The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About19811210 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 81-29 meeting 81-29 low MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415) 965-4717 Special Meeting Board of Directors Thursday Multi-Purpose Room December 10 , 1981 San Carlos High School 7 : 30 P.M. 2600 Melendy Drive San Carlos , California A Special Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District will be held on Thursday, December 10 , 1981 at the above location in San Carlos for the primary purpose of gathering public input on the proposed acquisition of the Hassler Health Home property. A G E N D A (7 : 30) ROLL CALL WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (7 :45) STATUS REPORT AND PUBLIC COMMENT ON HASSLER HEALTH HOME ACQUISITION PROJECT a. Introduction -- R. Bishop b. Staff Presentation -- H. Grench c. Public Comment (9 : 45) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS CLAIMS CLOSED SESSION - Land Negotiations ADJOURNMENT Herbert A Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,NonetteG Hanko,RichardS.Bishop,EdwardG Shelley,Harry A Turner,Daniel G.Wendin k1V *kl MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415) 965-4717 NOTICE OF DECEMBER MEETING SCHEDULE Special Meeting of December 10, 1981 There will be a Special Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District on Thursday, December 10, 1981 at 7 :30 P .M. in the Multi-Purnose Room of San Carlos High School, 2600 Melendy Drive (see attached map) . The primary purpose of the meeting is to gather public input on the proposed acquisition of the Hassler Health Hore property. First Regular Meeting - December 16 , 1981 The First Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, which would have been held on Wednesday, December 9, 1981, has been rescheduled to Wednesday, December 16 , 1981. The meeting will be held at the District office, 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1, Los Altos , California, beginning at 7 : 30 P.M. Cancellation of December 23 , 1981 Regular Meeting The Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District scheduled for Wednesday, December 23 , 1981 at 7 : 30 P.M. has been canceled. 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 COP"MUNICATION �Ieetino 81-29 sec. 10, 1981 S Zil a-W '11W L� S � ' �i P�Fi o L:5 ° c San Carlos Hioh 2600 Melendy �o, I oM E R � o Oa r a �. b� 0 5 WRITTEN COMMUNICATION meeting 81-29 Dec. 10 , 1981 eMaz9azet Ala.ziQl 19,47 eozdd l F-zai d�oad e,?Edwood City, ealifomia 94062 y/ 71rti IRA V-', e-� �0i. �Y�/1" GL �CCvrJvv t dto1 AfiPdly, ? ,Z; ,(At �,�, a rrQcP,fr�r ac4c��vt o/ram � kp arl 0c � 4141 ry era-/` S n 61 �ohb -9 T86T `OT 'oo 6 Z-T 8 buT4,)GW � �l �-� � �� I�IOIZE�"JINf]Y�� T•LRLd �P4 Va n�4Dd --cs�!v ��a�ta p "13 ---.r:) Tyl-.9 --'�S -9 7� q G G �d WRT�'T'GN COMMUNICATION Meetii .-29 Dec. lu, 1981 Jew ►2 � eN S et o wr a I s e w. S tr'2A,s Robert E. Hess 2411 Graceland Ave. San Carlos, CA 94070 WRI# CCN2vK I=CN eting 81-29 Dec. 10, 1981 ®E C ,7 q!98 1 2848 Tramanto Drive San Carlos, CA 94070 5 December 1981 lvix. Herbert A. Grench, General I anagwr i4iidpeninsula Regional Open Space District 375 Distel Circle , Suite D-1 Los Altos , CA 94022 Dear Mr. Grench; ';then we arrived and settled in San Carlos in 1973 , the Hassler Health Home pro perty was already a controversial issue , and as committed conservationists, we soon became concerned in its resolution on the open space side of the issue. As native ( southern) Californians, we had recently seen numerous open areas gobbled up by developers, when opposition was too widely scattered and disorganized to be effective. Now that space is lost to those who need it more than they realize, and their children ' s horizons are more and more limited to parning lots and neon lights. But beyond aesthetic values lie the problems of water, roads, sewage disposal , education , and innumerable corramunity service problems -- the nitty-gritty issues which are being dossed over by some development-prone San Francisco Supervisors Vife are writing to urge that every possible legal action be taken to prevent the development of the Hassler property, and we certainly applaud the possibility of exercising the right of eminant domain. Sincerely, t,_ Jean and' an Jenks nor 1981 J C,2 WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Meeting 81-29 Dec. 10 , 1981 �r L � WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Read at Special Meeting December 10, 1981 _9 _ 61/ a1 r1� ��o�o WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Read at Special Meeti..a December 10, 1981 1230 Highland Ct. San Carlos, Ca 94070 December 8, 1981 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 375 Distel Circle, Los Altos, Ca Dear Board Members, Please don't let Hassler slip through our hands. This property, Snn Carlos's last chance for open space, has been dangled before us for ,years, and time and again this community has reaffirmed its sincere desire for the acquisition. This is why we joined the Open Space District in the first place. Go get it! ';,e have hassled over Hassler long enough. Very truly yours, R Ruby Smager Lewis (Mrs. Gordon F. Lewis) WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Read at Special Meeting rz December 10, 1981 A r A e- ,-ram Cod �/�,� A w ve- �-e-6-1 -e 1,7 P _ A m, a Ali Ozh e e Z �y -A le o l� �jr AA, ti d .0 1�� 1/e r` s e 4- Th01i e- y � �(/I��o p /lee GR J fiW, A Vpr 114,6 k- e- l' ee S '' � -e- 1 �eyrch- i a �3 /"f/1, CC, r1ce e ,6, M ,e e-� /H / 4LC�s K ��„N P - o e,- C Letter sent individuals who had expressed interest in the Hassler property. List file in y Land Acquisition. -A) z 4► Map to-San Carlos High School acconpani ��11, , letter. G MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE 11-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)955-4717 Subject: Hassler Health Home Property - Development or. Open Space ? Dear Constituent: A Special Meeting of the .Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District will be held on Thursday, December 10, 1981 beginning at 7:30 P.! . in, the multi-purpose room of San Carlos High School , 2600 Melendy Drive,_ San Carlos. The purpose of this meeting is to gather public input on the District's proposed acqui- sition of the Hassler Health Home property, located adjacent to Edgewood Road and Interstate 280. As you may be aware, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has been negotiating with the City and County of San Francisco to purchase this 293 acre parcel for over two years. ' Negotiations to purchase the property have reached a critical point. The Finance Committee of the City and County of San Francisco is now considering the possi- bilities of selling the property at public auction (the only means through which the land could be sold to a private developer) or of developi.ng the property them- selves to generate income to the City. Therefore, it appears that a negotiated purchase of this property may not be possible. As the District Director representing San Carlos, Redwood City, and parts of Wood- side, I have actively supported the District's acquisition of the Hassler Health Home parcel for open space and public recreation. It is my opinion that this is one of the most important public meetings concerning the acquisition of this property. I believe that, a majority of the.residents in the area still over- whelmingly support the acquisition of -_this property for -public open space. Of central concern to the entire District Board will be the relative importance of the Hassler Health Home property as prime open space land and ,ihether the District should consider-proceeding with this acquisition even if it appears that it will be necessary for the District to consider exercising the power of eminent domaine. I look forward to seeing you and hearing your comments on Thursday, December 10. If you have any questions; please call the District office at (41-5) 965-4717. Also, letters may be addressed to the Board of Directors at the above -address. Sincerely, .0 Richard S. Bishop Director, hard 7 RB:ej Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duty.Barbara Green.Nonette G.Hanko.Richard S Bishop.Edward G Sheney.Harry A Turner.Daniel G WeF d+n WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Meeting 81-29 Dec. 10 , 1981 December 8, 1981 MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1 Los Altos California To All Members of the Board of Directors: Dear Directors, As residents and property owners in San Carlos for ever thirty years we have watched the steady urbanization all around us, and the consquent loss of open or green space. We strongly urge you, as a District to do whatever is necessary to keep the Hassler Health Home property as open space. We sincerely hope it will not fall into the hands of developers whereby only a few will profit temporarily and all the rest of the citizens of the area will lose. Surely we should save some of what makes this part of California so beautiful for future generations. Thank you all very much for your efforts on behalf of those of us who deplore ASPHALT CREEF. FRdM: The Charles Geraci Family �! 600 Knoll Drive TJwZa San Carlos Polly Ggraci Lisa Lamb ! 2350 San Carlos Avenue San Carlos Charles L. Gera i L se Lamb J Tom Geraci R-81-48 V (Meeting 81-29 ,A%I 00k Dec. 10, 1981) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT December 4 , 1981 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager PREPARED BY: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager SUBJECT: Status Report and Public Comment on Hassler Health Home Acquisition Project Introduction: District purchase of the Hassler Health Home property from the City and County of San Francisco has been the subject of many previous Board discussions and actions, including, most significantly: 1) March 9 , 1977 (Report R-77-10 , dated February 24 , 1977) Site evaluation and conceptual plan for District participation. 2) October 10 , 1979 (Report M-79-35 , dated October 4, 1979) Authorization to enter into federal Land and Water Conservation Fund grant project and proceed with negotiations for purchase of the property. 3) July 9 , 1980 (Report R-80-56 , dated October 3 , 1980) Approval of formal offer to purchase the property at a price of $2 ,240 , 000. In addition, this item has come to Board attention through various in- formational reports, public oral communications , and during the public hearing process that led to the conclusion that no compatible recrea- tion use existed for the major portion of the buildings (possibly with the exception of the main doctor' s house and nurses ' duplex) . Please refer to the attached "Hassler Health Home Chronology. " Discussion: Between the time of the formal written offer to purchase the property (October, 1980) and today, you and the public have been apprised of the on-going progress of negotiations. It was not until September 23, 1981 that the Finance Committee of the Board of Super- visors for the City formally considered the District' s offer. By that time , because of escalating land prices , the District' s offer for the property had been informally increased to $2 ,500 ,000 through negotiations with the City' s Real Estate and Health Departments. At the September 23 hearing, the Finance Committee directed City staff to report back on the considerations necessary to subdivide the property and have the City assume the role of land owner/developer. Although the City' s Real Estate Department recommended the direct sale of the property to the District, their alternative suggestion was that the property be auc- tioned to the highest bidder at a minimum price of $3,000 ,000 (based R-81-48 Page two upon an apparent guarantee from a private development company that such a bid would be tendered) . Over two months have passed since the Finance Committee discussed the Hassler property and further Committee discussions have not been scheduled, although a City staff report has been completed which explores the following six alternatives : 1) City sells property at public auction in the "as is" condition. 2) City leases the land . 3) City secures conceptual approval for development from San Mateo County planning staff, then sells the land. 4) City develops raw land and sells finished lots. 5) City enters into joint venture with developer. 6) City holds property in anticipation of property appreciation and lower interest rates. The concluding recommendation is that the City auction the property to the highest bidder, ignoring the District' s current offer and the possi- bility of a direct sale. Public Hearing Opportunities On two previous occasions, you have held public meetings in the San Carlos area before considering appropriate action concerning the Hassler Health Home property (February 24 , 1977 at Heather School in San Carlos and on September 27 , 1978 at San Carlos High School) . It is my conclusion that the District needs additional public input prior to coping with the current direction of the City (and the inevitable outcome) that a negotiated purchase of this property for public open space and recreation purposes may not be possible. None of the alterna- tives presented by the City' s staff include a direct sale of the property to the District. Additionally, time delays and escalating land prices have tended to work against the District, and since the City' s disposi- tion of this property has become such a political matter, a final decision by the City may not be reached for many months , even a year or more. The District has several alternatives at this point : 1) Continue to work with the City staff and within the existing political framework to a--chieve a alrect sale of Une pr6`peYEY to the District. Although the alternatives mentioned in the City staff report do not include sale of the property to the District, it is still my opinion that the District' s offer of $2 . 5 million is the best solution for the City. The private developer who has supposedly guaranteed a $3 ,000 ,000 bid at public auction has purportedly deposited $35 ,000 with the City. Prior to public auction, this developer may discover the difficulties involved in developing the property, and assuming continuation of high interest rates , may decline to bid. It is easier to walk away from $35 ,000 than to absorb the costs of holding an expensive piece of property that can' t be developed. The District' s offer is all cash at the close of escrow and has no contingencies , i .e. , "a bird in the hand. " R-81-48 Page three Since the Finance Committee has not yet met to consider this item a second time, it is District staff' s intention to continue to work with the City toward a negotiated purchase of the property. However, based on experience , this is expected to be a long, slow process. Although some of the members of San Francisco' s Board of Supervisors have supported an open space program for the City, it will be difficult for them to reach a conclusion on the disposition of the property because of the remote possibility of more money through auction or development. 2) Wait for the City to complete their process , and as-suming the decision is to auction the property the most probable deE_ision) , have the District take its chances at public auction. Experience involving public agencies , when one agency acquires land from another, especially land that is considered "surplus" , is on a negotiated basis. The purchase of the Edgewood site from the State is an example. In good faith, the District has had the Hassler property appraised by an appraiser recognized by San Francisco to be highly qualified and competent. The City,' s Real Estate Department has been a hard negotiator, and the agreed upon final price of $2 . 5 million is actually in excess of the District' s appraisal. With support of City staff in the Real Estate and Health Departments , District staff had assumed this purchase would be ratified by the Board of Super- visors. It is highly unusual for an elected Board to pro- ceed in an entirely different direction and consider under- taking the development of a piece of property, as a private party might, when local residents have not only expressed an interest in purchasing the property, but have actually raised the cash to buy it! It is equally unusual for a public agency to bid on a piece of property at public auction, es- pecially when legal mechanisms exist to purchase the property directly on a negotiated basis. Unfortunately, this is the solution that the City' s Real Estate Department has recommended, and I feel this alternative has many shortcomings. Unless the District was positive that no bid would be received, the price could escalate or even be bid beyond the District' s reach. If an auction did fail, the District could continue to negotiate a direct purchase. However, time delays would be inordinate. 3) Drop the project, rescind the Land and Water Conservation Fund -grant, disband the assessment district and rely on preserving the open space on the property that might be dedicated as part of a private development project. The District has been actively involved in this project since 1977 , and each step to acquire the property has been carefully and deliberately examined. Not only has the District secured a federal Land and Water Conservation Fund grant in the amount of $1. 1 million, but the local residents have also formed an assessment district to raise an additional $300 ,000. This type of local support is unprecedented in the District. San R-81-48 Page four Mateo county staff has indicated a willingness to participate in the project, and District staff has carefully analyzed the open space and recreation potential of the property. At this time , it is my firm opinion that this parcel of land is highly desirable for public open space and recreation use. The pro- perty' s close-in location and ease of access, coupled with the excellent funding opportunities , make this site one of the highest priorities for District acquisition. I could not support dropping the project short of absolute public apathy on the desirability of this property. 4) Consider exercising the District' s power of eminent domain. Although the power of eminent domain should be exercised only with great care and consideration, it may be an appropriate alternative in the case of the Hassler Health Home property. This property has been "surplus" land for many years and is definitely "for sale" ; the main question becomes price. Price is also the central issue in eminent domain proceedings , de- fined as follows : "Eminent domain" is the inherent power of government to devote private property (or public property when a "higher or better use" is contemplated) to public use upon pay- ment of just and fair compensation. It is inherent in the sovereignty of the state because it is an essential power for the achievement of the ends of our organized self-government. It is a power of constitutional authority, recognized in both the United States and California con- stitutions , which make it subject to the requirement that just and fair compensation be paid for all property ac- quired for public use. The California Legislature has sensibly and specifically enacted statutes which set forth the preservation of open space as a recognized public use , for which the eminent domain power may be exercised. The legislature has also enacted a fairly lengthy set of formal legal procedures which must be followed to exercise the eminent domain power in order to ensure that the rights of the owner are respected in full and that fair and just compensation is paid for all property so acquired. The formal legal procedures, and the case law which has grown up around them, require the filing of an action in court and a determination by the court of what is the "market value" to be paid for the property. Court de- cisions and subsequent statutes have defined "fair market value" as the highest price that would be agreed to by a seller, willing to sell but under no urgent necessity to sell, and a buyer who is ready, willing and able to buy but under no urgent necessity for buying, assuming that both buyer and seller are aware and informed of all possible uses for the property. As so defined, "fair market value" obviously incorporates a substantial degree of subjective judgment. Owners , whose property a governmental agency seeks to acquire, R-81-48 Page five therefore traditionally do whatever they can to draw attention to their property and to increase the sense of importance attached to it, in order to lend the maximum support to their contentions in court as to the high price an informed seller and buyer would be willing to agree upon for their property. Since the land is surplus to the City' s needs and the public need and necessity for open space and low-intensive recrea- tional use , such as hiking, is well documented for this property, a court of law may be the most appropriate forum for a price determination. Conclusion: The District has been negotiating in good faith for the purchase of the Hassler Health Home property since October 1979 , approximately two years. The history of interest in the property for open space and recreation use dates back to- 1974 , and possibly as early as 1972 when the health facility was finally abandoned. When the Dis- trict entered into negotiations , it was expected that a final settlement would take several years; not only does San Francisco' s staff have a reputation of being difficult negotiators , but the property itself involved several complex issues including the Hetch-Hetchy tunnels , sewer capacity, Crestview/Edgewood access ,. and the disDo§ition of the substantial improvements on tne property. It should be pointed out that the City of San Francisco has never had the property formally appraised, nor have they been willing to spend City funds to prepare the property for sale (survey, access determination and description, sewer rights resolution, etc. ) . Even though the Real Estate Department has been cooperative , originally supporting and encouraging the offer of $2 . 24 million, and later recommending to the Board of Supervisors the sale of the property to the District at $2 . 5 million, they have now changed their position and are recommending a public auction. District staff intends to continue working with San Francisco repre- sentatives including the Finance Committee , to accomplish a direct sale of the property to the District. However, the Committee' s hearing has been continued on several occasions , and it is now anticipated the Committee will discuss the disposition of the property later this month. If, however, this item is not heard by the end of January, 1982 , 1 feel the District must take other action. As outlined above, the alternatives of public auction or dropping the project do not appear satisfactory and therefore , some combination of a continued effort with San Francisco and consideration of eminent domain action must be con- sidered. It is important that the District' s constituency have an opportunity to address these alternatives- before any- final recommendation as to which direction the District should take is made. Recommendation : I recommend that you invite members of the public to comment specifically on the alternatives listed above , and based upon that input, instruct staff to report back at a subsequent Board meeting on the consensus and direction for future action. R-81-48 Page six Members of the public should also be encouraged to comment on their current feelings of need for this site as a close-in low-intensity recreational area for uses such as hiking, horseback riding, grass picnicking, kite flying, nature study, and photography. It appears that more specific information would be available after San Francisco' s Finance Committee has heard the matter. If they have not considered this item by the end of January, 1982 , 1 think wo can assume that this item may be delayed indefinitely. Therefore , it is recommended that you direct staff to present this matter for your consideration at the first meeting in February, 1982. -13n MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94,322 (415) 965-4717 Hassler Health Home information and Chronology Description: The Hassler Health Home property is a 293 acre site on Edgewood Road near 1-280 in an unincorporated area of San Mateo adjacent to the City of San Carlos , owned by the City and County of San Francisco. There are several buildings on the site -- the former Hassler Health Home -- built in 1926 as a tuberculosis sanitarium under the supervision of Dr. William C. Hassler, a San Francisco physician. The Center was closed in 1972 . 1974 : San Carlos voters approved a tax levy not to exceed 7� . This tax override would have allowed the City to pay $1 . 1 million for the property -- as matching funds if other sources of revenue could be found. San Carlos subsequently was turned down twice for federal fundings (a 50% matching grant) for the land -through the Department of the Interior. ' San Mateo County also declined to help with the funding. 1976 : State Department of Corrections considered using the property as a prison facility. Citizens protested this use of the site . The State dropped its plans to use the site for a prison, citing the high cost of the extensive remodeling needed . , Feb. ' 77 : The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District pledged support of up to $1. 05 milli-on to buy the land which was price'. at $2 . 1 million, with the City of San Carlos and other sources to pay the other half. Aug. ' 77 : The San Carlos City Council declined to participate in the purchase. Sept. ' 77 : 11ROSD applied for a $1 million federal Land and Water Conservation Fund grant. $550 , 000 was granted in January 1978 . Nov. 14 , ' 77 : San Carlos City Council asked the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors to consider the joint purchase of the property along with MROSD. The County did not respond favorably. Apr. ' 78 : San Mateo County Supervisors considered rezoning the site from residential estate to resource management , which requires each lot to be judged on factors such as slope and soil composition. Resource management zoning allows the county to require lot sizes between five and 40 acres . This issue is still pendingilerbertA G,ench.Gene,-a!Manager Board ot Urectors:Katherine Duffy.Bxbira Green,Nonette G Wnko.R,CharC!S B:shop.EcK,.,ardG SheNey Harry A Txn-,r.D3nie1G Wend.n Page two Sept. 178 : Federal Land and Water Grant funding increased to $1. 1 million. Sept. 27 , 178 : MROSD Board held a Public Hearing at San Carlos High School to assess current public attitudes regarding preservation of the site as open space. Nov. 1 , ' 78 : MROSD Board discussed alternate funding sources for purchase of the Hassler property. Jan. 179 : Discussions on the formation of an assessment district in San Carlos to help purchase the Hassler property . District Board authorized Legal Counsel to prepare a resolution authorizing expenditure of funds in connection with initiation of a Hassler assessment district. Feb. 14 , ' 79 : 1 MROSD Board adopted a resolution stating the District' s willingness and intention to purchase $300 ,000 of City of San Carlos Assessment District Bonds for purchase of the Hassler property. March 14 , 179 : District Board decided to continue to delay signing of an , agreement for State Land and Water Conservation Funds for the Hassler property until the results of the assessment district petition drive were known. June 1 , ' 79 : Appraisal for property completed -- $2 , 000 ,000 (less $126 , 000 for demolition costs) August 22, 179 : Staff reported to Board that the San Carlos City Council had passed necessary resolutions scheduling a protest hearing to determine whether or not the Hassler assessment district was to be formed . Sept. 12 , ' 79 : MROSD Board reviewed the draft agreement out- lining the terms, conditions , and relative responsibilities oi- tIne District and the City of San Carlos in regard to the formation of the Hassler assessment district. Sept. 24 , ' 79 : The Council of the City of San Carlos voted unanimously in favor of the formation of the Hassler assess- ment- district and referred the draft agreement to the City' s attorney and the attorney for the assessment district for final revisions. Final document approved by San Carlos City Council on October 9 , 1981. Oct. 10 , 179 : MROSD Board authorized execution of the federal Land and Water Counservation grant for the Hassler property and instructed staff to proceed with negotiations with the City and County of San Francisco to purchase the property . Oct. 16 , ' 79 : Appraisal for property approved by State; District authorized to proceed with the acquisition based upon approved documentation . 1979/1980 : Various meetings with San Francisco Real Estate Department in attempt to negotiate purchase of the site. Page. three April 9 , 180 : District staff directed to solicit recreational use proposals for health home buildings according to grant criteria. May 28 , 180 : District held public hearing on proposed use of the Hassler buildings. Discussion focused on use of the buildings as a youth hostel by Golden Gate Council of American Youth Hostels , Inc. July 9 , 180 : District meeting considering possible recreational uses of the Hassler buildings . Board authorized staff to expend up to $13,000 for the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and analysis of demolition of the Hassler buildings. July 24 , 180 : Appraisal for property updated to $2 ,240 , 000 (less $186 , 000 for demolition costs) October 8 , ' 80 : MROSD Board of Directors adopted resolution to make a formal offer to the City and County of San Francisco to purchase the Hassler Health Home property for $2 . 24 million . October IG , 180 : District staff sent letter to San Francisco making formal offer to purchase the property. October 22, ' 80 : MROSD Board concurred with request from Golden Gate Council of American Youth Hostels , Inc . to delete a youth hostel concept from planning considerations for the Hassler buildings . 1980/1981 : Continued meetings with San Francisco to obtain Health Department- concurrence in purchase ; presentation to Public Utilities Commission for permission to cross Water Department land with access road; access road survey; preparation of ordinance for direct sale to District. March 25 , ' 81 : staff reported to Board that ,tiff had. contracted with an engineering firm to prepare an Initial Study for the demolition of the Hassler buildings. May 5, ' 81 ; Appraisal for property updated to $2 , 450 , 000 (less $208 , 000 for demolition costs) July 31 , ' 81 ; Letter sent from San Francisco Real Estate Depart- ment to Board of Supervisors recommending direct sale of the Hassler property to the District for $2 , 500 ,000 . Matter was subsequently referred to the City ' s Finance Committee. Sept. 23 , ' 81: Finance Committee of Board of Supervisors for the City and County of San Francisco met to discuss the sale of the Hassler property. item referred back to City staff for consideration of the City developing the property or selling property at public auction. c Page four Sept . 23 , ' 81 : MROSD staff_ reported to Board that District received extension on Land and Water Conservation Fund grant for. Hassler property until July 1, 1982 . Nov. 14 , ' 81 : Staff of City and County of San Francisco sent report to Finance Committee on sale or possible development alternatives for Hassler property. -- \ y'.ecrl� �/ , 1 .�.. '\\�\ y- ,. lam' - AN High )r Su Water ell V� POO P 16 r 600, q f �7 It,IN -IL It F.. .......... W .......... -,Too = Belmont San 7� 4.3 X, .7, 4 K ;co 2.6 L H AND 1.3 REFUGE V'4 (USGS) 22 HASSLER P 2 2-8 1.2 1" NORTH 'RTH j Claims 81-24 "ecember 10 ,1981 .eeting 81-29 Revised MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT C L A I M S # Amount Name Description 2698 $ 750.00 California Advocates , Inc. Legislative Consultant ' s Fee- November 2699 69 . 00 Cardillo Travel Agency, Tnc. Out-of-To-vm Meeting Expense- Herbert Grench 2700 213. 00 Communications Research Co . Equipment maintenance-Nov. 2701 300. 00 Susan Cretekos Patroling Windmill Pasture-Nov. 2702 209. 04 H.S . Crocker Co . , Inc . Office Supplies 2703 64. 67 Ewert ' s Photo Audio-Visual Equipment 2704 280. 42 Herbert Grench Out-of-Town Meeting Expense 2705 60 . 39 Image Technology, Inc. Photo Processing 2706 61 . 60 Stanley R. Norton Telephone , Copying and Meal Conference Expenses-October 2707 623. 41 Mobil Oil Corporation District Vehicle Expense 2708 2 . 77, City of Palo Alto Utilities Utilities 2709 36. 00 San Mateo Times Newspaper Subscription 2701 89. 00 Scott 0. Reese Partial Reimbursement for Land Manager Interview 2702 324. 84 Shell Oil Co. District Vehicle Expense 2703 105 . 82 Uno Graphics Brochures-Windmill Pasture 2704 40. 00 U. S . Postal Service Bulk Mailing Permit-1982 2705 7.5 . 89 Norney' s Office Supplies 2706 750. 16 Pacific Telephone Telephone Service 2707 150 . 00 Eric Mart Refund-Ranger Residence Deposit 2708 13. 77 Monta Vista Garden Center Road Repair-Fremont Older OSP 2709 4,500.00 Christopher E. Taaffe Rental-MceTiel Property 2710 5 ,.341 . 97 Rogers , Vizzard, and Tallett Legal Services-October 2711 65 . 20 Mary Gundert Private Vehicle Expense 2712 195. 98 PG and E Utilities 2713 167. 91 Petty Cash Meal Conferences , Postage, Private Vehicle Expenses Office Supplies , Seminar's and Training, Photo Processing, Printing , and Miscellaneous C71 Expenses . Claims 81-24 December 10,1981 fleeting 81-29 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT C L A I M S # Amount Name Description 2698 $ 750.00 California Advocates , Inc. Legislative Consultant's Fee- November 2699 69. 00 Cardillo Travel Agency, Inc. Out-of-Town Meeting Expense- Herbert Grench 2700 213. 00 Communications Research Co . Equipment Maintenance-Nov. 2701 300. 00 Susan Cretekos Patroling Windmill Pasture-Nov. 2702 209. 04 H.S . Crocker Co. , Inc . Office Supplies 2703 64. 67 Ewert ' s Photo Audio-Visual Equipment 2704 280. 42 Herbert Grench Out-of-Town Meeting Expense 2705 60. 39 Image Technology, Inc. Photo Processing 2706 61. 6.0 Stanley R. Norton Telephone , Copying and Meal Conference Expenses-October 2707 623.41 Mobil Oil Corporation District Vehicle Expense 2708 2. 77, City of Palo Alto Utilities Utilities 2709 36. 00 San Mateo Times Newspaper Subscription 2701 89. 00 Scott 0. Reese Partial Reimbursement for Land Manager Interview 2702 324. 84 Shell Oil CO. District Vehicle Expense 2703 105 . 82 Uno Graphics Brochures-Windmill Pasture 2704 40. 00 U. S. Postal Service Bulk Mailing Permit-1982 2705 7.5 . 89 Norney' s Office Supplies 2706 750. 16 Pacific Telephone Telephone Service 2707 150. 00 Eric Mart Refund-Ranger Residence Deposit 2708 13. 77 Monta Vista Garden Center Road Repair-Fremont Older OSP 2709 40500.00 Christopher E. Taaffe Rental-McNiel Property 2710 5 ,'341 .97 Rogers , Vizzard, and Tallett Legal Services--October 2711 65. 20 Mary Gundert Private Vehicle Expense 2712 195. 98 PG and E Utilities MLDPETtIMSULA REGICIAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: F-Y-I- DATED: '12J4/81 y MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 3172 Emerson Street Palo Alto, California November 17, 1981 Myron Myers 24600 Olive Tree Lane Los Altos Hills, California Dear Mike : Thank you for your letter concerning our ordinance which prohibits walking dogs on District preserves. The Board has received several letters from members of the public on both sides of this issue. As a result, last year we established a Board committee to review the ordinance. Because of some changes in staff, the committee has been delayed in holding their first meeting. I am now assured by Herb Grench, our General Manager, that the committee will be able to meet in the Spring. You will be apprised of the date and time. My own personal view on the subject is that since the walking - dog prohibition was adopted as a part of a package of protective measures early in the District's acquisition years , the District was not then the owners ( in behalf of the public ) of such large holdings where historically dog owners have walked their dogs. While I see great merit in the District's determination to protect and restore the natural habitat of the wildlife whose homes are there, I am hopeful that with good planning on our part, that some portions of at least some of the preserves can continue to pro- vide "room - to - breathe " for man's best friend also. Thank you again for your letter. Sincerely Yours, Nonette Hanko MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415) 965-4717 November 25, 1981 Board of Supervisors Santa Clara County County Government Building 70 West Hedding San Jose, CA 95110 Dear Chairman Diridon and Members of the Board: As I mentioned on November 17, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has been interested in the acquisition of Mt. Umunhum for park and open space purposes for several years and has been actively involved with federal officials for the last two years. Over the last few years the District has acquired about 1600 acres of land south of Highway 17 as it has been available, including a parcel which almost surrounds Mt. Umunhum. Our intention is to create in the long term a large, virtually wilder- ness area that is close to our urban population. Mt. Umunhum would be an excellent access point and hub of a hiking and equestrian trail system for the area. The County trails plan recognizes this fact. A view point and picnicking area could eventually be ,built there, and a study might uncover recreational use potential for some of the existing structures. There are lovely sweeping views of South Santa Clara County and Monterey Bay over the Sierra Azul from this 3500 foot peak. Furthermore, we believe that a prison facility or other highly developed use is in- appropriate for this remote location in the hillside area where County policies have been to preserve and protect the natural qualities of the land. Therefore, we believe the site should be transferred to the District for the long term. We recognize, however, that the County has a serious jail overcrowding problem at the present time. Therefore, we propose that the County and District work toqether to effectuate a no-cost transfer of the site from the federal government to the District. As part of the arrangement, the District would be willina to lease the property at no cost to the County for a period of, say, up to seven years if you indeed decide you need to go ahead on this site. We are concerned that if the County proceeds with a lease directly from the federal government without agreeing with the District initially as to the longer term use of the property, then it would be very difficult for the District to acouire the property should the County want to retain it. Basically, we hope you will agree that the best land use is for park and open space purposes and make a commitment that other solutions to the jail problem will have to be found after a maximum lease period. 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 Board of Supervisors Santa Clara County November 25, 1981 Page two Speaking for my Board, we ask that you direct staff to work with us now along these lines. We appreciate the spirit of cooperation that has always been most evident between the County and District and look forward to working with you further on this project. Sincerely yours, Herbert Grench General Manager HG:ej cc: MROSD Board of Directors APPLICATION FOR OFFICE USE7ON ] Civic Center PERMISSION TO OCCUPY FACILITIES Other Rental Fee $18. 0 SEQUOIA UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT $20. 00 additional for PA System from 7 : 30-10 : 30 p.m TO: Sequoia Union High School District Board of Trustees: Date of Application The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District hereby applies for permission to occupy Rooms Multi-Purpose at San Carlos Hi qh School SPECIAL NEEDS Date Dec. 10, '81 Day Thursday Hours 7 :30 PM to 10:30 PM A 'system preferably with several mikes; Table & Date Day Hours to chairs to seat 11-12 faci nq public seatino.* Description of Activity Public Meeting by MROSD Board of Directors to hear public comments regarding matters of interest to citizens of San Carlos/San Mateo County * PLEASE NOTIFY IF SPECIAL NEEDS CANNOT BE MET Estimated number in attendance at meeting 100 An admission fee of $ none will be charged. The proceeds will be used for We bereby certify that we sball be personally responsible on bebalf of our organisation for any damage sustained by the scbool building or furniture accruing tbrougb the occupancy of said building by our organisation. We agree to conform to all the rules and regulations of the Board of Trustees applying to building usage and we furtber agree to indemnify and bold barmless the SEQUOIA UNION NIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT from any and all liability arising out of bodily injuries, including deatb, resulting tberefrom, as well as for damage to property,including the loss of use tbereof, resulting or alleged to bane resulted from the use or occupancy by Midpeninsula Reqional Open Space District Organization and/or Individual Responsible of the demised premises, .(Signed) (Authorized Representative) ADDRESS 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1 CITY Los Altos, CA, c1N�2v PHONE No.965-4717 Application Approved ' (School Official) // more than one time usage is requested, the organization must provide insurance coverage showing the School District as co-insured. 1377 Rev. '73 amww MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415) 965-4717 December 8 , 1981 Mr. John Catchings Assignment Editor KGO-TV 277 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 Dear Mr. catchings: I 'm sending you some background information on the Hassler Health Home property, which will be the subject of a public hearing at San Carlos High School at 7:30 p.m. this Thursday night, December 10. (Directions to the high school are enclosed, on the back of the meeting notice. ) The materials should explain the issue from the point of view of the Open Space District, which has been engaged in a long and frustrating effort to purchase the land from the City and County of San Francisco for use as a public open space preserve and recreational area. The neighbors of the property have wanted to save the land for many years and have formed their own assessment district to help finance the purchase. The District has obtained a million dollar federal grant for the same purpose and has made San Francisco a cash offer of $2. 5 million--the estimated fair market value of the 293-acre site. But San Francisco is now indicating that it may put the property up for sale at public auction in the hope of selling to a private real estate developer for a higher price. And their decision may be delayed so long that our federal grant could expi,re, in the meantime. Thursday night's hearing will be for the purpose of stating the District 's position and for receiving public comment on this issue. We expect a large and vociferous turnout! For more information and other points of view on the matter , you might wish to contact the following people: San Francisco Supervisor Louise Renne, Chairman of the Finance Committee: 558-5015 Fred Endicott, key member of the citizens ' movement to save the Hassler property: 593-1720 (home) 494-4183 (office) Richard Bishop, President of the MROSD Board of Directors: 393-0875 (home) 420-8550 (office) 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 Vlerdin