Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19800514 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 80-09 Meeting 80-9 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415) 965-4717 Regular Meeting Board of Directors May 14 , 1980 7 :30 P.M. (7 :30) ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES - April 9, 1980 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ADOPTION OF AGENDA ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED (7 :45) 1. Endorsement of the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program (Proposition 1) H. Grench Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional open Space District Endorsing the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program (Proposition 1) (7 :50) 2. Use and Management Plan Follow-Up for Williams Property Acquisition - H. Grench NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED (8 :05) 3. Proposed Addition to Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, Picchetti Ranch Area (Consigny Property) C. Britton Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional open Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to Purchase Real Property, Authorizing officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction - Monte Bello Open Space Preserve - Picchetti Ranch Area (Consigny Property) (8 :20) 4 . Review of Use and Management of Planning Area IV (Rancho San Antonio and Foothills Open Space Preserves) - S. Sessions Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,Nonette G Hanko,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin C Meeting 80-9 Page Two OLD BUSINESS WITH NO ACTION REQUESTED (9 :05) 5. Proposals for Uses of Hassler Buildings - S. Sessions (9 :10) 6. Follow-Up on Patrol of Windy Hill - S. Sessions (9:20) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS CLAIMS EXECUTIVE SESSION - Land Negotiations ADJOURliMENT TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: When an item you 're concerned with appears on the agenda, please address the Board at that time; otherwise, you may address the Board under OraZ Communications. When recognized, please begin by stating your name and address . Conciseness is appreciated. We request that you complete the forms provided so your name and address can be accurateZy incZuded in the minutes . i WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Meeting 80-9 April 24, 1980 May 14 , 1980 Dear Members of the Palo Alto Planning Commission, Palo Alto City Council and Staff, and Members of the Board. of the Midpenninsula Regional Open Space District, I am a neighbor of M.R.O.S.D. 's Montebello Ridge Open Space Preserve , residing at 31570 Page Mill Road ., Palo Alto. I want to argue against the parking lot location M.R.O.S.D. Is presently proposing for the Montebello Ridge Preserve:- Site G. Site G initially looks good. in several ways , but I you urge g y to look at it carefully and consider alternatives to it. Site G. recommended by M.R.O.S.D. staff and approved by a majority of its Board , sits at the very top of one of the upper ends of Stevens Creek canyon. The view is spectacular, unique , and threatened. It provides an unspoiled overlook of the entire Stevens Creek Valley and is one of the view experiences people come to M.R.O.S.D. 's Montebello Ridge holding to enjoy. M.R.O.S.D. now proposes to put a graded harking lot rigtt there , at the very top of one of the fingers of the watershed. M.R.O.S.D. has jurisdiction to protect. There will inevitab?y be an impact of runoff, erosion, litter, and other impact below a parking lot at Site G. And there will be a degradation of� the vista and the unspoiled knolls that people come to enjoy. This grading: of a rare , unspoiled upper watershed is totally unnecessary because there are other and better sites, among them the large flat area roughly east of the existing parking lot over a low rise , behind the big wooden "Los Trancos" sign, ZvAa a few dozen yards from the existing lot. This area is a former riding ring, already level and sand-gravel surfaced . It has been used. (not recently ) by the District for overflow parking, and is a natural, logical place for parking. It istscreened from the road by a berm of some ten feet in height, and. bordered by shrubs on the back side. ::4" kZIS a 1ara�-ear �a�r1�C � GzTa This site, call it the overflow/riding ring, was not even Included. for consideration on the list of sites the Board has ,just given analysis , and. then selected. Site G from, though to many neighbors it looks like one of the logical sites . If this "overflow" area were added. and linked. to the exit ting lot, it would require that rangers drive (or walk) into the inner lot in order to make efcheck of it, but this would take about -fv-e 44t rouwd ti i p two minutes and is precisely the kind of thing that rangers in parks normally do. (The additional lot might be lock-gated and closed to parking at non-peak times ) . The screening of cars in this scenic park is a plus factor to neighbors and visitors alike, but the park District has rated. ease of surveillance from the road so highly that the logical site I argue for- already levelWnot requiring any grading impact on the land.forn and. watershed- this site was not even included. on the list of sites to be given serious evaluation by the Board.. For the same reason, Site G was approved in preference to other sites that would. have less visual and. less geological impact. As M.R.O.S.D. now proceeds toward more than doubling their parking capacity, the need. for public protection, interpretation, par intenance , and even sanitation will increase. Not wanting to provide that increased level of presence and responsibility is not a good argument against even considering one logical parking site and for rejecting others because they would cause a little more surveillance effort by park personnels as a tradeoff for not making a major visual and geologic impact. At this point, there is very little presence for surveillance, protection, interpretation, maintenav%M , or even for removal of existing hazards . It is , in fact, neglected land, land in a near-vacuum, that has invited vandalism and a brutal machete attack. There is not even a sign to warn of the danger of fire and to caution against smoking in dry grasslands. There is a ruined cabin that is a sheer hazard , with not even a Dann e -KW O,iat signah And so on. The M.R.O.S.D. cannot assume that they can be responsible for 1L*Sing more and more automobiles , sightseers , T'ccnickers , and hikers into the area without also planning to put more employee time Into maintena nce, protection,ct1 on and surveillance so I do not believe this is a good argument against a partially screened, low-profile parking lot. My point is to urge that in locating additional parking, the desire of the M.R.O.S.D. not to spend money for staff presence at the preserve commensurate with increased public use should not be the overriding criterion. The public value of preserving this beautiful area. for public enjoyment and OF protecting the land and the watershed.-- which is the purpose of the park-- should be paramount, even if the District has to provide some additional staff and ranger hours and, effort, In the tradeoff. M.R.O.S.D. already needs to provide more presence. Please do not approve this unfortunate initial site selection before looking at some of the alternatives suggested by neighbors . Thank you, 4 t« John Olmsted 31570 Page Mill Road Los Altos , California 94022 (mailing address ) Palo Alto, California (actual address ) I M-80-35 (Meeting 80-9 5/14/80 Agenda Item #l) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM April 30, 1980 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager PREPARED BY: J. Fiddes, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Endorsement of the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program (Proposition 1) Introduction: The June 3 , 1980 primary election ballot includes Proposition 1, the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program, which, if approved by California' s voters, would allow the issuance and sale of $495 ,000,000 in state bonds for park- lands and renewable resources purposes. As a Board, you indi- cated your support of Proposition 1 at the meeting of March 12 , 1980 (refer to memorandum M-80-24, dated March 6 , 1980) ,so that an informational article could be placed in the spring issue of Openspace. At that time, I indicated that a formal resolution of support for Proposition 1 would be placed before you for consideration prior to the June 3 election. Discussion: As has been noted during prior discussions of the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program and in literature you have received, the District would benefit directly from the passage of Proposition 1. For example, of the $338,000, 000 designated for parklands and recreational purposes, $95, 000, 000 has been earmarked for 100% grants to counties, cities and districts for acquisition, development, rehabilitation, or restoration of real property for park, beach, recreational, and historical resources preservation purposes. Since funds will be distributed to each county in proportion to population and since Proposition 1 specifically states that regional park and open space needs must be taken into consideration in the allocation of funds, the District will receive a portion of the grant funds designated for Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties. In addition, the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program includes $35, 000, 000 which will be distributed for the purposes of the Roberti-Zlberg Urban Open-Space and Recreation Program from which the District will receive a proportionate allocation. M-80-35 Page Two Even more importantly, the passage of Proposition 1 will allow this District, as well as the State, counties and cities, and other qualifying special districts, to meet the challenge of providing for the parks, recreation, and open space needs of the people of California. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board adopt the attached Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Mid- peninsula Regional Open Space District Endorsing the Park- lands and Renewable Resources Investment Program (Proposition 1) . RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ENDORSING THE PARKLANDS AND RENEWABLE RESOURCES INVESTMENT PROGRAM (PROPOSITION 1) WHEREAS, the voters of the State of California will vote at the June 3, 1980 primary election on the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program, authorizing the issuance and sale of $495,000,000 of State bonds; and WHEREAS, the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program will provide $338,000, 000 for parklands and recreational purposes, including $95, 000, 000 in grants to counties, cities, and districts for acquisition, development, rehabilitation, or restoration of real property for park, beach, recreational, and historical resources preservation purposes and $35,000,000 for urban park projects; and WHEREAS, it is the responsibility of the State to preserve and protect environmental and recreational resources and to pro- vide and encourage recreational opportunities for the citizens of California; and WHEREAS, the demand for parks, beaches, recreation areas and recreational facilities, and historical resources preservation projects in California is far greater than the supply that is presently available, and such facilities may become even more critically inadequate as time progresses; and WHEREAS, because past and current funding programs cannot meet present and future park, recreation and open space deficiencies, and such facilities help to alleviate the urban social problems in California' s major metropolitan areas; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the citizens of the State of California to pass the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary and important that the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program receive as much support and endorsement as possible; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District endorses and supports the passage of the Parklands and Renewable Resources Investment Program (Proposition 1) . R-80-21 (Meeting 80-9 5/14/80 Agenda Item #2) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT May 2, 1980 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Use and Management Plan Follow-Up for Williams Property Acquisition Introduction: At your meeting of March 26 , 1980, you voted to acquire the Williams property on Mt. Melville as an addi- tion to the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve (see report R-80-10 of March 20, 1980) . Staff was to report back on the following two items : (1) The question of whether rights in the portion of the property on the Skyline Boulevard side of the ridge could be dedicated while leaving options open for possible development on the back side of the ridge if financial conditions so dictated. (2) Alternative uses for the dome-house and garage. The first item is addressed herein; the second is discussed in the attached report R-80-20 , dated May 1, 1980, from S. Sessions to me. Discussion on Dedication: I have discussed the question of dedication under the Public Resources Code with Legal Counsel. In principle, a lot split might be made of either or both parcels so that a portion of the acreage or an open space easement over a portion could be dedicated. However, unless the District could be adequately assured by San Mateo County that such an action would not reduce the number of currently or potentially allowed dwelling units, the District could lose the economic value it was trying to retain in the first place. Additionally, this approach would take considerable staff time to accomplish. Alternatively, one might think of dedicating rights in a portion of the property in accordance with the Public Resources Code without a lot split, but the effect of this on potential development of the remainder of the property would be very difficult to predict without adequate assurances from the R-80-21 Page Two County. As another alternative, it may be possible actually to convey an easement to another agency, presumably the County, but such agency would then control enforcement of that interest. Similar assurances would be needed. None of these alternatives appears worth pursuing, considering the time involved and possible pitfalls. However, if you wished to make your intentions clearly known without actually making a dedication of rights or conveying an easement at this time, you could adopt a motion of intent along the following lines: If all or part of the former Williams property is ever released for private development or ownership, the District at that time shall reserve an open space easement or other assurances against development with respect to the un- developed portion of the property from Skyline Boulevard to the top of the ridge. Although I wholeheartedly support eventual dedication of at least that portion of the property, I am not recommending this motion because it might set a precedent for other non- dedications and tend to lock the District into premature planning decisions. Recommendations: (1) It is recommended that the property remain in its current undedicated status for the present. The question of dedication will be addressed in Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve use and management plan reviews and in January dedication status reports. If you wish, nonetheless, to pursue dedication or conveyance, staff should do further work and report back on where along the ridge the line should be drawn. (2) Concerning the house, it is recommended that after the previous owner vacates the premises, the building should be secured and a rental of trailer house space be made available until the end of 1980 to provide on-site presence near the structures. R-80-20 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT May 1, 1980 TO: H. Grench, General Manager FROM: S. Sessions, Land Manager SUBJECT: Recommendations for Disposition of the Williams House (Mt. Melville) Discussion: Staff has investigated alternative uses for the unfinished residential structure located on the Williams property (Mt. Melville) and identified in report R-80-10, dated March 10, 1980. The unfinished 700 square foot dome type building is structurally complete, but lacks exterior finish and interior wiring, flooring, wallboard, and fixtures. An unfinished 4-car garage structure is adjacent to the dome. For the purposes of this report, interior and exterior items associated with finish and decor were not considered. In order to complete the dome and garage structures to a level that would permit occupancy, it would be necessary to finish the water, septic and electrical systems and install exterior roofing and siding, as well as interior insulation and drywall. The dome also requires floor completion and cabinets and fixtures installation. The garage requires roofing, rear wall completion, and electrical hookup. Some work would be required on the driveway. Bids were solicited from a contractor to complete the structures . A minimum level of construction to bring the structures up to District standards would require $22, 000, construction to rental standards would require $35,000, and $51,000 would be required to complete the structures to the owner' s original design. If the structure was completed and used as a rental unit, the estimated fair rental value would be $500 per month. Three and a half years would be required to recover the District ' s capitol investment (maintenance and operating costs have not been figured into this report) . There is no valid reason to consider finishing the dome to the level of detail identified in the owner's speci- fications. Various uses and alternatives have been discussed and they include: 1) Ranger residence use, because of the Skyline location and proximity to Windy Hill, Thornewood, and Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve; R-80-20 Page Two 2) Enterprise use of the building for short-term commitment (five years) ; and 3) "No-use" status, which would include boarding up the structures and maintaining the property status quo. There is a liability problem with an unoccupied structure and additional staff/patrol time would be required to insure the integrity of an unoccupied building. In reviewing the alternatives, staff finds that: 1) As a ranger residence, the use of the structure would cost $22, 000 plus some amount for annual maintenance. A ranger resi- dence in this location would be desirable and the amenities on the site would benefit operations by providing a satellite ranger yard for material and equipment storage. 2) A rental residence would require the investment of $35,000 and subsequent rental at $650 per month for 5 years to realize a return on the capitol investment plus operating costs. it should be noted that this approach is not consistent with Board policy on structures, and if the property is to be dedicated and preserved as open space, the commitment to invest in a rental unit may not be desirable. 3) The last option would be to demolish the structures, possibly using material salvage value to trade for demolition costs. This option could be postponed by securing the buildings without occu- pancy. A variation on the above alternative has been offered to the District. The present owner would like to remain in the dome for an additional thirty days until June 30, 1980. Another individual has expressed interest in moving his mobile trailer onto the property and renting trailer space on a month to month basis. This would allow the District to secure the structures and property with minimum cost until a determination is made on the dedication status of the property and until the economic posture of the District is determined following the June election. Whereas the above status quo position does not provide for a positive decision, it does allow additional time to study the alternatives without incurring undesired costs. Recommendation: I would recommend proceeding with the interim approach for a period not to exceed eight months, until approxi- mately December 31, 1980, or if evaluation of other factors would allow for an economically desirable disposition of the structures before December. OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Subprograms A. Planning, Design and Development B. Operation, Maintenance and Volunteer C. Enterprise Activities To Implement The BASIC POLICY OBJECTIVE: The District will follow a land management policy that provides proper care of open space land, allowing public access appropriate to the nature of the land and consistent with eco- logical values. R-80-23 (Meeting 80-9 5/14/80 Agenda Item #3) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT May 7, 1980 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager; S. Sessions, Land Manager; and C. DiGiovanni, Environmental Resource Planner SUBJECT: Proposed Addition to Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, Picchetti Ranch Area (Consigny Property) Introduction: The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has been offered the opportunity to purchase approximately 97 acres of land adjacent to the southern boundary of the Picchetti Ranch Area of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve (see attached map) . Located in an unincorporated area of Santa Clara County, the property adjoins Stevens Creek Park and contains an important trail link. A. Description of the Site. 1. Location and Boundaries. The unincorporated property is located on Stevens Canyon Road within the Sphere of Influence of the City of Cupertino. It is bordered to the north by the Picchetti Ranch Area of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, to the south and west by private property, and to the east by the Santa Clara County Stevens Creek Park. 2. Topography and Natural Resources. This steep hillside parcel contains a canyon formed by a tributary of Stevens Creek and a ridge with elevations to 800 feet above Stevens Canyon Road. Chaparral and oak woodland are the dominant plant communities. 3. Existing Development. Two dirt road/trails are the only development on the 97 acre portion of the property. The seller will retain approximately 50 acres which contains 3 residential structures and a stable/barn area being operated by a concessionaire. 4. Conformity. This acquisition has been found to be in conformity with the Santa Clara County General Plan and with the City of Cupertino General Plan. or MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415) 965-4717 May 6 , 1980 U. S. Forest Service 507 25th Street Ogden, Utah 84401 Dear Sirs : Please send one copy of your publication, "Handbook for Inventorying Downed Woody Material" by J. K. Brown to the above address, Attention: Cynthia DiGiovanni. Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,Nonette G.Hanko,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G Wendin R-80-23 Page Two B. Use and Management Recommendations. 1. Trail easements are included in the acquisition; however, trail routes do not exist. One roadway which services the stable operation could be used by hikers, but the absence of trail connections to adjacent public property creates a restrictive situation. Therefore, since the site currently contains no direct public access, it should remain open to hikers and equestrians who can gain access from the existing portion of the Preserve or from adjacent private property with permission from the owners. Recommendations for trail locations, development, and signing will be considered as part of the Monte Bello/ Picchetti Use and Management Plan review. 2 . Preserve boundary signs should be placed where appropriate. C. Dedication. It is recommended that this site be dedicated as open space land. D. Naming. It is recommended that the property become an addition to the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, Picchetti Ranch Area. E. Terms. The attached purchase agreement outlines the conditions under which the District could acquire approximately 97 acres of a 147 acre holding. The total purchase price of $250,000 includes payment for comprehensive restrictions on the seller' s remaining lands, including right of first refusal, development and density limitations , advisory design review, and public trail easements. The terms of the agreement require a $50,000 advance payment by the District on June 14, 1980 (if escrow doesn 't close by then) , which would be secured by a note and deed of trust on the entire property. The balance would be due and payable at the close of escrow, some time before November 1, 1980. Because the District would acquire only a portion of a larger parcel, a survey is necessary to accurately define the boun- daries. It is estimated that a survey will cost between $10,000 to $20,000 and bids are currently being solicited. Under the agreement, the seller is allowed to divide the remaining property into a maximum of two building sites, and therefore the survey work would be equally beneficial. The agreement further provides for an equal sharing of these costs up to a maximum partici- pation by the District of $10,000. The most recent accounting figures show that the Opportunity Purchases budget category has an approximate $225,000 balance after deducting all the recent land purchases. The New Land Commitments budget category was spent in its entirety for this fiscal year. It is anticipated that only $50 ,000 for this proposed acquisition will be spent this fiscal year, which would leave a $175,000 balance in Uncommitted Land purchase funds for this fiscal year. R-80-23 Page Three Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board adopt the proposed Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to Purchase Real Property, Authorizing Office to Execute Certi- ficate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction - Monte Bello Open Space Preserve - Picchetti Ranch Area (Consigny Property) It is recommended that the Board authorize expenditure of the necessary funds for this purchase from the Opportunity Purchases budget category. It is also recommended that the Board authorize for expenditure of up to $10,000 for the District' s share of the survey costs required as a part of this acquisition. In addition, it is recommended that the Board adopt the use and management recommendations contained within this report, dedicating the property as open space, and adopt "Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, Picchetti Ranch Area" as the official name of the site. AC 11 •r XL jSp 00 54 r 1 nt lb Plcc}2e t i Ranch I reap Ub It i 1 l� \� _ak . r PR O SEAD TI 86 Bella _ �O` ��; .,rolk oe. � ;/�� �' L-•o �� i �`` l4Op= r tY %F ARK ✓Z Saratoga `Gap_. �� >> ,; -� J„ � �,.,--�:StLVehs Creek\ Open,Space�� �' �` ��� „ ,,Count, Parkree � Jr , Presex- to 8 e� SAN ANTONIO^. , ����� �• RANCHO co - -7 1.3 rvNDEViLOPErn W .9 .7 Cupertino_ 1.3 CR L1ix OLE.' ,. Y 1 INE EXHIBIT A - SITE MAP (USGS) � � �!► yRO _ I Wat \ PROSPECT l.> PROPOSED ADDITION �'� �- a n Cm =f TO MOIITE BELLO K:d OPEN SPACE PRESERVE - - J` t� It `44 SARAT�A � � �NT. 4�0� PICCHETTI RANCH AREA � SPACEGAP fN 1 �.e ��► _ �SPACEI p� p 1.6 . --`i`�1. � �i�w.�.aA. CO.P 9O. a �.• ss � .Saratoga 1 1.6 o rat e n 1" = 2000' North ) ';) ' - '„„»Gs '.. 1 ': .;f -�LOQNRY cO APx wE+uN• g �y j pp• � —_xov�T-+vl _�1 Y� - r;�� RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY, AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT, AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION - MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE - PICHETTI RANCH AREA (CONSIGNY PROPERTY) The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve as follows: Section One. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained in the attached purchase agreement between Peter Consigny, et al. and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District dated May 5, 1980, a copy of which is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof, and authorizes the President and appropriate officers to execute the Agreement on behalf of the District. Section Two. The President of the Board or other appropriate officer is authorized to execute a certificate of acceptance to any deed (s) granting title to said property. Section Three. The General Manager of the District shall cause to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the seller. The General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all other documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing of the transaction. Section Four. The General Manager of the District is authorized to expend up to $5, 000 to cover the cost of title insurance, escrow fees, and other miscellaneous costs related to this transaction. AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY By and Between Peter Consigny, a single man and Robert M. Weissberg, a single man, hereinafter called "Seller" , and The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereinafter called "District" . 1. PURCHASED PROPERTY. Seller agrees to sell to District, and District agrees to purchase from Seller, a portion of Seller' s real property located in the County of Santa Clara, State of California; said portion consisting of ninety-seven (97) acres, more or less, and commonly referred to as a portion of Santa Clara County Assessor' s parcel number 351-16-003 (PTN) , and designated parcel one (1) as outlined in red on the map labeled Exhibit "A" as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. PROPERTY RETAINED. District and Seller understand and agree that Seller is retaining Fifty (50) Acres or more of Seller' s property, designated parcels two (2) and three (3) as outlined in green on said Exhibit "A" . 3. EASEMENT OVER RETAINED PROPERTY. District and Seller understand and agree that District shall receive, as a recorded appurtenance to the purchased property, as above mentioned, the following easements over Seller' s retained property: a. An easement 40 feet in width for pedestrain, equestrian and vehicular use over the existing roads as depicted in orange on said Exhibit "A" . b. An easement 40 feet in width for non-motorized trail purposes, limited in scope as follows: the actual trail shall not be more than ten (10) feet in width, with a buffer of fifteen (15) feet on each side which shall be left in a natural condition. The general location of said easement is depicted in brown on said Exhibit "A"; the said trail to be constructed by District in accordance with the objective of the optimum trail alignment, maximum environmental protection and minimum esthetic and ecological harm or disturbance. 4. PURCHASE PRICE: PAYMENT. The total purchase price shall be Two Hundred Fifty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($250, 000.00) payable as outlined in Clause 5 hereinbelow. 5. CLOSE OF ESCROW. District shall pay and Seller shall be entitled to receive Fifty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($50, 000. 00) on Friday, June 14 , 1980, as partial payment toward the full purchase price as mentioned in Clause 4 hereinabove. In the event that escrow has not closed prior to said date, said $50, 000. 00 advance shall be secured by a note and deed of Trust as hereinafter provided. If escrow is not so closed, the balance of said full purchase price shall be paid and escrow closed after the successful completion of the division of Seller' s remaining land as outlined in Clause 12 hereinbelow. In any event this escrow shall close no later than November 1, 1980. In the event escrow has not closed by June 14, 1980, and District pays Seller said $50, 000. 00 advance, as above required, Seller shall give District a promissory note for said $50 , 000 . 00, with interest at the rate of 15% per annum, secured by a Deed of Trust on Seller' s entire property. If escrow closes on or before November 1, 1980, said note and Deed of Trust shall be cancelled, interest shall be forgiven, and District shall be credited with the $50, 000. 00 payable on account of the purchase price. Otherwise the said note and Deed of Trust shall remain in full force and effect and shall be immediately due and payable including accrued interest along with a full refund of District' s share of the survey costs as paid in accordance with Clause 11 hereinbelow plus accrued interest at the rate of 15% per annum. 6. TITLE AND POSSESSION. Title and possession of the subject property shall be conveyed to District at close of escrow by Grant Deed, free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, easements, assessments, restrictions, rights, and conditions of record except: a. Taxes for the fiscal year in which this escrow closes shall be cleared and paid for in the manner required by Section 4986 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. b. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and reservations of record, if any. C. Easements or rights of way over said land for utility or street purposes, if any. 7. COSTS. Seller and District shall share equally (50/50) all escrow, recording and normal title insurance charges incurred in this transaction. Seller shall be responsible for and pay all costs of any reconveyance of Deed of Trust, full release of mortgage or any legal costs or fees incurred in order to deliver marketable title to District. 8. COMMISSIONS . District shall have no obligation to pay any real estate agent' s commission or other related fees in connection with this transaction. 9. LEASES. Seller warrants that there are no oral or written leases or rental agreements on all or any portion of the subject property being purchased by District, or persons lawfully occupying said property, and Seller agrees to hold the District harmless and reimburse District for any and all liability, losses and expenses occasioned by reason of any such lease or rental agreement or occupancy of the property being purchased by District (including but not limited to relocation payments and expenses provided for in Section 7270, et. seq. of the California Government Code. ) 10. RESTRICTION AGREEMENT. Seller agrees to grant and be bound by all of the terms and conditions of a Restriction Agreement with Covenants, in the form attached hereto and designated Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by this reference; which restriction agreement shall be recorded against Seller' s remaining property as described therein, and District agrees to accept said restriction with covenants. It is specifically understood and agreed that the grant of said restriction with covenants is an integral part of the consideration for the sums to be paid to Seller hereunder and that Seller is fully and fairly compensated for the voluntary imposition of said restrictions. The parties on behalf of themselves and their successors and assigns of every nature specifically agree and acknowledge that this paragraph is not, and does not, in any way, constitute a restraint on alienation. 11. SURVEY. District and Seller understand that a survey of all of Seller' s property will be required in order to assure Seller that its remaining land, as outlined in green on attached Exhibit "A" , contains no less than fifty (50) acres in accordance with Clause 2 hereinabove; District agrees to pay one-half (�) , up to a maximum to District of ten thousand and No/100 Dollars ($10, 000. 00) , of all survey costs incurred in mapping and describing the portion of Seller' s property being purchased by District and the remaining lands of Seller as abovementioned. The balance of said survey costs to be paid and satisfied by Seller. 12. DIVISION OF REMAINING LANDS. It is understood that Seller desires to divide its remaining fifty (50) acres into two (2) legal building sites, of approximately twenty-five (25) acres each, subject to the Restriction Agreement as described in Exhibit "B" herein. District shall, prior to the close of escrow, but after completion of the survey referred to in Clause 11 hereinabove, submit a record of survey to the County of Santa Clara for Certificates of Compliance in order to divide the whole of said property into three parcels. If, for any reason, it is not possible for District to obtain Certificates of Compliance to divide said Seller' s remaining property into two parcels as above mentioned, prior to October 1, 1980, any and all responsibility by District to complete said subdivision of Seller' s remaining property shall terminate and escrow shall close in accordance with Clause 5 hereinabove. In the event of the successful land division, as above mentioned, Seller shall be responsible for any and all geological analyses, soils tests, engineering costs, or any and all other costs associated with obtaining building permits for said building sites . 13. ACCEPTANCE. District shall have thirty (30) days from the date of execution hereof by Seller to accept and execute this agreement, and during said period, this contract shall constitute an irrevocable offer by Seller to Enter into a contract with District on the terms and conditions set forth herein, in consideration of which District 4 has paid, and Seller acknowledges receipt of the sum of ten and no/100 dollars ($10 . 00) . This transaction shall close in accordance with Clause 5 hereinabove through an escrow with First American Title Guarantee Company, 675 North First Street, San Jose, California, Escrow Number 1-8154-JP. 14. The provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and bind the respective successors, heirs , and assigns of the parties hereto. MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT: SELLER: APPROVED AS TO FORM 42 Stanley Nort n, District Counsel Peter Consigny Dated- ACCEPTED F RECOMMENDATION: t L. Cra"g' Britton Robert Weissberg Land Alquisition Manager Dated RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: Herbert Grench General Manager APPROVED AND ACCEPTED: By: Barbara Green, President Board of Directors Dated: ATTEST: Clerk of the Board Ac" ,-.�• .-. � �` tiICX -_ter N •� F. .:r_s_ _; . 000 mn Y t 5 �•. - )M- � � j , `` / .w J -ram 1 x 21,E _� - ::� �—_---' ` X - - . s t" )% 3 `� �•4 �tr i -. •..n•- ..^.+.ii.- — — -�. �_ +� `y' it J�' �S:? �` t i� f fir_ 66- �' ..t� ; A� �'+Y. v� 1 � i � '" a .•I^�;�� /r r� � . .TL...-- �- rb �' •sue � �.,�-: -•,. 't'♦•, w_. fir, .y,i .r' `S �s .��.f. .•a. :�_ ,�.rr � - n ... - • 'r �'•r"ter' r"�f� y7�i�f �`'f ;rf F .. ..�.r.. � 3F � :if• K •74ir•5;• �""�'�• _ k ..� �n -r}y-Y :7/ �?Fr V KEY l<i ` RED (PARCEL 1) - PURCHASED PROPERTY �- i, (GREEN PARCELS 2 e 3) - RETAINED PROPERTY SCHN BA ORANGE - - VEHICULAR EASEMENT E X - - - ROW - TRA I 4 A EXEC 1131T Page —I--°f,—I 2 ° � f f } � } / I �d : � � � : y , � � � � . . � % � © � . � � \ . : >y � � >, \ } > . RESTRICTION AGREEMENT WHEREAS, THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, A Public District, hereinafter referred to as "DISTRICT" and PETER CONSIGNY, a single man and ROBERT M. WEISSBERG, a single man hereinafter referred to as "GRANTOR" , have heretofore entered into a purchase agreement, dated May 14, 1980 and WHEREAS, pursuant to which agreement, GRANTOR agrees to convey the portion of GRANTOR'S property described in Exhibit " A" as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, to DISTRICT, Is and WHEREAS, GRANTOR further agrees to restrict GRANTOR'S remaining land, as described in Exhibit "B" as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, as to development density and- subdivision potential as set forth herein, and WHEREAS, GRANTOR further agrees to allow DISTRICT to have the first opportunity to purchase the property described in Exhibit "B" for the benefit of DISTRICT and the land described in Exhibit "A" should GRANTOR ever decide to sell or convey the lands described in Exhibit B ", and WHEREAS, it is now the desire and intention of DISTRICT and GRANTOR that the lands described in Exhibit "B" be made subject to certain limitations, restrictions and convenants for the benefit of DISTRICT, its successors and assigns and the land described in Exhibit "A" . ` EXHIBIT Page t of 10 -2- NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the substantial payment being made to GRANTOR, the public benefit to be derived therefrom, and in order to assure that GRANTOR's remaining property will be developed and maintained in a manner compatible with DISTRICT's maintenance of the conveyed property (Exhibit "A") as park and open space land, it is hereby agreed as follows: 1. The development of GRANTOR's remaining property, as described in Exhibit "B" shall be limited as follows : (a) The one (1) existing main, single family residence may be restored and maintained, or replaced, along with the existing associated outbuildings, including stables, fences and so on; (b) One (1) addition single family residence may be con- structed on the property, along with necessary out- buildings, fences , etc. (c) No building of any nature may be constructed above an elevation of 680 feet, as delineated in red on the map labeled Exhibit "C" as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. (d) Nothing herein shall be deemed a waiver of any govern- ment process required for the securing of a build- ing permit or other permits for the construction, reconstruction, restoration, or maintenance of said single family residences or associated outbuildings, stables, fences, etc. 2. The two (2) remaining existing residential structures (other than GRANTOR' s main residence or the one (1) additional single family residence which may be constructed as above mentioned) on GRANTOR' s remaining land (Exhibit "B") shall be phased out and removed by GRANTOR, subject to the terms of paragraph 3 hereinbelow, in the following manner: EXHIBIT Page of 1 -3- (a) Within 90 days after the Recordation of this re- striction agreement, all unoccupied and/or vacant residential improvements, buildings or structures or other things will promptly be dismantled, or demolished in an environmentally senstive manner, and all construction materials and debris shall be removed by GRANTOR, the area or areas to be left in a neat, clean and safe condition in order to allow the land to return to its natural condition. (b) As and when the remaining residential improvements, buildings, structures or other things are vacated, either voluntarily or at GRANTOR's pleasure, by the present tenants and/or occupants, such residential structures shall also be dismantled or demolished and removed in accordance with the above outlined criteria. Nothing herein shall require GRANTOR to cause or require said improvements to be vacated. (c) It is the intent and the understanding of the parties that GRANTOR shall establish a "no re-rent" policy for the current residential improvements, buildings, structures or other things and that said improvements are to be removed as GRANTOR chooses to require or allow the vacation of said improvements, but within 90 days after vacation, as herein provided. In the event GRANTOR does not remove said residential struc- tures as above prescribed, DISTRICT may at its discre- tion, upon giving notice or making a reasonable attempt to give notice to GRANTOR, enter upon the land and de- molish said structures and bill GRANTOR for DISTRICT's actual costs of demolition and removal. DISTRICT shall, upon recordation of a notice to that effect pursuant to this agreement, have a lien upon GRANTOR' s said land for the recovery of such costs. 3. In the event GRANTOR cannot obtain the necessary building EXHIBIT page 3 of 10 -- --------- -4- permits or other permits required to construct the one (1) additional single family residence (Clause 1 (b) ) , GRANTOR is relieved of any and all obligation to remove the two (2 remaining existing residential structures as outlined in paragraph 2 herein. 4. Before there can be valid sale or transfer of the parcel described in Exhibit "B", GRANTOR, its successors or assigns shall first offer said parcel to DISTRICT, its successors or assigns in the following manner: (a) Upon receipt by GRANTOR or its successors or assigns of a bona fide offer by a third party to purchase or take title to the property (which bona fides shall be subject to verification by DISTRICT) , GRANTOR shall deliver to DISTRICT at its principle place of business, by mail or other appropriate means, a notice in writing, accompanied by a copy of such offer, which shall set forth the price, terms, conditions and date of such Ip offer, and GRANTOR's intention to accept such offer. Within twenty-one (21) days after its receipt thereof, DISTRICT or its successor shall have the prior right to purchase said property at the price and upon the terms and conditions stated in such notice. Such right may be exercised by delivery in writing by mail or other appropriate means to GRANTOR of a notice of exercise of right to purchase. (b) If DISTRICT or its successor notifies GRANTOR that it does not wish to exercise the right of first re- fusal or if the right is not exercised within the twenty-one (21) day period, GRANTOR shall be free to sell the property to such offeror, but only at the price and upon the terms and conditions stated in the afore- mentioned notice and offer, and provided that said sale shall be consumated and escrow closed prior to the lapse EXHIBIT Paso 4 ®f 6 o of ninety (90) days from the date of said offer. A waiver by District of one such opportunity to pur- chase shall not be deemed a waiver of any future right to pur6hase, it being the intent and agreement of the parties that the right of first refusal hereby granted, shall run with the land as hereinafter set forth. (c) In the event DISTRICT or its successors or assigns exercises the right of first refusal as provided here- inabove, GRANTOR or its successors or assigns agrees to deliver the property described in Exhibit "B" vacant of all persons and personal property at the close of escrow and GRANTOR, on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns and on behalf of any tenants or occupants of the premises, hereby specifically waives and releases DISTRICT or its successors from any and all claims, by whatever name known, including, but not limited to claims for relocation benefits and/or payments pursuant to California Government Code Section 7260 and following (or similar law) ; and GRANTOR or its successors or assigns agrees to hold DISTRICT harmless and reimburse DISTRICT for any and all liability, losses and expenses occasioned by reason of any and all of such claims. 5. DISTRICT shall have the right of Design Review as herein defined with respect to any and all improvements proposed to be constructed on the property described in Exhibit "B" . This right shall not pertain to the maintenance or improve- ment of presently existing structures on said property. Design Review is intended to provide a process for review by the DISTRICT of development in environmentally and ecologically sensitive areas in order to assure that develop- ment will be harmonious with other uses in the general Page of 1 t> -6- vicinity and will be compatible with environmental and ecological objectives. (a) With regard to construction of any improvements on the property described in Exhibit "B", an applica- tion fok design review shall be made to the DISTRICT. The application shall include the. following: (1) A site plan showing the location of all proposed buildings, structures, planted or landscaped areas, paved areas, and other improvements , and indicating the proposed uses or activities on the site. (2) Drawings or sketches showing the elevations of all proposed buildings, sufficiently dimensioned to indicate the general scale, height, and bulk of such buildings. (b) Within 30 days from the filing of the application with the DISTRICT, DISTRICT shall review the site plan and drawings, and shall make its recommendations based upon the following objectives : (1) To ensure construction and operation in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites. (2) To ensure that sound principles of environ- mental design and ecological balance shall be observed. The design review provided for herein is advisory only in nature and the owner of the property described in Exhibit "B" shall consider but is free to accept or reject the recommendations of the DISTRICT. 6. IT IS FURTHER AGREED, that this Covenant is made (a) for the benefit of the DISTRICT, its successors or assigns; EXHIBIT Page of 0 -7- (b) for the benefit of the residents of the midpeninsula area in which this property is located; and (c) for the benefit of the lands described in Exhibit "A" . This Covenant is expressly intended by GRANTOR and DISTRICT to run with the land described in Exhibit "B" , to constitute an equitable servitude therein, and shall bind each and every successive owner of said land, or of any interest therein, and shall be enforceable by DISTRICT, its successors and assigns and all parties having any right, title or interest in the land described in Exhibit "A" . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Restriction Agreement this day of 1980. MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, A Public District By President GRANTOR: Peter Consigny Robert M. Weissberg EXHIBIT Page of 16 Exhibit "A" to Restriction Agreement Legal description to be provided after completion of survey. This will be a legal description of Parcel one (as outlined in red) as shown on Exhibit "A" of the purchase ,Agreement. 'k EXHIBIT Exhibit "B" to Restriction Agreement Legal Description to be provided after completion of survey. This will be a legal description of Parcels Two and Three (as outlined in green) as shown on Exhibit "A" of the Purchase Agreement. II w III EXHIBIT Page of (� VEXHIBIT "C" TO 1-7 Ac -. ..� ._• _ =� RESTRICTION AGREEMENT i T �. _ ! `�,� 1'i l' .k r.:':-S_-:j?yM,rJ.t�•� ;ate : ,i �t• .ii44° ® 60 t -. �l fin• ,T � '� r/�� 4p !mot cvs.�R`:1-!�/�' � . � /� � ., :_� i `�;� �r }'•ter sr!";\s"s4�-?tiY �.,�r� - SCH BA f•s I1 1 . PAczCt� 1 �y. Pacne l o of t.b R-80-22 eAA- (Meeting 80-9 a 5/14/80 Agenda Item #4) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT May 6 , 1980 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: S. Sessions, Land Manager, and C. DiGiovanni, Environmental Resource Planner SUBJECT: Review of Use and Management of Planning Area IV (Rancho San Antonio and Foothills Open Space Preserves) Introduction: The Land Management Planning Process incorporates a procedure for monitoring the use and management of District preserves. All use and management plans will be reviewed biennially in detail, and a summary review will be conducted in alternate years. Instead of reviewing all use and management plans at the same detail level each year, reviews will be alternated according to the attached schedule (memorandum M-80-37, dated April 28, 1980) . A. Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Public use of this site has increased tremendously over the past year since Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve has become more widely known through various programs run by the City of Mountain View, the Environmental Volunteers, Nature Explorations, and other groups, as well as through general publicity. The parking problem has become critical since St. Joseph Seminary has eliminated parking on the approach to the Preserve. Santa Clara County has completed its Master Plan for the ad- jacent park and Phase I of the development, scheduled to be completed by the end of August, 1980 , includes: 1) a paved service road from Cristo Rey Drive to Permanente Creek; 2) a gravel service road from Permanente Creek to the St. Joseph Avenue entrance to the Preserve; 3) four 25-car Parking lots located between Cristo Rey Drive and Permanente Creek; and 4) one comfort station near one of the parking lots. R-80-22 Page Two Phase II of the County' s Master Plan proposes development of two parking lots and a picnic area on the District' s Preserve and construction is tentatively scheduled for the summer of 1981. Recommendations regarding this development will be contained in the District' s use and management plan progress report scheduled for April, 1981. When the Phase I parking lots are completed, staff will attempt to redirect the public to Cristo Rey Drive as the vehicular access point to the Preserve. As part of an agreement for mutual assistance with Santa Clara County Parks Department, the District' s ranger staff will patrol the county park until Phase II construction is completed. 1. Completed Projects. a) As recommended in last year' s use and management plan and as approved by the Board, Wildcat Canyon Trail has been closed to equestrians by constructing barriers at both ends of the canyon. Wildcat Canyon trail is utilized as an interpretive trail by the Environmental Volunteers and Nature Explorations. This trail was washed out by heavy winter storms and subsequently rebuilt at a cost of $2 ,000. b) The trail system has been re-signed to incorporate desti- nation points and mileage. c) The equestrian gate, which was installed at Ravensbury Avenue, has been an effective method of allowing neighbors to gain access to the Preserve. However, since the combi- nation lock was stolen several times, it has been replaced by a key-lock which is welded in place. Keys are available at the stables adjacent to the Preserve. 2. Incompleted Projects. a) A bicycle rack will be installed at Deer Hollow Farm by early summer. b) No grazing tenant has been secured for this site. However, the Preserve will continue to be designated as suitable for grazing, and efforts to find an acceptable grazing tenant will continue. c) Approximately $5, 000 will be spent on chain link security fencing and to upgrade the electrical system at the ranger yard before the end of the 1979/80 fiscal year. 3. New Recommendations. a) Because of increased use of the site, a second loop trail should be established. A quarter mile section of trail connecting Rogue Valley Road with the ridge trail would complete the loop shown on the attached map and would be open for equestrian use. Estimated cost is $1200. R-80-20 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT May 1, 1980 TO: H. Grench, General Manager FROM: S. Sessions R-80-22 Page Three A trail route study for the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve area should be prepared to integrate the Preserve trail system with the County Park plan. Included would be recommendations for relocating trails and redesigning trail/stream crossings. b) Office and shop space at the ranger yard should be modified to accommodate present staff needs. Interior walls, parti- tions, ana minor modifications costing about $1,000 would be included. 4. Dedication Status. A total of 512 acres of the Preserve are dedicated and 80 acres are undedicated to allow for possible future adjustments. No change in dedication status is recommended. B. Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve, Windmill Pasture Area Overnight camping in conjunction with Hidden Villa programs was permitted occasionally last summer, but, as planned, all camping has now been discontinued. It is anticipated that the City of Palo Alto will grant a permit for use of the camping area on the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve for the summer of 1980, and this will become the District' s only camp area. The site is regularly patrolled through a contract arrangement which would continue in 1980-81. 1. Projects Completed. The windmill tower has been retained as an historic resource and secured so as to discourage people from climbing it. 2. Incompleted Projects. None. 3. New Projects. Some additional fencing and signs should be installed to dis- courage intrusion by off-road vehicles, along with minor safety repairs to the windmill, at a cost of $500. 00. 4 . Dedication Status. The 430 acre preserve is dedicated. R-80-22 Page Four C. Foothills Open Space Preserve In the 1979 use and management plan review, staff presented the concept of de-emphasizing this Preserve. However, since guide- lines to implement the site emphasis policy have yet to be adopted by the Board, no recommendation concerning the emphasis designation for this site can be made at this time. This site continues to require extra patrol effort because of problems associated with its use, and consideration to de-emphasize should continue. 1. Projects Completed. None. 2. Incompleted Projects. The cabin shell on the former McCulley parcel will be removed by the end of June, 1980. 3. New Projects. Interim recommendation to mitigate current use problems would involve installation of signs and fencing to control parking and decrease off-hour use. 4. Dedication Status. Foothills Open Space Preserve has 170 acres dedicated. The 10 acre McCulley parcel of the Preserve is undedicated and should remain so to allow for boundary adjustments or exchange of property rights . Recommendations: It is recommended that the Board adopt the use and management recommendations contained in this report. It is further recommended that you concur with the new schedule for use and management plan reviews, as described in the attached memorandum (M-80-37) , dated April 28, 1980, from S. Sessions to me. M-80-37 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM April 28, 1980 TO: H. Grench, General Manager FROM: S. Sessions, Land Manager SUB=: Schedule for 1980 Use and Management Plan Review The following schedule reflects proposed reviews of use and management plans by planning areas. The significant change between this year's proposal and last year's review schedule is the types of reviews proposed for 1980. All use and management plans are reviewed biennially in detail, and a summary review is conducted in alternate years. This schedule proposes alternating detail and summary reviews within the year, thereby distributing the staff's workload more evenly. Staff expects to adhere to the proposed schedule; however, it is flexible if changes become necessary. Planning Area MAR APR MAY JUKE JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1 D 2 3 Tbomewood Russian Ridge Los Trancos 4 Rancho San Antonio n Foothills D 5 Saratoga L.,a2 S Picchetti q I I Ion g Ridge 6 FrerLiont. Older D 7 El Sereno & Costonoan Way T) 8 bbnzanita Ridge 9 Baylands 10 Hassler D Note: 1) S = Summary review; D = Detail review 2) Although Monte Bello is part of Planning Area #5, it will not be reviewed this year since the Use and Management Plan is not scheduled to be presented in its final form until August, 1980. 3) LWCF Grants and Budget Preparation during May and June x� .r •r S'• .Y '� �t ,� •.S :� +�V�_'...=�.,r kai:•ti y}' � . i.`j rL•'::•�� ��• `Y�� � 't}••. .. .�1,:::.;•. t1 - �.:.•.•. :. o � �Y} / y j ` �, T �'!�� ' -3 Patrol Road/Hiking/Bicycles / 1 ; 4��� ,� ;;1; lY�7• ::` ', .i•'�{ _ _ --r \�� � —__= Patrol Road/Hiking/Equestrians11 Hiking Trail Only , / ,.� a ter �`- D �/ �%l-'�_f J � / •� ;��'•�� • --...► �� '� ! �,Z ,v � i ;J1 • 3 ---- Hiking and Equestrian Trailto`,r •i - - 1. ^�/.:. 1"=2000' North )���GI=a 'l �� l � 1" ,•'r Esp •� o� , / ~` �6aP�%y. .S• G, ! �Ey�,Ir \V!"_- �( - �.�u'� � � � '-r.. �. • .rn�-� YtivQ���•� �•w •� /PV /�1� j•ti: 1':•c. R\-i , mi V jf)�� �i�lfl(1IIN7),ANY` 14e y �r'� --e��J/ cln���`• H -/ ,.. '„ _ ♦ ` �J �(✓.,♦� L� H yt J 4 _ 11 AIR IX •'�f� � ����j� )L \ ./ ��i�..� iJ`'����r 1� ,4���� ♦ �f � rr•i��� � �- '� _ t'•� r itn° �I T ' \��•� '� ���� ��(11T• .`1 �) ,+.i ✓-=c�� �,�� J��/' s' ♦ �t �� � � R- � Off.-.. ,�� �/,��.� ti�W'- 3-�.1."V/L� ♦ ` ��' )]\ !r� v` _ {► •,r �f I ►•�1V ,<'y`• L� "• O\� •/.• A `� {1•�'. �� �'4�a�:e � � •j\ I ✓ \NJ � /Lj• � '' � Montclair �, ,;•J�� r�_� ?��y'l �`/�/�����--=~_;-^�\..a/'t,i T,\--il����� � J � +'4 �—w'` I 'l sao ♦� i �..,.�• i(t` �Q .1 (• \ �` Sch �� '`' ' r:' � f> 1 / �/, ( 1, .O' ,,\�� `�--'� 'I1/1� II-. _��-- �a,�,— -a--_ �=��- _ Il�e� __ -.\. "Z�•►N ll. �+ l / 11/w! O�l' {,,'1 � y ti� NiC• �,!�► fBG•: DUVENECK WINOP13Ll 1, / �� l ss L .� ts�/ L a ` r PASTURE (AREA ' ti(i ���o t!�� rR�ILool' o .�w v \ h + e JP _ �,.�%. _n �� -�%� \ ,'�J i 11 \��.\ 1 \ ► <� ' IDS oacuh � 1 _ •:xea Mary M tia nary. r - - [°° /�� -� 5� s/'� �c `) , •�� r RA�ICHO`,�AN ANTQN 0.` :E? Z PARK (UNDEVFLOP 'J / a 'v Altos. •�'cm==.�:,," ''e',1q � �_ ",\"� /' �. � -/ / �,� ,.� 2 �Y r`. X` t <, !Foot woony 9 w •:�a V2�@ ��i- \� (. F x�y -' a "" ; �xc•Ivu ��a,�v lei �.\�\ _ i N v, PP600 EXHIBIT A — SITE MAP (USGS) wafer .\( " u Pernianenle . ' r :• J Z� RANCHO SAN ANTONIO CQ1E T''PLANT \1 € ( "gsrfrEwi ;I� >�{�' - � i \ �• "ICe CREEK S EfK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE = xcFVY-! CR �e ( 1 /� [,l •• -� V_ ��'?� �'•4 ' 'pry / 1/11_ �I /1��. ''I`) W •��� � %/ f 4 ,� ' •i..v r1' AJJ (y i {{C}a•fir' / IA;.1 `J rSARAJOOA FV� � :_ i f• tS ` �'/l l y4 ■ ^•�� f /�-/�• �� •\ !Al',-r,Ir.w I,�1.'.lr•,r tiC9f�j.Y111 ytiMD. rl r� �7j(�j�(,,� \.�{ 1. f �` /•_-`�,�` �/ '' I�i `: ,JI' {: � • � J ��'1 '=,x>»,Px .� ,x,x;:� ((II \ fe� �� ! -� ! �,' ����777 a r.G _�„'".-' 1 2000" NORTH ;�� .....�.�...� .:�.i:rm•rrnvn'rnYrnr,rrrn��ry .�-.•rr�•rrrn-.m�rrfttrrrrh�••tii'hr•!h•r���=r•':=lird'=: :1�}h•. r:r 1, i Ibh4':1'.::?ya:4� ':it?':•::'J��'h�,'''::'•'� r�� ..s.r_r„-�.-1 - - -- --'-•.-.,•.•r.�"•�Yrr.- .�:`.•ri':•�•rc•.•.yr'♦ a�:�E...?.T.S=:.??.l'4.T.4..._..........................r.Y:L ... :7:. ... •w_,--=-.f.-=.1....•.....{�d2�x.....�.,•._ _ , . M-80-3 6 AMP (Meeting 80-9 5/14/80 Agenda Item #5) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM May 5, 1980 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager PREPARED BY: S. Sessions, Land Manager SUBJECT: Proposals for Uses of Hassler Health Home Buildings Introduction: At your meeting of April 9, 1980, you directed staff to solicit written proposals for possible recreational uses for the Hassler Health Home buildings (refer to memorandum M-80-31, dated April 9, 1980) . In accordance with the Board approved proposal process, District staff distributed press releases to local papers and sent requests for written proposals to local public agencies, special interest groups, members of the Hassler assessment district, and the homeowners' association representing residences adjacent to the Hassler complex. Discussion: As of Friday, May 2, 1980, the deadline for proposal inquiries, one proposal had been received. The Golden Gate Council of the American Youth Hostels expressed an interest in three of the Hassler buildings for possible hostel use (see attached correspondence) . A representative of American Youth Hostels will be present at the May 28, 1980 Public Hearing to present their proposal. One verbal inquiry was received by staff; however, a follow-up proposal was not received. The next procedural step is for the Board of Directors to conduct a Public Hearing to review possible recreational uses of the Hassler buildings. That hearing is scheduled for your Regular Meeting of May 28, 1980. 36 Berenda Way Portola Valley, Ca. 94025 April 3, 1980 Mr. Steve Sessions MROSD Los Altos, Ca. 94022 Dear Steve, I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to see the Hassler property again on Tuesday. While I cannot speak for the full Board of Directors of the American Youth Hostels Golden Gate Council, I feel that there is a real possibility that the two lower dormitory buildings could be used for a hostel in the future. The doctor's house and the duplex also seem like potential*y useful buildings in a future hostel set-up. I would like to arrange with you for another tour for our architect and hostel development director at your convenience. If your schedule per- mits, they would prefer to wait until the rush of completing the San Francisco Hostel is over, probably in another month. Mr. Alfred Lanier, of Lanier, Sherrill and Morrison, 660 Mission, San Francisco, is .the architect, and Mr. Mark Ahalt, AYH Offic, Bldg. 240, Fort Mason, San Francisco, is the Hostel Development Director. Both can be contacted at 771-4646. Trail and bus connections to the Hassler site are quite feasible and of course, the car access is very convenient. When the time comes for discussing hostel usage more fully, I would like to show you the trail conpections that I mentioned the other day. Sincerely, {Jean Rusmore A AMERICAN YOUTH HOSTELS, INC. Golden Gate Council g ,�+ Building 240,Fort Mason San Francisco,CA 94123 (415) 771-4646 April 25, 1980 Mr. Steve Sessions Mid-Peninsula Open Space District Los Altos, CA 94022 Dear Steve: On Tuesday, April 23, 1980, the Board of Directors of the Golden Gate Council of American Youth Hostels met and included in their discussion the possibility of exploring use of the Hassler property for a chartered Hostel facility. As a result of this discussion, I was instructed to contact your office to arrange for a formal hostel site evaluation and facility critique. I am prepared to conduct this evaluation as soon as possible so that we may take the necessary steps before your meeting scheduled for May 28, 1980. I spoke with Cynthia of your office and was to be contacted when their was a time available for site visits . I have received copies of Jean Rushmore' s letter to you of April 3, 1980 and am writing merely to concern our interest and inten- tions to pursue the possibilities that exist with regard to the Hassler Health Home on behalf of the Board of Directors . I look forward to meeting with you or Cynthia when we conduct a site visit . Sincerely, American Youth Hostels, Inc-Golden Gate Council i Mark w. Ahalt Hostel Development Mangger Copy: Jean Rushmore M-80-38 (Meeting 80-9 5/14/80 Agenda Item #6) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM May 7, 1980 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager PREPARED BY: S. Sessions, Land Manager SUBJECT: Follow-Up on Patrol of Windy Hill Introduction: At your meeting of March 12, 1980, you reviewed memorandum M-80-26, dated March 6, 1980, and a letter from Robert Augsburger of the Peninsula Open Space Trust (P.O.S.T. ) regarding the management and patrol of Windy Hill. You approved a recommendation authorizing patrol of Windy Hill with authority to enforce certain District ordinances, and directed staff to meet with Mr. Augsburger to define conditions of the licensed agreement involving public access and liability. Discussion: Staff met with Mr. Augsburger and discussed the following: 1) Public access will be allowed on the Windy Hill site. P.O.S.T. would like to have the District lease the Spring Ridge rest area to insure proper management of the rest area and to pro- vide a formal public access point. The District could con- struct a hiking stile and install use and regulation signs. P.O.S.T. would like to discourage public access south of Hamm' s Gulch because of sensitive vegetation, hazards, and rights hts of the inholdin s and could place appropriate signs in the area of Hamm' s Gulch to identify the limits of the public areas. However, the District would not cite trespassers. 2) The previously presented exclusions from the District ordi- nances are still valid, except that P.O.S .T. would like to discourage hang gliders from using the property. 3) The District will patrol the Windy Hill site; however, the District will be held harmless from any liabilities arising from public usage and/or activities. Conclusion: An agreement will be prepared for your consideration between P.O.S.T. and the District more precisely identifying the geographical limits and enforcement emphasis of patrol activities, providing for a management lease of the Spring Ridge rest area, and indemnifying the District from any liability. C-80-8 May 14, 1980 Meeting 80-9 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT C L A I M S T Amount Name Description , 968 $ 58.52 Western Surveying Instrument Company Field Equipment 969 3.07 Peninsula Blueprint Service Blueprints 970 100.00 Valley Title Company Preliminary Reports 971 1,800.00 Rogers, Vizzard & Tallett Legal Services 972 7.00 Campus Report Annual Subscription Renewal 973 19.00 Meredith Sun Newspapers Subscription Renewal 974 800.00 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative Services - April 975 267.66 Best Products Company, Inc. Field Supplies 976 35.59 Norney's Office Supplies 977 521.16 Carolyn Caddes Photographs 978 6.39 Katherine Duffy Printing 979 225.92 Flame-Fire & Land Management Enterprises Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Fire Plan - Publication 980 300.00 Susan Cretekos Patrol Service - Windmill Pasture 981 3.62 Keeble & Shuchat Photography Film Processing 982 21.59 Cynthia DiGiovanni Mileage Claire 983 465.00 Fischer Land Surveying Field Surveying - Hassler 984 700.69 First American Title Guaranty Company Escrow & Title Fees 985 61.02 Bay Microfilm, Inc. Office Supplies 986 29.80 Mission Blueprint & Supply Company Blueprints 987 90.01 Kragen Auto Supply Company Vehicle Maintenance f Revised C-80-8 May 14, 1980 Meeting 80-9 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT C L A I M S r Amount Name Description 968 $ 58.52 Western Surveying Instrument Cry yield Equipment' 969 3.07 Peninsula Blueprint Service Blueprints 970 100.00 Valley Title Company Preliminary Reports 971 1,800.00 Rogers, Vizzard & Tallett Legal Services 972 7.00 Campus Report Annual Subscription Renewal 973 19.00 Meredith Sun Newspapers Subscription Renewal 974 800.00 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative Services - April 975 267..66 Best Products Company, Inc. Field Supplies 976 35.59 Norney's Office Supplies 977 521.16 Carolyn Caddes Photographs 978 43.95 Katherine Duffy Printing, Phone Chgs.., :Supplies 9 225.92 Flame-Fire & Land Management Enterprises Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Fire Plan - Publication 980 300.00 Susan Cretekos Patrol Service - Windmill Pasture 981 3.62 Keeble & Shuchat Photography Film Processing 982 21.59 Cynthia DiGiovanni. Private Vehicle Expense 983 465.00 Fischer Land Surveying Field Surveying - Hassler 984 700.69 First American Title Guaranty Ccripany Escrow & Title Fees 985 61.02- Bay Microfilm, Inc. Office Supplies 986 29.80 Mission Blueprint & Supply Company Blueprints 987 90.01 Kragen Auto Supply CaTpany Vehicle Maintenance 988 10.00 Charlotte MacDonald Seminar 989 77.52 Bill Upson Private Vehicle Expense 990 9.57 Action Photo Service Photo Service 991 250,000.00 First American Title Guaranty Company New Land Expenditure-Consigny 992 67.80 Rancho Hardware & Garden Supply Field Supplies 993 88.41 The Dark Room Film Processing 994 61.71 Steven D. Sessions Private Vehicle Expense y r 416.65 The Hub Schneiders, Inc. Ranger Uniforms t a 39 0.60 Orchard Supply & Hardware Field Supplies 997 76.14 Hubbard & Johnson Site Maintenance 998 149.87 Los Altos Stationers Office Supplies • Page Two May 14, 1980 C-80-8 Amount Name Description '► $ 66.13 Pat Starrett Personal Vehicle Expense 10U0 74.88 San Jose fury Classified - Rental Units & Bookkeeper 1001 550.00 Foss & Associates Professional Services - April 1002 242.50 Los Altos Garbage Carpany Garbage Service 1002 23.21 Dennis Danielson Text Books for E.M.T. Recerti- fication 1003 35.57 ZZZ Sanitation Company Portable Toilets-Los Trancos 1004 19.15 John Escobar Ranger Uniform 1005 105.29 Dorn's Safety Service District Vehicle Expense 1006 211.83 REI Co-op Ranger Uniforms 1007 176.00 Communications Research Company Radio Equipment Maintenance 1008 33.17. Emergency Vehicle Equipment Service District Vehicle Expense. 1009 174.00 Honeywell Protection Services Burglar Alarm System 101.0 200.00 U.S. Postmaster Newsletter Mailing Postage 1011 650.00 Kathy Blackburn . Contract Services/April 1980 1012 163.00 Peninsula Times Tribune Classified Ads - Accountant and Secretary l J-3599.06 Pacific Telephone Telephone Charges 14 823.01 Xerox Corporation Maintenance Agreement & Usage - March & April. 1015 206.12 Scribner Graphics Topography and layout- Basic Policy 1016 - �245.44 Valley Title Ccapany Title Insurance and Escrow Fee- Collins. 1017 8.40 Victor/California Field Supplies 1018 528.00 State Compensation & Insurance Fund Deposit Premium 1019 66.88- Herbert Grench Meal Conference; Out of town Business Expenses 1020 439.89 Ginny Mickelson Graphic Design, Newsletter 1021 273.86 P. G. & E. Electricity - Sites 1022 10.00 Wendy Lieber District Vehicle Expense 1023 13.74 City of Palo Alto Utilities Utilities 1024 62.16 Minton's Lumber, & Supply Field Supplies 1025 212.14 California Water Service Water Service 4/01/80-5/01/80 1026 33.00 B & H Equipment Company Equipment Rental T7 34.08 David Sanguinetti Reimbursement for Uniform Expense I. s 8.63 Foster Bros. Security Systems, Inc. Key Duplicates 1029 81.51 Alvord and Ferguson Ranger Uniforms Page Three May 14, 1980 C-80-8 r Amount Name Description -A0 484.06 Valley Title Conpany Title Insurance & Escrow Fee u#:lton) 1031 511.50 Olsten Temporary Services Tenorary Secretary 1032 406.25 Elizabeth Poore Scott Interest Pay ent - El Sereno 1033 172.53 Petty Cash Slide Library, Postage, Meal- Conferences, Office Supplies, Printing, Subscription, and Miscellaneous Ezcpenses. PHILIP D. MORTENSEN April 26, 1980 Director Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 375 Distel Circle Los Altos, Calif. Dear Sir: The people in charge of maintaining the loop trail at St. Joseph's college do a terrific job - after the extensive damage from the rains they built new bridges and had the trail open in just a few weeks. There is, however, something more that needs to be done. There is a section of the loop trail on which there is almost always some kind of a snake. This is the part at the end of the creek where the trail turns sharply to the right and rises up the hillside with a southerly exposure. This is a kind of a Monte Carlo for snakes, where they bask in the sun. I think of it as Snake Alley. The trail is at its narrowest here where the danger is the greatest, and the tall grass alongside the trail overhangs and covers up much of the trail. The snakes lie in the grass, and one must pass within six inches of them to get by. Twice in the last month I almost stepped on a rattlesnake. Utmost care there is not enough. I 'm too apprehensive now to want to use that trail again, but there are few convenient alternatives. The trail is heavily traveled. I wish to suggest a remedy to this problem: 1. Cut the tall grass alongside the trail immediately. 2. Widen the trail. I believe it is only a matter of time until a person is struck or a horseman thrown if something is not done. Very truly yours, 200 E.Dona St.#87 • Mountain View,CA 94041 (415)961-0623 Philip Mortensen EMU I 0 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415) 965-4717 May 7, 1980 Mr. Philip D. Mortensen 200 E. Dana Street - #87 Mountain View, CA 94041 Dear Mr. Mortensen: Having received your letter concerning the loop trail at the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve and enjoyed the;'i'ehclosed cartoon, I want to thank you for bringing your concerns to our attention. We are aware of the "snake" problem, and as a part of our annual maintenance program which takes place at this time of year, narrow trails are widened, grasses are trimmed, and snake "caution" signs are installed. The District rangers have been made aware of your concern about this particular section of the loop trail and will attempt to mitigate the problem. Thank you again. Sincerely, SteveRaS ess o s Land Manager SDS:jc Herbert A.Grench,Generai Manager Board of Directors.,Katherine Dutty,Barbara Green,Nonette G Hanko,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendm May 2, 1980 To: The Staff of-"tAe Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, The local equestrians, who use the Rancho San Antonio Park, are unsure of the reasons for the closure of thC- quarter mile section of the Wild Cat Loop Trail., We would also 111,nee to know the reasons iihy, equestrians are not allowed to ride on thee trails at the entrance of the park by- Saint Xoseph,"s and the trail via the Mori, Drive entrance. Could you please state these reasons on paper and return by- mail. Thank You Very Much For Your Attention To This I'la-t-ter. Sincerely, Janet Kingsley 1� mow,see ...+.'vim MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE 0-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415) 965-4717 May 9, 1980 Ms. Janet Kingsley 779 Mora Drive Los Altos, CA 94022 Dear Ms. Kingsley: I am writing in response to your letter of May 2, 1980 requesting an explanation of the restrictions on equestrian use of the trails at the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve. The Board of Directors adopted the recommendation to close Wildcat Canyon Trail to horses as part of the use and management plan for the Rancho San Antonio Preserve in 1979. The trail was completed in 1978 and opened to horses on a trial basis. After more than a year of use, it became apparent that the trail should be closed to horses because of environmental and safety hazard concerns. As you know, the trail is located in a fragile creek corridor and during the winter months, the horses were damaging the trail surface. The trail is intended to be an interpretive trail which affords visitors an intimate woodland experience. The narrow trail surface cannot accomodate hikers, joggers, and equestrians all at the same time. A continually increasing number of joggers use the trail, and as a horseback rider, you must be aware of the dangerous situation that occurs when a jogger meets an equestrian head on around a blind corner. The new hiking stiles used on the Preserve are designed to facilitate access by the physically limited. It is anticipated that Wildcat Canyon Trail will be used by the De Anza College program for the physically limited. These visitors cannot quickly get out of the way of a trotting horse, and a wheelchair and a horse cannot pass each other in many places on the narrow trail. Horses are restricted to the back or western portion of the Preserve mainly for safety reasons because of the vehicular traffic on the roads at the St. Joseph Avenue entrance. Four equestrian access points to the Preserve have been provided, I I Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy.Barbara Green,Nonette G Hanko,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G Wendin Page Two as shown on the attached map, from the residential area where horse-owners live, the nearby High Meadow stables, and adjacent properties which have been historically used by equestrians. Equestrians have been excluded from using the Mora Drive entrance because this entrance is in a wide open grassland where a barrier could not be placed to keep equestrians from continuing on down to the restricted front portion of the Preserve. However, since you have expressed an interest in using this entrance, we will install a gate for this purpose within the next month and keys will be available by deposit at the High Meadow stables. This privilege will be extended to you and other neighbors with the understanding that the trail to the right immediately beyond the gate is the route to be used. If that privilege is abused, the gate access will be removed. As shown on the attached map, a new loop trail will be established with the construction of a small section of trail connecting the Rogue Valley Road with the Ridge Road. This loop will be open to equestrians. I hope I have sufficiently explained the reasoning behind the trail designations at Rancho San Antonio and that you will continue to enjoy using the trails. Sincerely, eve Dions Land Manager SDS:jc KA/SER CEMEN T KAISER CEMENT CORPORATION, PERMANENTE PLANT, PERMANENTE, CALIFORNIA 95014 TELEPHONE (408) 996-4190 (TWX)910 /366 - 7232 April 28, 1980 Steven D. Sessions Land Manager Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1 Los Altos, CA 94022 Dear Mr. Sessions: I appreciate the concern of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District over our revegetation plans. I feel Ms. Anita Jessie was remiss in not advising you that action had been taken, see attached letter from A and J Shooter. Please find attached our present seed mix, which I hope you will find satisfactory. The Landscaper and myself have spent considerable time consulting with various experts on the best method of revegetating the Quarry Area. Ms. Anita Jessie's comments have been considered in the plan. I hope this letter will alleviate the concerns of the board. When the areas in question are vegetated I hope you will be able to visit them. Yours very truly, KAISER CEMENT CORPORATION E. S. Baumgartne Quarry Superintendent attch. ESB/ac Anna SHOOTER t� and Associates LANDSCAPE CONWACTORS 1129 Huff Avenue- Mountain View, California Q4343-State License#335641 - (415) 965-3550 January ')I , 19,'S0 Kaiser Cement S Gypsum Corporation Attn: Mr. Paul Deutschman Permanence Cement Plant Perinianente, California 0,5014 Re: Quarry Revegetation Program for Erosion Control Kaiser Permanente Plant Dear Mr. Deutschman: We are replying, in part, to Anita-Jesse's letter of December 19, 1979 criticizing the efforts of revegetating the quarry cuts and, in t, L_ general, the plant material used in an attempt to revive erosion control on the slopes at the above referenced site. As you are well aware, the original program was outlined in a Landscape Rehabilitation and Ridgeline Study by Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey in November of 1972. To the best of our ability, we had fol- lowed the recommendations of the plant materials with minor exception. However, we soon found that the deer in the area liked the plants as well as Royston's firm did, destroying most of them and giving us very poor results. In an attempt to get the hills green and find plants more resistant to drought and deer, we contacted Soil & Plant Labora- tory. Their- recommendations were based on what they felt would grow given the present problems. Our last hydromulch seeding, program basi- cally followed their recommendations. However, following the receipt of Ms. Jesse's letter, we contacted Mr. Barry Coate of the Saratoga Horticultural Foundation as a consultant. On January 1�), 1980, Jim Butts of our organization and Mr. Coate visited the site and discussed the problems. Mr. Coate's reactions (copy en- closed) were more or less in agreement with Ms. Jesse's criticisms and recommendations. As we have to repair the washed out slopes in the very near future, we will follow the recommendations of Barry Coate's letter as nearly as is feasible with such short notice. As to the recommen- dations of plant material, we intend to meet with Mr. Coate for further consultation and outline a more permanent program as soon as time per- mits. If t you have any questions after reading Mr. Coate's letter, please call me. on equal opportunity employer ..h.. "�wwww■��■■■■■■PI■uw��M■ f� x AandJ SHOOTER and Associates LANDSCAK CONTRACTORS 1129 Huff Avenue. Mountain View, California 94043.State License*335641 • (415) 965-3550 Mr. Paul Deutschman Page 2 January 31 , 1980 If the native plants suggested by Mr. Coate do progress without being eaten by deer, we will have to invite Ms. Jesse to the site in a few years to let her know that her time and efforts were not wasted. Sincerely yours, A J SHOOTER & ASSOCIATES, J n J. Shoo er President brs cd: Mr. Edwin S. _Baumgartner, Kaiser Ms. Anita Jesse, California Native Plant Society Mr. Barry D. Coate, Saratoga Horticultural Foundation -County of Santa Clara on equal opportunity employer 11F- 7 AandJ SHOOTER "`- and Associates LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS 1129 Huff Avenue • Mountain View, California 94043 • State License#335641 • (415) 965-3550 May 2, 1980 Kaiser Cement Corporation Attn: Mr. Edwin S. Baumgartner Permanente Cement Plant Permanente, California 95014 Re: Hydroseed )fixture Dear Ed: Per your request, the following is the hydroseed mixture we pro- pose for your approval: Adenostema fasciculatum Baccharis pilularis consanguinea Eriodictyon californicum Lupinus, picked on site This seed mixture is as recommended by Barry Coate in his letter of January 19, 1980. We propose to use this mixture on the areas re- quiring repair due to excessive erosion. Please advise me if this meets with your approval, and we will proceed with collecting the seeds. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely yours, A & J SHOOTER & ASSOCIATES � r f James E. Butts � Corporate Secretarv/CFO JGeneral Superintendent brs fr an equal opportunity employer Similar letters also sent to: .1► Senator Dills i Senator Garcia Assemblyman Naylor MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 May 8 , 1980 The Honorable Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr, State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Governor Brown: On behalf of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, I want to thank you for signing SB 1550. This act will enable this District and the County of San Mateo to proceed with the acquisition of the surplus State college site at Redwood City from the State. Present and future generations will benefit immeasurably from the park and open space land which is being preserved. Sincerely yours, gm"4-c . All-� Barbara Green President Board of Directors BG:jg cc : MROSD Board of Directors Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,Nonette G.Hanko,Richard S.Bishop.Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin - i MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 April 28, 1980 The Honorable Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Governor Brown: Senate Bill 1550 has been passed by both houses and is being sent to you. This bill was introduced as clean-up legislation so that the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and the County of San Mateo could complete purchase of the surplus State college site at Redwood City. You had previously signed legislation authorizing this market value sale for park purposes, but a snag developed because of the way the language was written regarding the State' s retention of mineral rights. The problem endangered both a federal grant, which had been approved to help fund the purchase, as well as the appraised value of the property. The problem was resolved with the Department of General Services, and necessary mineral rights will be retained, but the clean-up bill is needed to complete the transaction. We respectfully request your approval of SB 1550. Sincerely yours, Herbert Grench, General Manager cc MROSD Board of Directors Doc Mattison, Director, San Mateo County, Department of Parks and Recreation i MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 April 24, 1980 Honorable Nicholas C. Petris State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Senator Petris: I understand that SB 1969 regarding directors' compensation, which you are carrying for the East Bay Regional Park District, was amended in committee to delete the provisions regarding benefits. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is interested in having the medical and dental plans which are available to District employees also available to Board members but at Board member expense in lieu of salary. In this case, the overall compensation in terms of salary plus benefits would still not exceed the currently allowed maximum salary. Therefore, we would respectfully request that the following R language be inserted after the word "month" in line 12 of page 2 of the March 12, 1980 original version of the bill to replace the deleted amendment.- The board may provide by ordinance or resolution that each of its members may join any medical or dental plan available to permanent employees of the district, prov- vided that the monthly cost of such benefits for each participating board member is deducted from the monthly compensation of such board member. If you have any questions, please contact me or Bob Beckus, who will follow up on this matter for us. Thank you for your con- sideration. Sincerely, ,� / Herbert Grench General Manager cc: MROSD Board of Directors R. Trudeau G. Tate, Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District P. Joske, Marin County Open Space District K. Finney, Senate Natural Resources and Wildlife Committee R. Beckus Herbert A Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,Nonette G.Hanko,Richard S Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G Wendin