HomeMy Public PortalAbout19810422 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 81-11 t' '-Ang 81-11
ea-,w, rt ok+t)o,+
++v Qooae met4iAj MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
DjVtXAV,,ra75 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
dk,*A i n4utct- 94,0 r1CA-4 Open
III sl�.%C_+ i S el,rA Regular Meeting
WEbj3r:-SpAq ptell a_ ,, JC(g Board of Directors
7. A G E N D A
April ,,?-3, 1981 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos , California
(7 : 30) ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 8 and 11, 1981
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(7 :45) 1. Proposed Lease of a Portion of the Picchetti Ranch Area
of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve -
a) Picchetti winery Committee Report - K. Duffy, N. Hanko,
and R. Bishop
b) Staff Report - S. Sessions
(9 :00) 2 . Addendum to the Thornewood Proposal Parameters - E. Shelley,
H. Turner, and D. Wendin
NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(9 : 30) 3. Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan
for the Black Mountain and Page Mill Road Areas - S. Sessions
OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(10 : 00) 4 . Issues and Questions From Site Emphasis and Program
Evaluation Workshops - Ranger Ride-Along Program - R. Bishop
(10 : 30) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
CLAIMS
CLOSED SESSION - Land Negotiations and Personnel Matters
ADJOURNMENT
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. Tle
request that you complete the forms provided so your name
and address can be accurateZy incZuded in the minutes.
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.Werdin
Y '-.ing 81-11
orc
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
Regular Meeting
Board of Directors
A G E N D A
April 25, 1981 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos , California
(7 : 30) ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - April 8 and 11, 1981
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(7 :45) 1. Proposed Lease of a Portion of the Picchetti Ranch Area
of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
a) Picchetti Winery Committee Report - K. Duffy, N. Hanko,
and R. Bishop
b) Staff Report - S. Sessions
(9 :00) 2 . Addendum to the Thornewood Proposal Parameters - E. Shelley,
H. Turner, and D. Wendin
NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(9 : 30) 3. Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan
for the Black Mountain and Page Mill Road Areas - S. Sessions
OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(10 : 00) 4 . Issues and Questions From Site Emphasis and Program
Evaluation Workshops - Ranger Ride-Along Program - R. Bishop
(10 : 30) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
CLAIMS
CLOSED SESSION - Land Negotiations and Personnel Matters
ADJOURNMENT
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.
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
Meeting 81-10
April 11, 1981
'Ally
Wtoe",
,*�=9 nc
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
Special Meeting
Board of Directors
M I N_ U T E S
April 1T,_198T
I. ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 9 :10 A.M.
Members Present: K. Duffy, D. Wendin, N. Hanko, B. Green,and E. Shelley
Members Absent: R. Bishop and H. Turner.
AYH Members Present: Bartley Deamer, Bert Schwarzchild, Artemas
Ginzton, John Frankel, Libby Lucas , Barbara Coppock, Bob Coppock,
Miriam Schaefter, and Jean Rusmore.
Personnel Present : H. Grench, S. Sessions, M. Gundert
Others Present:'9 Ellie Huggins (P.O.S.T. )
II. DISTRICT PRESENTATION
S. Sessions presented' an overview of District goals and identified
various preserves. Questions were asked concerning the distance
between preserves and preserve access and trail routes (i.e. from
Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve to Monte Bello Open Space
Preserve) .
III. AMERICAN YOUTH HOSTELS PRESENTATION
B. Schwarzchild, B. Deamer, and A. Ginzton presented an overview
of hostelling and discussed the following concepts :
1. "Gateway Hostels" - an attempt to develop a chain, such as a
coastal chain.
2. Loops of hostels and trails - a loop connection to Santa Cruz
or Pescadero.
American Youth Hostels representatives reviewed hostel criteria
relating to:
1. hostel facility with a house parent
2 . compensation and management costs of hostels
3. feasible size, such as a 30 bed facility
4 . location of hostels near centers of activity, such as trailheads
American Youth Hostels representatives explained that hostels are
bases of exploration, and not limited to international visitors .
They said that any member of the public may use a hostel pass ,
and that AYH was actively seeking local use.
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
Meeting 81-10 Page two
They discussed hostel needs as related to District sites. They
noted their interest is concentrated in the area south of Page
Mill Road and Skyline.
IV. GENERAL DISCUSSION
Discussion centered around the best staging areas , proposed
circulation routes, the differences between hiking and bicycling
needs, ideal distances between hostels, and necessary amenities.
District staff was asked to prepare an inventory of property and
buildings owned and managed by the District.
D. Wendin stated that he felt AYH representatives had to plan
ideal hostel locations rather than focusing on existing buildings
the District owned, since the District or other agency may
acquire more buildings.
V. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 12 :00 noon.
An informal tour of Los Trancos, Monte Bello., Russian Ridge ,
Windy Hill, and Thornewood was conducted for the benefit of
several Board members of American Youth Hostels.
Steven Sessions
Mary Gundert
V
'All
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-11,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
NOTICE OF MEETING
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION COMMITTEE
April 22 , 1981
1 :00 P.M.
375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos, CA
There will be a meeting of the Public Notification Committee
of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 1 :00 P.M.
on Wednesday, April 22 , 1981 at 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1,
Los Altos. The purpose of the meeting is to review the Board' s
. current procedures relating land use planning notification and
to discuss possible notification changes .
Herbert A Grench,General Manager
Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,NonetteG.Hanko.RichardS.Bishop,EdwardG.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G,Wendin
All ,J.
1
0
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
Notice of Meetings
of
Budget Committee
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos, CA
There will be meetings of the Budget Committee of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 375 Distel
Circle, Suite D-1, Los Altos, California at 12 : 00 Noon
on the follcw� ing dates: Monday, April 20 and Tuesdays,
April 28, May 5, 12, and 19, 1981 for the purpose of
discussing preparation of the budget for the 1981-1982
fiscal year. These meetings are subject to cancellation.
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
Written Communication
Meetina -' -ll
April 2 1981
.PV ILI. as y J. cRUwno2s
36 OF-u-nJa CWay
<-Do¢EoLa (VaIIsy, bog 94025
�L
v w j L �
1
r 'Cow
R-81-15
(Meeting 81-11
April 22, 1981)
A 1 5
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Picchetti Winery Committee (R. Bishop, K. Duffy, N. Hanko)
SUBJECT: Picchetti Lease Proposals
Background: Since the acquisition of the Picchetti property in 1977 ,
the District has pursued the goals of restoring the historic buildings
on the property and improving public access to the 5 acre historic
building complex and the 195 acres of contiguous open space. It has
been the opinion of the District' s Board of Directors and staff that
these goals could best be achieved with the help of private "concession-
aire" funding which would allow for a use compatible to both the open
space character of the land and the neighborhood. Implementation of
this concept has been plagued by a number of problems, including the
financial uncertainties of Proposition 13 and Proposition 9, and the
failure to secure a successful lessee from a prior search for lease
proposals.
In July 1980, a new Board committee was formed, and lease parameters
were established by the Board in August, 1980. Following extensive
advertising, site tours, and numerous discussions with staff, seven
proposals were submitted to the District in December. In January, 1981,
the Committee was instructed by the Board to "review and evaluate lease
proposals" and to "return with findings" to the full Board.
Access: District policy has been to allow as much public use of the site
as possible considering the difficult safety and security problems arising
from the dilapidated condition of the buildin5s and the lack of ade-
quate parking. However, pending resolution of these problems, use of
the preserve has not been encouraged through publicity or signing. In
the historic area, the yellow house has been partially repaired and
is presently used as a ranger residence which has been helpful in
inhibiting vandalism. Since acquisition, a separate entrance and small
parking area has been developed adjacent to the historic area. Access
to this parking area and the historic area has been allowed by group
permit only. Permits have been issued to art and historical associa-
tions, wine clubs, the Sierra Club, the League of Women Voters and
other interested groups. District Docents have also conducted histori-
cal tours. Until restoration is complete, some permit restriction will
continue to be necessary. Access to the 195 acres of open space at
Picchetti does not require a permit except for group use of the parking
area.
R-81-15 Page 2
Previous use and management plans for the site called for development
of a separate trail approach to give access to the Picchetti open space
from Stevens Creek. This planned access has been poorly implemented
for a number of valid reasons, including storm damage and a low staff
priority. This access is now open and usable, as is the pedestrian
access allowed from Monte Bello Road through the gate leading to the
parking area and adjacent trails. During the summers, the City of
Cupertino runs a day camp program.
Public Comment: Critical comments by members of the public were made
at several Picchetti Winery Committee meetings, including a special
meeting at Monte Bello School. The criticisms are summarized as
follows:
1) MROSD' s lack of responsibility in caring for the historical
buildings.
2) MROSD' s perceived "closed to the public" policy at Picchetti.
3) Commercial, money-making use of public property.
4) MROSD' s lack of concern for the impact on the neighborhood,
especially traffic and the possible attraction of "undesirable
elements" to the Ridge.
The Committee also received a petition, signed by 55 individuals, which
was forwarded to the Board. This petition requested that restoration
of the property be undertaken by the District without outside funding.
It should be noted that very little public comment was received re-
garding the merits of the individual proposals.
Lease Concept: It is the opinion of the Committee that the Board should
continue to pursue the Picchetti Winery lease concept under current
District guidelines. Because of the high costs to the District of
restoring and maintaining the historical complex (an expenditure not
in keeping with the original concept of the District as a land acqui-
sition agency) , we believe a lease agreement provides the best method
of preserving the historic buildings, and, at the same time, provides
responsible public access to the site. The advantages of a lease con-
cept are reviewed as follows:
1) Restores the historical structures with little cost to the
District.
2) Improves and enhances public access to both the historic area
and the open space area by providing parking, restrooms,
trail connections, historical displays and regularly estab-
lished open hours.
3) Restores the vitality and traditional use to the area, as
opposed to having a lifeless historical building complex
with a memorial plaque, by providing the public with oppor-
tunities to see winemaking and agricultural processes and
machinery in use.
4) Aids security and maintenance for the complex by providing
a continuing and caring presence on the site. Provides re-
sources for continued maintenance
R-81-15 Page 3
5) Encourages agricultural use of 20-40 acres of open space in
accord with District policy.
6) Provides a potential for future revenue to the District.
7) Generates public interest in the site which could be tapped
for financial support and volunteer efforts for the continued
preservation, museum development, and docent programs.
Specific Proposals: Following advertisement for lease proposals under
the Board approved "parameters" , seven proposals were received. Two
proposers dropped out early and after the initial presentations to the
Committee, two more proposals were withdrawn. In addition, there was
an interesting verbal presentation suggesting development of a full-
fledged ethnic cultural center on the site; however, there was no
follow-up proposal outlining funding or implementation for this concept,
other than the implication that the District should do it.
Although the guiding parameters left the area' s use open to creative
ideas, all of the proposals called for the operation of a winery
in one degree or another. In this respect it should be noted that
winemaking at the level proposed is a very low intensity industry with
most activity occuring sporadically during the six week harvest and
crush season. Other impacts, including the expected increased public
use of the open space, result from wine tasting and other group events
and from agricultural use.
The remaining three proposers, Frederick Peterson, Ronald and Rolayne
Stortz, and Louis Rorden, provided more detailed information and were
interviewed in depth concerning finances, cost analysis, proposed
operation, restoration, public access and personal references at two
Committee meetings. Each proposer' s presentation included statements
regarding financial organization, site management, historic renovation,
viticulture, and winemaking, and all had excellent references.
In addition, two Committee members visited the current Peterson (Mt.
Eden) and Stortz (Sunrise) winery operations and had further discussions
with Mr. Rorden.
The Committee was pleased to have three excellent proposals, which made
having to make a single Committee recommendation a difficult decision.
All three proposals met the District' s parameters and all proposers
appeared very capable of carrying out their plans.
The Committee wishes to thank all the proposers for their time, thought,
and effort, and for their patience through the procedure.
The parameters and summary of the proposals are appended to this report.
Recommendation: After review of all the proposal information, both
tangible and intangible, the Committee felt all proposals could be
acceptable to the District. As our unanimous first choice, we recommend
the Stortz proposal. Without wishing to take away any credit from the
R-81-15 Page 4
other proposals, some high points of the Stortz proposal are as
follows:
1) Family on-site residence - lived-in homestead concept.
2) Solid management and financial experience.
3) Winery and vineyard development on a moderate, realistic
scale.
4) Keen interest in historical restoration with past experience.
5) An excellent understanding of District policies and expecta-
tions.
6) Our belief that Ronald and Rolayne Stortz will be considerate
and responsible neighbors to the residents of Monte Bello and
to the District.
We recommend that the Board direct staff to negotiate a lease agree-
ment with Ronald and Rolayne Stortz and return to the Board with the
results by the second meeting in June 1981.
The Committee members agree to offer their time to consult with staff
and the Stortzes as necessary during the lease negotiations.
Page five
A BRIEF SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS
Peterson Stortz Borden
All--restoration of winery, fermentation shed, barn, garage, homestead, yellow house
All--to the required degree
All--experienced consultants in architecture and restoration
Rapid construction First priority winery, shed 5 year program with
and house. Basic work by winery and shed first
fall 1982. Complete by priority.
fall 1983.
Museum
All--initial restoration with future development help from historical groups, community
colleges, NROSD docents, etc. Enthusiastic personal interest.
Initial funding Initial restoration Restoration expertise
In garage Barn location from menbership, (In Barn?)
Public Access
All--development of parking, picnic, restrooms, trail connections.
All--daily access to parking and open space.
All--limitations on access to historic area.
Open weekends 2 days/week(Wed. & Sat.) When members present.
& by appointment. As required.
Perhaps tasting. Perhaps tasting. Educational & recreational
use of ballroom 20 days/yr.
All--District directed tours and special events OK
All--some limitation during construction and pressing times.
All--attractive fencing and signing to indicate open hours.
USE EFFECTS ON LEASEHOLD AREA
All--experienced in winen-aking.
Commercial winery annercial winery. Hone winemakers cooperative
with up to 500 members.
All--initial importation of grapes, starting small and slowly growing to maximum.
All--even at maximum vineyard development, some grape importation.
Maximum Size
16-20,000 cases 10-12,000 cases 5 cases
(150-300T grapes= 6 trucks) 50 tons
**In the previous proposals, Rakish = 8000 cases, Baker - 10-12,000 cases, Ridge Winery
production is $25,000.
Facilities
All--only necessary exterior construction as required; ramps at winery building which
can be textured and colored to soften appearance. (No outside tanks or permanent
equipment as with the Baker proposal.)
Bottling in barn Portable bottler Bottling on site by
Restaurant proposal brought in and membership.
withdrawn. bottling on site
Page three
house on the site ig available for the establishoont
of a resident caretaker. If it is deemed feasible,
staff will establish a resident caretaker on the site.
overall Recommendations: Adopt the recommendations con-
thinod withinn—th--iis—le-p—ort and direct staff to develop a
draft use and mina_ ment plan by April 1976.
Page six
Peterson Stortz Rorden
Tasting and Sales
Law-key tasting Keep small Membership tasting events.
(by appointment?) 2 invitational tastings/yr. No sales of wine. Sales
No sales center limited by available parking of juice for on- or off -
Expanded tastings and sales site winemaking.
off site.
Traffic and Parking
6-8 weeks intensive crush 6-8 weeks 6-8 weeks by members
during weekdays some weekends weekends
All--as discussvO, eLl- kznad i-naKLrtnt park-Lng Ln the area designated providing UP to
20 parking spaces for public use.
No planned maximum events A moderate series of 20 maximum events/year
events/year
"Ridge Winery - Saturday tastinqs are offered and attract 50-100 cars)
Water, Septic, fencing, all code requirements
All--as required.
Recreational Program
All--no problem with continuation of the Cupertino outdoor recreation program.
Trails
All--trail system will be developed from parking, skirting winery and through or around
vineyards. Deer fencing necessary at vineyards.
All--expect participation from the District in policing and maintenance of trails and
open space.
Development of pond area
as destination.
Vineyards
Would develop 20 acres first; measure Slow 6 year growth to 50A
80 acres success in 4-6 years - with membership labor
then more possible , up Test different varieties.
to 40 acres Consultation & encourage
experimental program
w/UC Davis: and/or
community colleges
MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT
All--maintain historical area, parking, and picnic area.
Budgeted item Set up maintenance fund Continuing member support
and labor.
Dwelling
Manager (winemaker) Stortz family residence Continued Ranger or care-
on-site residence (2 small children) taker residence
Experience in historical
ham restoration
Private area necessary.
Scheduled interior tours OK
L
Page seven
Peterson Stortz Rorden
Gardens and Orchard
Encourage CC hands-on Historical redevelopment Fruit growing test area
programs in gardens, of gardens and trees nears
orchards and vineyard house.
Working ranch concept.
FINANCES
Financing
All--have great confidence in the ability to raise the necessary funds, particularly
because of the great interest in winemaking and historical building. Possible
financial benefits associated with historical rehabilitation.
Develop limited partnership. Moving Sunrise to this site. Non-profit corporation.
Raise $1.3-2 million for (Sunrise a Limited Partner- Dues and labor from
total restoration and ship) membership, growing to
winery development. Personal funds. 500 in 5 years. Income
(Experienced consultant Moving toward additional through sales of juice,
limited partner investors. rental of equipwient and
firm) (Experienced as a CPA) storage, leasing of ball-
room.
(Excellent management
experience)
Profit Sharing
Based on value of lease Related to on-site sales Large, flexible pool of
as against financial (intends off-site expansion labor for improvement
input. To be negotiated as backup to lease) .Details projects. Future income.
(10% withdrawn) to be negotiated.
M-75-132
(Meeting 75-19 ,
Agenda item No. 2)
NIMPLNINSULA REGIO,"�AL PARK DISURICT
MEMORANDUM
September 4 , 1975
TO: 11. Grench, General Manager
FROM: J. Olson, Land Manager
SUBJECT: Interim Site Use and Management Recommendations
Attached are interim recommendations for use and management of
Black Mountain Open Space Preserve and Perrii;-itiente Creek Park.
These recoimnendations are consistent with tho planning pro-
cedures adopted by the Board of Directors at the July 23 ,
1975 meeting.
These recommendations are intended to be in effect until
long range use and management plans are developed. Draft
long range plans will be available for Black Moun'Cain Op,,_�n
Space Preserve and for Permanente Creek Park by April 1976 .
JO: jg
Stesc Sessions, Lend Mann"'Or
L>
i.;,jto.pc�ninsula Reggional Open S.-,):.%C0 District
37_5 Dist0l Circle, Suite D-1
. 1,0.-; t..I-Los, CA 94022
IT2:-
lie: PROPOSAL FOR RE"-c;T0RATI0N1T1 OF PIC01 1,TI >'t11'101Y RANCH
This proposal outlines the restoration cf the PIcchot-'U Vinery Ri--ich,
cDIly and functioi-11Y, as a PrOl"rtive vineyard and Vit,CrY We envision
a public tdnemzikinr, museum and instruction in basico,-nolo.-Y fox- the h07
Part, Of this restor 1g�>
et.ion. In the loner term wa propose that all Irt'L-. the
steepest a5
slopes ol.' the available orchard jima vineyard ztraa be converted -to vinr.y-
including;(frith nology DopzxtToni of U.C. Dw.,',-s)
elth the coop!:-.ration of the 00 rticularlY suited to the
plz-ratings of uncolt!mon varieties that should ba p,-i
-and that all of the surviving Structures 1,-13.1 be reslo-cocl as nearly as
to their original designs. At meturity, the project will bz-co-m.a -riot 0-rily S�:-Iff-
sufficient but -t producer of revenue and net income fro:.., the sale Of vi'Xic'a-
grapes, recreation and instruction aces and, if Winery bz):i:lin,, is rein E;` i—e
,-Z,aC- Of -V,-LnE-.
The business org�.mization proposal is a cooperative, probably incorparz,:t::�, ,tiinch '
will raise funds for material purchase t11rOujh _-,aLC of Shwres Z)',cL _L
o l.ig -juire Of each shanroholo.e-r in a p
through the re, d part.Lc.L .'L..
t!j(. pacl.*Lcipating s!i;jrr_'hc)a.dr_r;_; will b-:!
work day-s per year. In return, t, L, .
cro, "ti) at co:�t,
purc. m z!A, PJ.cch0%1
obtain vdne ercrPOS (inclu-,ling, jjaFccx vjt:cietics not —
and to use the winery's equipment under the instruction of t h
L� er;.J.5Lvc approach to bon:'..
Sta-Ef. Vjhile, it may soon unorthcNA A OX, this type 0j.-, coop
L> - usoft quite by the fo`_'
vine,makin- has b;-,on
r.zt_-,y years. Ve bE!l-le-je Vic cx1ce-o", to b.: Viable ;1:t -Llhe le-.!el. roquirc-K). fo-!7
Propose,-1 operation on the ba!-;Is of OUX Oj.,-ti experience. Vc Further.
—1 Y talent:: :ror
participants a:ttracventureto this vent" 11 tbe 11CCOS
111 include restoration and development. This. can ba aidedby its
ective Invitations issueft to those already ImOl"I -to 'the
;1 �r en frill ncc-2-!Ss:xi!y L1>',r_2:.
The restoration and development of Pied"I.-tti VlincrY Ple I
C> -,�
a nwtLb--r of years. The folloldl-llf,' P19asO a-re c su'Te'stC_1:
pl-,,-tse I - Initiza plw-ming including. clet-lilu'l ass:;-1-Sment Of Cost and 04,bra.
required, establishment of a budgrej. zal(I -i;lination of Ve mos,
_.e, zmc 11
I en.
PAvantagcous forn, for the o-q�;zrni7.ation as a taX
Initial organiza recruit
:a includin.- recru ., zurd or,,,Gnization oLf- - t, I
Pants establishment of boold,:00-pil1r.> Pnl 01�10-c and ap.L�)JLcaliorl fo:c
tore.t_
L, 6V -ti es the functionzal -
On the basis of t)jc:s� initiz�_l ac-LA2 .
of the winery irill follow ifil:fIckliattoly. This vdll I'lecez;s:fIxily inclide resto-cZa.'i n- of
C(Illi 1)7
the wzcter System and -the repair or -iisition of h vil e7t,",
ass d t', --.:L n,:,
Winery by for c _'LsLan �,C� " ne
Phase :ff - Use Of 1�11C- V -1 �jcnt Orcilzcr tY, wine
pl,-111-ting _x! ,JL
of portions of the PI-e
-,j -ties in .dth U.C. Davis.
La
including certain exporim-ental vaL
Complete historic- j-os-Loration of 1.Anw3r.
Bogill-n-ing res-tora,:'t"'Lul of old 11c),nes-Le'd.
L> repair of ba-rn, pre ;sln-
pmft othc,r buildings.
Offcring Of AslinLgs L>
Phase ITJ Complete historic.1-estoratlon Qf 61d holx_;c ancl
—Conlinn-ing conversion of orcha-ml to proauc'dve
of public WK."Nities Suen it-, tolICIS, Pzt:-_-;'i!-4-' and
TZ C-:,!Ic sites.
- CommercizLI vrine yroauction.
It vill be' noted thaI this pica sad approach to restoration of PICCI-Ctli
�'0 0-!
;-;.:-.ch allov.s for public access; to -LIA's historic site at a very early LL-1`
through offering vine tw,;-Ung anAd v-.Inc:aaking instruction. Once: is
c=.cnitiml- are in. place, of course, vide public acecss could be nore aval aCle Cn a
rczular basis.
The general aim presented in this propo__,_!3. is to restore o u-Inr_-,malkir-
:;_qction of the p1bencAti Vinery Ranch. A Whas'A ;,_T_);.roach v pem'it
G buildings. The cooperaIlve ortr"
through a6tivc Pwr't-iC.-q):-CGi*Oil in the c:
and rs-L-Iora.4t 4ir, vroc:-:!s�se�
�:_s :ell as providing a' m comurti-ty cducivtional. re.';ourca.
flany of the of the pr0:'pnSa_t re-.111ire cicttiilli
rc-c.aret, ba'L C or-0 Lhr:y cwn
be fully clarified. How(wer, ve scwlk the I!oai.-;I's of our ba:�Ikc
wid hop^ to have the oppor s tunity to purzuc these in aroater d'o p"'h.
The viidarsigned., uliose blo'--aphical skelehes -re attache'al, would serve z!!,
r-rincipals in -the ProPo'_.'d organi7,11:Uon.
r
Lol'is It.
341 1j. Da vie-.-r, Simn� -ale,
ath X 1Iax
PONALI) AT'-'D
L
SAN JMY
Szjjir1,;1 Cpjj�/., 9.30'JO
2 2 G
(40%Bb)
i�zovember 14, 1980 -
ilist.ori.c Renovation
- The house .and the Winery Building viill. be restored to their
origtinal, appcaxance- Primary attention will be placed on
-itf - I - JI ii res 5f
the exterior. Replaceri-.c; will be made viitl Xtu _ - 0
t1le period w1nere possible. It is understood that so-me
concess-ions may be, needed to con: oral to the I - CIs Of t
Winery operation and to ri,,.cet code requircment_*.
- porti
-ol-Is of the: w.i.nery would be set up to depict UK!
operational technique.s, and reguleir public. acre s
"liCL witb 0J.:)0rations occur�,.
v.,oula be provided. where no com.
iu-rent would
ne feasiDil.ity of operating original wine.-y equ I-
be explorecl an6i at sp.jail q, ty -i
-;ine might be
I.-ladc using the
The home ' s restoration would include, developing the garCions
to onlizince the overall impression of the buildings and
grounds.
Phe homed cad would be preserved and cleaned up.
I.0 other buildings would require aMiLio-lal." co, sidcration,but-it .3.s hope-ful that the' barn and blacl-Ism.itlibu:i.l.ding
could be saved.
Jmy ou-IL.-Side v:orh required to return the W-i Y)OKY to o;ac:����
N..,ould be plamied so as 'lot to ciji the C vc -On
of a
i-zoefern operation- As a produccl2-- of red
aging in small oak coopc-,�raqc, vie feel that tbo. Lipp� arance
of the restored viinnry can be ii,,ucln IiRe it VNAs i.Iithe past
Lease,'I'lol-0, Area
-,e intend t' this proposal covers t1he 5, ))',u or minus,jIlL I jj,,t t ,
acres including buildings and the c>'IZj,stjj-jg purling area -
v,e would also, its a In*i.nil-inim, want to have tl-)(:,- azisting
vineyards under this lease.
Steve Sessions,
pi--gc
1,1oveiii1icr 14, 1980
As a secondary step we would dcve-I.qp 'a feasibility stL,.(Iy
related to the 100, plus or minus, acres of po:,;siblc vincyetrd
lzmd. if feasible, the property would be plant-ed by an
investmont group who would sell. the grapes to the v7-incry.. .
The district miglit share in the proceeds-
Ptiblic Access
We would proppse -Lbat public access be Iii-iii1C.od to recjiila:
hours, on 2 days of the weeR. Porba)?�; Vlednc-sclay and SiLurday.
ITTIC: propol,'-ty also would he ap'-m by appointil-'Crit-
tours of the -wincry property would be avail.ablc . ACcC.:-.';s to
the home, would be -provided on a very lii-aitc-d basis .
Amcnitins
Parking arca ; and rcsL rooms are inc-ludcd ii-I our tbinIzing;
however, x-.,c would I.Jmit the parking t as a worhio insure that: the
OVCrilll ill!,13r0r�;Si011 of LIK' P)7o,,?- -ty'would be retained -
Pemirs
We would vant tho loa-(e to I),-- for 25 :h) c)J-' the
finzmcial and I-loode(I .
N-'70111(1 be to 'Lir..
0
ubor. Prov on s
TIC. hayc' co-nt-acted the Sianta. Clara Valley Wiyie Growers
AFsociation and feel. tliat -Ljic-,y voluld agree- to iir-'sis't wit-11
the clove lopi'tion t of a irtuscui,i program that woul.d work
conjunction v--ith tbeir proposed SouLli Com-1-IL-T
As mcm.bors, of the Wine Ins Litute ve jvci acccss to
bistorical information re'slarcling
Steve Sessions
4
vovcwb^r 14, 19£t0
Vie are t•)1.l l.inq to explore provisions -whiCi1 r-AC;]li:
revenue to t.hY• di.sta: ct an the future_ '�'i1u ho1_�li.n_g of a funtz
raising activ:Uy, perbap ; wine tall--inn, in
part going to t,1e district Iuight be appr_opriato.
t;(-. trust t}Iat we have covered the prig:=:ry areas of concern_ in tl1is;
p]rU��O_`�i2 �_. V'e 1:C_C:O_�ntlG thilt: t�1C'2 C' �lrC.• Tiklny deta-i-Is tO �� '_ col'L'rod
and are looking forward to working out. the
This prope):ty rep''c=;cants a rarr opportu»ity for us both ae;
livinU cnvirbi-imentt and as a busi.ness site. Ile are- very hop:`tll.
that the Boarel .ill. act favorably to-:;ard c:lr propc)sal.
Itespectfttlly
RoC i lld Stor l".z
r
��ol_c1y11.�` Sfortz
t
• j
��vii•JL•�..:-�l �•�'.J;t�_E.%�tnt �I•i�5_'F�i�-� l'_`•t�✓dT ��,�;n��=:ts'. R/v�`'v�:•'�`�-a
Sunrise Winery
by Ronald Stortz, General Partner
• - r
Submitted by Fredericlit C-
22020 1-!;:- Edc:ll ita
Sarat-o-In California 95070
I-7,e propose to restore the Plcch2ttl VlMrY P,:nc' to "13
ecollom.1c,ally viable u-Ir-a- zy vinaya-rd- -This vjIll b.rt dung in 0, -
di;- ---,s anA ed--K-at loiial
with. a program to establisa histol
practices III
,rand: lifeal
Clara Valley foothills A OuA-,d the
2
The proposed -.71nary 0-.Irl VIJWeVlrd OPeratiOl' 41nd t" 0' r r e'-tor c
historical buildings vouldbe
-ajjjtajj-,e(j o,>ercd by a privately
corporation set. up w?'ecif-Ically for thzsz' Purpo-100. 11-- Ope--a-1--lo:� is
desils-r--i; to bc a rcvenui�t pl.oduc--1111- Its xevcilue�; w.07,tly
L
fron, sales of 'Brie PyOlduced -t tl-,e frtni prer-11%.1-ol V,11710-a)l
-m,-a vor It. - Ics will 1)' e
grown in the
from sale of froit and Produce Exot-1 the appro dmltely. ten.,acre
fa revenues p%:ocjuccd by
devxnistra ion/tect *L fire) -C�-nd eve'l
a sunll yet, ejcc,fjiit: restm!ratit -olv`ea volild b;,- on the
first floor Of, the, Maf)' house-
A i-Ane-2-Y a-Mro suc!-' a3 c"'j be cstEjo"I N'J
grzaper, for th? J-,
lzanch , 13,-:Od"lc,- a qua;-1-t-Ity 0),
of thm:..,alr) of
quantities of wide coulcl be produced Ln a the si-:a Of th E! ex
Picchettle Vir ry If 012 were Properly.
i
k• lit s toi:i c• ion
Tiertso�t:x!�ly accux ate historic will he o:% III
St}:uCtll;.Cf3 So 1"e:lc'"si)f.i itwt@da S�):k.!C+:.11rt?S Plc:):1ed iOZ' �E'.iiabilitil�it� i::Cll:
the w:i}lexy, Pressing hour;e, blactcs?nith s.io2, one barn and the o:. i&i: .-il
h..-, --;!st cad house. 7n the case of the vliiar and.press Ir.- house Vlia iw_-cr:1 1
i
i rehabilitation cannot by tO.L11j h3r ;or_Cill�v cCGtir< iC th,_� rt,cui,n_S a
vl
for a funiz,k.LC)tl't 113 X.,In 'ry inc u("t, lli.C+'J: � C i i s.i::,. o
.i i. G i:C�..el-l: L�Q:J,- ;.,-L� •:\..z•�ti�..c�'..
clect~.rica'l1. .Arli,3 nn i plt!-loin-, ct c-, th i.:.,,,1 1,11 •C:i 2•?i' i'•:l t available il) t<:n
I n te ZFiC.)t1 r.• rflZ a >t:.:t:l1Ct;.13 .C., 110:3c:l7C.2: can bc^
their hi:lto)Ac con:."troct:ion. Th. black's, th Si Ck) i:'.u:lllt to
P:zblic P.Cc:e:ss and our i;ltmition is to have It Furbis:herJ ;:it=lz fo::C,: a-_-A bl,c:c--
M111th tooln and utilise Volunt-cer, smlth3 t0 Crilxi: -C) t',E!
Public on wee"Ct'nds-
the a}:Iui17 !l it;a:r�;;tCEttt l:oit:ie, �1:'.C:tttsc of its. 2.CiV :�C^:t stage'_ D�:
t't,!i Cr O1c' C)t"1 +:t)J''St4 r Ci`il:)Ji >:' t..' • ,,it '_Q
i ti 'p' a...._.} t
inte):nal pi��l t c accef'r j. ` • c4. 'tn �.f- 'n i r_ f tt ' .:2
t •> >..a..,a .` ):[ti Q.i�'. to St;.) t_'?.�;t t7 i1 t..t ,..•.l «.1(L ilea. C:.[i_,�� �.
to i:S lo;, ttLa .i f':t' 1' used
S:lt)�;- roo:,_7 t..o be fQ:.
allC?J the public to view into t?l S[ •xC30fi ;
In all crFse.S ve vAll Clor;el.y with thC county I'•lild?%1� i:t_'j)E:_%C=:
li)1 a:s' C i rl`? to {rs.�;%1 rC <:p l i c—tOLAC'_ CC�u'':i ;:n:C t:?,• ilil.:i t l:;S� CC'C
SUH-4 clently
2- l.eZsaliold Area
tt •'. }'CC�l1C'St thatlE'il:iCilt)lCt acre :'ate,
the cxl ti)1g vlvay4ivd and the 1.00 - c�c:c, rr(,tj th�!t 2?llI be p!14 into v3rej'3;:c:a
It is our incontrion OVLr a 4 yeor p£`ri0it to t>?ant af; C'.1C{t land to V_!n.a a-z-c:J
3.s poi�Jible•
•
3- PLIblIC t.C(
to th'. V.1-jou,; hintoric bu'I(:i.-i3!; trill
-
public acc�'sf; will be limit;., to n-)
public holidays, but ors the operation estabils"""d it
vo-ald b�-! open to the public will e;:j)zw.-:!- The bnlldings v*:ticla %,;'-Il
hp-vc: public access will be tha winery (,, ajso;-j p�-rci*-t1ij-) , blac?'::;mlth
shop, ho—o-stead hous&, and a barn/st,:ble- Public C.cCCS3 .thrOu 1C,
hold tire* to the trail system will be maintained and
4- krnanities
The enfst5.ng Parking area will be f;jIgIltly exonr0ed atl bl�ick;:o2pJu�
Rest row fcicilitiett adjaicent to the tri, vill-ba built :in!j
-M:�In- 0112- trail
re-aintained for the Use of thepublic Ut
Trv.51 coj)-,j.:tctjo1-j3 to the various tz.ziZs will b,-- P-YOVIO,-d' thonrgh t1tv--y
rn%;-'It ba xe-:Outcd r-ronnel. the central 0-C t i 0-n 0,{ 11 a 1,1 1 C� C 0
to rillow for greater pl'Iblic sal'-Cty durin,7' vlxlFry nud
to n;:Ov!de fo:-- easier: s,!C.'Irx*t:v S�O:: On
PARAMETERS FOR PICCHETTI RANCH PROPOSALS
The District's goal is to preserve the complex as a unique example
of turn-of-the-century ranch life in the Santa Clara Valley foot-
hills which has survived virtually intact. It is important that
continued public access be provided for open space use. Proposals
would be evaluated as to the extent that they meet the specific
requirements and desirable characteristics listed below.
Specific Requirements for Proposals
1. Historic Renovation
A. Rehabilitation of the historic area must be to a reasonably
historically accurate degree.
B. Buildings to be preserved must be reconditioned to a safe
condition to allow for public access to the area. The winery
building is the most important building to be restored.
C. All restoration activities and subsequent operations would
be subject to all applicable health, safety, building, and
zoning codes, and the lessee would be required to meet these
codes.
2. Leasehold Area
A. The minimum area to be considered would be some 40+ acres,
including the buildings and existing parking area. An
additional area could include an existing vineyard, some
60- acres for possible vineyard land or compatible agricultural
use, or any additional part of the site could be considered.
3. Public Access
Public access is to be provided for as:
A. Public access, perhaps limited, to the historic area (not
necessarily within the buildings) .
B. Public access through the leasehold area to accommodate the
trail system of the Open Space Preserve.
4 . Amenities
Parking areas and rest rooms required for public use of the
leasehold area must be available for the public using the rest
of the Open Space Preserve. Provisions for trail connections
through the leasehold area to the Preserve are to be included.
5. Financial
Proposal must contain provisions for the restoration, development,
maintenance, and operation of the leasehold area without District
expenditure. (The District would make applications for appropri-
ate State and federal grant funds to assist the restoration project. )
6. Terms
The lease would have a maximum term of 25 years.
Desirable Characteristics for Proposals
-
1. Permitted Uses
A. Historic area be used for a wine-related purpose or other
purpose in keeping with the historic uses of this site.
B. Provision for a display type of museum within the historic
area, utilizing District furnished artifacts.
C. Conversion of the existing orchard area to a vineyard or
other agricultural use compatible with the historic nature
of the site.
D. A revenue-producing operation with return tc . the District,
such as wine making and sales or agriculture.
E. Development and operations to accommodate recreation ana
day camp programs by outside groups.
2. Maintenance and operations
Maintenance and operation of an area greater than the minimum
leasehold area without District involvement. However , above
requirements for public access still apply.
3. Amenities
Amenities such as parking areas, restrooms, rest areas , and
trails.
Adopted by Board of Directors
Midpenil*lsula Regional Open Space District
August 27, 1980
M-81-44
(Meeting 81-11
April 25, 1981)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
April 16, 1981
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY : S. Sessions , Land Manager
SUBJECT: Picchetti Winery Lease Proposals
Discussion: The Picchetti Winery Committee has been assisted by
staff during the evaluation process of the Picchetti Winery
lease proposals . Although staff is not making a recommendation
for a specific proposal, staff is , in response to a request
from the Picchetti Winery Committee, providing the following
information for your consideration. Specifically, staff was
asked to address the following questions :
1) What impact would the Stortz proposal have on site use
and circulation at Picchetti, and are there any constraints
that must be taken into consideration?
The Stortz lease proposal, which is being recommended by the
Committee for Board approval , does offer, in staff's opinion,
a moderate approach to the restoration and use of the Picchetti
site that would not significantly alter the current land use
characteristics of the site. Specific impacts relating to
site use and circulation would have to be addressed when the
building restoration plans have been completed. However,
it appears at this time that the Stortz proposal would
provide adequate general public parking and trail access
to allow members of the public to use and enjoy the site, even
if they have no interest in the winery operation.
Impacts relating to future use and Williamson Act restrictions
would have to be addressed as a part of the restroation
process , and this particular concern is addressed later in
the memorandum.
2) What approach should be taken to negotiate the lease?
Staff should be authorized to negotiate a lease with the
successful Board-selected proposer. Lease negotiations should
require less staff time than previous lease negotiations since
lease material can be resurrected from the files and revised
as necessary for current lease negotiations . Staff feels
that it would take approximately two months to negotiate
a lease.
M-81-44 Page Two
Because of the expressed public concerns about access and
use of the site, staff feels that the annual review of the
Use and Management Plan for Picchetti, scheduled for August, 1981,
should be advanced to coincide with the lease negotiations.
This would allow staff to interface with the proposer and
the public to insure that all concerns are addressed. At
least one neighborhood meeting, including a a possible on-site
meeting, would be part of the planning process.
It is recommended that the existing Committee not be disbanded yet.
Although staff does not expect to need the Committee during
negotiations, something might arise where Committee inter-
pretation of Board policy or further recommendations to the
Board would be helpful.
3) After a lease has been negotiated, how should the restoration
project be monitored?
Staff suggests the establishment of a oversight committee
after the lease is approved by the Board to review and comment
on the restoration plans . Such a committee could be composed
of two Board members . Staff would support the committee.
Resource people could be added in an advisory capacity as
needed. These resource people could include, for example,
a member of the Picchetti family, a historical society
representative, and an agricultural or architectural con-
sultant.
Recommendation: It is recommended that, if you decide to
proceed with the lease, you do the following:
(1) Direct staff to negotiate a lease with the selected
proposer and return to the Board with the recommended
lease;
(2) Ask the existing Picchetti Winery Committee to be available
to staff during lease negotiations if needed;
(3) Agree that the use and management planning should be done
concurrently with lease negotiations ; and
(4) Disband the existing committee, when you approve a lease,
and appoint a two Director oversight committee.
R-81-14
(Meeting 81-11
April 22 , 1981)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
April 17 , 1981
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Thornewood Proposal Evaluation Committee (E. Shelley, H. Turner,
D. Wendin)
SUBJECT: Addendum to the Thornewood Proposal Parameters
The attached addendum to the Thornewood parameters has been reviewed
with the active proposers at a Thornewood Committee meeting held
on April 15 , 1981. Their comments at that meeting resulted in
some changes to the original draft addendum and the proposers
and/or members of the public may make additional comments at the
April 22 , 1981 Board meeting. A key aspect of the addendum is
the "C" list of excluded improvements.
The addendum further defines the lease parameters and presents a
schedule for proposal submittal. The Committee hopes to complete
its evaluation process and be able to make a recommendation by
June 10 , 1981 to the Board of Directors .
Recommendation: The Committee recommends that the Board of
Directors formally approve the attached addendum.
Addendum the Thornewood Proposal . ameters
(Proposers ' Instructions)
Each proposer is requested to develop a "best and final" offer for
presentation to the District for the restoration of the Thornewood
property.
Each proposal shall include reconstruction of the Thornewood house,
and some restoration of the grounds to a minimum level as indicated
in the original proposal parameters and as specifically presented
by the attached list "A" . Additional improvements and/or resto-
ration beyond list "A" will be allowed, including but not limited
to, list "B" . However, items given on list "C" shall not be allowed.
The District will retain site and design review privileges over any
proposed design and location.
The District believes that the lease has value, depending on the
extent and nature of the restoration. A Thornewood proposers ' form
T-1 is attached as a guide for your own computations. Each proposer
shall submit as part of his proposal an offer of upfront cash or
equivalent, but not less than zero. In addition, a proposer may
propose terms for payment of this amount.
Each proposer shall also submit as part of his proposal a buyout
formula for his investment based on the A and B lists , plus any
upfront cash, in the event that the District has to buy out the
lease at a future date. The buyout formula shall include an
amortization schedule, which may be less than 25 years.
Proposers shall submit their best and final proposals, including the
required addendum information in two parts, each submitted in a
separate sealed envelope :
A. Best and final proposal narrative, including items from lists
A and B, describing the restoration project. All of these
portions of the proposals will be made available to the public.
B. The cash offer or equivalent, any optional time payment plan,
and the buyout formula . A financial statement, separately sealed
and included in the "B" envelope, is to be presented to the
District demonstrating the proposer's ability to complete the
work. All of these portions of the proposals will be kept
confidential. The cash offer section and buyout formula and
the financial statement of the proposals not selected will be
returned. The cash offer sections and buyout formula but not
the financial statement of the selected proposal will be made
available to the public.
All proposals are to be submitted to the District office no later
than 5 :00 P.M. Thursday, May 28 , 1981 , and shall be good for 90 days
from that date. The District retains the option to reject any or
all proposals and to negotiate changes with the selected proposer.
Any questions must be submitted in written form to the District by
5: 00 p.m. Wednesday, May 5, 1981. All questions received will be
distributed to all active proposers. All questions will be answered by
the District by 5: 00 p.m. Wednesday, May 13, 1981. Questions received
after Wednesday, May 5, 1981 will be answered as time permits, but not
necessarily prior to May 28 , 1981.
LISTS A, B & C
A. minimum Required Restoration
Structural : as required by 25 year lease parameters and
uniform building code.
Stabilize and repair foundation
Remove or replace rear porch
Remove, rebuild, or replace garage
Remove or restore 3 outbuildings
Fumigation for termites and repair of damaged areas
Exterior Restoration
Historically accurate restoration to include such items as :
Paint, gutters , roof, window/door trim,
stairs, siding
Utilities
To include such items as :
Septic system, domestic water, solar, insulation
or other energy conservation plans , rewire elec. , heating system
Grounds Restoration
Upgrade irrigation , deweed, general clean-up,
walks , patios, and replace some plants
Interior Restoration
LR floor, kitchen, bath and DR,
structural & fixtures (no decor) ,
2nd floor structural
B. Additional Allowable Restoration and Improvements, such as :
Additional landscaping (including garden area)
Additional interior restoration
Additional living areas
Simple Stable
Pool
Added structural improvements or repairs
Fencing
C. Improvements That Will Not Be Allowed
Exterior non-historic changes
Perimeter chain link fencing
Tennis courts
41
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
The discussion of Use and Management Plan for
Planning Area No. 3 (including Windy Hill) has
been moved to the May 13, 1981 Board meeting.
THORNEWOOD BIDDERS ' FORM (T-1)
A) Your estimate of the present
market value of the house
and 3 acres of grounds $ (A)
B) Your estimated investment
for List A & B, including a
reasonable value for your labor $ (B)
C) Subtotal (A + B) $ (C)
D) Your estimate of monthly triple
net rental value of the restored
premises (1981 dollars) $ (D)
E) Your estimate of monthly
rental value of the restored
premises (1981 dollars) $ (E)
F) Your estimate of the reduced
monthly rental value because
of the impact of the lease
restrictions, including public
access $ (F)
G) Your estimate of the present
value of 25 years of this rent,
taking into account the future
rent increases over 25 years
discounted back to present
value in 1981 dollars $ (G)
H) Amount you would be willing
to pay the District in cash
or equivalent for this 25
year lease $ (H)
R-81-16
4%1'* (Meeting 81-11
April 22 , 1981)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
April 17 , 1981
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: S. Sessions , Land Manager, and
D. Woods, Open Space Planner
SUBJECT: Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan
for the Black Mountain and Page Mill Road Areas
Introduction: At your meeting of July 11 , 1979 , the Use and Management
Plan for Monte Bello Open Space Preserve (report R-79-29 , dated July 5 ,
1979) received your preliminary approval . On September 26 , 1979 ,
the plan was presented to the City of Palo Alto Planning Commission
and was continued to examine further the proposed parking lot location.
The development plan, with the exception of the proposed parking lot,
was approved by Palo Alto in October, 1980 .
In August 1979 , a grant application for the development of the Monte
Bello Open Space Preserve was submitted for federal Land and Water
Conservation funding. Since the project was not selected for fiscal
year 1979-1980 funding, it was resubmitted the following year, and
the grant was awarded in February, 1981. The grant funding amounts
to $35 ,000 , which is one-half of the estimated project cost.
In addition to the usual items considered in a use and management plan,
the Monte Bello plan contained certain development elements necessary
to accommodate potential preserve users. The parking area, a trail
plan, a backpack camp area, and demolition of existing hazardous
structures are the major elements of the development plan.
The Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan for the
Black Mountain and Page Mill Road areas is now being presented to you
for approval and final adoption. Changes have occurred since the
plan was initially reviewed almost two years ago. The site has been
increased in size , portions of the plan have been modified, and the
demolition and backpack camp sections of the plan have received
Board approval. Following is the complete use and management plan,
incorporating all changes and the status of implementation of previously
approved recommendations.
A. Site Description
The Monte Bello Open Space Preserve encompasses 2900 acres and
is currently the largest preserve managed by the District. It
is part of a 6300 acre greenbelt which extends from Arastradero
Road in Palo Alto to Saratoga Gap, and also provides connecting
R-81-16 Page two
links to public lands to the west of Skyline Boulevard. The
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve is comprised of three areas :
the Picchetti Ranch Area, which includes the isolated parcels
of the McCone, Collins , and Melton properties , the Black Mountain
Area, and the Page Mill Road Area.
The use and management recommendations contained in this report
relate to the 2530 acres of contiguous land located between Monte
Bello Ridge and Skyline Ridge, namely the Black Mountain and
Page Mill Road Areas (see attached Exhibit A) . The site is
located in the foothills to the west of Palo Alto, Los Altos,
and Cupertino. It is accessible by Page Mill Road, Skyline
Boulevard, and Monte Bello Road, and indirectly by way of Highway
9 and Stevens Canyon Road. It is also accessible by trail from
Rancho San Antonio open Space Preserve via Hidden Villa Ranch.
B. Planning Considerations
The northern portion of the Preserve , consisting of approximately
2200 acres , is located in the City of Palo Alto and is zoned
Open Space. The District has complied with the City' s zoning
regulations, and staff is in the process of obtaining use permits
for the demolition of structures and the development of the
backpack camp. Although the proposed parking lot has been changed
to a new location outside the City of Palo Alto, the District
is forwarding a copy of the final parking lot plan to City staff
for their information upon approval by the Board. City staff has
been made aware of the revised plan on an informal basis in accor-
dance with their request of October 21, 1980 to be kept informed
of the alternate parking lot location.
Since the parking lot portion of the development plan is now
located within the County of San Mateo, it is necessary to comply
with San Mateo County's Resource Management District ordinance
by submitting grading, design, and landscape plans. Upon review
by the Zoning Administrator, the project may be certified as a
minor development, thereby not requiring further site and design
review. The plans would be formally submitted following your
approval , and the San Mateo County process will most likely take
four weeks.
C. Use and Management Recommendations
1. Access and Circulation. The Preserve and adjacent parklands
contain a variety of environments , offering unique recre-
ational experiences to Peninsula residents. The proposed
access and trail system for the site is designed to invite
visitors into the many diverse landscapes while attempting
to minimize potential environmental impacts.
a) Primary Access. The preliminary use and management plan
proposed the development of a 55 car parking lot located
adjacent to Page Mill Road just to the south and west of
the existing Los Trancos parking area. The Palo Alto
Planning Commission expressed objections to the location
of the lot, and following almost a year of study, the
Board directed staff to withdraw its application from the
City of Palo Alto to develop the proposed parking lot.
(see Board meeting minutes of September 10 , 1980. )
R-81-16 Page three
In October, 1980, staff directed its planning efforts to
locate a parking lot to the south and east of the existing
Los Trancos parking area. The new location was evaluated
according to the same criteria used on other suggested
locations, emphasizing public safety, visibility, environ-
mental impacts, and relationship to the resource. The
new location was found to be acceptable , although not as
desirable in staff' s mind as the initial proposal.
A field survey was completed in November, 1980 to deter-
mine if the project was within the County of San Mateo.
District staff met with the San Mateo County Public Works
Department and Planning Director to discuss the planning
process by which the District could secure permits. It
was suggested that the project, with appropriate engineering
and design, may comply with ordinance 6461 allowing admini-
strative approval for minor development.
In February, 1981, upon approval of the Land and Water
Conservation Fund development grant, the District con-
tracted a landscape architect to prepare the necessary
plans for grading, design, and landscaping. The plans
show the parking lot to be situated on a relatively level
terrace adjacent to Page Mill Road, approximately 700 feet
east of the Los Trancos lot (see Exhibit B) . Page Mill
Road has a moderate grade near the proposed entrance to
the parking area and a turn-out lanO would be developed to
accommodate slow traffic. The parking lot plan specifies
minimal grading of less than 1000 cubic yards , improved
drainage, and a compacted surface parking area that would
provide 35 parking spaces. Split-rail type of fencing
would be used around the parking area and on some road
frontage, with the balance of fencing to be post and wire.
Landscaping with native plants in the parking area is in-
cluded in the plan. The detailed plan will be presented
to you on April 22 , 1981.
The final plans will be submitted to the State Department
of Parks and Recreation who require design review upon
adoption of this use and management plan. Approvals are
expected to take three to four weeks following submittal.
b) Secondary Access. Secondary access would be provided at a
number of other points shown on Exhibit C where roads and
trails meet the boundary of the site. These would not be
emphasized but would be signed appropriately with District
regulations and have stiles provided where necessary.
The docent parking area shown on Exhibit C is used by
District docent tour groups and would be graded and de-
lineated to accommodate 5 to 10 vehicles. This parking
area would remain closed except for docent group use.
R-81-16 Page four
c) Trail System. The trail system is designed to allow
visitors the opportunity to experience a variety of trails
ranging from short, leisurely walks to strenuous all day
hikes. The trails described below and shown on Exhibit C
have been approved by the City of Palo Alto. It should be
noted that the trails plan shown on Exhibit C is a schematic
alignment and is subject to field adjustment during con-
struction.
There are four major trails proposed for the site:
(1) Stevens Creek Nature Trail would be three miles in
length connecting the Page Mill Road parking area to
Stevens Creek. This trail would use existing roads
and paths and require some trail construction and
improvement of one or two creek crossings. This
would undoubtedly be a popular route as it would
pass through diverse environments , grassy meadows
with spectacular views , damp creek corridors and
shaded forest. Sections of this trail would be
available only to hikers and not equestrians because
of the delicate nature of the terrain and vegetation
in the lower canyon. Portions of this route would
be a self-guided nature trail .
(2) The Geology Trail passes many dramatic geologic features
associated with :Ehe San Andreas Fault which are not as
easily interpreted as on the earthquake trail at Los
Trancos. Staff has worked with Tim Hall, a geology
instructor at Foothill College, on an alignment of the
trail which would be signed but not developed as on a
self-guided interpretive trail . This trail would not
be intended to be for general public use, although
it would be usable by individual hikers. Rather it
is intended to be used for in-depth investigation of
fault features by geologists and students. Funding
for trail construction through educational or scien-
tific groups will be explored.
(3) The Page Mill Road to Saratoga Gap Trail would be 7 . 6
miles long and a regionally'significant connecting
link between Palo Alto's Foothills Park, the Los Trancos
Open Space Preserve, Saratoga Gap and the California
State Trail System which continues to the ocean. It
provides the longest public trail route on the Penin-
sula and is presently enjoyed by many hikers and
equestrians travelling from the urban area to the coast.
It would require no new construction but it will re-
quire regular maintenance due to heavy storm damage
occurring regularly in the creek. Ideally a bridge
would be placed across Stevens Creek, but because of
extreme and variable flow conditions and inaccessi-
bility, it would be difficult to maintain. Therefore,
a pylon creek-crossing would be used instead.
R-81-16 Page five
(4) Docent trails include the terraced hillsides near
Waterwheel Creek and the ridgetop along Monte Bello
Road. Docent-led group tours of these two areas
have proven to be an effective use of the less
regularly visited portions of the site, and it is
recommended they be continued. The trails would be
signed so that they would be usable by individual
hikers without a docent guide.
(5) other connecting trails on the Preserve would be
maintained and kept open, and no new trails will be
constructed on the west side of Stevens Creek because
of the steep terrain, loose soils and continual land-
sliding. Access to the site from Skyline Boulevard
would be limited to Charcoal Ridge Trail and Grizzly
Flat Trail. Trail construction would be required
near the junction of Grizzly Flat Trail and Stevens
Creek. The Skyline trail connection at the southwest
boundary of the Preserve would be maintained but access
would not be developed or encouraged because of
parking problems along the highway.
2. Provision for Use by Physically Limited. The design of physical
improvements would accommodate the American National Standards
Institute's "Specifications for Making Buildings and Facilities
Accessible and Usable by the Physically Handicapped" in the
following instances :
a) A section of trail leaving the parking area would be acces-
sible to wheel chairs and aligned at the required 5% grade
as far as Canyon Fire Trail , affording spectacular views
down Stevens Canyon.
b) A specially designed restroom would be provided near the
parking area.
3. Signs. A sign identifying the Preserve would be placed at the
P`a4_eMill Road parking area which would be the main entrance
to the site. A District regulations sign and a sign showing
the trail system would also be located at the Page Mill Road
entrance. Regulatory signs would be posted at all other access
points and District identification signs would be mounted on
perimeter fencing. Trail directional signs would be placed
where appropriate.
Signs within the Preserve would be kept to a minimum to provide
the visitor a more enjoyable wilderness experience. The place-
ment of trail signs would be designed to keep the trail system
as clear as possible.
4. Brochures. A brochure would be available in the Page Mill Road
parking rea and at the main office. It would include infor-
mation about the District and the Preserve and interpret the
Stevens Creek Nature Trail, including geologic features and
natural history.
R-81-16 Page six
5 . Structures and Improvements. The structures and improvements
located on the Preserve are described below.
a) Page Mill Road Area. The large concrete water tank near
Page Mill Road is a potential water source for future
agricultural or recreational development on the site. it
is recommended that the tank be secured with a lid and
screened with vegetation. An adjacent property owner has
expressed an interest in using a portion of the water for
agricultural purposes in exchange for making these suggested
tank modifications. Staff is currently exploring this
possibility. Other structures in this area include a
concrete pad, cisterns above the sag pond, a partially
destroyed cabin, and a free standing chimney. on January 14 ,
1980 , you authorized staff to proceed with demolition of
the structures. This demolition is scheduled to occur
when approval is received from the State Department of Parks
and Recreation, as it is part of the grant funded project.
b) Black Mountain Ranch. The current residents, who were
formerly caretakers for Stanford University, the previous
owner of the property, rent the upper residence and use the
barn and nearby pastures for their livestock. In the
winter of 1980, a section of the barn was destroyed and the
remaining portion was stabilized.
The condition of the old Morrell cabin is deteriorating,
and the cost of repair associated with bringing the struc-
ture up to the District's rental standard far exceeds its
usefulness . However, its removal is not being recommended
at this time, because it could be useful in its present
condition in the vicinity of the proposed backpack camp area.
All the structures at the ranch would continue to be used
until they become hazardous or unstable . Their construction
and condition do not warrant major rehabilitation, so they
would eventually be dismantled and materials salvaged, as
practical, for District purposes.
The water system includes a number of spring impoundments,
pumphouse and storage tanks. The pump has been replaced
and the main reservoir has been secured. other impound-
ments are in poor condition and present a hazard. This
system would be upgraded to eliminate hazards.
c) Skyline Cabin. The one bedroom cabin is located on an addition
to the Preserve near Skyline Boulevard. It was occupied at
the time the District took possession, and the residents
remained until September of 1979 . The interim use and
management plan for this area designated the cabin as a
ranger residence, and it is recommended that this continue
pending resolution of the ranger residence policy. Locating
rangers near the Page Mill Road, Skyline Boulevard, and
Saratoga Gap areas reduces off-hours response time to nearby
preserves.
R-81-16 Page seven
Portions of the cabin were unstable and reconstruction
was completed in January, 1979 .
The service road leading to the cabin should not be part
of the designated public trail system because it ends
shortly beyond the structure and no new trail construction
is proposed in this area. It may become necessary to
close this trail to public use in order to provide security
for the ranger residence.
6 . Camping. In the past, the City of Mountain View Department
of Parks and Recreation and Hidden Villa, Inc. have used a
camping area on Black Mountain as part of a five day back-
packing program which ends at the ocean. Since these programs
were initiated, there have been an increasing number of requests
by individuals and groups for overnight camping on the ridgetop,
but the designated area was not suitable because of its exposure
and lack of water.
The area immediately surrounding the Morrell cabin is one of the
few places on the ridgetop protected from the wind and offering
a water source. The cabin could be used for the storage of
District supplies and provide mounting for an emergency pay tele-
phone in the vicinity of the backpack camp.
The camp area, as approved by you on February 11, 1981, would
be operated on a permit system with permits issued to hikers
and groups up to a total of 12 people with at least one member
over 18 . Please note that it is being recommended that even
individual hikers be accomodated. It is anticipated that the
Land Management office staff would be able to handle the permit
system. Management of the camp area could be handled by contract
with the Black Mountain tenants who are close to the camping area.
Staff is suggesting the establishment of a nominal fee system
for the backpack camp to help defray operating costs . Specific
fees are not being recommended at this time . However, staff will
return with a request to implement a reasonable fee structure
before the backpack camp opens.
Staff is currently applying to the City of Palo Alto for the
conditional use permit to operate the camp.
At the meeting of March 11 , 1981, you concurred with staff' s
recommendation for the use of campstoves by permit within the
designated camping area.
7 . Restroom Facilities. Restroom facilities would be installed in
two locations; near the parking area and adjacent to the back-
packing camp area. These units would be a vandal-resistant,
recirculating chemical type of restroom which require no plumb-
ing but need regular maintenance. A specially designed unit to
accomodate the physically limited would be located near the
parking area.
R-81-16 Page eight
The continual vandalism problem along the south side of Page
Mill Road may make it difficult to maintain these facilities.
If this is the case, the restrooms would be located across the
road near the Los Trancos Open Space Preserve parking lot.
This option would be considered at the time of development.
8 . Natural Resource Management. Steps should be taken to protect
the natural resources of the site through study, monitoring,
and active management.
a) Numerous roadbeds on the site that are not designated as patrol
roads or trails should be disced and seeded with grasses similar
to those found in surrounding areas. The reason for this is to
eliminate visual scars created by the roads, to halt soil
erosion, and to focus use onto designated trails . Such work
has been completed in the vicinity of Page Mill Road.
b) That portion of the site located west of Stevens Creek should
be designated a Natural Area and should remain free of develop-
ment. The slopes in this area are extremely steep and the loose
soils are highly susceptible to sliding. However, this designa-
tion would not preclude the establishment of a section of the
Skyline Scenic Recreation Route Corridor at a future date.
c) Stevens Canyon is a high fire hazard area (as mapped in the
Safety Element of the Santa Clara County General Plan) with a
dangerously high fuel load and poor emergency access. The
District has contracted with a fire management consulting
service to perform a field inventory and develop a plan to
decrease the fire danger particularly in this most critical
portion of the Preserve . The initial phase of the Burn Plan
was implemented successfully in February, 1981.
Staff has submitted a proposal to the California Division of
Forestry for grant funding of the next part of the burn project.
The second phase, if approved, would be conducted in the late
fall of 1981. The fire management plan as prepared calls for
subsequent phases to be implemented over the next 8 years.
Staff will investigate the feasibility of possible alternate
methods of removing fallen timber which creates a fire hazard
but may have salvage value .
d) There are many edges between grassland and chaparral on the
west-facing slopes of Monte Bello Ridge. In order to assess
the dynamics of these two communities (i.e. , whether the
chaparral is advancing into the grassland to potentially
take it over) , vegetation transects should be established to
monitor the change, if any, over the years. San Jose State
and De Anza College students are performing this study for
the District.
e) Serious soil erosion is occurring at two sites. Staff con-
tinues to work with the U. S. Soil Conservation Service to
study these problem areas and come up with control measures.
An area shown on the attached Exhibit C indicates excessive
gully erosion approximately a half mile in length and reaching
R-81-16 Page nine
20 feet in depth. A soil scientist and engineer have made an
initial evaluation of the area and have suggested three possible
corrective measures that would involve different levels of
funding. (Costs are included only as preliminary estimates . )
Plan 1: Minimal control consisting of some rock fill in
places where side-channels are developing and modification
of steep banks by hand labor followed by revegetation with
grasses. Accomplished with $1 ,000 in labor and $500-$1,000
in materials.
Plan 2 : Same as Plan 1 with the addition of more intensive
bank modification and gully control requiring a larger
labor force such as the CCC. Cost $1,000-$5 ,000.
Plan 3 : Total restoration to a grassland swale requiring
substantial filling, grading, recontouring and revegetation.
Cost $20 ,000-$50,000.
District staff has concluded that the probable cause of the
erosion resulted from drainage from a City of Palo Alto water
tank. This is confirmed from aerial photographs taken before
and after the water tank was constructed and by common sense
observations noting that the erosion emanates from the outflow
of the tank. Attempts at a staff level asking Palo Alto to
undertake the repairs have not been successful. It is recom-
mended that a letter be sent from the President of the Board
to the City Council with a specific request for the City to
restore the eroded area as proposed in Plan 3 . It is desirable
to return this area to its original state with total restoration
to mitigate the existing visual impacts from the erosion and
eliminate further erosion and possible silting of downstream
areas.
An area located near Skyline Boulevard contains a narrow trench-
like gully and a wider bowl-shaped cut which is visible from a
great distance. The impact of these two gullies can be con-
sidered moderate. Corrective measures consist of controlling
the water leaving the roadside ditch, and grading and shaping
each gully to conform to the surrounding topography to reduce
the probability of forming another gully. The grading should
be followed by seeding with appropriate grasses.
9 . Agriculture. Over the past three years , the resources on the
site have been carefully evaluated, and agricultural advisors
have suggested the most appropriate uses and applicable areas.
a) Agricultural crops such as hay, orchards, or vineyards
are suitable in the flat area adjacent to Page Mill Road
east of Canyon Fire Trail and the area adjacent to Skyline
Boulevard along the southwest boundary.
b) An existing 20 acre tree farm adjacent to Skyline Boulevard
has been leased to Skyline Ranch for a period of fifteen
years.
c) Grasslands on the east side of Stevens Creek where the
soils are shallow and ground moisture low, are suitable
for cattle grazing.
R-81-16 Page ten
Cattle grazing would be the most extensive agricultural
activity considered for the site. As previously stated in
the report titled "Agricultural Use Approval and Lease
Information" (R-78-3 , dated December 13 , 1978) , cattle
grazing is a management tool and allows for productive use
of District lands , lessens the hazard associated with
wildfires , and minimizes the protective discing needed
during the summer months which is disruptive of the grass-
land community.
Cattle grazing was recommended for the Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve and would have been implemented if technical
problems could have been resolved.
In order to avoid any long term detrimental effects which
could be caused by grazing, such as the deterioration of
range quality or conflicts with site users, a specific
plan would be addressed when a request for grazing is
received by the District.
As brought out at recent discussions on site emphasis and
related subjects , it is not clear whether you wish to
actively solicit agricultural uses , to continue existing
uses, or simply to respond to unsolicited proposals.
Further policy definition is needed before the District
proceeds much further.
10 . Site Cleanup. As part of the proposed development plan, areas
around the proposed parking area, the cabin, cistern areas ,
and other areas are to be cleaned up by removing trash and
debris which is not only unsightly but presents potential
hazards. It is planned to try to recruit volunteers for
additional clean-up on the site.
11. Visitor and Site Protection. In addition to the regular pa-
trolling of the site by District ranger staff, a resident
ranger would continue to be located on the Preserve near Sky-
line Boulevard (pending resolution of the ranger residency
program questions) . This would decrease emergency response
time during non-patrol hours.
The District' s Docent Program is also a benefit to visitor
and site protection. The presence of docents who are leading
tours often deters potential problems , and docents are
presently aiding the rangers by providing field reports on
unusual occurrences. It is planned to continue this practice.
The City of Palo Alto staff had a previous discussion with
District staff as to the possibility of constructing a station
on District land in the Page Mill Road area for use by fire
and police services and as a ranger office. There would have
to be extensive consideration on the part of the District, if
we were to receive a request of this type. The visual impacts
alone would be significant enough to discourage construction
of structures in this area.
R-81-16 Page eleven
12 . Cost Analysis
A) Improvements
LWCF Grant District funded District
Funds (Land Management Force
Maintenance & Account &
Operations Volunteer
Budget) Labor
Page Mill Road
parking area in-
cludes fencing &
landscaping $20 ,000 $1,000 $6 ,000
Fencing & stiles 3 ,000 - 4 ,300
Trail construction
& creek crossing 2 ,500 1,000 6 ,000
Signs 1,000 500 4 ,000
Brochures - 200 -
Demolition 2 ,000 - 2 ,500
Backpack camp
includes water
system & restroom 2 ,500 - 2 ,500
Site cleanup in-
cludes discing &
reseeding - 500 5,000
Restroom for
parking area 4 ,000 - 1,500
TOTAL $35 ,000 $3 ,200 $31,800
13. Name . The Monte Bello Open Space Preserve was formerly divided
into the following areas :
A. Page Mill Road Area
B. Black Mountain Area
C. Picchetti Ranch Area
Now that the Page Mill Road and Black Mountain areas are con-
tiguous, these area names should be combined and the entire
area named Monte Bello Open Space Preserve - Page Mill Road
Area. The Picchetti Ranch Area would incorporate the more
recent additions which are not contiguous to the Picchetti Ranch
Recommendation: It is recommended that you adopt the use and management
recommendations contained in this report and authorize staff to imple-
ment the plan, including the development items , following receipt of
appropriate permits from the City of Palo Alto and San Mateo County and
State design approval. Staff should also be authorized to solicit
bids on the parking lot and restrooms and return to you for approval.
L .BIT A - REGIONAL MAP
San
N
Francisco
Bay
,an
Carlos
a`oc
Sayshore P�
p Fe o
ed ewoode a`°a� �
Fast
Redwood City F alo Alto
n Atherton ca
0 ,rpp
Palo Alto
d`rG�as .. 9a
Menlo Park % a
Mtn. qd �
K^9e Woodside <<
Pd � Jn
Portola Mountain
F�
h„„ v se View
v A Valley Los �-
Los Altos
9e P J m Altos
n P4HI is SO v e
O�
\ M s
Oppy Fd
SP
ae '\
N d„,.0 ra
`""T"' � Cupertino
R�.-an Hid,,
� o
c
P—h—'
p(;ap
Epp m 5a
Cop n N Saratoga
Pd Sa dro
40
Monte '°sq
Sereno\
V r y
Al Ii
% ` Los Gatos
9
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Boundary of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District open space preserves
Major city, county, and state parks and open space preserves
s '1
C+
v � �
d
sl
w�
r r \ ao
` R
G
c
2 ®
o w � to L1
U— �'
M-81-43
(Meeting 81- 11
April 22 , 1981)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
April 15 , 1981
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Issues and Questions From Site Emphasis and Program
Evaluation Workshops - Ranger Ride-Along Program
Discussion: At your meeting of March 25 , 1981, the discussion
of a possible ranger ride-along program was continued until
all members of the Board were present. Assuming that all Board
members will be in attendance at the April 22 , 1981 meeting
(and assuming that time will permit) , the discussion of the
ranger ride-along program has been scheduled on your agenda.
For your convenience, the portion of memorandum (M-80-93 of
December 2, 1980) from the Site Emphasis Committee relating
to a ranger ride-along program is attached for reference.
Recommendation: I recommend that you reach preliminary consensus
on the items in the list and then refer the matter to staff
for comments and recommendations .
A-80-93
Izancier Ride-Along
Ranger Ride-Along is defined as 'a Board mci..iber riding alone;
with a member of the Yanger staf-jr.
1. Should a ranger ride-along policy be adopted?
2- what would be the advantages or disadvantages of such a
program?
3. If there is a ride-along program, should -it be structured
or informal?
A . if it is a structured program, how. should it be structured? .
a. Ride-along arranged by office staff
b. By. direct request'
of Board member to ranger
c. Arranged by* senior staff member
d. Arranged and attended by a senior. staff irember
5. Should the ride-along program have a time limit or should
it be of an indefinite duration?
6. What mechanisms, if any, should be used to assess benefits
and disadvantages of the program?
ey-
Consolidation of �en4-
�) !�pace Man,�q Policies
1. Should it be sent to a coliunittee or should it just be
referred to staff?
2. Should this i-c,- be CQnsIdered z, one of the aCtivities for
the Open Space Management Program in the 1981-3-982 fiscal
year?
44.
C_ 9
April 22 , 1981
Meeting 81- 11
Revised
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
C L A I M S
A Des*cription
Amount Name
2045 $ 7 , 000. 00 Vert J. Lovell Purchase Contract-El Sereno
2046 2,843 . 75 Maryanne Moore Hayes Purchase Contract-El Sereno
2047 2, 031. 25 Elizabeth Moore Scott Purchase Contract-El Sereno
2048 700. 00 E.P. Brodd & Assoc. Appraisal Services
2049 733. 00 Kathy Blackburn Contract Services-April
2050 1. 03 Wm. C. Brown Co. Tax on Book-"Fi.nancing ,Man. ,Marketing,
Recreation"
2051 208 . 94 CA Water Service Co. Utilities-Rancho San Antonio OSP
2052 171 . 00 CENTRAC Carpet Shampooing-Main Office
2053 1 ,.750. 00 Clevenger Realty Corp. Appraisals
2054 176. 00 Communications R Radio Equipment Maintenance
e-
search 0.
2055 107 . 03 The Dark Room Photography for Public Communication,
Film Processing-Grants
2056 263. 56 Dept. of Parks and Basic Park Maintenance Program-Joan
Recreation Ferguson
2057 785 . 62 Dorn' s Safety Service District Vehicle Expense
2058 40. 00 Excel Pool & Patio Pool Maintenance
2059 190. 00 First American Title- Preliminary Title Reports
Guaranty Co .
2060 1, 100. 00 Foss & Associates Personnel Consultant-Feb. and March
2061 200. 22 General Electric Radio Equipment-Antenna and Battery
2062 26. 00 Mary Gundert Private Vehicle Expense
2063 16. 70 Hubbard & Johnson Site Repair-Wallboard and Joint Com-
pound
2064 400. 00 Mr. & Mrs . Jens-Karl Deed of Trust Payment-April
Kroijer
2065 7. 39 Kragen Auto Supply Shop Equipment-Distributor Wrench
2066 77. 00 Los Altos Garbage Garbage Service-Ranger Office
2067 185. 89 Minton' s Lumber,Paint,Hardware and Building
Materials
2068 66. 76 Norney' s Office Supplies
2069 .5 , 177 . 59 Stanley Norton Litigation Legal Services-1/14/81 to
4/10/81
2070 197 . 93 Orchard Supply Field Supplies and Hardware for RSA
'Pence
C- -- -9 Revised
A 22, 1981
Me- -.Lng 81-11 Page 2
Amount Name Description
2071 $ 70. 38 PG and E Utilities
2072 25-00 Park Rangers Association Subscription-Eric Mart
2073 51 . 30 Peninsula Times Tribune Legal Advertising-Combined B'alance
Sheets.
2074 1,425. 00 Rogers ,Vizzard and Legal Services-March
Tallett
2075 32. 25 San lose Art Drafting Stipplies-Electric Eraser
and Shiel'd,Formaline Tapes ,and
Letraset Sheets , and Felt Pen.
2076 415. 34 Scribner Graphic Press Los Trancos Brochures
2077 124. 29 Security Contractor Rite Ma Ion en t Fngni-To-Gate Posts and
Services inges-m e
2078 465 . 34 Techni-Graphics , Inc . Stationery and. Busirkess Cards
2079 314. 81 Union Oil CO. District Vehicle Expense
2080 70.00 Vangas Utilities
2081 421. 20 Xerox Installment Payment and Xerox Pape
2082 92. 92 The Frog Pond Meal` Conferences-Public Notificati, :
Thornewood, and Budget Committees
2083 37. 33 ABRACADABRA Typesetting-Fremont Older Brochure
2084 6. 98 Graphicstat, Inc. Map Photo Reproduction
2085 54. 00 Del Woods Private Vehicle Expense
-2086 138. 85 Petty Cash Maps , Office Supplieg ,Blueprints ,
Meal Conferences ,and Private
Vehicle Expenses .
2087 235 . 70 Herbert Grench Out-of-Town Meeting Expense for
H. Grench and D. Wendin
/ffl,m
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
April 6, 1981
To: Board of Directors and Herb
From: Stan Norton, Legal Counsel
Subject: Vacation Plans
Please be advised that I plan to be on
vacation (in England) from June 1 to June 24, 1981.
I will miss the regular board meeting of June 10
and possibly some or all of the June 24 meeting.
the fort.In response,the builders
demolished the trail,tearing up all
stai
rways and the boardwalk.
A Practical Approach We learned our lesson.While we
could not let anybody do just
s anything in the park for fear of their
To Vandalism retaliation, conceded that remote
areas where surveillance is
impossible are prone to vandalism.
Therefore,if we are unwilling to
by Paul T.Brady patrol an area properly,we should
be prepared to encounter vandalism
there.In remote areas,we may have
to put up with destructive behavior
V
ANDALISM,BE IT the living within a mile or so of the park. and abuse,but we will also support
defacing or destructive use of There are four public entrances and no improvements in those areas.
property,is an ever-present, many trail entrances in constant use. The best antidote we have found
seemingly ineradicable management In short,the opportunities for for vandalism is prevention.There
problem for recreation and park vandalism are so numerous it is a are a number of effective
departments.In designing and wonder any facilities remain. preventative techniques,some of
administering a facility,you must which are simple and inexpensive.
accept the reality of vandalism.You We tried education first Heading the list is surveillance,and
cannot wish it away or carry out a our management of the park's old
beautification project in the hope Early in the park's life we naively barn and farmhouse exemplifies the
that the beauty will deter vandals. thought to stop vandalism through value of this technique.
But that doesn't mean coping with education.But our first attempt at In the years immediately
vandalism is a Sisyphean task.By such failed embarrassingly.At issue following acquisition in 1973,the
adjusting to the realities of were four professionally made signs park remained undeveloped and the
vandalism,you can minimize its describing fossils along a stream old buildings vacant.Visitors
impact. bank.A week after installation,we repeatedly broke into the farmhouse
At Poricy Park Nature Center,a found one of the signs lying in the and barn and,worst of all,in early
250-acre preserve in Middletown, stream.I blush to confess that I 1977 the farm became a haven for
New Jersey,we have had to do just immediately set about typing up a gangs of motorcyclists.At that time,
that in the decade since the park's mini-sermon on an index card there was no nature center,only
purchase,developing systems with indicating that the signs were summer programs run by our
which to evaluate the advisability of installed and maintained by citizens committee.
repairing vandalism and a proposed volunteers and wouldn't it be nice if After numerous appeals,the
project's vulnerability to vandalism. they were left in place.I carefully township finally cracked down on
Poricy Park,originally vacant stapled the card to the back of the the motorcyclists,earning a fierce,
land zoned for housing,was the replaced sign. immediate response.The farmhouse
result of a long citizen campaign.At The response was instant, was viciously smashed and
the park's heart is a 90-acre farm unequivocal,and most creative.The firebombed,only miraculously
with a farmhouse and a barn built sign with my card was left standing, escaping complete destruction.
around 1704.Trails,a nature center, but the other three were uprooted Despite the horrors of the
and environmental education and smashed to bits. firebombing,there was one
programs attended by thousands This vandalism was an example of beneficial result.The motorcyclists
annually are now part of the park. casual vandalism,destruction carried never returned.Extensive volunteer
The Poricy Park Citizens out without malice aforethought. efforts restored the farmhouse so we
Committee(PPCC),a private When we put up the note,we were could conduct summer nature study
nonprofit group,operates the simply creating a game for the programs.But we were still left with
programs and pays the professional vandals.But some vandalism is the long-range problem of protecting
staff(a naturalist,a teacher,and deliberate and malicious,rooted in thebuildings.
administrators).While the revenge.For example,in 1971 we With a combination of techniques,
committee has assumed constructed a trail in the first parcel the area is now reasonably well-
responsibility for the park and its of park land acquired.Remote as the protected:
programs,the Township of land was,the trail lasted several
Middletown,which owns the land years.But in 1977 we found an 1. Photo-operated mercury vapor
and buildings,provides utilities and elaborate tree fort had gone up beside lights have been installed on the
maintenance. the trail,a clearing made,fires built, historic buildings and remain on
The park is almost entirely and beer cans strewn about—all all night.
surrounded by single-family accomplished in February,a low use 2. A modern ranch house,located
developments with perhaps one- and maintenance month.After
sixth of the town's 60,000 people much deliberation,we dismantled
32 PARKS&RECREATION/APRiL 1981
teenagers,in park activities.When systems are wired to police
we have work parties,particularly headquarters.We have had them for
on a hill above the old buildings outdoors,the neighborhood children several years,and they havebecome
and part of the farm property, invariably show up.We promptly a hodgepodge of techniques
has been rented to a town police put them to work.They share in the including infra-red photo detectors,
officer. pizza and soda we have for lunch, ultrasonic movement detectors,
3. The new nature center was also and we usually have a group photo window foil tapes,and magnetic
constructed on top of the hill, taken for the bulletin board. switches on doors and windows.
with special care taken that the No,the pizza is not a bribe to A major problem we have had
old buildings would be visible prevent vandalism.Rather,it is an with burglar alarm installers is that
from the nature center. honest effort to get the community they think in terms of preventing
4. The buildings have been kept in involved in our nature center.And it theft while we think in terms of
good shape with damage is working.Many of our best,most preventing vandalism.Anvone who
repaired immediately.In productive volunteers are these wants to steal from our nature center
addition,a fairly extensive youth.But this involvement has a either is ignorant of our financial
burglar alarm system has been distinct side benefit—it brings people position or has an insatiable craving
installed,but with rather to the park.The same children whoa for bird seed.But the alarm people
complex results which will be help in the work parties also tend to are eager to sell devices that will
discussed later. spend their leisure time in the park, detect a mouse at 20(human)paces.
5. The buildings are located in the thereby increasing surveillance. In considering alarm systems,
most frequently used part of the The themes of surveillance,usage, there is first the question of a silent
park,so that even when the and maintenance are dominant in versus an audible alarm.The idea
nature center is closed,there are the protection of the land and its behind a silent alarm is that it
often hikers within sight of the resources informs the police without alerting
buildings. the intruder so the police can sneak
6. In 1979,a new housing up and catch the perpetrators red-
development was built a short handed.
distance from the old buildings. In practice no such thing happens.
Although a marsh and small The police usually take several
wood lie between the buildings minutes to respond and arrive in a
and the houses,the buildings are r highly visible squad car,providing
visible from the houses, the vandals ample warning.While
especially in winter. the police are responding,the
vandals continue to do their thing,
Surveillance is the key i unaware they have set the alarm off.
How much damage can vandals do
The most important element in all in five minutes?Answer:a lot.
these steps is surveillance.Anyone
wanting to vandalize the farmhouse ; 4'• Silent alarms failed
and barn is in the open,visible from = r many places.The system is not In the three ears eve had a silent
foolproof and there have been some �`� � ,._� .� alarm at the farmhouse there were
frequent break-ins and nobody broken windows,but the net effect y was
has been a sharp drop in vandalism. ,, ,4' caught.(Of course,whenever
Another deterrent to vandalism in ' �` �� children arecaught,nothing is ever
our experience is lighting.The The burglar alarm is a widely done about it.)
reason for its deterrent effect is touted tool in preventing vandalism. There are several advantages to an
probably rooted in the main It is also one big fat pain in the neck. I audible burglar alarm.First,it alerts
"reason"for vandalism:to wit,it is Poricy Park has two independent the vandals.After they have broken
done without reason.Typical vandals burglar alarm systems,one on the one window,the siren goes off and
are not people who consciously go farmhouse and barn,and the other they vanish.They are not going to
out looking for someplace to"hit." on the new nature center.Both stick around to wait for the police
They are,rather,people who are (but they may very well watch from
already there for other reasons and a distance so the remote line to the
then happen to think it would be fun police station is essential).
to,say,smash windows.Lighting, Second,the alarm alerts neighbors.
along with other measures that Again,vandals will not stick around
suggest the possibility of being seen, with people staring at them,or even
discourages the impulse to destroy. if they suspect people are watching
' them.
Also especially effective in A final and most necessary feature
preventing vandalism is the involvement of many neighborhood of an audible alarm is that it alerts
residents,especially children and
the nature center staff when they muddy slope.I would like to offer a
have set it off,so they can plan called Design with Vandalism.
immediately reset it,call the police, It consists of a set of factors that can
and prevent a false-alarm call. help determine whether or not to
The false-alarm nuisance proceed with a project that may be
subject to vandalism.
False alarms are the bane of a The plan finds its philosophy in
burglar alarm system.The the light-one-candle-or-curse-the-
farmhouse system has behaved well darkness debate.Is it worth all the
recently,but at one time it was trouble to build a nature trail if it will
falling up to 30 times a day.The be wrecked?Should we even bother
nature center alarm,with newer to have a park,especially in a
equipment,is now worse than the heavily Populated area?The answers
other,and goes off at least once a to these may be found by considering
week. the following factors:
At fault is bad equipment and poor • Value to the project.Here is,
installation.Some types of perhaps,the most important element
equipment—heat sensors and of all.If 10,000 people annually walk
ultrasonic detectors—,are so sensitive across a bridge that gets vandalized
that atmospheric changes will every three months,you should
occasionally set them off.Next in the regard the one-day repair effort as
line of troublemakers are external an investment in 2,500 people.If an
contact switches,such as a window interpretive trail is used by only 200
latch with prongs that touch a metal people a year,maybe it is not worth
plate when the window is closed. spending one day every three
The slightest film of dirt will result in months to repair it.
intermittent contacts.Sealed, • Cost of the project.A
magnetically operated switches boardwalk through a marsh is
work reasonably well as does metal expensive,a simple path through the
window foil,but our most reliable
technique has been the infra-red woods with painted markers is
photo beams. inexpensive.Interpretive signs on
Since the audible system was pouts are costly;;but a mimeographed
installed in the farmhouse in 1977, trail leaflet is cheap.
there have been no break-ins and • Ease of surveillance.A ravine
only two broken windows.The
nature center was vandalized during
construction when no alarm system
was installed,but since we started
programs the vandalism has been
only external(plants,trail signs).The
alarm system has certainly helped,
but it is only one element of a many-
sided effort.
One final note:People occasionally
suggest a"dummy"system,with
false cameras or even a sticker on the
building stating that an alarm system
is installed when in fact there is
none.Such a system would be
worthless in our park for the
children have become expert in how
the system works.Given the chance,
they examine every window fitting,
all electric eyes,and so on.
Design with vandalism
Ian McHarg has offered the
concept of Design with Nature.For
example,don't build a house on a
one mile from park headquarters is The barn had unquestionable very high.The New Jersey Historic
impossible to monitor while an historic value.We had a contractor's Sites Division had placed the park on
historic building next to a highway is estimate of$20,000 to renovate it. its register as one of the state's oldest
visible to the world. The renovation would follow barns.
• Cost to repair.A boardwalk historically accurate lines,as The cost of the project was high,as
consisting of a few planks nailed determined by a noted historical is the potential cost of repair.The
down to logs can be repaired in a few architect,and most of the cost could overriding negative factor was and
minutes by one person while a set of be raised through donations. still is the possibility that the barn
20 interpretive signs,stolen from Our choice was simple:either could go up in flames in just minutes.
their posts,would take as much renovate the barn or tear it down. Perhaps the swing vote was cast
effort to replace as it took to put There was no middle ground.The by surveillance.Located in plain
them there the first time. existing structure was in such poor view of the nature center,a police
An extremely difficult application shape that repair was impossible and officer's home,and several other
of these rules occurred with our 275- it was a dangerous eyesore left houses;illuminated at night;and
year-old barn which had reached an unrenovated. wired into a burglar alarm system:it
advanced state of deterioration in The decision to restore the barn is in a much safer setting than many
1977.The two 20th century wings on was not made in 15 minutes by other historic restoration projects.
it lacked roofs and the entire mathematicians applying the above- Thus the barn was restored and is
structure had over 23 boarded-up listed factors.It was an agonizing a handsome attraction in the park.if
doors and windows,one or more of process because the arguments for we should ever lose it,we can only
which were demolished nearly and against were so strong.But the hope the value gained in the years it
every week.It was a dangerous reasoning followed the four factors was restored and open was worth
place,and children constantly broke very closely: the investment.
in and climbed over the beams. The value of a restored barn was
Practicality must reign
A firmly practical attitude is the
first step in combating vandalism.
This past year,a well-improved trail
in Poricy Park was destroyed by
some local dirt-bike riders who
meticulously dug out all the steps on
the ravines so they could ride their
dirt bikes up and down the slopes.
The area is one mile from the nature
f center.Occasional police
surveillance has only partially
controlled the problem.The issue is:
Do we restore the trail?
One advocate of restoration asked,
:r "Just because a bunch of kids want to
ride their motorcycles on our trail,
does this mean we can't restore it?
Given the circumstances,it does
mean exactly that. As one woman
_ • put it,"The only way to protect that
property is with an army of
avenging angels with flaming
swords on 24-hour duty."
We,like everyone else,have
• •• - limited resources.If we invest too
• heavily in maintaining that trail,we
. . . _ • .
• would neglect other areas that
provide greater benefits,and incur
• • less damage.
It does not pay to proceed as if
vandalism doesn't exist,neither is it
productive to do nothing for fear it
will be destroyed.We must recognize
the reality of vandalism,attempt to
minimize it,adjust to it,and then go
on about our business.O
Please circle reader service card number 36
36 PARKS&RECREATIONlAPRIL 1981
I
•
it
• . \
i
\
t
Ntbsk , 1%4 art
o
'e.. ■ i �
WINDMLL. PAsr iMg
�F A. , : <
...r • 119""
•
•
EXHIBIT C -
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
Existing patrol roads
----Im_---aim
Old roads and trails
New trails
1100' NORTH fi
•
/
•
1, ` ... . .
v
i
C-
1
• \