. 1 Hearing; Reinstatement. Any person who has had a permit
so revoked or suspended may, within ten (10) days demand
a hearing and review thereof. Upon receipt of such re-
quest, the General Manager shall establish a time and place
for hearing and give reasonable written notice thereof to
all interested persons, including the person requesting
review. At the hearing the General Manager shall receive
evidence in such form as he or she sees fit. The General
Manager may continue the hearing from time to time. Within
three (3) days of the close of the hearing the General
Manager shall render a decision and give notice thereof to
all interested persons. His or her decision may include
an order of reinstatement, conditional reinstatement, or
an order confirming the revocation or suspension. The
General Manager' s decision shall be final.
70. 5 Permits; Termination for Good Cause. For good cause, such
as threat of fire or other hazard, administrative diffi-
culties , overuse of District lands or facilities , or the
existence or threat of similar conditions or hazards , the
General Manager may without a hearing order the revocation
or suspension of any outstanding permit or permits as to
specific lands or classifications of persons. He/she may
reinstate the permit (s) when the condition or hazard has
ceased to exist.
80.0 Fees. The Board may from time to time adopt a schedule
of fees for types of use of District land when additional
management or operational cost is associated with that
particular use .
AA M-75-88
AW (Meeting 75-14 .
4V Agenda item No. 2)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
June 20 , 1975
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Site Planning Procedures
Introduction: The Action Plan for the Implementation of the
Basic Policy of the Midpeninsula Regional Park District for
the Fiscal Year 1975-1976 , which was adopted on May 28 , 1975 ,
contains an Open Space Management Subprogram. Typical projects
include short and long term use and management planning for
District lands. Staff has been developing a generalized pro-
cedure for planning and analysis. It is presented in the
attached memorandum (M-75-87) from J. Olson to me.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board of Directors
adopt the format shown as the pre-acquisition Phase I and post-
acquisition Phase II as generalized site planning policy for
the District. This will then serve as a guide which will un-
doubtedly be refined in the future as experience is gained.
Staff will continue to develop the planning area concept of
Phase II.
HG:acc
-75-87
(Meeting 75-14 ,
Agenda item No. 2)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
June 19 , 1975
TO: H. Grench, General Manager
FROM: J. Olson, Land Manager
SUBJECT: Proposed Land Use and Management Planning and Analysis
Format
Introduction : The following is a suggested structure for the
analysis and planning process of potential acquisitions and
previously acquired District land. It is intended to provide an
orderly and comprehensive system for dealing with the various
levels of analysis necessary to make informed and responsible
decisions regarding acquisition, use, and management of District
land.
Discussion: The suggested analysis and planning process is
divided into two phases : Pre-acquisition and post-acquisition.
The accompanying charts have been developed with the help of
Del Woods and in consultation with you. The charts illustrate
the contents of the two phases.
Phase I : The pre-acquisition phase is divided into two sections ,
namely, preliminary site analysis and a public pre-acquisition
report. The intent is not to have two independent written reports
but that much of the information (some in draft written form)
developed during the preliminary analysis would be incorporated
into the final pre-acquisition report.
The decision when to initiate a preliminary site analysis would
be at the discretion of the General Manager, when, in his opinion,
potential acquisition of a property or properties appears likely.
If the preliminary analysis and negotitations appear favorable,
the material would then be refined and expanded into a pre-acqui-
sition report.
The structure of this phase is primarily that of a checklist to
identify all of the factors relevant to making the most reponsible
decisions on whether or not to acquire land and to begin to
identify those factors relevant to land use and management after
acquisition.
M-75-87 Page two
Phase II : This phase is also divided into two parts : (1) a site
specific part, which is related to individual sites, and (2) an area
planning part, which relates to a larger geographic unit.
(1) Site Specific.
This process would begin either upon acquisition or
sometimes upon the optioning of the property. It is a
step-by-step process to gather information and solicit
public input, leading to the development of use and
management plans for each site.
(2) Planning Area.
In the second part the District would be divided into
planning areas based upon geographic , environmental and
use considerations. While no specific area planning
boundaries are being recommended at this time, possible
area planning boundaries are shown on the attached map
to illustrate the concept of area planning. Individual
site boundaries are often arbitrary and have little
relationship to natural features such as creeks and
ridges. Many aspects of individual sites are influenced
by factors outside of the site, such as wildlife and
vegetation dynamics, access, development of adjacent
property, etc. Studying individual sites relative to
area planning allows a broader perspective for making
decisions regarding individual sites.
Information developed within planning areas would be
valuable to the District when considering the acquisition
of other land within the planning area.
Implementation : Emphasis during the next few years would be pri-
marily on Phase I - pre-acquisition, and the site specific aspects
of Phase II. Development of area planning and a comprehensive
planning process for these areas would be developed in the future
as the District and other public agencies acquired significant
acreage within these units.
Recommendation: It is recommended that staff adopt the format,
shown as pre-acquisition Phase I and post-acquisition Phase II ,
as the generalized site planning policy for the Midpeninsula
Regional Park District. It is further suggested that staff develop
the criteria for defining planning areas and refine the planning
process to be used for the area planning section.
JO:acc
PRE-ACQUISITION PHASE Public
Preliminary Pre-Acquisition
Procedures Description Site Analysis Report
1. Site Analysis - General (a) Size, Location, Boundaries
(b) Current Use
(c) Geology, Soils
(d) Vegetation
(e) Wildlife
(f) Developed Resources
(g) Improvements
(h) Utilities
2. Interviews with Property (a) Additional Site Description
Owners and Others Familiar (b) Suggested Use
With Site (c) Potential Management Problems
(d) Public Attitudes
3. Determine Compliancy With (a) Zoning
Political and Planning (b) Sphere of Influence
Jurisdictions (c) General Plans
(d) YJRPD Plan
(e) Williamson Act
4. Review of Title Policy, (a) Easements, Mineral Rights •
Tax Assessments, and Other and Other Restrictions
Factors Influencing Acqui- (b) Deed of Trust - Recorded
sition, Use and Management or Unrecorded
(c) Status of Tax Payments
(d) Assessed Value - Total and
$/Acre
(e) Review of Services Supported
by Property Tax
5. Determine Boundaries for (a) Study Access - Regional,
Effective Use and Management Community and Neighborhood
of Site (b) Determine Current and
Potential Adjacent Land Use
(c) Recommend Additional Parcels
to Increase Effectiveness of
Site
6. Cultural History (a) Review of Cultural History
Associated with the Site
(b) Describe Past Use Coinciding
with Cultural History
7. Potential Use Considerations (a) Natural Resource Protection
(b) Agriculture
(c) Recreation
(d) Education
(e) Other
8. Potential Management (a) Natural Resources
Considerations (b) Agriculture
(c) Recreation
(d) Tenants
(e) Dumping
(f) Patrol - Review Existing
Fire and Policing
(g) Immediate Action - Steps,
Cost and Timetable
9. Indicate Relationship to
Regional Trails Plan and
Other Parklands
10. Terms
11. Other Factors (a) Land Tour - If Feasible
Could Include Public, MRPD
12. Discussion of Factors Board & Public Agency Staff
Influencing Acquisition
13. Recommendation
14. Environmental Assessment or
Determination on Acquisition
15. Negative Declaration or EIR
if Required
Public
Preliminary Pre Acquisition
Procedures Description Site Analvsis Report
POST-ACQUISITION PHASE
Site Specific Planning Area*
Procedures Description Procedures Description
1. Interviews with Property (a) Insight into Use and 1. Divide District (a) Planning Areas
Owners and Others Familiar Management Problems into Geographic Based Upon
With Site (b) Public Attitudes Planning Areas Ecological
Units, Water-
2. Classification and Mapping (a) Delineate Geographic sheds, and Use
of Vegetative Communities and Vegetative Units Patterns
(b) Locate Fragile or
Otherwise Significant 2. Detailed Inventory
Areas of Resources Within
(c) Indicate Action Neces- Planning Area
sary for Protection
or Restoration 3. Develop a Use & (a) A Long Range
Management Plan Plan for the
3. Investigate Accessibility (a) Cammunity/Neighborhood Planning Area
(b) Regional With Emphasis
(c) Regional Trail on MRPD Lands
(d) Internal Circulation of
Trails and Roads
4. Monitor Adjacent Use (a) status of Adjacent
Lands
(b) Reccnmendations for
Further Acquisitions
(c) Continued Land Use
Monitoring
5. Preliminary Public (a) Consist of Neighborhood
Meeting and Community - Public
Notice Mandatory
(b) Compile Information on
Potential Use and Manage-
ment
6. Draft Use and Management (a) If Sufficient Portion is
Plan Preparation Fragile, Consider Site a
Planning Area and Proceed
to Area Planning, Step 2
(b) Use Preceding Information
to Justify Development and
Management Scheme
(c) State Basic Policies for
Use and Management on
Specific Areas such as:
Types of Permits and Con-
ditions, Circulation, Edu-
cation, Staging, and Agri-
culture, as Applicable
7. Public Presentation of Plan (a) Public Views Concerning
the Proposed Use and
Management
(b) Evaluation and Revision
of Plan
8. Other Factors (a) Land Tour - If Feasible
Could Include Public, MRPD
9. Prepare Final Draft of Use Board & Public Agency Staff
and Management Plan
10. Presentation of the Plan
to MRPD Board
11. Environmental Assessment or
Determination on Plan as
Required
112. Refinement of Plan (a) Depending on Action of the
Board
13. Negative Declaration or EIR
on Plan if Necessary
14. Adoption or Motion of Endorsement *Area Planning Could be Initiated
Parallel to Site Specific Planning
15. Yearly Review of Site PlansI to or Implemented at a Later Date
Determine Effectiveness and Pro- Depending on Staff Resources and
vide for Public Input Regarding Priorities
Changes in Use
neI 1.1 03 ` wPLc" o Lo At10 -CSib \% 'COy1Ni __ - ,!i• -'�_�• \ .N -i
e.a
5 'F
o� ar qo os",y I 7 ,>`-Q3°-I .7
t2 3 ' .z� C •. 1 7 O - r ALnso r !o ' vans
o J7 srwu� 6
,J 3 STANFORO 1 4V 1.7Cp _ 7 y o
Pp. ... C' 7 - - �-' e i <'`1
t11i1 itas wrw '$ .
AIOFfETT I 2.5 F 1.� UNIV EASIrYV ; qi Ro, r6I '^18 .� fr po • COILEOEY
1.4 ,} C _7 7 4 A s/ grAo HELD i < GWaJ4Y v O ALVIs6 Mf.Pm9 2 2 - t' 9
w. ANLi FS ENrEP NAVAL .7
' \:. a EOpo f AIR STATION
.7 6 4f I s a AONEws'nriE_� �:t,
^Nosnrn44' srA1E 7 t�
na: � S 1.1 4, N•4 a od 1-3 +° 2 , a1 .a�v,' L 2 :�,..• 5 ` � 1 -i
-4+E REFUGE N3
-. 2.2 cq ¢8t1}rE FNr'< a`'`•r E.N,o ' Ea 2.2
- -- o 30 �V ,v'''� 5 a..N�E a•I 19
LzCer3 In .3 c ~Np v{lllil 1. 1.7 aE�r+n�`. "4 .8 1.2 ASn4 *i.3
Et xo . z puesrArE1.2 t i
`1.4 '4 Vtew g 3 1.2 s 4y\�:E v ' lg .`•.a.�P°J! �1 4} .Bn8 o a .
Los F.4.7 R z' ~AUDt'Av$ " .6 a°I .7p S"t .A ads 4' 1.3
4. ySfa AVE Oi Altos RLr1 4•^ J } .9 t�t 1 f '•`P `+b
o" TE ,a" Los Altos 1 Y EL aro p q[ .4 "''`I`t 1`3
_.-.'
Rig s 1.8 SUony'fale s. .
a u 2 1.3 c EL,o
3i �. 3.3 i28 '6 1.8
i RLnC'fCp O EEO AVE MGNROF
I EoorNnt a .8 1 - 2 1.9 1.3 1sAN Jos
1.3
17 'I S i' MUNICIPAL y 1 `' 3
!e ,'FOOTHILLS Rp PQ' 71ia'" 7 x .S y 1 } R [IrRIORi y 7 O.i ~ t ).2 O
PARK �_ 4p0+ ,xpOR�d FREMONT 1.5 s 'S AYE. Z29 WEL CAMIN r REAL w 1 4 °(Fyq T N!°gL_�?�',"w�
IAAN'ATl1 7 a+�. 9 _ 1 7 [gsrxHV e N A: F 4
5.4 2.6, �r.7 r i 1.4 1.2¢ 9 Sa to Cara°=•"•� _ 6 ; 7 4AE+S8 sL 11
T1afCn5 I no
¢ 2 2 •c`.c m 7 ` ri •? t
l Woods O MCNES,GO= .. tN srEAo - m 3 A 2 _s" �� sAN lusE sr:r.
1.8 v Ir .o .8 2. Yts ' ti uNN vry
.ter z,� W 4 \ P°"�y+ s• So ,
1.3 2 1.3 =m .9 'J s •ArFOA'� t .�`I��` t
:r.7 a .s Cupertino
:1_t Permanente:�- '9 1 It ns' i 1.4 7 3
�evEN a cREeK 8 z 5 f 5 W. 1 sAN CARLO ' !I J
i nsucnNr t }s 1.8 .5 rs.EA` t : 3 .J 4 ^8 sat I
.3 eVo
.5 ,,,,,/1 '[ i
r Je m`2a,[EOE F 1. .5 .� .4
Idinim 1.4 u
E 1" a� � 1.4
�
0 1 1.9 18
3.1 `,. v2 2 �} 21 ° 2-1 17 cr =�� vta'`8
I L
57
Ro- II u PE won FFEI`o Ao .6;RNE�,A 1.4 o�1PF�a 7
1 W.N K AMTON AVE.E. 5E. XIMILTON I.Z
6. SYEVEJIS.-t W r.STEVENS cs! -*"OLT�-,q-IEN- •3 I.e -6Cam bell/' .2 I A.E.
s• _ 11CREER -,I C,EEK s B3 ? W GNe3Ftt A+f �%rAf
COUNTY t r i' T I
il lil •S\PARK' l,Af '.YYn I---__Sao I ao - � � n -_ e>R %i• 1.9 1y.2 1.2Co. �< `'IP. P . •;0..
*o"4C-ON$NANuxArCc.L
5PARK b78 S
16 � f,^. .7
r___ 8 Y_JI MT ��EN,[Nr,F°onL.n,.r _ GAP plp � •' 'e A !. - [aPrroe
s•y I. �ol. Ro 1.8 .8 C
3 +O. w:rr:,rtr. . 'I.b o J- i µ„
1.8 N ��l'01 % O?q,1Epe,N 1
Po RT06.i �`- I F r,_, 3 .9 a 1.6 aratoga,t,., rJ_` +e.4 001.5 8
!�
.S'T,TE L.__J r� I i ua4 1.6 gryN .9 .8
'•.1RJC r-`' II `�^ -......_...«.....,..,. [STATE
Novnu*E E•o �`' .W 3 - l4.Am.. ,�'' pA1NAM I.1
1 � -
.:' R13Y�._ ao •�_ _..__. _• o._.._p.,.,_.E..
Cggr< s9 I `wLu Monte �1. 9 �GI,tOS AM.oEfl YO J) ro.`
F s L MONFALYO of eco `f :
i J NfGAN NO 1 L RBDRETUM
( V 1 CA ROC
L K YfINE Co-uAkYJ PARK I
III «-1 L-.�<••- .:xOEvELDPEO/ J S.2 p•r gSHANNO =••[�srO;rou AY AK.
[-T n rrEEuwsAr� r- 06 N �.- R[[WnnD 4.5
l.7 Fr
t NIIOPE°I (R I'7 fSUNNYVALE 3.3
1 y N S
NOU+sIIArN - Nfi. RO.
Cf, w.1EPNAx GAi i --'' _ PARK I •\Los'f; •a. RD. -�15
!L rrS r / L `-� IgxOK'ATEGatos s j
r i s �•Er,ew J
ROCK
'LEXINGTON
V 3 - 4.7 RES. - RE ,rrP (i,NMJUInO
I L WATER
of Rb.I ECPEArKH1
Sf9 t __ _ PO '1 •, AREA SOO+ AL-VEN
cavA
3 7
it
•Aldercroft eo
` Chemeiieta Park 9O
Badwoo9 40 �� I�"EP cutcx
Islatas
o
ao Hly
2.5 i City
r
x 4.7 °
I �
9 RR
1.4 2.1 *S��AuarPrAN VI
[O4f
2.7 r q�
C °^ 6, t
F'
v Locx LONONo W Laurel -or
Clef»God • 1.2 ~• _.5 a q° RO'P `o-1.9 ,
• R
Q •Lfmypco J+�S woos. •°+y O. \..I�a4�.
A 11-Aas1A)E _ C4r.E� dL 4 ` � a . 5 a
Eltn A.vO OwE pM1 o =
SSS
a
NAVAL
-a '.on«.ns •cr r •7••`' 7 i. •,rR crArION I -%�. i.5 c yyy
e•Nc r?f°'JGc'I� / I I 1.51
'' �.,�' I 1 °4[ J.s '} ,,,�o•. sa` '>`.: g .� „ 2 2 .Y \\f• rat \ a,
L.'•rI r _ ,�'. �J o L..ya'/;il�h� �•' ,.7
1.4.w {fiai'�f1 1�/.y `- 7L..I - 1.2 P °
???... ua A v y A�1�$ a RF 1 .7 �s"3° ' l't� r• F ,J �r _ 1.3
,T - - - - 1 �'y 1 9 a, t c}•• I 9% J \iTw. e°
. [,w '7 2 I J I.B S 1
3 ri�ll�.l i '�� �1 7 �A 7 Ss•�,._�_-. _ rv. :.i T......._� l..l •-
2 15
1.8 yyy
a ' EF,,o .F toaE /1 9 0 i .I
•t[, rwarwLL _ 5 ,. I.1
to -us eee..:rr et'
O 1$ 1 Rr ' T 7
gyp• 1 )
PRRR - 4'p0 �:0� , cR_VO4T RE.
IE. '^g (� '•Y• :i 16 S
J ti[ .J -FL Cay..v0 _ L 1 �o 4. •+�'
I.5 S fa Cl a ra Z '.� - ':. S�ns�``
-i L^s !r o.4 2.6 r. '><� LQi 1.� �- _ vo [L.uo, .; �t,,. _ �
TIMM 2
I z 1 ::rxa€ .7
{yob w __.Ixo W.; •i � t_._s• � :.[
3 > 2.3 ,
•.+� C- '7� 1.3 2 1.3 z .9c atom. ♦ �} 1
T�
P?rn�n?nt?.1 ca±RR 1.4 8 i 5 ,: 5�1w. S sar[ tLnL.oY 1.1 r
n[uc�,n /r + �sT .9 1 t- .3r.s.e:.` acvo• 5s ram• vt,
q .Q ,4Lt
Alt
14 s 1
�j., o' b
A,
i •� W. "a `t N - RV' Sp 1F. J :ul'a
SrN_ENS { -PRLIIYRGT li'���rbbl�: h T
r LT R r Le ArE
1 ttGRIER 1 4 � C+EEx z. 3 Z
;co \3 waur._�_ "- �}`- I- 1.2 a '<�•.s'S 7f�s"s
Jfy�l 11 tovnrr vARx - �s_ r jPARR n�2E -•c, a 1 5 i / JJ3 s`L5 c,rr,
(` 1 I :•°- L6 a AJt _ „gym 19
-4 11.? A .7 •�r "IT
f:T a racv -- - �.
LE Al 'R 1 d 1 7 •, Q L: 7 _ I tP'x' Ax•¢ •t S ^
-� .9 a a(atoga Wou..[ �E.
3 •'a'Is
T.1 Tt• f 1 r• / �w - �i .
-IC[Hre �� 9
4r AVf FaAn.rx'.x `
a9a
sr4rE r.,f r^i y Q (`1 g 3.. 1-
\ a�- I Cq;.rL _, s y.,.0 :417a1
•�r j � �.A__r .. i 1 NO TgtvO , $��� .,. ♦ o a f
1 fAiTL£lTry_A
17 _
` XfUNE�rC04'N,Y iAAx l
WUwtxr,: rc•.J, r--J ` {2 Or��NA.V.VO.V' :.[=[L ra "Le ty *tor.,,q MVP
Grt Th1P I4Ai:, ,. 1 P L Ei (,
ti .`L�RO, 1 3.3
C'r,_\T1• R3,
r'
-----•--"--. w+A w.v + , _ ._ [,. NARK i A ��$ Lz Ao.
ors .---,
_ 4.7 _ RES.
�xrArrO.v +
AQ!A AL.ACM
�
co
:r `t
33
' _ � yak 1�� ...'...EL..! .._.__ 4'..'"-_. f.[.[. _-_...._,•.
S[A1 rldHG01t _ �f.
' Chzn_;a•a Park \�'--,
POSSIBLE PLANNING AREAS
' Es'fes .- 'HaI r.
T
_N 4.7 �
It �
2,1
19 \ �
C-75-13
June 25 , 1-975
Meeting 75-14
I4IDPI'?\!IL\TS ILA RI-,GI0N'A!. PARI", DISTRICT
C L A I MI S
Amount Name Description
1134 $15 , 261. 55 Rogers, Vizzard & Tallett
Legal services
1135 4G5 . 18 Xerox Corporation Duplicating
1136 60. 00 Legal Process & Courier
Service Service of subpoenas
1137 33. 20 Jeanne Pinneo User survey
1138 24 . 80 Doten Travel Service Air fate to
Sacramento
1139 4 ,125. 00 Clevenger Realty
Appraisal Corporation Professional services
1140 3 , 061 .21 Frahm, Edler & Cannis Engineering services
1141 484 .42 Valley Reproduction
Services Brochures
1142 1, 699 . 55 Stanlev R. Norton Legal services--Perham
liticration
1143 80 .14 Stanford Electric Works Light fixtures
1144 42. 72 Eureka Office Products Office supplies
1145 22. 54 B. Green Telephone $20 .84
Postage 1 .70
1146 535. 00 H. Grench Reimbursement for
legal expenses
1147 25 .35 E. Jaynes mileage
1148 46 .31 R. Garcia Uniform $31 .76
Mileage 14 .55
1149 22. 09 H. Grench Out-of-town meeting
expense
I-III)PEN:[:t7SUL?1 REGIONAL ��AR�: DISTRICT
C L A I M S
Amount Name Description
1150 $ 257 . 91 J. Olson Dist.-vehicle expense $ 80 .20
Office furniture 106 . 50
Peal conference 13 .78
Uniform 15 . 88
Mileage 41 .55
1151 34 . 20 C. Harrington Mileage
1152 10. 60 Altoan Press Office supplies
1153 16. 54 Dahnken Office equipment
1154 95 . 00 Western Title
Guaranty Company Litigation guarantee
1155 250 . 00 E. Jaynes Educational assistance
REVISIEDIt
-C-75-
June 5, 1975
fleet ng 75-14
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
C L A I M S
Amount Name Description
1134 $15, 261. 55 Rogers, Vizzard & Tallett Legal services
1135 465 .18 Xerox Corporation Duplicating
1136 60. 00 Legal Process & Courier
Service Service of subpoenas
1137 33. 20 Jeanne Pinneo User survey
1138 24 .80 Doten Travel Service Air fare to
Sacramento
1139 4 ,125.00 Clevenger Realty
Appraisal Corporation Professional services
1140 3 , 061 . 21 Frahm, Edler & Cannis Engineering services
1141 484 .42 Valley Reproduction
Services Brochures
1142 1, 699 . 55 Stanley R. Norton Legal services--Perham
litiaation
1143 80.14 Stanford Electric Works Light fixtures
1144 42 .72 Eureka Office Products Office supplies
1145 22.54 B. Green Telephone $20 .84
Postage 1 .70
1146 535 . 00 H. Grench Reimbursement for
legal expenses
1147 25 .35 E. Javnes Mileage
1148 46 .31 R. Garcia Uniform $31 .76
Mileage 14 .55
1149 22 . 09 H. Grench Out-of-town meeting
expense
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
C L A I M S
Amount Name Description
1150 $ 257 .91 J. Olson Dist.vehicle expense $ 80 .20 '
Office furniture 106.50
Meal conference 13 . 78
Uniform 15 .88
Mileage 41 .55 '
1151 34. 20 C. Harrington Mileage
1152 10. 60 Altoan Press Office supplies
1153 16.54 Dahnken Office equipment
1154 295.00 Western Title
Guaranty Company Litigation guarantees
1155 250 . 00 E. Jaynes Educational assistance
1156 600. 00 Diridon Research Survey
1157 313 . 25 Western Title Policy Fee
Guaranty Company
1158 1,400. 00 Castellanos Associates Appraisal
1159 5. 33 The Regents of the
University of Calif. Book
1160 280. 00 Lisa Anderson Environmental assessment
1161 17. 66 Documents & Books
Publications
1162 170. 86 Petty Cash Meal conferences $25 . 69
Dist. Vehicle exp. 5. 88
Maps 19.76
Office supplies 31 . 57
Office equipment 11. 11
Field supplies 10.70
Mileage 16 . 15
Increase fund 50. 00