HomeMy Public PortalAbout19831207 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 83-29 Meeting 83-29
(The December 28, Z983
Regular Meeting was
rescheduled by the Board
to this date. )
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
REGULAR MEETING
BOARDF DIRECTORS
Wednesday A G E N D A 375 Distel Circle, D-1
December 7, 1983 Los Altos, California
*(7:00) ROLL CALL
CLOSED SESSION (Land Negotiations and Litigation Matters)
*(7:30) APPROVAL OF MINUTES (November 22, 1983)
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(7:45) 1 . Hassler Restoration Plans -- D. Wendin
(8:30) 2. Dedication and Naming of Easements Acquired From The Trust for Hidden
Villa -- C. Britton
NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(8:35) 3. Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan -- D. Hansen
(9:20) 4. Proposed Addition to Long Ridge Open Space Preserve - Chesebrough
Property -- C. Britton
Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of Purchase Agreement, Authorizing Officer
to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing
General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appro-
priate to Closing of the Transaction (Long Ridge Open Space Preserve - Lands
of Chesebrough--San Mateo County) .
Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of Purchase Agreement, Authorizing Officer
to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing
General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appro-
priate to Closing of the Transaction (Long Ridge Open Space Preserve--Lands
of Chesebrough--Santa Cruz County) .
Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of an Agreement for Purchase and Sale of
Real Property, Authorizing Officer to Execute Grant Deed for Interest in
Property Being Released, Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of
Acceptance of Conservation Easement, and Authorizing General Manager to
Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing
the Transaction (Long Ridge Open Space Preserve--Sempervirens Fund).
(9:35) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
CLAIMS
CLOSED SESSION (Land Negotiations and Litigation Matters)
ADJOURNMENT
*PLEASE NOTE THAT THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN AT 7:30 P.M.
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 83-28
�. 0 ,
MIDPENINSUL,A REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTIL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)9654717
SPECIAL MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NOVEMBER 22, 198
MINUTES
I. ROLL CALL
President Daniel Wendin called the meeting to order at 7 : 05 P.M.
in Room 298 of the San Carlos City Hall, 666 Elm Street, San
Carlos.
Members Present: Katherine Duffy, Daniel Wendin, Teena Henshaw, Edward
Shelley, Marry Turner, and Richard Bishop. Nonette Hanko arrived at
7: 12 P.M.
Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Craig Britton, David Hansen, Stanley
Norton, Jean Fiddes, Charlotte MacDonald, and James Boland.
II. CLOSED SESSION
The Board recessed to closed session on land negotiation and litigation
matters.
The Board reconvened for the Public Meeting in the San Carlos City Council.
Chambers at 7 : 35 P.M.
:III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A) November 2 , 1983
J. Fiddes stated the minutes being considered for approval were incorrectly
dated and were the minutes for the October 26, 1983 Regular Meeting.
Motion: N. Hanko moved the approval of the minutes as corrected. K. Duffy
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
IV. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
J. Fiddes stated the Board received written communications from the
following individuals or groups favoring the preservation of the Hassler
buildings and the San Mateo Arts Council ' s proposal for an arts and nature
center:
1. Susan Trubow, Peninsula Serigraphers, San Mateo;
2. Nicholas Isaacs, Corresponding Secretary, Music Teachers ' Associ-
ation of California, Palo Alto Branch;
3. Marguerite L. King, Los Altos;
4 . Frederick Wells, Supervisor of Performing Arts, City of Palo Alto;
5. Thera Rabinowitch, Palo Alto;
6. Joseph E. Judge, Past President, Brittan Heights Condominium
Association, San Carlos;
7 . Roberta Wood, Sunset Drive, San Carlos;
8 . Tannisse E. Brown, Palo Alto;
9 . Marcia Szabo, Cupertino;
10. T. Jack Foster, Foster Enterprises, Ltd.,, Foster City;
11 . Sandra Goodwin, Atherton;
12. Sheila V. Sardi, Mountain View;
13 . Dana Marie Bunnett, Coordinator, San Mateo County Very Special
Arts Festival;
14 . Joseph Saitta, Palo Alto;
Hem=^A G er,,r Ger erar.Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green.Nonette G Hanko.Richard S.Bishop.Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner.Daniel G VWtnd:n
Meeting 83-28 Page two
15. Eleanor and Cy Jobson, Brittan Avenue, San Carlos; and
16. Irving Klein, The California Music Center, Inc. , Morgan Hill .
She said Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Rick, Leslie Drive, San Carlos had expressed
their opposition to retention of the buildings via a telephone call.
She stated the Board had also received a letter from Suzanne Brillhart,
Sandra Blackburn, and Debbie Powell of Fremont requesting that Canyon
Trail be reevaluated, that markings be posted at unclear points, and that
they be reimbursed $20. 00, the amount they paid a person to drive them
back to their car after becoming lost on Canyon Trail;
a letter from Thomasene Dutton, Los Altos, regarding the upper house at
Rancho San Antonio and stating it is her hope that possible future use
of the house will not enhance the over-use problems the preserve may
soon face; and
an invitation from Phyllis Cangemi to attend the Whole Access Project' s
Training Program for Administrators and Policy Makers on January 12, 1984.
V. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
The agenda was adopted as presented by Board consensus.
V1 . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were no oral communications.
VII . PUBLIC HEARING
Status of the Hassler Site Restoration Plans
After reviewing the procedure that would be followed, D. Wendin
declared the Public Hearing open at 7 :46 P.M.
Walt Worthge, President- of the San I'Mateo Arts Council, expressed thanks
to the Board for placing the matter on the agenda, to various public offi-
cials, including Congressmen Zschau and Lantos , . and Assemblyman Naylor, the
San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, and the San Carlos City Council for
supporting the Council 's proposal, and to other agencies and individuals
who had given support to the Arts Council 's project. He said the
Council wanted to preserve a major asset in San Mateo County that could
be used for many generations to come, and noted he hoped the Council 's
presentation tonight could relieve some of the frustrations, anxieties,
and misunderstandings that some people, particularly the Brittan
Heir-thts residents, had about the project.
Barbara Wiesner showed the Council 's slide presentation, A Creative
Center for Arts and Nature.
Ruth Waters discussed materials she had distributed to the Board, in-
cluding the Adamson and Associates report that included rehabilitation
and operating costs estimates. She outlined the manaaement structure
of the arts center and said projected annual operating costs would
include salaries, maintenance, and utility costs, which the Council
hoped would be balanced by projected revenues . She noted restoration
costs, based on information from Adamson and Associates, were staggering
from the point of view of fundraising and that the Council was looking
at what had to be done in terms of restoration, as opposed to what
could be done, as well as how volunteer efforts could be utilized to
reduce costs. She stated that Option F-- (the two houses, the first
three tiers of buildings, and the garage) , rather than costing $1 . 5
million, could be accomplished for $496 , 000 if volunteer help were
used for much of the work.
Meeting 83-28 Page three
Nancy Jalonen, Executive Director of the San Mateo Arts Council, dis-
cussed funding for the project. She noted efforts had been . directed
to major donors, and to date the following pledges had been received .
$25,000 from David and Lucille Packard, either through their foundation
or as individuals, and $10,000 from, Dr. Stanley Hanfiing, who had
also offered to raise '$150, 000 in the next six to twelve months, and
$2700 in small contributions. She said the Council had obtained a
line of credit or loan from the Bank of America for the amount of
$115,000 that was guaranteed by one of the ifunders. She said some
potential pledgers are waiting to see the actions and decisions taken
by the District's Board. She noted there was also the potential for
a successful grassroots fundraising effort.
Arlen Gregorio, Chairman of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors,
noted Supervisors Ward and Eschoo had wanted to attend the meeting,
but could not, due to previous commitments. He said the Board of
Supervisors had been touched by the Arts Council 's hope and vision
through their infectious enthusiasm and discussed the seed money that
had been given the Council to pursue further the project. He noted
the third element of the seed money contract was for the Arts Council
to demonstrate that there was community financial support for the
project, stating the Council was to raise $200, 000 by December 1 . He
stated that if the $200, 000 were raised, there would still be a great
deal of fundraising to do. He noted there were some legitimate concerns,
including potential loss of grant funds, the assessment district, and
on-going costs, but noted these concerns added to the challenge of ful-
filling the miracle of what the Arts Council says it can achieve.
Bill Schumacher, - San Mateo County Supervisor, stated the Supervisors
were unanimous in wanting to see something positive arise from this
situation. He noted the Supervisors had rejected the City and County
of San Francisco's request to upzone the Hassler property and had
contributed $100, 000 toward the acquisition of the property. He said
the Supervisors felt they had a partnership with the District, adding
they also had a commitment to arts and the San Mateo Arts Council which
receives funding from the County. He said the Supervisors did not want
to be adversaries of the District and that the Arts Council and the
District should work towards compromise in the matter.
Victor Stoltz, a member of the San Carlos City Council, discussed the
City's position and read from a letter, resulting from a June 13, 1983
Council meetina. , regarding the Arts Council 's proposal, which included
the statement " . . .the Center would be such a tremendous asset to the
region that we feel the Arts Council should be given an opportunity to
provide the solutions that meet with your Board's approval . . . " . Speaking
as a mer=er of the Arts Council Advisory Committee, he spoke in favor
of the Council ' s proposal and discussed the benefits of the proposal,
noting the District collects tax funds from San Mateo County residents,
that irittan Heights residents would continue to have the open space
and recreation for which they assessed themselves; that surrounding
cities and their artists would have the benefit of the buildings made
available to them at a low cost; the property could have maximum use;
and the value of the property would be increased because of the
existence of the buildings.
Meeting 83-28 Page four
Bill Steele, San Carlos City Council member, urged the Board to find a
way to meet the obstacles inherent in this proposal since, if it were
to come to pass, a cultural center would be a great asset to the area.
He noted the Council, referring to the June 13 meeting, felt the
final decision was the District's . Noting that although he did not
consider the Center a violation of open space, he said. hefelt the
members of the assessment district had a lecitimate concern.
Joan Williams, Administrative Assistant for Congressman Ed Zschau,
expressed Congressman Zschauls strong support to preserve the buildings
for an Arts Center, his feelings that this was a rare opportunity to
match the arts and nature, and that he hoped it could be worked out.
Bob Newmark, representing the San Mateo County Historical Resources
Advisory Board, urged the Board to preserve the Hassler buildings,
noting the buildings were not old and provided a history of how tubercu-
losis had been treated. He said the Board felt the Arts Council 's
plans were very possible. He said he was a member of the Sierra Club
and personally did not find the buildings to stand out as an obtrusive
mass .
H. Grench reviewed portions of the staff report (memorandum M-83-134 of
November 16 , 1983) and discussed the main reasons the Board had voted
5 to 2 on July 27 , 1983 to proceed with the removal of the Hassler
buildings and proceed with the restoration of the site to its natural
condition. He said the main reasons given to proceed with the removal
of the buildings included the absence of proof that the texts Council
could raise necessary funds; potential traffic problems; the fact that
limited District funds are raised for and should be spent on open space,
not cultural facilities; the District is not in the business of being a
landlord and having the ultimate responsibility for such intensive
activities as proposed by the Arts Council; that the neighbors of the
site had been promised and expected the buildings to be removed and
the site restored to its natural condition as part of the movement to
raise $300, 000 through assessments; and that the District could most
probably have had the undeveloped portions of the site protected and
trails provided at no cost at all if the District had been willing to go
along with development or redevelopment of the site ' s building area. He
noted that the Board minority either took exception to the reasons
stated or felt they could be overcome, felt that the buildings were
attractive and should be utilized for public purposes, and thought that
a fine marriage of the arts and open space would result. .
He clarified that the demolition bid to remove the buildings and restore
the site to its natural condition was $236 , 000 . He noted that the Dis-
trict could lose up to $1.1 million in federal grant funds if the Arts
Council ' s project were to proceed, and stated that if the area of the
buildings were to be carved out of the area to be funded by the grant,
the remainder of the property would have to have a value of $2. 2 million
in order for the District to receive $1. 1 million in grant funds. Ile
said the area containing the buildings was the heart of the property and
potentially the most important area for open space uses and said arts
center uses were incompatible with quiet open space uses of the site.
C. Britton explained the process involved in determining the value of
the property, noting the District had an approved appraisal for the
property on file with the State in the amount of $2. 5 million. He said
that if only two or three tiers of the building area were carved out
of the grant, the District could lose $200, 000 in grant -funds since the
value of the remaining property would only be $1 . 8 million. He reviewed
Pgetinq 83-28 Pacre five
slope density and geological maps of the site and various development
scenarios for the property noting that the existing footprint of where
the buildings are currently located is the area where any development
would occur, and if the buildings were retained, most of the developable
areas would be wiped out, thus decreasing the fair market value of the
property. He stated he thought it would cost the District about $20,000
to figure out the carve out area and get necessary appraisals and that
the grant funds available after the carve out of the entire building
area would be a loss of approximately $600,000 in grant funds.
D. Hansen reviewed the proposed open space uses for the property,
noting the heart of the property is where the buildings are currently
located and that the buildings were a visual intrusion on the site and
not a part of nature. He stated that the building area could be an open
meadow through which hiking and walking trails would pass. Noting that
the area provided the best views of the Bay, he said people could use the
meadow to enjoy the views, fly kites, have picnics, .and paint paintings.
He stated that the District would be going backwards if a lot of traffic
were introduced on the site and that he felt the Arts Council' s proposal
was an intrusion on open space values.
Craig J. Mathias, a member of the Brittan Heights Condominium Associ-
ation's Board of 'Directors and Chief Financial Officer, speaking in
behalf of the Association's Board of Directors, stated the Brittan
Heights homeowners had seen fit to tax themselves in the interest of
the envirorLment to preserve the vanishing open space in the area;
that their contribution had helped to make the Hassler acquisition a
reality; and that theyhad no special interest group in mind when they
taxed themselves. He questioned where the Arts Councilwas between
the years 1978 and 1982 when the assessment district worked to preserve
the land and why the Council felt they had a claim to the property.
He stated the residents of Brittan Heights wanted the property to be
open space and said the Board of Directors of the Brittan Heights
Condo-minium Association would not allow Hassler to be used for any
special interest purpose. He urged the District's Board to reaffirm
its stand.
Edward French, President, Palomar Property Owners Association, said the
Association favored the preservation of the Hassler buildings, noting
they were a valuable asset for community use.
Clarisse Eber, 3341 Brittan Avenue, #2, San Carlos, speaking as an
employee of the University of California, noted she had been assessed
for open space and recreation purposes and spoke in favor of preservina
the buildings for an Arts Center. She stated the medical history of
the buildings was essential to relating the history of tuberculosis
treatment, discussed the medical history of the buildings, and expressed
the support of other individuals to preserve the buildings . She dis-
cussed the ramps as a valuable asset for use of the site bythe
physically disabled, and use of the barns by 4-H members.
Dana Bunnett, Coordinator, San Mateo County Special Arts Festival
Comamittee, expressed her support for the Arts Council 's proposal, noting
how disabled artists would benefit from the preservation of the buildings
and the -,ossible use of a large room for an on-going day program in the
arts for emotionally and physically disabled. She said the proposal
would allow art to become accessible.
Seeting 83-28 Page six
John N. Thomas , 3295 La Mesa Drive, #8, San Carlos, expressed his
opposition to the Arts Council 's proposal, noting members of the assess-
ment district assessed themselves $600 each for open space. he stated
no other group had come forward to help purchase the property. He
said that if the Arts Council "won" , he would ao to court to get the
assessment district's money back, as well as challenge the Board of
Supervisors ' authority to use $25, 000 of taxpayers ' money for the project.
George Kirk, Assistant Chief of the Palomar Park Volunteer Fire Depart-
ment, noted his group had trained at the Hassler site since 1972 and
will continue to provide fire protection when called to the site. He
said the Department favored utilization of the buildings in some con-
structive way and expressed his support for the Arts Council 's project.
Elia Van '_uyl, 4017 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, a member of the
Advisory Coz.mittee to preserve the Hassler facility, but speaking as a
District constituent, expressed his support for the Arts Council ' s
proposal. He noted the disabled, elderly, youth, and children could
use the site and it would help meet the needs of the District's con-
stituents. He said the only people opposing the Arts Council 's project
were members of the assessment district and urged the Board to keep in
mind the needs of all its constituents.
Karl Schmidt, a teacher at Foothill College and a choir director in
Los Altos, discussed the buildings ' inspirational value and noted the
buildings could provide retreat access for schools, community groups,
and churches and thus, be an asset to the community.
Richard Hill , a member of the Board of Directors of the Brittan Heights
Homeowners ' Association and the group that had helped form the assess-
ment district, expressed his opposition to the Arts Council 's proposal,
noting the members of the assessment district had put their money where
their mouths were to help acquire the property. Ile said he felt be-
trayed, noting residents had assessed themselves for open space, not
noise or concerts.
Lou E. Howard, a past president of the Brittan Heights Condominium Associ-
ation, spoke against the Arts Council 's proposal . He discussed some
of the history to save the Hassler site prior to the District's involve-
ment, noting the State Department of Corrections had found the buildings
unsuitable for a prison since they were not built to earthquake standards,
said ha assumed that since the buildings were not suitable for a prison.,
they were not suitable for an arts center, and noted that in 197E the
City of San Carlos said it could not participate in the acquisition of
the Hassler property due to the constraints of Proposition 13 . Mr.
Howard stated that the members of the assessment district had been
told the Hassler property would be open space with no comrcercial ventures
on the property, and said the Arts Council now wanted to share in the
action, noting the Council wanted to usurp the Hassler project and had
no right at this late date to capitalize on the assessment district's
effort and money .
Jim Goesser, 222 Frances Lane, San Carlos, stated the buildings were a
valuable San Mateo County resource and should be preserved. He dis-
cussed the amount of support for the project coming from San Mateo
public officials and said he felt the project was worthwhile.
Ellis Rother, 903 Sunset Drive, San Carlos, a former mayor of the City
of San. Carlos , stated he was also speaking for Joseph Judge. Ile said
Hassler had been saved from development and preserved for open space
and said the Arts Council P F
project does not violate open space uses
and makes valuable buildings available for public use. He expressed
Meeting 83-28 Page seven
his support for the proposal . He said groups had not come forward
earlier and made proposals for use of the property since it had been
owned by the City and County of San Francisco.
Wayne Swan, 240 Kellogg Avenue, Palo Alto, spoke in favor of the Arts
Council 's proposal, said there is a super abundance of open space
already in the area, the heart of the Hassler property where the
-buildings are is only 7% of the total acreage and is already developed,
and people are losing open space, noting the sale of school sites
for urban development. He said the Board had a great resource and
opportunity and should adapt the structures to more creative use.
Edgar Gihnan, 3350 La Mesa Drive, #4 , San Carlos, expressed his opposition
to the Arts Council 's proposal , noting traffic problems are being gen-
erated on Crestview Drive. He discussed noise that would result from
the proposal and said nothing would be the same if the arts center
were developed. He said he had been promised and paid for open space
and that is what he wanted.
Fred Endicott, 3336 Brittan Avenue, #14, San Carlos, stated several
thousand volunteer hours over a two year period had gone into the
formation of the assessment district. He said the effort that had
been put into the formation had been done with the understanding the
land would be kept as open space. He said the philosophy and purpose
of the Open Space District was not to create intensive use of the land.
He questioned the use of the buildings such as the dormitories, the
amount of noise that would result from an arts center, the impact on
wildlife which is abundant in the area now. He said it was not the
District's purpose to support- the arts and that he did not support
the Arts Council 's proposal.
David Harris, 4204 George Avenue, #3, San Mateo, expressed support
for the Arts Council 's proposal, noting he felt part of the heritage
of the area was on the blocks. He cited the loss of the Mills Estate
and the Sixteen Mile House in San Mateo County. He stated grass
roots advocates of the Council ' s proposal would assess themselves to
support the proposal which could benefit the entire County.
Ross A. Frazier, 3368 La Mesa Drive, San Carlos, stated that seven
years ago only Brittan Heights residents were interested in saving
the Hassler property from development. He said the Arts Council was a
Johnny-come- lately who wanted to be now a part of the assessment
district ' s action to preserve the property as open space. He noted it
was understood by members of the assessment district that the buildings
would be torn down and the land restored to its natural condition and
said that if the buildings area was carved out, no open space would
be left and what was left would be dominated by the buildings.
Jim Federer, 4008 Haines Avenue, San Jose, stated he was representing
Parents Helping Parents and United Cerebral Palsy, noted he was speaking
as a parent of disabled children, and said disabled people needed open
space where they could interact with other individuals . He said the
Hassler buildings were a unique asset to the disabled community, that
he was not advocating use of the buildings by any one group, and that
the buildings should not be demolished.
Bob Lanzone, 2325 Eaton, San Carlos, stated he owned a unit in Brittan
Heights and voted for the assessment district. He expressed his
support for the Arts Council ' s proposal , noting noise and traffic
problems could be controlled . He said the Arts Council ' s proposal
would benefit the entire community, that the Hassler buildings existed
when people bought units in the Brittan Heights .deve lopment, that if
Meeting 83-28 Page e1qnt
the area were pristin pen space, it would be p_ ate open space for
only Brittan Heights residents, and that the Council 's proposal was
of outstanding cultural value.
Pat Keller, Keller and Daseking, Architects, Menlo Park, an architect
employed by the District for the Hassler project, discussed the con-
-struction estimates prepared by Adamson and Associates, noting various
items were not included, such as insulation costs, Titli� 24 energy
requirements, underground utilities, and the use of the boiler. He
said actual square footage costs would be much higher than quoted in
the report. He also discussed California and San Mateo County building
codes for use by the handicapped and noticed the ramps do not comply
with current codes and discussed the slopes in the buLlding area. Mr.
Keller said the buildings do not meet seismic requirements and were no
better than the buildings in Coalinga.
Jerry O'Donnell, 3355 Brittan Avenue, ITr4, San Carlos, expressed his
opposition to the Council 's proposal, noting the site would be re-
stricted to a few, rather than open to everyone. He said open space
was not walking by studios reading plaques, viewing named wings, and
paying user fees .
Cliff Nelson, 416 Pearl Avenue, San Carlos, expressed support for the
Council 's project, noting the San Carlos City Council amd the San Mateo
Board of Supervisors also supported the project. He said he hoped the
buildings would not be destroyed because of their architectural and
historical significance.
Elliott Klein, 140 Beulah Street, San Francisco, a member of the
Arts Council ' s staff, suggested that, if Brittan Heights .residents
had been led to believe the buildings would be removed, their assess-
ments be returned and they be given the freedom of choice of supporting
the Hassler acquisition.
Robert Dehner, 165 Leslie Drive, San Carlos, a member of the assessment
district, stated he strongly opposed the Council 's proposal as it
violates the concept of open space and constitutes the arts Council 's
private use of public land. He urged the Board to get on with making
the land open to the public.
Jack Sutorius, 2030 Waverley Street, Palo Alto, compared the Arts
Council ' s proposal to the dream of forming the District, stated he
felt the proposal was wholly in concert with open space policies and
objectives, hoped the Board could find conciliation nor the many needs
and conflicting interests expressed during the meeting, and said the
Board now had an opportunity similar to what a small group had in 1970
when the idea of the District was created.
Bob Fissel Star Route 2 , La Honda, stated the Board should consider the
amount of volunteer effort involved with the Arts Council 's proposal
and look at the proposal from a proactive role. He said the money
Z
collected from the assessment district may have to he refunded, that
the Board should put up a matching grant for the Arts Council , and
urged the Board to be more concerned with uses of the landi, rather
than acquiring more land at this time.
Pamela Mengers, 216 Oak Avenue, Redwood City, discussed the role of art
and the artist in society, stated she felt the arts in general should be
supported by society, noted the benefits that would result with artists
working together in the Hassler buildings , rather than being isolated,
and expressed her support for the Arts Council ' s proposal .
George Duggar, a member of the Arts Council ' s Board of Directors ,
focused his remarks on Mr. Keller ' s remarks regarding the buildings '
Meetinq 83-28 Page nine
rar^ps, noting Mr. Peter Margin from the Center for the Independence of
the Disabled had stated the buildings on the whole lend themselves
easily to meeting standards of accessibility for physically disabled.
Nancy Jalonen stated most of the opinions held on the issue had been
expressed, that the problems that the issue has raised have been raised
by people and people can solve problems, that the problems can be
solved by people of good will working on them, that the project had
provided joy, inspiration, excitement, and the possibility to do some-
thing significant for society, and that the decision is now up to the
Board.
D. Wendin closed the Public Hearing at 10: 30 P.M.
Victor Stoltz stated the demolition of the buildings was not mentioned
in the petition that was circulated to form the assessment district.
Sylvia Ferguson, 707 Continental Circle, Mountain View, stated she
identified strongly with the Arts Council and that the lack of opposition
to the project coming from the other wards should be taken into con-
sideration by individual directors. She discussed the amount of money
the City of San Francisco had spent to protect the buildings.
N. Hanko questioned whether anything had been done in the Arts Council 's
fundraising efforts that would tie the Council to a particular alter-
native with respect to the size of the project. She noted she was
interested in this information because of the possible loss of grant
funding from the Land and Water Conservation Fund because of the
larger number of buildings mentioned in some of the alternatives.
Ruth waters said that Paul Koenig, Environmental Planning Manager for
San Mateo County, had stated the potential loss of grant money due to
a carve out is anon-existent issue and that he had said Congressmen
Lantos ' and Zschau's offices had told him that if there was any loss
of grant funds, they would do everything within their power to see
that it would only be a few dollars.
In response to Director Hanko's question regarding which number of
tiers appealed most to the donors, Mrs . Waters said that potential
donors see potential for the entire building site and cannot understand
why the Arts Council would want to sacrifice any ,of the buildings. She
said she recognized there had to be a meeting of the District's intent
and money before coming to any resolution. She stated that Governor
Deukmejian's office was looking for a suitable place for a State-
sponsored music master class and representatives would tour the Hassler
property to evaluate the potential.
Barbara Wiesner stated most of the donors see the project as a whole
site. She stated she could not speak for the Packard family, but said
Dr. Hanfling viewed the project as a total site vision. She said
the Board should realize that the pledges were based on the Board's
decision and vision. She said donors did not understand reducing the
project by two tiers and that the upper two tiers would serve community
organizations who wanted to spend a day in the wilderness. She stated
use of the dormitories was part of a vision that was in progress and
not in the final stage.
In response to a question from D. Wendin regarding costs concerning
boilers, underground utilities, and sewers, Ruth Waters stated all
utilities were currently underground and a contractor had checked the
boilers . She discussed seismic bracings, the energy coefficients of
the buildings, and whether a sprinkler system would have to be added
where it did not now exist.
Meetinq 83-28 Page ten I
R. Bishop asked what the Council considered as fundraising goals for
completing Phase I of the rehabilitation, specifically the work that
would have to be done by professionals to do basic restoration, with
Phase II to be done by artists themselves to improve the working space.
In response, Ruth Waters stated she considered Phase I to be restoration
of the basic utilities, rehabilitation of the two houses and the first
three tiers, and approximately $200,000 would be needed. She said work
would proceed in phases and fundraising efforts would be on-going.
N. Hanko explained the reasons she did and does continue to support
the Arts Council proposal. Referring to the nine items addressed in
the staff report, she stated the potential loss of federal funds would
be overcome; the Arts Council had shown they can raise the money the
Board of Supervisors had requested; the District, by agreement, should
control traffic uses and compatible uses on the site; limited District
funds should not be used for demolition and the $236,000 would be
better spent as a contribution to the restoration of the buildings;
the buildings allowed for use by the elderly, handicapped, youth, a
large constituency of artists and those who enjoy the arts; there is
an existing environment of trees and shrubs on the site for which
the District should be concerned; the District should not accept the
responsibility for the restoration and that San Mateo County is better
suited for this task; she is not convinced that a majority of the
assessment district members would be unwilling to support the proposal
if the District were to ensure positive uses and have District controls
over abusive uses; and the proposal was a public use. She said the
District had the opportunity to cooperate with San Mateo County on
a project in which environmental education would be a partner of
the arts, and added inspiration and creativity deserve environmental
protection.
H. Turner requested that an item be placed on the Decerruber 7 agenda to
reconsider proceeding with the demolition. He noted he had initially
been concerned with how to do the Arts Council proposal , not whether
to do it, but added the costs and risks to the District could be over-
whelming. He said that under the stipulation of the grant, the District
could not use the $236,000 for restoration; that it was still undetermined
whether $600 ,000 of grant funds would be lost; that the assessment
district had been formed with the understanding the buildings would
be removed and the District's credibility was at stake; that the
project itself was not a mainline District mission and meets the
County's objectives; that San Mateo County should take over the project,
including the costs and risks, and that there were significant costs
associated with further delays and increased costs if the San Mateo
Arts Council could complete the project.
R. Bishop discussed the need for the District to use its money to
acquire and manage open space. He noted the Hassler acquisition had
cost the District more than expected and the federal grant and con-
tribution from the assessment district had helped significantly to
purchase the property. He cited the loss of grant funds, the need to
keep the faith with the assessment district members who had been told
the site would be restored to open space, save one or two of the
smaller buildings that could be used as Ranger residences, the increased
costs to the District if the Arts Council is not successful in over-
coming obstacles, and the expiring bid from the demolition contractor.
He stated he did not favor delaying making a decision and said the
Board should tonight reaffirm its decision- , which he favored, to remove
the buildings . He noted the demolition costs could be raised by a
substantial amount if the bid expires.
meetinq 83-28 Page eleven
E. Shelley stated th-,, although he had heard a, -.Ltional public and
political support for the project tonight, he had not seen a significant
change in the problems that had led him to reject the proposal the
very first time it came before the Board.
D. Wendin noted that, while the Arts Council clearly understood the
District controlled the scope of the project as a landlord, theycere
out selling the maximum scope of the project, pointing out the slide
show discussed a large variety of uses and opening access from the
vista point on Interstate 280. He said an incredibly large amount of
public use was being created, but the District was not the solution,
adding the project was in the wrong place. He said he was troubled
by the assessment district, the loss of grant funds, noting Mr. Koenig
had told him $200,000 could be lost, and the question of sewer rights.
He said the District had already contributed $2 million to this project
and $236,000 should not be spent on the Arts Council 's project. He
stated the Board's Liaison Committee had been discussing with reDre-
senta-11-ives from the San Mateo Board of Supervisors what it would mean
for the County to take over this project, and said Supervisor Gregorio
had made a tentative commitment to place this item on their December 6
aaenda. He stated he felt the Board would not allow the project to
go forward without such a commitment from the County and urged the
Arts Council to get such a commitment from the County.
K. Duffy stated she had supported the Arts Council 's Proposal, expressed
her concern that members of the assessment district felt they could
dictate exactly what types of open space activities would occur on the
site, and said, because of the enormous risks to the District, it
was important to try to get the County to assume the financial risks
involved with the project.
D. Wendin asked for Board consensus that the Liaison Committee continue
to work with County representatives on getting the County to assume
the risk of the project. There was no objection to this assignment
expressed by any member of the Board. D. Wendin clarified that there
are enor-nious risks involved and even though the County may indicate a
willingness to assume some or all of the risks, members of the public
should not construe the Board' s direction to the Committee as a
commitment to undo the vote that had been made to remove the buildings .
T. Henshaw stated that unless factors were to change, she would support
the majority of the Board in the decision to remove the buildings .
Motion: H. Turner moved the Board place as an agenda item for action
at its December 7 meeting reconsideration of the Board's
urior decision to demolish the Hassler buildings. N. Hanko
seconded the motion.
Discussion: R. Bishop stated he would vote against the
motion since he did not feel the Board of Supervisors could
come to any meaningful decision in such a short period of
time and that the District was placing itself in Jeopardy
by not accepting the contractor's bid by December 5.
ALES : D. Wendin, N. Hanko, K. Duffy, T. Henshaw, E. Shelley, and
H. Turner
NOES : R. Bishop
VIII . 31.-SINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
A. nand- of The Trust for Hidden Villa (Formerly Hidden Villa, Inc. ) -
Acc,uisition of Open Space Easements
C. Britton reviewed report R-84-46 of November 17 , 1983 regarding the.
second easement that could be acquired from Hidden Villa which included
the 50 acre ranch area and a 348 acre wilderness area. He said the cost
INeetim 83-28 Paqe twelve
of the easement pure e was $265,426 .20 and ex} ined an apparent dis-
crepancy of 48 acres was discovered during recent negotiations, noting
that staff had accepted Hidden Villa' s acreage estimates for the purposes
of this transaction and that staff would return to the Board for approval
of any recommended compromise.
Motion: K. Duffy moved the approval of Resolution 83-49 ' a Resolution
of the Board of Directors- of the Midpeninsula Regional open
Space District Authorizing officer to Execute Certificate of
Acceptance of Grant to District and Authorizing General Manager
to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate
to Closing of the Transaction (Lands of The Trust for Hidden
Villa) . T. Henshaw seconded the motion. The motion passed
unanimously, with N. Hanko not present for the vote.
B. Rancho Lower House Roof Repair Bids
D. Hansen reviewed memorandum M-83-155- of November 12 , 1983 regarding
bids to re--oof the lower residence and garage at Rancho San Antonio Open
Space Preserve. He noted that Guy's Roofing did not have the lowest
responsible bid since the company' s bid did not include the required fire-
proof layer of sheet rock for a shake roof and declined to furnish a bid
for a fiberglass composition roof. He said staff was recommending the
approval of the $9,472 bid from Roofing Services Company as the lowest
responsible bid for the project.
Motion: D. Wendin moved the Board authorize staff to award the contract
to Roofing Services Company for an amount not to exceed $9 , 472
for reroofing the lower residence and garage at the Rancho
San Antonio Open Space Preserve. E. Shelley seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
IX. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS _.
H. Grench stated the legal research being done on the use of Grandview
Drive and Espinosa Road had not been completed and should be furnished
in December, at which time the staff 'would arrange a meeting with the
homeowners involved.
K. Duffy questioned staff about the Written Communication from the indivi-
duals who had become lost on Canyon Trail. J. Boland stated staff had
contacted the individuals involved and said a sign would be reinstalled
at the trail junction in question. The Board requested a letter of
apology be sent the hikers.
D. Hansen reminded the Board members of the December 3 invitation from
the Stortzes to tour Picchetti. Staff was requested to consult with
S. Norton on whether notification was required for the event.
T. Henshaw stated she had attended the November 18 Ranger meeting.
X. CT I.1,1S
LA
D. Wendin moved the approval of the Revised Claims 83-22 of
November 22 , 1983 . K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion
passed unanimously.
XI. CLOSED SESSION
The Board-did not hold a Closed Session during this part of the meeting.
XII . ADL]TOUPN?%1ENT
The public meeting was adjourned at 11:45 P.M.
Jean H. Fiddes
District Clerk
Claims 83-22
?Meet- , 83-28
P:ove _r 22, 1983
Revised
141DPENLINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
C L A I M S
Fr_ouat Name Description
5810 $ 12.CO =_erigas Oxygen/Acetylene Refill
All 42-19 Ban roft-vTnitney Co. Resource Documents
5812 5.33 :'_thew Bender & Co. Resource Documents
5813 28.34 L. Craig Britton Local Meal Conference
5814 160_77 C_ Safety and Supply Co. Rain Gear for Rangers
'5815 21.14 C.=:d°n Rentals Miscellaneous Supplies
5816 104.56 Ci Water Service Co. Water Service-Rancho San Antonio
Open Space Preserve
5817 213.00 Co=mications Research Co. Radio Service
$818 85.74 The Dark Room Photo Processing
$819 200.00 First American Title Preliminary Title Report
insurance Co.
45820 43. 79 The Frog Pond" Local Meal Conferences
'821 43.15 Graphicstat Artwork Enlargement
y92? 364.00 Herbert Grench Travel Expense-NRPA Computer
Conference
1823 35 .04 Lucia Ham✓ar Reimbursement for Rental Repair
Work
$824 76.53 Harbinger Communications Computer Services-Onensvace
Mailing List
5825 217. 78 ::oneywell Protection Services Burglar Alarm-Ramer Office - ,
826 528. 00 --teller & Daseking, Architects Architectural Services-Hassler
827 ?25 . 05 Los Altos Garbage Dumpster Service-Ranger Office
5828 2 ,077. OS ::illiam P. :11urphy, County Tax Property Taxes-Long Ridge Propert
Collector
5829 73:). 05 ::able Ford Tractor, Inc. Accessories end Repair for Ford
Tractor
MO 7013. 35 On-Line Business Systems, Inc. Computer Services-Aug. and Sept.
5831 255 .04 Orchard Supply Hardware Miscellaneous Field, Shop and
Plumbing Supplies
5832 125 . 35 jG and E Utilities
�833 �?5 . 55 Sete Ellis Dodge District Vehicle Repair
�834 8 , 3 Pinklerton' s , Inc. Guard Service-Hassler
I�835 15 3 -recision Engravers , Inc. Namebadges for Rangers
I
A=,Ont Is
,: Description
58.36 $ 56.07 S & W Equipment Co. Equipment Reoair
837 1 6L. 33 Scribner Graphic Press Inc. Printing-Rearint of 5000
All-Site Brochures
j838 239 .24 John S. Shelton, Inc. Construction, Materials-Rancho
San Antonio Open Space Preserve
5839 09.60 Del Woods Private Vehicle Expense .
5840 305 . 30 US Rentals Backhoe Rental
1',841 15. 60 ::mion Oil Co. Gas for District Vehicles
5842 200.71 Xerox Corporation Final Installment Payment
5843 2 ,500.00 Kurt-- L. Reitman & Associates Appraisal Services
5844 265 ,425.20 The Trust for Hidden Villa Open Space Easement Purchase
5845 1-85.24 Patty Cash Postage,zis cell aneous Office
Suppli.es,Priza4e Vehicle Expens
Copies,Lock. Repai:•rs and Keys,
Shop Supplies ,Computer Seminar,
Local 'teal Conferences , and
Addit=_oral Petty Cash Fund of
$50.00 at the Ranger Yard.
Testimony for the Public iearing to the Mid-Peninsula Opp.. Space District on
Tuesday, Nov. 22, 1983. FOR HASSLER HEALTH HOME PRESERVATION
TO: President Daniel Wendin
My name is Clarisse Eber, and I live at 3341 Brittan Ave. #2, San Carlos,
in one of the Brittan Heights Condominiums, overlooking the brilliant green
mountains that surround the red-tiled rooftops of the Hassler Health Home. The
color contrast is very pleasing to the eye, and that is the reason I chose that
location. I am most interested in medical history because I, have worked at the
University of California, San Francisco Medical Center for 26 years.
I urge you to preserve the Hassler Health Home, and I plead for its life,
so to speak, for all the reasons previously stated by the San Mateo County Arts
Council. But in addition, I wish to state that the medical history of the build-
ings is vital to the younger generation and to those that follow to show how tuber-
culosis patients lived and were treated before the discovery of antibiotics in
1944. Mr. Leo Walsh, formerly a non-medical hospital administrator at Hassler from
1960-1972, has given us some historical documentation in the form of scrapbooks and
newspaper clippings. He is a resident of Redwood City and deeply regrets that a
prior commitment prevents his attendance here tonight. He wants us to emphasize
that we must remember that tuberculosis patients gave up a major portion of their
lives to live in isolation, fighting for a chance to survive. At that time, it
was most important that fresh air, good nutrition and good nursing care with the
added occupational therapy, namely, the arts and passive recreation be provided.
My concern is that we preserve history - not destroy it. Dr. Gert Brieger, pres-
ently the Chair of the Medical History Department at the University of California
San Francisco, strongly supports our position and will check with his ten doctural
candidates to see if one of them can take on this subject for his/her thesis or
dissertation.
Dr. Francis Curry, formerly the Deputy Director of the Hassler Health Home,
has given us invaluable leads to locate former nurses and employees who had devoted-
ly given of their time to care for the TB patients. We have a fascinating obituary
of Dr. Hassler, including his picture, in which it not only states that he was the
Director of the Hassler Health Home, but that he played a very important role in
preventing the spread of bubonic plague in the 1906 earthquake and fire in San
Francisco. Dr. Curry has agreed to supervise the establishment of rooms in which
to place historic plaques depicting what took place in the sanitarium. What more
can we ask for? Incidentally, Dr. Curry is writing a history on San Francisco
Department of Public Health.
Another outstanding feature of the buildings are the ramps. Today, the entire
United States government is cognizant of the needs of physically handicapped people.
My own deceased husband had been,in a wheelchair in the sixties before legislation
was established to aid the physically handicapped to lead as normal a life as pos-
sible. Today, it is exorbitant to redesign buildings for wheelchair access. But
we have ramps in structurally sound buildings. It would be criminal to destroy them.
Barbara Wiesner described the architecture. May I please ask you to refer to Dr.
Robert Cartier's report of March, 1978, an,- evaluation provided to the Mid-Peninsula
Open Space District. This style of architecture is not commonly built in Northern
California today. We have two volunteers, Mark Still, a member of the Board of
Directors of the San Mateo County Historical Society and Don Neumark, a member of
the San Mateo Historic Resources Advisory Board.
Hassler Health Home P. 2
The slide show showed that these buildings are most adaptable to the surround-
ings if we preserve this heritage. Just think of the potential for horticulture and
landscape architecture students in the local colleges and universities. Blind people
would be able to have a nature walk similar to the one in Golden Gate Park, in San
Francisco. There is also a need for space for members of the 4 H Club who will be
losing their land on Eaton Avenue, in San Carlos, to private developers. The Hassler
Health Home has barns in good condition, ideally suited for their projects, and the
barns and buildings should not at the mercy of the wrecking ball. The important
point is that by preserving the buildings, we will be protecting the property, the
293 acres, because the area will be less subject to vandalism!
We must use the buildings for enhancement, enrichment and education for the
entire community, for the Bay Area Region, not just for a few home owners. Of course,
we were assessed for $300,000.00, but that was for the purpose of OPEN SPACE AND
RECREATION and to prevent private realtors and a women's prison from buying the land.
We must preserve and protect, not just for open space, not just the pristine state
advocated by those who wish demolition of the buildings. In my opinion, the demoli-
tion advocates have not truly stated their fears, except to say they wish to have
open space - no rock concerts - no overnight living quarters.
The San Mateo County Arts Council has NEVER advocated rock concerts (that
would destroy the serenity we wish to preserve.) The living quarters are in the
three existing buildings for the director, the maintenance engineer and the park
ranger, in lieu of salaries. Artists are not hippies; they are creative, hard work-
ing people who wish to have a place for self-expression and to offer their talents to
the community. Twin Pines Arts Center, in Belmont is an excellent example. Please
preserve the Hassler Health Home so that we, in San Mateo County, will be proud of
our cultural and educational endeavors. There is an advisory board who will super-
vise and control the activities to retain the magnificence and tranquility of the
land. The Hassler Health Home mut be preserved.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I will mail this testimony and the
attachments to the Board for your records.
Nov. 22, 1983.
P.S. Today, Dean Sandra Weiss, Mental Health & Community Nursing, of the UCSF
School of Nub endorsed the above proposal, too. She wants the historical
data to show the instructors who teach nursing history.
Vice Chancellor Seymour Farber, who is the Emeritus Professor of Public Programs
and Continuing Education, was formerly the "chest" physician, the medical director
of the TB Ward at San Francisco General, and in his own words, "Some of my most
happy years were those spent caring for the patients at the Hassler Health Home."
He has promised to give us as much information as we need regarding that important
phase of medical history.
'�• CITY OF SAN CARD
�Vi art Ion. .cdC G
I1) 1-113 &a vd
Cdy lua�u� _
P.O.BOX 700
SAN CARLOS,CALIF.94070
(415) 591-7111
June 1, 1983.
SPECIAL NOTICE
HASSLER HEALTH HOME ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
NOTICE is given that agreement for the sale of the Hassler Health Home property has been
reached: This means that the Hassler Health Home property will �e acquired for open .space
purposes and the work of removin the structures on it will soon commence. On
May 23, 1983, the City Council of the City of San Carlos adopted resolutions allowing the
assessment district financing to be completed.
If your assessment has already been paid, take no further action.
If you have not paid your assessment, and wish to do so, full payment may be paid prior to
June 30. 1983, without incurring any prepayment penalty.
Mail or deliver payment to: City Treasurer, City of San Carlos, 1347 Laurel Street,
P.O. Box 700, San Carlos, CA 94070. Unless otherwise indicated below, your assessment is
$600.00. When making payment, please show on your remittance the assessment number and
parcel number which is shown below.
You are not required to pay your assessment at this time.
If you do not pay your assessment at this time, it will become part of the assessment bonds
to be issued. Interest on the bonds, and the interest you will pay will be 5.5% per annum.
Bonds will be paid over a period of ten, years.
Your assessment payments to cover bond redemptions will be as follows: Principal payments
of $60 will be due October 15 each year; Interest payments, at 5.5% per annum on the unpaid
principal balance. will be due on October 15 and April 15 each year. Penalties at 22 per
month will accrue on delinquent payments. You will receive a billing from the City Treasurer
for the annual principal and semi-annual interest payments.
After the bonds are issued, you may still clear your property of the assessment at any time.
To do this, you must pay (1) the outstanding principal; (2) interest to the next due date;
(3) any penalties accrued and unpaid; and (4) a prepayment penalty of 5% on the unmatured
principal.
If you have any questions about your assessment, contact: City Treasurer, 1347 Laurel Street,
San Carlos. Telephone No: (415) 591-7111 during the hours of 9:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M.
weekdays.
II CARLOS
. � G
r
H. Hons, Jr.
reasurer
ASSESSMENT NO: ��V
l l 0- 100- 02 6 (W�1
PARCEL N0: ih �.
NOTICE OF IMPROVEMEN
City of San Carlos
Hassler Health Home Assessment District
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of San Carlos,
California, did on the 13th day of August, 1979, in proceedings under the Municipal
Improvement Act of 1913, Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code, adopt
its resolution of intention, Resolution No. 1979-87, declaring its intention to order
the acquisition of certain real property and improvements within an assessment
district designated the Hassler Health Home Assessment District within the City
of San Carlos, and ordering the Engineer of Work to prepare a report as required by
said Municipal Improvement Act of 1913. A brief description of the proposed
acquisition and improvements is as follows:
Participation in the acquisition and improvement of the recreational park area
commonly known as the Hassler Health Home Property adjacent to the City of San
Carlos for Public park and open space purposes.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that said Engineer of Work has prepared and
filed a report covering the aforementioned acquisition and improvements and
that said report was presented to the City Council at a regular meeting of said
City Council held on the 13th day of August, 1979, and that said City Council
considered and passed on said report.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the 24th day of September, 1979, at the
hour of 8:00 o'clock p. m. , in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, 666 Elm
Street, San Carlos, California, are the day, hour and place for the hearing on
said resolution of intention and on said report, when and where any and all
persons having any objections or protests to the proposed improvement, the
extent of the assessment district, or to the proposed assessment may appear
before said City Council and show cause why said acquisition should not be
-carried out in accordance with said resolution of intention and said report. Any
person interested may file a protest or objection as provided in said Municipal
Improvement Act of 1913. All protests must be in writing, describe the property
owned by the signer, and be filed with the City Clerk of said City not later than
the hour set for hearing. The total cost of the proposed improvements as shown
in said report, including incidental expenses, is $343, 800. 00. Reference is hereby
made to said resolution of intention and said report on file with said City Clerk in
the office of said City Clerk for a description of the property and improvements to
be acquired and of the assessment district, and for further particulars.
Inquiries regarding the protest proceedings may be directed to the City Clerk,
telephone number (415) 593-8011 or the Engineer of Work, Edwin Smith, telephone
number (415) 366-9595.
The amount to be assessed against the property which you appear to own is
set forth below.
Dated: August 31, 1979
at
SADIE CONBOY
City Clerk, City of San Carlos
��CAL
KEEP HASSLER HEALTH HOME
OPEN SPACE
Public Hearing: Wednesday, September 27./-'5
7:30p.m.
San Carlos High School
Melendy Drive, San Carlos
The Midpeninsula Open Space District (MPOSD) is holding a public
hearing to determine if the residents of San Carlos want the
MPOSD to purchase the 293 acre Hassler Estate (The . property and
pink building bordering on the condominiums). The MPOSD -to
which you pay 100 per #100. tax override (regardless of Prop 13)
can purchase the property by itself. It merely wants to know
if ,you want it tol. The probable alternative is the current
owner will sell the property to a developer for low density
housing.
Do you want to keep the Hassler Estate as open space? If yes,
come - bring your neighbors and friends - and tell the MPOSD
to buy Hassler with your money.
History:
Owner: City of San Franciso (who want to sell).
1974 : San Carlos Electorate passes tax override to raise
half the Hassler purchase price if another funding
source can be found.
Jan -1977 : State of California announoes desire to place
wiomens prison on Hassler.
March - 1977 500 turn out for public hearing. 8900 signatures
presented to City of San Carlos to ask their
acquisition of property.
May - 1977 : MPOSD offers to jointly purchase Hassler with
"San Carlos.
July -1977 : Dept. of Correction removes Hassler from current
list of sites.
Aug.. -19?7 : San Carlos Cit Council notifies MPOSD and San
Franciso - -no interest in Hassler.
Aug. -1978 : MPOSD having received somo federal funds tries
to. set joint hearing with San Carlos - San Carlos
City Council says no.
September 2 1 8
. p 7. 97
MPOSD holds public hearing at High School to ascertain
r g s
local interest in the property.
?? THE OUTCOME ??
BE THERE ON WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27 AT 7:30P,m• IF YOU WANT
OPEN SPACE.
Board of Directors
Brittan Heights Homeowners Association
R-76-29
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT r
? ys bested br.
REPORT Iw•a S A(+as
October 12, 19976
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Tour of Hassler Health Home Property
Introduction: The following is background information on
to Hassler Health Home property which the Board of Directors
will be touring at its October 31, 1976 Special Meeting.
Location: The Hassler Health Home property, consisting of
about 293 acres , is located along the north side of Edgewood
Road and east of Interstate 280, within the Sphere of Influ-
ence of the City of San Carlos but unincorporated. The site
is bordered on the west by the City and County of San Francis-
co watershed lands; on the north by a privately-owned 80 acre
parcel; on the east by San Carlos residential developments;
and on the south by lands owned by either San Mateo County
or the City and County of San Francisco (See attached map) .
Site Description: The major portion of the site is undeveloped,
iitth a broadleaf forest vegetation. The most predominant physi-
calacross the cen-
ter feature is a ,�ridgetop extending diagonally
f e dee e r cany
ons have
Some o th
ter portion of the site P Y
coniferous vegetation, such as Douglas fir and redwood. The
ridgetops and south-facing slopes have brush and chaparral.
There are several buildings which comprise the Hassler Health
Home located on the major ridge. Access to the area is via
Hassler Road, which connects with Edgewood Drive off of Edge-
wood Road. Waterpipes from the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir extend
through the northern portion of the property. The San Fran-
cisco Water Department owns a sixty-foot right-of-way through
the property for the pipeline easements.
Historical Information: In 1924 , the City of San Francisco
purchased the property from the Allis Chalmers Manufacturing
Company for $27,500. Money to purchase the property and to
build a tuberculosis sanitarium was allocated from the City
and County of San Francisco General Fund by the Board of
Supervisors.
Page two
The first four _ards of the sanitarium were built in 1926 ,
and opened in 1927. The sanitarium was named after William
Charles Hassler, an influential San Francisco physician who
had been a leader in the movement to eradicate the bubonic-
plague-carrying rats which infested San Francisco following
the 1906 earthquake. Hassler served as Chief Sanitary Engi-
neer and Public Health Officer for the City of -San Francisco
during the early 1900 's and the tubercular sanitarium was
built under his guidance.
Additional wings and satellite buildings were built in 1939-
40 to expand the health facility, but throughout the 19601s .
the need for a tuberculosis sanitarium declined. The proper-
ty was then declared to be in excess to the needs of the
Department of Public Health.
Current Status of Property: The Hassler property has not yet .
been declared a surplu s si rte by the City and County of San
Francisco, presumably in order to give the City of San Carlos
the opportunity to raise funds or find assistance to purchase
the property, which is included in the 1972 San Mateo County
Park and Open Space Plan gs a regional Park or oeen space site
but is not included in the County 10-year acquisition pro-
gram. San. Carlos voters have approved a $1, 000,000 tax over-,
ride toward purchase if another source for the additional funds
needed can be found. Although it was anticipated that San
Mateo County would provide the needed additional funding, the
County declined to do so. The City of San Catlos applied for
Land and Water Conservation Funds in 1975 to assist in the
acquisition of the site, bud was unsuccessful. An application
for 1976 Land and Water Conservation Funds has recently been
submitted. The City of San Carlos proposes to keep the Hassler
site in as natural a condition as possible` allowing- such uses
as defined camping and picnic areas, and trails.
Conclusion: It appears that this site will rank high in open
space values as determined in the current Master Plan study—
Its proximity to urban development would also put it in strong
position for MRPD involvement. The tour of this property will
help to put it in perspective with other potential acquisitions
of the District.
HG:pl
•. l a -�,.)�f• �;�y`�;19>I; N ,\�z. '` , • t• . •I i -, t 'f %�• 1 't.r��'y�\" YT'Y V�p'^��
• 1.- `••tip w` y`� � /���� JI - ,YI / ) � l` ` i''• �"�/ ♦ f - ��� SPAN �I�A
�•- \ r'" �� � � Z`�s •fir.• . High k/r• ~s.. �" i911'6r/feai AcrWO �i�� v
♦ k '._ �-`� l ' -fir T vh{ R� •fit . sc ► sew,
• \ •• � 1. , •1 sj �t 1 r.7 Y•� '.' "`1c� �i.:,: J L. \' �,��''C./ s � S'�S~�r •`�'r�
*Water JM
Sch
dld6 /f; .!' _�`•�� �^'�i^3-',/` ., '1 ~v.l' •••ice -� G i , '
;HASSLER PROPERTY;
. � ^ !_�, �j� �... wi;i•.tea ,rti '�� T% ,�-• ��' '?e„ / :h. �� ,,� .•; � � �-��"`�• ! �p'
iF
600
•�•_`:'}• \�\\f`/ .i 1 k.+, -\ �T'�,..•�%•i'Irr-\"��` \ }i✓`�`) \ V, ��1�1?O mot.
�_J��� «�7`,,•\ - )i_, t�.l,. - - r-'' -'i i T'r _ I -, V ' �.i^J •� �pi11w� •
`^\^''�\ r U E�e'`zr 1Nr�`fi•\ �`, `�=`,•• l � '�': .��1 � '�spt ,r�, � �-\� ;
lospit
/7 `�% r;t "�r `, `�14.', _�T�.V�j 1 \5^ '� � y j.�l• •,.,` •�' 5@GuOly� t o
��/^• •` �,`'` a�, ��� � I�.�1 ''�y� 1 I �1�..•��., r O.iti'f%'�i •� �/��/ )t�•�j+.•r�•+ •` ` ��
� , - r `� \� ,.• `\ :2 G� �' i�/�, J/{�i7,, -at: r�'Y :.'� W �tr '�•;)1`
.�QUEDU ems`_ •�„ ��I �/ ���,
• ~� t\ - sue, ��j'•'"'`� �./} i v�o ,,; -'�:: � or�fl-era:#. ''- /:• , i'=: -8F
+l '= i L� \'-.�.li'•5 `�--./ ��/ ?� �•� �•r�Y'= �♦ �.��".� .,V';C�� ',tom
�J9< r5� ! � � l �•
f`. � '� 7 •r- .elc_�. � ems.•--'�.,/�
` C�•� , :I \-� -` t,':_\\`-���\ ' V�l\" \. \ __ `••'•''�;,;yam/. ti�•'4S'•'�-'—�
`t\ �'$,•v� ' \ r' //�.�•- ` \`tom\\�••0`� '.\=`' C��.�� •:nw��� '��"r'����''��I•re:�'-• ��•
M 4� •.�`i• �/ J�.�- �� �`_;. pit/F'G.6 :R'i 1��
�� �:� ,ram --c - •Lr--.� ,'1 •, \ --� '' \\`` ��G�- ll ��_ys
�' 1 v is ' �� •�ar '•Jr .. �. �•'• •.ibt
•.♦.
Nr
Ivor
`� SaJ \I`� \�� '� i' p �`�' • I• wr-
a MIN
s-6r 16t. r.Goef
i' � �1 1l � � �. ,• SIN ��'• �• ��,; �•• \ _ -�- I i.
9 We
i, I• .. `\\ �� ! � '.• '�. i ✓ ri —'`.� ~1--'"'' �� ter:" \
f%i / \ \ � V-r ?•- /• •i �V � �jam.� r :F. a r�
Let ./ 'moo,' ... -•s i ✓,�, \
- �c'�rl �o �tlP1.��
f.� / 0 11 --•� �\ ,.,ter
�Q." ••. ••i �\\ f i'I�• \� • j~ �-.l�j �, j i �r .V•1i r \. '• •. '`t. - f'� w,• ♦ ��� t �
yss `pp11RT`�\ i' �:);: \, r �! v --� .' / \ �� J • `�, • ri9`'�'• • . �V,O@
9 9 =
City Hall, San Carlos, California
June 1.1, 1979.
The City Council of the City of San Carlos held an Executive Session at 7:15 P.M. for
the purpose of discussing Labor Relations and the regular adjourned meeting of the
City Council of the City of San Carlos was called to order at 8:10 o'clock P.M. , the
above date by Mayor John Buchanan.
The Pledge of Allegiance was repeated.
ROLL CALL
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Patricia F. Bennie
Charles E. Calderhead (late arrival 8:35 P.M.)
Gayton De Rosa
William M. Steele
John G. Buchanan
ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Anthony Lagorio
Assistant City Administrator/Finance
Director Warren Shafer
City Engineer George Cook
Planning Director Malcolm Byce
Lt. Robert Paresa
City Clerk Sadie M. Conboy
ITEM #3 PROCLAMATIONS:
1) Mayor Buchanan announced he had presented a Proclamation on June 5, 1979, to
Dennis Houghton for earning an Eagle Scout Award.
2) Mayor Buchanan announced he had accepted the gift of a living memorial for the
late Ray De Nardo and that Burton Park had been selected as the site for either
a tree or bush.
ITEM #4 CONSENT CALENDAR:
Councilman Steele requested Consent Calendar Item #3 be removed until later in the
agenda. Mayor Buchanan requested Item #1 be removed.
Councilman De Rosa moved approval of the Consent Calendar with the exception of
Items 1 and 3 as follows:
2. Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 1979-52 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
OF SAN CARLOS ACCEPTING THE SLURRY SEAL - Fall, 1978,
Project No. 3-3-81 and authorized Clerk to Record
Notice of Completion.
4. Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 1979-53 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
OF SAN CARLOS APPROVING AND ACCEPTING AGREEMENT for
Banking Services - Crocker Bank with authorization for
Mayor and Clerk to execute the document.
5. Granted authorization for the Police Department to call
for bids re modification of communications radio equip-
ment (consoles) .
6. Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 1979-54 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS APPROVING AND
ACCEPTING AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
(Building Inspection Services) with authorization for
City Administrator and City Clerk to execute the
document.
7. Set July 9, 1979, for hearing Appeal filed by Board of
Directors, Brittan Heights Condominium Association to
the decision of the Planning Commission to adopt a
Negative Declaration for an E.I.R. on the proposal
for the Brittan Heights Shopping Center submitted by
Dividend Development Corporation.
i
j
I
too
8. Denied the following Claims with referral to Insurance
Adjuster:
1. Jean Chestnut, 577 Laurel in an undetermined
dollar amount (alleged personal injuries
suffered in fall) .
2. Ruby Klunis, 178 San Carlos Avenue, Redwood City,
in the amount of $7,000, (alleged personal injuries
suffered in fall) .
9. Set July 9, 1979, for hearing Appeal filed by Thomas Peet, 54
Wessex Way, to the decision of the Planning Commission
approving Grading Permit and Tentative Map for Matthews
Terrace Subdivision.
10. Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 1979-55 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS APPROVING WARRANT LIST
EXPENDITURES (June 11, 1979) in the amount of $302,940.52.
Motion seconded b Councilman Steele carrying b the following vote: Ayes
Y a
Y g Y g Y
and in favor: Councilmembers: De Rosa; Steele, Bennie, and Buchanan.
Absent: Councilman Calderhead.
Referring to Consent Calendar Item #1, Mayor Buchanan requested a correction and
addition to minutes of May 29, 1979, under Item #7-New Business COUNCIL ACTION
regarding verification of signatures for Hassler Health Home property the following
should be added: "That the City Engineer be requested to confirm and certify the
Assessment District description; that the City Attorney be requested to prepare, in
conjunction with City Council, a Resolution allowing the City to remove its own property
from the Assessment District."
Referring to Consent Calendar Item #3, Resolution re Approving and accepting
Encroachment Permit request of E & B Construction for access over existing
easement and authorizing Mayor and Clerk to execute the document, Councilman Steele
observed he did not think this belonged on the Consent Calendar; that it should
be an agenda item for full discussion. Council concurred that Item #3 should be
scheduled as an agenda item at the next meeting under UNFINISHED BUSINESS. So ordered.
Councilman Steele moved approval of Consent Calendar Item #1 with correction as
noted, seconded by Councilman De Rosa, carrying unanimously.
ITEM #5 PUBLIC HEARINGS:
(a) Public Hearing for the purpose of hearing and considering a request
filed by William and Sara White, 3 Sara Lane, for the abandonment of
a Public Utilities Easement located along Sara Lane.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman De Rosa moved acceptance of the Affidavit of Publication, seconded by
Councilwoman Bennie and carried unanimously.
City Engineer Cook reported there was no objection by the City to the abandonment
of the Public Utilities Easement and that all Public Utilities had written to the
City advising they saw no future requirements to use the easement and had no
objection to its abandonment. Responding to Council query, City Engineer Cook
confirmed no other property was involved in the easement.
Mayor Buchanan suggested striking from the Resolution the words in the second
sentence ". . .vacation of this. . ." as they appeared to be unnecessary. City Attorney
Lagorio confirmed this would be done.
i
As there was no-one present wishing to speak, Councilman Steele moved to close the
Public Hearing, seconded by Councilman De Rosa and carried unanimously.
Councilman De Rosa moved adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 1979-56 A RESOLUTION ORDERING
THE VACATION OF A 5-FOOT PUBLIC UTILITIES EASEMENT WITHIN PARCEL 5, WHITE ACRES
SUBDIVISION (along Sara Lane) , seconded by Councilman Steele, carrying by the
following vote: Ayes and in favor: Councilmembers: De Rosa, Steele, Bennie, and
Buchanan. Absent: Councilman Calderhead.
Staff was requested to forward copies of RESOLUTION NO. 1979-56 to P.G. & E. ,
Pacific Telephone and California Water Service Company with attached map of subject
area.
101
ITEM #6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(a) Resolution re Proposed Assessment District - Hassler Health Home.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mr. Joe Hughes, Assessment District Counsel, presented Resolution of Intention
(authorizing acceptance of Petition filed with Clerk if determined that sufficient
number of property owners have signed it and instructing Engineer to proceed to
determine what assessment would be levied against each parcel of property based on the
benefit to that parcel from the proposed acquisition).
Councilman Steele moved adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 1979-57 RESOLUTION OF INTENTION RE
HASSLER HEALTH HONE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT,Cec son ed ty Councilman De Rosa and carrying by
I ,s:
the following vote: Ayes and in favor: / 9M osa, Calderhead and Buchanan.
Noes and opposed: Councilwoman Bennie. Hearing to be set at a later date.
See Exhibit A.
There was a ten minute recess.
Upon the meeting being reconvened,
ITEM #6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS was the next order of business:
(b) Resolution re Accepting and approving Encroachment Permit ,with the
City of Belmont to erect a traffic barrier on Chestnut Street in
the City of San Carlos at Sunnyslope Avenue in the City of
Belmont with authorization for Mayor and City Clerk to execute the
document.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman De Rosa moved adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 1979-58 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND
ACCEPTING AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF BELMONT (to erect a traffic barrier on Chestnut
at Sunnyslope) , with authorization for Mayor and City Clerk to execute the document,
seconded by Councilman Calderhead, carrying by the following vote: Ayes and in
favor: Councilmembers: De Rosa, Calderhead, Steele, and Buchanan. Noes and opposed:
Councilwoman Bennie.
ITEM #6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
W Council discussion re Revision of the FY 1978-79 Budget.
(Continued from previous meeting) .
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman De Rosa moved acceptance of the city Administrator's recommendation in
connection with the revision of the FY 1978-79 budget as outlined in memo dated
May 24, 1979, with the proviso that when discussion is held on the 1979-80 budget,
discussion will be held as to where these funds are to be placed, seconded by
Councilwoman Bennie, carrying unanimously.
ITEM #6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(d) Report re limiting newspaper racks on sidewalk.
(Continued from previous meeting) .
Lt. Paresa reported that Chief McGuigan had met with seven newspaper distributors who
had volunteered to replace some of the racks with modular racks which would reduce the
number of racks but would permit the same number of newspapers. Chief McGuigan
recommended the distributors be allowed to demonstrate their cooperation.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Council concurred that the Police Chief is to allow the distributors to demonstrate
their cooperation in limiting the number of newspaper racks on the sidewalk. So
ordered.
ITEM #6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(e) Resolution re Approval of final cost re San Mateo County Joint
Powers Liability Program.
102
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman Calderhead moved adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 1979-59 AUTHORIZING THE CITY
OF SAN CARLOS' PARTICIPATION IN A JPA AGREEMENT OF SAN MATEO CITIES FOR LIABILITY/
RISK MANAGEMENT (in an amount not to exceed $41,500.00) , seconded by Councilman Steele,
carrying by the following vote: Ayes and in favor: Councilmembers: Calderhead,
Steele, Bennie, De Rosa and Buchanan.
ITEM #7 NEW BUSINESS:
(a) Council discussion re Request to modify Ordinance #308 - Minors
prohibited from Operating Amusement Devices.
Lt. Paresa informed Council a request had been received from the California
Music Merchants Association to amend the Ordinance restricting operation of amusement
devices by persons under the age of 18 years; the Ordinance also prohibits owners
having machines on their premises from allowing persons under 18 years to operate
them. Lt. Paresa noted the Police Department does not favor any amendments although
Chief McGuigan has indicated an amendment could be considered whereby persons under
the age of 18 years and accompanied by a parent or guardian could be permitted to
play. A similar amendment was considered in 1974 but the problems of younger children
using the machines and loitering resulted in no changes being made.
Mr. Jim Ham, 222 Rockridge Road, addressed the Council commenting as a parent of
two children, he supported an amendment to the Ordinance citing the fact the
establishments in San Carlos could be adequately controlled and offer a wholesome
environment. He commented he was in the vending machine business consisting mostly
of cigarette machines and juke boxes; that preventing children from spending their
money did not teach money management. Mr. Ham inquired if the Ordinance was difficult
to control adding that bordering Cities allow minors to play and that youngsters enjoy
the electronic games with out any harm to their well being.
Ms. Mary Gardner, 2696 Eaton, addressed the Council commenting that her family had
owned and operated the San Carlos Bowling Center for 30 years and they had never
had any problems relating to pinball machines or amusement games, also that High
School students are not permitted on the premises during lunch time or school time.
Mrs. Gardner noted that parents have asked her why the children cannot use the machines
as they do in other Cities while the parents are bowling and she urged Council to
drop the 18 year age limit completely, adding that in 1974 they were informed
by Police Department there would be enforcement of the Ordinance and at that
time they withdrew all of the pinball machines from the Bowling Center, further,
that after 10:00 P.M. no-one under 18 years is allowed on the premises unless
accompanied by their parents.
COUNCIL ACTION:
After Lt. Paresa's response to their queries, Council concurred that it was
demonstrated that San Carlos parents do not support the use of coin-operated
machines, so the request to amend Ordinance No. 308 - Minors prohibited from operating
Amusement Devices, was denied.
ITEM #7 NEW BUSINESS:
(b) Election of officers for South County Fire Protection Authority Board
Off Agenda Item:
Upon the City Attorney giving his legal approval, Councilwoman Bennie moved
adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 1979-60 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN CARLOS AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1979-51 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION
OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT - SOUTH COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION AUTHORITY (Amending
Section 6.3. . . "The proportion thereof shall be borne equally between each of the
Agencies unless otherwise agreed upon by them on or before August 15 of each
year. . .") , seconded by Councilman Calderhead, carrying by the following vote:
Ayes and in favor: Councilmembers: Bennie, Calderhead, De Rosa, Steele, and
Buchanan.
COUNCIL ACTION:
1 nominated Councilman De Rosa o serve o the Sou o Steele n mate C n t n South County Fir Councilman e
Y
Protection Authority Board for a term of one (1) year; that Mayor Buchanan serve on
the South County Fire Protection Authority Board for a term of two (2) years,
seconded by Councilwoman Bennie. Unanimous vote cast for Councilmen De Rosa and
Buchanan to serve on the South County Fire Protection Authority Board.
ITEM #7 NEW BUSINESS:
(c) Council discussion re providing Janitorial Services for City Hall
and Library.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman Steele moved to authorize Staff to proceed to implement in-house Janitorial
Services and to notify the Janitorial Contractor of the termination of his services.
Council to receive a more detailed report as to the number of employees (part time) ,
etc. , further the in-house janitorial program not to exceed $25, 164.00. So ordered
ITEM #7 NEW BUSINESS:
(d) Set date and time for Budget Session.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Council set Saturday, July 14, 1979, 8:30 A.M. for the first Budget Study Session,
to be held in Council Chambers.
ITEM #7 NEW BUSINESS:
Off Agenda Items:
1. Councilman Calderhead reported concern about City Park next to
Burton Park Ball diamond on Woodland with the young people causing
some problems due to lack of supervision. He requested this item
be transmitted to the Parks and Recreation Commission for their
study and recommendations to Council for resolution of the problem.
Staff to communicate this to the Commission with the Police Department
invited to attend that meeting.
2. Mayor Buchanan requested Council's feeling in connection with
San Mateo County Development Association membership fee in the
amount of $250. Council concurred in that it did not receive
any benefit from the Association to warrant the payment of a
$250 Membership fee.
3_ Council tentatively set Saturday, June 30, 1979, as a date to
interview candidates for the vacancy in the Planning Commission.
Interviews to commence at 9:00 A.M. and scheduled at 10-minute
intervals in Room 201.
ITEM Jk7 NEW BUSINESS:
(e) Community Forum.
There were no speakers under Community Forum.
ITEM Yk8 ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business on hand, the meeting adjourned at 11:27 o'clock
P.M. to Monday, June 25, 1979, at 8:00 o'clock P.M. , in the Council Chambers,
City Hall.
Respectfully submitted,
Clerk
105
li
EXCERPT FROM COUNCIL MINUTES, JUNE 11, 1979.
EXHIBIT "A"
ITEM #6 - UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(a) Resolution re Proposed Assessment District - Hassler Health Home.
Assistacit .City Administrator .Schafer briefly related direction given to Staff regarding
Resolution of Intention which has been prepared by the Assessment District Counsel.
Mr. Joe Hughes, Assessment District Counsel addressed the Council explaining the nature
oT the Resolution ot Intent; t at it oes not take any action but accepts petitions and
instructs the Engineer to proceed to determine what assessment would be levied against
each parcel of property based on the benefit to that parcel from the proposed acquisition
and also determines that if a successful hearing is conducted, the property owners have a
right to appear to contest any individual assessments or the necessity of the improvement
itself. Mr. Hughes referred to the procedures which could be followed and noted that
Attachment A covering description of the Hassler property and Exhibit B, map of the
proposed Assessment District, would be included in the Resolution.
Councilman Steele inquired if adoption of the Resolution will start the proceedings with
Mr. Hughes confirming it would and that it would direct the City Engineer to proceed t-
look at the acquisition and the property to be assessed and to determine what the
benefit is to each parcel of the acquisition.
City Engineer Cook presented preliminary calculations advising the confirmed
signatures were checked and by assessed value of the�area within the boundary of the
proposed district, the signatures represented 70.8% which is slightly in eXcess of
$10 million; that by area, which does not include City property, it is 75%, further
indicating that both the signatures and area pass the 60%.
Mayor Buchanan inquired if a separate Resolution was required to include or drop the
City property out of the Assessment District, with Mr. Hughes informing Council that
language has been included in the Resolution of Intention to determine all City property
will be excluded from the Assessment District.
Councilman Calderhead inquired if there was a cost figure or is it open to negotiation
with the owners of the land, with Mr. Hughes responding the Open Space District is to
purchase the land if it has a dollar amount contribution of $300,000 from the City and
it is anticipated the approximate cost of the property will be $2.2 million with a 50%
Federal Grant; further advising that the individual household assessment would be
approximately $75.00 a year and the ownership would be in the Park District, who, he
understood, would be responsible for maintenance and patrolling.
Mayor Buchanan inquired if there was anything in the Resolution of Intent that binds
San Carlos to the maintenance and patrolling of the property and Mr. Hughes advised
there was not.
Responding to further Council queries, Mr. Hughes commented he understood the $75.00
assessment would be for the purchase price; further if the City property is excluded
the City still has control of the proceedings.
Councilman Calderhead inquired if there would be any restrictions on the Park use
by the Assessment District with Mr. Hughes commenting he would not advise any such
restrictions that the acquisition was for the entire general public and the district
cannot keep people out of the area. Mr. Hughes further cited the fact that a 30-day
notice is required for the hearing and an Engineer's Report is required to be on file,
noting this Report is not yet prepared, although the necessary information is available,
further explaining the Engineer's Report may support the fact that there may be some
dissenting property owners who will be assessed.
Responding to a query from Councilman De Rosa, City Engineer Cook advised there were
560 parcels involved, that 70% had signed the petition, leaving approximately 160
property owners who did not sign. Mayor Buchanan observed that all the parcels, for some
reason or another were not contacted.
Mr. Dick Bishop, Mid Peninsula Open Space District addressed the Council commenting
the District has been interested for a long time in acquiring the Hassler property,
however, due to Proposition 13 financial problems, it was felt that in acquiring
property where the amount involved is substantial and of special interest to some City
that there should be local assistance. The people who live on the hills "verlooking
Hassler obviously have a greater interest in acquiring the property than residents on `he
flat lands. Mr. Bishop pointed out that a Public Meeting was held in September 1978 at
which time it was the Open Space District's policy not to proceed in acquiring Hassler,
even after the grant was received, until the funds were matched by the City.
lab
Subsequent to that Public Meeting, when it was found there was interest in an Assessment
District, the Board passed a Resolution making a 5'y/o interest rate on Open Space District
notes available to the Assessment District. The importance of the Resolution is that the
Board unanimously agreed to give assistance to the Assessment District and although there
was no formal vote on it, it appears implicit in the action that if the Assessment
District contributed $300,000 towards the purchase of Hassler, then the Open Space
District would move ahead and make an effort to buy the property. Responding to a
point raised by Councilman Calderhead, Mr. Bishop commented the legal status of the
Assessment District is simply contributing money to help purchase Hassler because of the
benefit property owners see in having the land remain as open space. The District
fully expects to take over the responsibility for the management and patrolling of the
Hassler property; regarding legal liability, it is considered there will not be any
legal liability on the City of San Carlos or on the people in the Assessment District,
further, the property would be open to everyone. He alluded to the fact that a
contract or sales agreement has not yet been reached with the City of San Francisco and
it� depends on whether the $300,000 is received from the Assessment District.
Responding to various inquiries from Council Mr. Bishop responded the grant had been
pending for six months and it would be desirable to either accept or not accept it,
however, as long as progress is being made, the Federal Grant people will wait and
the adoption of the Resolution by the City would indicate progress. He commented if
the Resolution is adopted, that the remaining steps be taken as quickly as possible
so that there may be the Final Hearing and reiterated that it appears the assessment
will be approximately $75.00 annually for ten years for each homeowner and condominium
owner.
Mayor Buchanan inquired if, as a result of the protest hearing, there would be the power
to modify the agreement in any way with Mr. Bishop advising the Council would have the
power.
Mr. Fred Endicott addressed the Council giving details of the petition advising they had
been unable to contact 15% of the owners, but out of those contacted, 90% had signed
in favor of the Assessment District including large landowners or developers and it
appears the property owners are overwhelmingly in favor of the assessment. Referring
to the 107/o who did not sign the petition, Mr. Endicott commented these property
owners would find the value of their property enhanced far more than the $75.00
Assessment; noting it was of particular importance after Proposition 13 that the City
of San Carlos has zero financial participation in the acquisition of Hassler. He
pointed out SamTrans goes to the edge of the property providing easy access for
everyone and concluded by urging the Council to adopt the Resolution.
Mayor Buchanan commended Mr. Endicott for his efforts.
Ms. Nancy Kies, 3328 La Mesa, addressed the Council commenting she was a real estate
broker and emphasized the desirability of the homes and condominiums was tied in to
the open space of the Hassler property.
Mr. D. Wolff, 3337 Brittan, #8, addressed the Council commenting he had helped gather
signatures and emphasized the high rate of signatures in favor of the assessment;
that $75 a year is a small price to pay for the potential PropertZ value increase and
that many owners who had not signed were out of town, absentee landlordsilanI Tifficult
to contact, also concurring in the City property being excluded from the Assessment
District.
Mr. Bob Carlson, 109 4#jends, Chairman of the San Carlos/Belmont Sierra Club group,
addressed the Council/commenting they unanimously approved the latest plan to acquire
Hassler property for open space and urged Council to adopt the Resolution.
Mr. D. Hartnet, 3334 Brittan, addressed the Council f rst commenting there were 100
houses in the District, not 24 as earlier mentioned, and that the group wishing to form
the Assessment District were not a "no growth" group but a cross section of the
community. He further commented on the sound accoustics of the valley and cited the
fact that if there was development in the valley, there would be severe noise
pollution, concluding that the $75.00 annual investment would enhance the property
values.
Mr. Jim Goeser, 222 Frances Lane, addressed the Council commenting the property is a
Regional Park and people on the Peninsula have been paying taxes to the Open Space
District for four years; that the District has pledged to do something for this
section of the County and if the Hassler property is turned down, all the people in
the southern part of the County will be let down. He observed that the alternative
use of the land is development with 1% property tax of the assessed value and the
homes built would never pay for the services they require.
Mr. William De Witt, Redwood City, addressed the Council commenting on the far-
sightedness of the San Carlos citizens in forming an Assessment District; that he
�I
107
was interested in the taxes paid to the Open Space District and urged the Council to
adopt the proposed Resolution.
Mr. Hughes commented the acquisition has been discussed in terms of open space noting.
Mere are buildinR that s=on the ropert4 a ited the t that incTuded in the vrovosal is
they
the liklihood will be taken down or they could be brought uv to Code: that this is
a matter which should be discussed at the hearing.
City Engineer Cook clarified his earlier comment regarding 24 single family residences
in the proposed Assessment District noting this was the munber which had not signed
the petition; that he had found an additional six houses making a total of 30. He
reiterated there are 565 parcels in the area and 173 did not sign, making it approximately
70% who had signed.
Councilwoman Bennie commented she was not in favor of the Hassler purchase; that the
federal money is not "free" as we all are paying for it; also, that in these times of
priorities, to purchase the Edgewood and Hassler properties, practically side by side,
is a questionable value. She expressed concern on whether there are hidden costs to the
City and County and the loss in revenue when the property comes off the tax rolls,
adding there is an alternative use of the property other than development, which would
be more valuable.
Councilman De Rosa, referring to non-signers, inquired if the 30 single family homes
are in one area or dotted throughout the proposed Assessment District,with City
Engineer Cook responding they were all scattered. Councilman De Rosa expressed concern
at forcing the Assessment District on people who do not wish to participate although he
recognized the enthusiasm of the group preparing the petition who also deserve
consideration, however, it seemed difficult, to him for 60% of the people to determine
what the other 40% must do, although he recognized more than 60% had signed the
petition. He agreed that the arguments presented for the Assessment District were valid
but that he would like to see an overwhelming majority, possible 90%.
Councilman Steele pointed out this kind of opposition could be expected at the hearing with
Councilman De Rosa commenting once the proceedings have started with the adoption of the
Resolution, it becomes difficult to void the opposition at the hearing. Councilman Steele
further commented on the difficulty of contacting everyone, pointing out that of those
contacted,90% were in favor of the Assessment District.
Councilman Steele moved adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 1979-57 RESOLUTION OF INTENTION RE
HASSLER HEALTH HOME ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. On the question, Councilman Calderhead inquired
if the Resolution sets a hearing for the opposition and at the conclusion of the hearing,
does the Council still have an option to go or not go with the Assessment District, with
Mr. Hughes informing Council it does not even set a hearing, it simply directs the
Engineer to prepare a report and when it is filed there will be a hearing within 30 days
and the Council must determine at the conclusion of the hearing that
if there is to be an Assessment District, then there is benefit of the land and that the
assessed value of the land will be increased by as much as the assessment against the land.
Councilman Calderhead inquired who makes the determination whether there is a benefit with
Mr. Hughes advising it is the City Council. Councilman Calderhead inquired if the City
was responsible for any costs and Mayor Buchanan explained the District is responsible for
the maintenance. Councilman Calderhead inquired about fire and police protection and was
advised there was no cost other than the mutual aid agreements which are currently in
effect.
Councilman De Rosa seconded the motion.
Responding to Councilman Calderhead, Mr. Bishop reiterated that the Open Space District
intends to take over the complete management of responsibility for the property; that
fire and police protection has already'been discussed with the County and the County Fire
and Sheriff's Departments will continue to provide the fire and police protection that
presently exists; that the same Mutual Aid agreement will continue, confirming the Open
Space District will be responsible for paying the entire cost of managing the property,
further, that the Assessment District will pay for its own legal and engineering costs in
setting up the Assessment District and the City does not have any costs beyond the time
expended by Staff.
as
Mayor Buchanan observed the issue/long-time and unusual andhe encouraged Council to ligpt
the Resolution as it appears to be the only opportunity of seeing the full answer to/problem.
He agreed with a 60:40 split, adding that a lead must be taken by the "Yes" votes who have
demonstrated positively there is a reasonable majority.
Voting on the motion as follows: Ayes and in favor: Councilmembers: Steele, De Rosa,
Calderhead, and Buchanan. Noes and opposed: Councilwoman Bennie.
End of excerpt to Minutes of June 11, 1979.
159
City Hall, San Carlos, California.
September 24, 1979.
The Council met in Executive Session at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of discussing litigation.
The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of San Carlos was called to order at
8:07 P.M., the above date by Mayor John G. Buchanan. The Pledge of Allegiance was repeated.
I
ROLL CALL
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Patricia F. Bennie
Charles E. Calderhead
Gayton De Rosa
William M. Steele
John G. Buchanan
i
ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Anthony Lagorio
City Administrator C. R. Allen
Assistant City Administrator/Finance
Director Warren Shafer
City Engineer George Cook
Planning Consultant Neal Martin
Police Chief Owen McGuigan
City Clerk Sadie M. Conboy
ITEM #3 PROCLAMATION:
Proclaiming Sunday, October 7, 1979, as FIREFIGHTERS' MEMORIAL SUNDAY.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Mayor Buchanan read a letter from Congressman Bill Royer in which he enclosed a copy of
the President's Proclamation which appeared in the Federal Register. -
Mayor Buchanan read President Carter's Proclamation designating October 7, 1979, as
"FIREFIGHTERS MEMORIAL SUNDAY, 1979", presenting a copy of the Proclamation to Acting
Chief Schmidt.
Acting Chief Schmidt, on behalf of the South County Fire Authority, accepted the Proclamation.
I
- ' ITEM #4 CONSENT CALENDAR:
Mayor Buchanan announced the addition of Item #12 to the Consent Calendar: "Setting
October 9, 1979, 8:00 P.M., as date and time for hearing request of Dividend Industries to
amend Plan of Development to change off-street parking for commercial buildings from one (1)
space per one hundred sq. ft. (100 sq. ft.) of gross floor area of retail uses to one (1)
space per two hundred sq. ft. (200 sq. ft.) of gross floor area for retail uses."
Councilman De Rosa requested Items #2, 3, 4 and 5 removed for discussion.
City Engineer Cook requested Item #8 removed for separate discussion.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman Steele moved approval of the Consent Calendar Items Nos. 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 and
12 as follows:
1. Approved Minutes of meeting of September 11, 1979.
6. Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 1979-105 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND ACCEPTING AGREEMENT
WITH ROBERT H. AND JANET M. PAUL (Encroachment Permit - 27 Swart Lane), with
authorization for Mayor and Clerk to execute the Agreement.
7. Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 1979-106 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND ACCEPTING AGREEMENT
WITH ANNA R. MARSHALL (Encroachment Permit - 1701 Industrial Road) with
authorization for Mayor and Clerk to execute the Agreement.
9. Denied claim filed by J. Don Mincey, 1036 Rosewood, for alleged sewer line
backup damage in the amount of $363.00 with referral to Insurance Adjuster.
10. Set Monday, October 22, 1979, 8:00 P.M. as date and time for Show Cause
Hearing for possible revocation of Use Permit for Trans Pak, Inc.,
1069 Center Street.
I
160
11. Adopted RESOLUTION NO. 1979-108 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SAN CARLOS APPROVING WARRANT LIST EXPENDITURES, in the amount of
$231,054.69 (September 24, 1979.)
12. Set October 9, 1979, 8:00 P.M. as date and time for hearing request of
Dividend Industries to amend Plan of Development to change off-street
parking for commercial buildings from one (1) space per one hundred sq. ft.
of gross floor area for retail uses to one(1) space per two hundred sq. ft.
of gross floor area for retail uses.
Motion seconded by Councilman' Calderhead, carrying by the following vote: Ayes and in favor:
Councilmembers: Steele, Calderhead, Bennie, De Rosa and Buchanan.
In connection with Consent Calendar Item #2 - Approval of Policy Statement re the use of
Stop Signs - Councilman De Rosa commented he felt the standards for the erection of
Stop signs were too rigid, that the policy needs to be more flexible and he would
vote "No."
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman Calderhead moved approval of Consent Calendar Item #2, Approval of Policy
Statement with regard to use of Stop Signs, seconded by Councilwoman Bennie. Motion
carried with Councilman De Rosa voting "No."
With regard to Consent Calendar Item #3 - Civil Service recommendation - Salary Ranges for
Assistant Civil Engineer and Engineering Technician, Councilman De Rosa commented he
objected to the unscientific approach to coming up with the salaries for these two
positions; that it appeared, with the material handed to Council, that the Commission
just took the Job titles and struck a medium with what other Cities were paying without
regard to the specific duties, so he could not vote "Yes" on this matter.
Assistant City Administrator/Finance Director Shafer informed Council that the Civil
Service Commission first approved the Job Descriptions before any Salary Survey was
done and with that information, Staff surveyed the surrounding communities to find what
the comparable position was to the Job Descriptions and based on that information, a
recommendation was made.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman Calderhead moved approval of Consent Calendar #3 the adoption of
RESOLUTION NO. 1979-103 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1979-39 (The Salary Resolution) AND ADDING ASSISTANT CIVIL
ENGINEER AND ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN, seconded by Councilwoman Bennie and carrying by
the following :vote Ayes and in favor: Councilmembers: Calderhead, Bennie, Steele
Y
and Buchanan. Noes and opposed: Councilman De Rosa.
In connection with Consent Calendar Item #4 - Ratifying and adopting a Memorandum of
Understanding between the City of San Carlos and San Carlos Police Officers, Councilman
De Rosa requested clarification of Paragraph #3 of the Memorandum of Understanding,
specifically the reference to the minimum of two hours pay and three hours pay.
Assistant City Administrator/Finance Director Shafer explained the difference was that
in the two hour pay, the Officer was scheduled for duty and immediately after his shift
ends, or before it begins, he has to go to Court, but the three hour pay applies to the
Officer who is called back to work during off duty days for Court appearances.
COUNCIL ACTION:
i
Councilman De Rosa moved approval of Consent Calendar Item #4 the adoption of
RESOLUTION NO. 1979-104 RESOLUTION RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
REGARDING SALARIES AND RELATED BENEFITS BETWEEN CITY ADMINISTRATION AND SAN CARLOS POLICE
DEPARTMENT (Police Officers.) Motion carried unanimously.
Regarding Consent Calendar Item #5 - Authorization to go to bid on photocopy machines,
Councilman De Rosa took exception to the sentence "These items were budgeted in a prior
year and the moneyhas been reserved", commenting these items were not in the budget
for the current year; that this item was rejected by Council because of the problem
the 'buy' vs. 'lease' analysis was improperly presented; that without any background
information, he felt this item should be removed from the Calendar.
Assistant City Administrator/Finance Director Shafer explained the money was put forth
from Revenue Sharing funds last year; that he is requesting authorization to go to bid
to determine whether 'lease' or 'purchase' is the best way to go.
161
COUNCIL ACTION:
Council instructed Staff to get the vendors to respond to a functional or technical
specification and then ask for bids. Consent Calendar Item #5 taken off Calendar until
there is a comparison of 'Lease' vs. 'buy.'
In connection with Consent Calendar Item #8 - Approving and accepting Subdivision
Improvement Agreement with Robert A. Gall, Los Vientos Way, City Engineer Cook informed
Council the Parcel Map also involves a dedication of the right-of-way for Los. Vientos Way
and he requested Council amend the Resolution to include the acceptance of the right-of-way
and the easements involved with this map; further explaining the owner is requesting a
2-year period for completing the improvement instead of the standard 365 days period.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman Calderhead moved approval of Consent Calendar Item #8 with the adoption of
RESOLUTION NO. 1979-107 RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT RE LANDS
OF ROBERT GALL SUBDIVISION AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION THEREOF, with the amendment to the
Subdivision Agreement . . .All of said work and improvements shall be completed within
two (2) years from and after the date of this agreement.. ." and further, that the
Resolution accept possible dedications of Easements, seconded by Councilman Steele,
carrying by the following vote: Ayes and in favor: Councilmembers: Calderhead, Steele,
Bennie, De Rosa and Buchanan.
OFF-AGENDA ITEM:
Mayor Buchanan introduced Mr.Neal Martin, Planning Consultant, welcoming Mr. Martin to the
City Staff.
ITEM #5 PUBLIC HEARINGS:
(a) A public hearing for the purpose of hearing protests to the proposed
acquisition, the extent of the Assessment District or to the proposed
assessment for the proposed Hassler Health Home Assessment District.
I
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman Calderhead moved to accept the Affidavit of Publication for filing, seconded
by Councilman Steele, carrying unanimously.
Mr. Edwin Smith, Engineer of Work for the proposed Assessment District, presented a Summary
of the Engineer's Report under the Municipal Act of 1913 including a description of the
acquisition to be made which is a participation in the purchase of the Hassler Health
Home property; the financing amounting to approximately $300,000, which is about 14'/0
of the funds necessary to purchase the property, with the balance monies coming from a
Federal Grant and by funds of the MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District. He alluded
to the incidental expenses for the Assessment District which consist of the preparation
of the Assessment, the legal fees, printing and advertizing Bond handling and t`�? 'City
administration of the project amounting to some $43,000. He outlined the proposed area
involved in the proposed Assessment District and the cost of each unit as $600 per unit
with the exception that the commercial property is assessed at about half of what would be
charged if it were fully developed as residential property, explaining that the Assessments
can be paid off in full or extended over a 10 year period with interest. Mr. Smith
answered several questions with regard to the technical aspects of the proposed Assessment
District.
Mr. Robert J. Hill, Bond Counsel for the Assessment Proceedings detailed the financing,
explaining the reference to Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code that spells out
the Law that is applicable to conducting this type of proceedings; the payment of the
Assessments; the sale of the bonds for any amount that is not paid within the 30 days with
interest amortized over the 10-year period; that the bonds will not be sold until there
is a binding purchase agreement for the property and the payments of the principal and
interest will not start until the year following the sale of the bonds; that the interest
rate is 5k%. Mr. Hill answered questions posed by the audience with regards to the
interest rate, the payoff if the property is sold, the property being permanently dedicated
as open space when it is acquired, the question on why the half assessment on commercial
property, the sources of funding and other related matters.
Mayor Buchanan read the following protest letters:
1. Peggy Nunes, 3312 Brittan Avenue, #9.
2. Dorothy Tarantino, 3312 Brittan Avenue, #3.
3. Tom J. Faltinow, Elfriede Faltinow and Lorraine Faltinow, 3457 La Mesa Drive.
4. Sylvia P. Caplan, 3294 La Mesa, #3
5. John Y. C. Lee and Allison S. S. Lee, 3565 La Mesa Drive.
6. Marianne Grosserhode, 3315 La Mesa Drive. -
7. Edith Kohlmann, 3290 La Mesa Drive, #2
8. Edward F. Stokan and Stephanie A. Stokan, 3257 La Mesa Drive.
162
Clerk reported no further letters of protest were received.
Protestors: Bernard Gutow, 3263 La Mesa, addressed the Council voicing his protest,
pointing out he was not in agreement with the methods taken to establish the Assessment
District; that he felt there was a vested interest being preserved and voiced his concern
as to the boundaries being laid out to define the special assessment district.
Alfred Leidy, 3239 La Mesa, addressed the Council in support of the previous
.protestor; that he supports open space and will pay the $600, but believes the Open Space
District was arbitrarily established and left out those homes which are pockets of
resistance and probably should be reconsidered.
Proponents: Dave Wolff, 3337 Brittan, addressed the Council outlining the procedure
followed in obtaining additional signatures for the proposed Assessment District, which
had been requested by Councilman De Rosa at a previous meeting, and the time and effort
F
spent in verification of signatures. He presented Clerk with a list of new signatures
for the petition showing an overwhelming support for the acquisition and displayed
transparencies summarizing the 'yes' and 'no' signatures on the 569 addresses in the
proposed Assessment District, including six City-owned lots not assessed and two access lots
not to be assessed, leaving a total of 561 lots to be assessed, alluding to the fact that
they have 90% of those owners in favor of the project.
Dick Oliver, representing the commercial properties in the proposed District,
addressed the Council explaining his support of the acquisition in that as a developer,
he felt he did have a responsibility to the home buyers and to the present residents.
Mary E. Brill, 3327 Brittan, #3, addressed the Council pointing out she
was one of the people who went out and collected signatures for the Petition; that she cares
about the open space and the value of her property and urged a favorable vote by Council
on this matter.
Celia Hartnett, 3443 Brittan, addressed the Council reading a letter from
Nancy Kies, Broker Associates i I who could not be in gttendancej"ich she urcypd Citv
Mcil U enn-Mpr frf, gignificant financ I bglaefit to nropertv owner-s -if Hassler is
pggsegved. Letter was filed with Clerk.
Morey Sussman, 3336 Brittan, #7, addressed the Council citing the fact he
also collected signatures on the Petition; that he, personally, feels the acquisition
of the property and keeping it in open space will make his life more pleasant as well
as being of much benefit to the citizens of San Carlos. He wished to go on record t
that he would be willing to pay half of the assessment for the property owner who wrote
that she was on a fixed income and could not afford the assessment, and urgently requested
the Council to vote 'Yes' on this measure.
Bryan Baarts, Eaton Avenue, addressed the Council pointing out that the City
residents are paying part of the share through the MidPeninsula Open Space District
taxation; that actually, everyone benefits from a Park like Hassler, more particularly,
such an accessible one, urging Council to support the proposed Assessment District.
Elly Hess, 2411 Graceland, addressed Council citing the fact that she is
interested in Environmental Education for children and has taken children on field trips,
but with busing not available any more, she felt it would be delightful to take the
children walking in the pristine valley of Hassler. She urged Council's support for
the project.
Fred Endicott. 3336 Brittan, #14, addressed Council outlining the tremendous
effort put forth in support of the proposed Assessment District to preserve Hassler,
citing the fact that all the money needed for the purchase is available, if the Council
will permit the formation of the.-District, and further outlined the benefit to the
community if the property is purchased and urged Council to proceed with the establishment
of the Assessment District.
Richard Bishop, 1797 Elizabeth, Member of the Board of Directors of the
Mid-Peninsula Regional OEen Space District representing the area including 522 UElosl
Redwood City and part of Woodside. cited the fact that if the project is completed, L
the Open Space District will assume sole responsibility for the management and
maintenance of the property. As to the concerns voiced in connection with Police and
Fire protection, Mr. Bishop read a letter addressed to Mr. Herbert Grench, General
Manager of the District, from Supervisor Edward J. Bacciocco, Jr., which outlined that
both the Sheriff and the California Department of Forestry will continue to provide
police and fire support should the MidPeninsula Open Space District acquire the
property. Letter was presented to the Clerk to be made a part of the Record. He
outlined, in detail, the source of funding: $1 million in Federal Grant money, $300,000
paid by the Assessment District, with $700,000 being paid by the Open Space District;
that the general taxpayers are also participating to a substantial extent. Mr. Bishop
answered other questions in connection with the amount of money raised by taxes from
the general taxpayers, the low interest rate on the bonds and other related matters.
Edwin Kahn, 3325 Brittan, #9, addressed the Council pointing out the
magnificent view of the western hills and stating he would hate to see any scar on that
view. He urged Council to vote in favor of the proposition.
Robert Black, 585 Dartmouth, addressed Council pointing out he has been
associated in the past with working toward obtaining,Hassler as open space, working on
the 7(,% tax rate, which was not utilized by Council. He felt it was very important to
consider those people who would not be able to afford the $600 assessment; that four people
had indicated in their protest letters that this assessment was too much for them to pay
and he went on Record to help share in the amount of $600; suggesting the City start a
fund for those who have formally protested, due to financial hardship.
Mr. Hill, Bond Counsel, advised Council that the proponents should adminster
such a fund. The City should not become involved.
Randolph Jenks, 2848 Tramanto, Chairman of the local Sierra Group, pointed
out it is the feeling of the Sierra group that this proposed Assessment District is a good
and wise thing to do for the people today and for future generations in keeping the
environment we have and also to consider the complete public support for such a project,
urging Council to adopt the project.
Jim Goeser$ 222 Frances Lane, spoke on the issue brought up by some of the
protestors that the Assessment District boundaries had been gerrymandered in such a way
that there would be a large 'yes' vote, alluding to.the fact that the District includes
all those houses which would get the greatest benefit from being in the District; that
houses that did not get a view of the,District were not included.
Carol Gutow, 3263 La Mesa, commented she feels that those people who do have
a view of the Hassler property are being penalized and asked to bear the whole burden of
support for everybody in San Carlos.
Mr. Hill, Bond Counsel, formally requested that the Engineer's Report, as
the complete document, be included as a part of the record of Public Hearing on file with
the City Clerk; in addition, the letters that were read, should be made a part of the
Record of the Public Hearing (letter from Nancy Kies and Supervisor Bacciocco.)
-COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman Steele moved to include the letters from Nancy Kies and Supervisor Bacciocco
and the Engineer's Report as part of this public hearing record, seconded by Councilman
De Rosa, carrying unanimously.
Councilman Calderhead moved to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Councilwoman Bennie,
carrying unanimously.
Council heard responses to its inquiries in connection with certain sections of the
Agreement of Understanding with the MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District, more
particularly, the District's scheduled hearings on acquiring the Hassler property, the
start of negotiations with the City of San Francisco, the exception with regard to the
exchange of 10 acres for 'like contiguous' property for open space purposes and the
purpose of the 25-year lease under control of the Open Space District Board.
Mr. Hill, Bond Counsel, requested the approval of the Agreement be continued for two weeks
to allow him an opportunity to peruse same; that he has no intention,of delivering the
bonds for the purchase of the property until the District has completed their hearings
and there is a binding purchase agreement with the City and County of San Francisco
which can be funded by the $300,000 Assessment District, the Grant monies and the
additional amount paid by the Open Space District.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman Steele moved adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 1979-109 A RESOLUTION OVERRULING
PROTESTS re Hassler Health Home Assessment District, seconded by Councilman Calderhead
carrying by the following vote: Ayes and in favor: Councilmembers: Steele, Calderhead,
Bennie, De Rosa, Steele and Buchanan.
Councilman Steele moved adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 1979-110 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING
ENGINEER'S REPORT, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT AND ORDERING THE WORK AND ACQUISITIONS,
DIRECTING RECORDING AND FILING OF ASSESSMENT, ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM AND NOTICE OF
ASSESSMENT, APPOINTING COLLECTION OFFICER, AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE TO PAY ASSESSMENTS,
seconded by Councilman De Rosa, carrying by the following vote: Ayes and in favor:
Councilmembers: Steele, De Rosa, Bennie, Calderhead and Buchanan.
Mayor Buchanan called for a 5-minute recess. Meeting reconvened at 11:15 P.M.
164
ITEM #5 PUBLIC HEARINGS:
(b) Resolution - Approving and accepting Agreement of Understanding
with MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District re Acquisition of
Hassler Health Home property, with authorization for Mayor and Clerk
to execute the Document.
COUNCIL ACTION:
With Council concurrence, the approval of the Agreement was continued for two weeks.
ITEM #6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(a) Resolution re Approving and accepting proposal from Mr. Don McLean
and Dr. Nuener in connection with representation at PUC meetings
California Water Service Company's proposed Rate Increase.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilman Steele moved adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 1979-111 Approving and accepting
proposal "A" from Mr. Don McLean and Dr. Nuener in connection with representatation
at PUG Hearings and the City Administrator authorized to contact Mr. McLean and have
a presentation to the Council, as soon as possible, with the potential that Council
may increase its agreement with Mr. McLean and Dr. Nuener, seconded by Councilman
Calderhead, carrying by the following vote: Ayes and in favor: Councilmembers:
Steele Calderhead, Bennie, De Rosa and Buchanan.
At this time, Councilman Steele moved to waive the automatic adjournment hour of 11:30 P.M.
seconded by Councilman De Rosa. Voting in favor: Councilmembers: Steele, De Rosa,
Bennie and Buchanan. Noes and opposed: Councilman Calderhead.
ITEM #6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
(b) Staff recommendation re Interim action on Program for Rat Control.
City Administrator Allen made an oral presentation recommending the City cease charging
for the Rat Bait and making the Rat Bait available at the Fire Stations for the citizens;
2) With the help of the Public Information Officer of San Mateo County and the
Cable TV operators within San Mateo County, spot announcements could be developed to
be shown as part of the public interest effort to get public support on a County-wide
basis to help solve the problem.
Mr. Kovenlenko reported San Carlos is the only City charging for the Bait and outlined
the policy in which anyone working in any City in the County could go to any Fire Station
and pick up the bait.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Council concurred in authorizing no charge for the Rat Bait; Bait to be distributed from
the Fire Stations and Clerk's office with no questions asked as to their residency; the
possibility of the Boy Scouts and Girls Scouts project to go out into the City with
information on how to use the bait, etc. Mayor to follow up on the Scouts education
and information program in the City. City Administrator to follow up on contacting the
Utility Companies.
ITEM #7 NEW BUSINESS:
(a) Council discussion re adding additional sewer connections in the
Devonshire Sanitation District.
Council heard a presentation by the City Engineer regarding the problem existing within
the Devonshire County Sanitation District in which the District has already permitted
seven new connections thereby exhausting their allowance of Grant funded sewer capacity;
that any more connections within the District will have to be allocated to the extra
capacity purchased directly by the City, recommending a deposit of $650 for the L
connection fee based upon the latest cost data available for the new Plant; that the
County has adopted a policy of informing anyone inquiring about a new connection in the
District, that the connection will not be allowed without the City's permission.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilwoman Bennie moved Council accept Mr. Cantwell's proposal Items #1 through #4
as a method of allocating additional sewer connections with Staff instructed to set up
some planning policy with regard to requests for such connections, seconded by Councilman
De Rosa,- carrying unanimously.
Council granted approval to Meissner & Steiner Development for one (1) sewer connection
for 141 Lynton (APN 049-093-080.)
165
ITEM #7 NEW BUSINESS:
j (b) Community Forum.
There were no speakers under Community Forum.
ITEM #8 ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business on hand, the meeting adjourned at 12:15 A.M. to Tuesday,
October 9, 1979, due to Columbus Day Holiday.
Respectfully submitted,
Clerk
I
i
City and County of San F#Acisco: Office of City Attorney
G**r9*Agnost, WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
City Attorney Meeting 83-29
Dec. 7, 1983
December 5 , 1983
HAND DELIVERED
The Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle , Suite D-1
Los Altos , California 94022
RE: Hassler Health Home
Dear Members of the Board:
It has recently come to the attention of this office that
the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is considering a
proposal to use the Hassler Home Property as a center for the
arts , including use of the existing buildings for artist
studios. The City and County of San Francisco reminds you that
Midpeninsula purchased the property in question from San
Francisco in a negotiated settlement of litigation. That
settlement is memorialized in a written Settlement Agreement ,
which was executed by the President of Midpeninsula 's Board of
Directors pursuant to Resolution 83-20 of the Board on May 11 ,
1983.
Paragraph 8 of the Settlement Agreement provides as
follows : ( 1 ) Midpeninsula will use the Hassler property
exclusively for public park , open space , and/or public
recreational purposes; ( 2) Midpeninsula will not lease the
Hassler property for any purpose for which Midpeninsula 's power
of eminent domain could not be exercised; and ( 3) Midpeninsula
will pay all profit on resale of the property within 10 years to
San Francisco.
The foregoing conditions of San Francisco 's sale of the
property to Midpeninsula illustrate San Francisco 's concern that
Hassler be maintained as open space , and that Midpeninsula be
prevented from acquiring the property in eminent domain only to
resell the property, or portions thereof, to a developer at a
profit. A use of the Hassler site as an artists ' community would
be for other than public park , open space , and/or public
recreational purposes , and would constitute a clear violation of
the Settlement Agreement. In addition , a lease of the property
to artists for use as studios would be a use for which
Midpeninsula may not exercise the power of eminent domain, and
would also violate the Agreement.
(415) $584315 Room 206 City Hall San Francisco 94102
The Board of Directors 2 December 5 , 1983
Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District
The City and County of San Francisco would view with grave
concern any attempt by Midpeninsula to use Hassler for any
purpose not permitted by the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
Should it be required , San Francisco would not hesitate to take
appropriate legal action to enforce the Settlement Agreement
between the parties. We would be pleased to discuss this matter
further with you or your counsel at your request.
Very truly yours ,
GEORGE AGNOST
City Attorney
ANDREW W. SCHWARTZ
Deputy City Attorney
3803d/t
cc : The Board of Supervisors of
San Mateo County
i I
I
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meeting 83-29 416 Pearl Avenue
Dec. 7, 1983
San Carlos , CA 94070
December 1, 1983
Dear Mr. Wendin,
I am writing concerning the preservation of the Hassler
Health Home complex. First, let me state that I have been a
firm supporter of the policy of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District in the past. I attended the meeting on Novem-
ber 22 in San Carlos and have found several things about the
stand of the committee that deeply troubles me.
First, I feel the Open Space committee made a mistake in
accepting private money from the Brittan Heights Association
and thereby letting it be the "tail that is now wagging the
i dog."
Secondly, and far more distressing, is the board's appa-
rent lack of any response to a wide range of people in the com-
munity who wish the Hassler complex to be saved for a wide
variety of reasons.
Unless the structures can be saved, I am beginning to
strongly question the further need of an organization, sup-
ported by the taxpayers , which has embarked on a road that
a great many of the taxpayers have disapproved. Perhaps the
Open Space board no longer has a part to play in the San Mateo
County affairs if it can no longer respond to the citizens who
pay the bills.
It would be truly tragic for you to win this battle, and
then lose the war. I, as a resident and taxpayer, seriously
do not know if I could continue to support the Open Space
district. It seems to me your mandate is ended if you must
buy land with buildings of value and potential use, which are
also of historical and architectural importance , and then des-
troy them to get "Open Space. " It makes me very sad to be
losing faith in an organization that until now I have so admired
and supported.
Tf_ the Hassler_ complex is destroyed, I fear its ghost
will rise up to haunt you.
Sincerely,
Pat Nel on
PS. I enclose a copy of a San Mateo Times editorial of Decem-
ber 2 which I hope will help you in your reconsideration of
youregrlier tentative decision to destroy these historic buildings
of architectural importance.
I
PRNelson:n:12/l/83
W'R' -N COMMUNICATION
ing 83-29 8 FINGER AVE. APT 5
Dec. 7, 1983 REDWOOD CITY, CALIF.
NOVEMBER 30, 1983
BOARD OF DIRECTORS,
MID-PENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
373 DISTEL CIRCLE
Los ALTOS, CALIF. 94022
DEAR BOARD MEMBERS,
I
AS A RESIDENT AND TAXPAYER OF BOTH SAN MATEO AND
i
i
SANTA CLARA COUNTIES FOR OVER FORTY YEARS, I AM WRITING
TO YOU TODAY TO INTREAT YOU TO PRESERVE THE BEAUTIFUL
BUILDINGS ON THE HASSLER HEALTH HOME SITE. THIS ENTIRE
COMPLEX HAS GREAT POTENTIAL, IN MY VIEW, FOR MANY USES
BY THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF OUR TWO COUNTIES, AND SHOULD
ai NOT BE DESTROYED! ONE EXAMPLE IS THE HANDICAPPED, WHO
NOW COMPRISE ALMOST 200% OF OUR STATE S POPULATION, AND
WHO COULD EASILY USE ALL OF THE HASSLER BUILDINGS. THIS
IS TRUE BE-CAUSE THE BUILDINGS ORIGINALLY ACCOMMODATED
BOTH WHEELCHAIR AND AMBULATORY TUBERCULOSIS PATIENTS.
THESE ARE THE SAME NEEDS THAT OUR HANDICAPPED NEIGHBORS
ARE LOOKING FOR,AND CAN PUT TO GOOD USE IN THEIR CRAFT
i
WORK, MEETINGS AND FOR SOCIAL GATHERINGS: THE SITE ALSO
LENDS ITSELF TO OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES BY HANDICAPPED PERSONS?
SUCH AS PICNICS, WALKS, NATURE OBSERVATION, ETC. IN
MY HUMBLE OPINION, THE HASSLER HEALTH HOME COMPLEX "FILLS
THE BILL", AS FAR AS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR HANDICAPPED
ACCESSIBILITY IS. CONCERNED!
PAGE
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, I AM CONFIDENT THAT THE PROBLEM
OF POSSIBLE LOSS OF FUNDING CAN BE RESOLVED, AND THE SITE
PRESERVED AT THE SAME TIME. WHY, FOR EXAMPLE, CANNOT THE
BOARD PURCHASE TEN ACRES OF OPEN LAND IN THE AREA, AND
SUBSTITUTE THAT TEN ACRES FOR THE SO-CALLED "CARVE-OUT"
OF THE ACREAGE TAKEN UP BY THE HASSLER HOME? THIS WOULD
j
SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF YOUR GRANT, AND AT THE SAME
TIME SAVE YOU THE COST OF DEMOLISHING THE BUILDINGS!
OTHER PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIONS CAN BE OVERCOME, I AM SURE,
IF A SPIRIT OF CO-OPERATION AND COMPROMISE IS PRESENT
DURING YOUR DELIBERATIONS ON THIS SUBJECT. WE ALL WILL
BE WATCHING WITH GREAT INTEREST HOW YOU DECIDE. FOR
!
THE SAKE OF FUTURE GFNERATIONSIAS WELL AS OUR OWN, MAY
GOD GUIDE YOU IN YOUR DECISIONS.
SINCERELY,
EDWARD F. BR ER
I
I i
I i
i
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Rige,Anderson &Turnbull,Inc,
Meeting 83-29
Dec. 1, 1113
30 November 1983
Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle, Suite D1
Los Altos, CA 94022
Gentlemen:
It is our understanding that some consideration is being given to the
preservation and possible use of the Hassler Sanitorium structures for
cultural purposes.
As specialists in assessing the potential of older structures and
preparing plans for their possible retention we would be most
interested in assisting you in looking at the probability of their
re-use potential should you consider doing so.
Sincerely,
Charles Hall Page
Enclosure
364 Busli Street•San Francisco,California 94104-(415) 362-5154
GJRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meeting 83-29 , •±
Dec. 7, 1983
1065 Drake Ct.
San Carlos , Ca. , 94070
November 29 , 1983
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Cr. , D-1
Los Altos , Ca. 94022
Dear Board Members :
We wish to express our opposition to the conversion of
the Hassler site buildings to an Art Center.
We believe that such a use is incompatible with the con-
cept of open space . Our area needs open space that can
be used by everyone , and we should not provide a private
site for special interest groups .
We feel that the heavy use of this site by people and
automobiles would disturb the wildlife on the site , and
would mean parking lots , traffic , and noise--things not
compatible with open space.
This land was purchased by the Open Space District to
prevent the development of sub-divisions , but wouldn' t
many of the same problems be present with the development
of an Art Center--lighting, police protection, sewers ,
streets?
Very truly yours ,
Bob and Dorothy Young
DAVID HARRIS ASSOCIATES WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meeting 83-29
Dec. 7, 1983
November 26, 1983
MPROSD
375 Distel Circle , Suite D-1
Los Altos , California 94022
Dear Sirs ,
I was privilege to have had the opportunity to
speak at the San Carlos hearing on the 22nd of November
concerning the Hassler Health Home. Nevertheless , I still
feel the need to react in writing to the ideas and attitudes
express at that time. I was particularly distnrbadeby the
seeming lack of responsiveness to the majority clear interest
in preserving the Hassler Health Home on the part of some
members of your board. It seemed that no amount of facts ,
evidence , persuasive argument could change their thinking.
It would seem to me that the long-term interests of the
larger community and its needs would and should prevail over
a very few. Those generations that come after us will
certainly praise the preservation rather than the destruction
of our resources.
The legitimate concerns of the Regional boardwere ,
I believe , addressed and answered by experts in their .fields.
The remaining problems could be overcome given a change. It
should be understood and recognized that blood , sweat , tears
and determination also translates into dollars. It could be
a project that would pull a large segment of the county
together and, ultimately, in turn, justify to many citizens
and elected officials the large monetary contribution that
is made to the open space alstrict each year. Giving something
back to the community back to the community doesn't hurt
anyone.
There comes a time in the course of events when
wisdom and courage is required. The great accomplishment in
science , art , technology have come about by people willing
to take a chance on an idea or a person. Contrary to some ,
I feel the time is truely here and now. The average citizen
would also like to participate with his money and energies.
I fervently hope you have the good wisdomeand vision that
peeservation of this asset would mean to the vast majority.
Sir�c a ly
D4vi.d Harris
1221 RAISTON AVENUE • BELMONT, CALIFORNIA 94002 • (415) 349-3464
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meeting 83-29
Dec. 7, 1983 November 21 , 1983
22 Antique Forest Lane
Belmont, CA 94002
Board of Trustees
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle Suite D-1
Los Altos , CA
Dear Board Members:
I understand that the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
is considering a proposal by the San Mateo County Arts Council for restor-
ation of the former Hassler Health Home buildings as a regional art center.
Since the Twin Pines Art Center was founded and developed here in Belmont
by Ruth Waters during my tenure as City Manager, perhaps my experience with
Twin Pines will be of interest to you.
The buildings now known as Twin Pines Art Center were originally
Rebec Hall , the main patient wards for a psychiatric hospital which closed
in 1972; the property was subsequently purchased by the City of Belmont for
a park. Following closure, the buildings were stripped for salvage, and
from 1972 through 1976 constant trespassing and vandalism turned them into
a shambles of broken glass and debris.
In the fall of 1976, Mrs . Waters presented her plan for an art
center modelled after the Torpedo Factory Art Center in Alexandria, Virginia,
to the Director of Parks and Recreation, City Council members , and myself.
Considering the merits of the plan and Mrs. Waters ' professional qualifications
in both art and business , the City Council approved the project in March 1977,
by which time all of the potential studio rooms were already committed to
prospective tenants. By July 1977 the buildings had been painted inside and
out by the artists and repaired sufficiently to permit public access . Since
then, the artists have continued to maintain and improve the buildings (no
services are provided by the City) .
Our experience with Ruth Waters and the Twin Pines Art Center,
which we understand to be in many ways a prototype for the Hassler project,
has been eminently satisfactory. Both communication and cooperation have
been excellent, and there have been no administrative or managerial difficulties .
Since Mrs . Waters acts as leasing agent for the City 's property as well as
facility director, the involvement of City staff is limited to a minor book-
keeping function.
I can think of no-one more qualified to direct this project and to
represent the best interests of the fine arts community while serving the
larger constituency of the mid-peninsula .
*Sincerel (
neChaine
es P.
l
WRITTEN uuMMUNICATION
Meeting 83-29
Dec. 7, 1983
December 3, 1983
Tr'idpeninsula Regional Open
Space District
Loard of Directors
375 Distel Circle, D-1
Los Altos, CA 94022
Dear Gentlepersons:
On most of my walks recently on the trails of Rancho
San Antonio I have become uncomfortably aware of many, many
joggers . When I am alone or with an adult it is not im-
possible to step out of the way of the polite, reasonable
runners (who are numerous) .
My concern istwhen I am with children or a group and
the unseeing speedster, unable to swerve or break stride,
seemingly unaware of our presence, comes barreling down the
trail, that the runner may cause me to lose a member of the
group in the creekbed , or the poison oak, or the blackberry
along the trail.
In the best interests of the multi-use nature of the
Ranch, I would like to suggest that some limitations be
placed on which trails may be used by the joggers especially
on the weekends. Pt. Reyes restricts horses to certain trails
on weekends ; we restrict them on the b.onte Bello Preserve in
places . Could we not do the same with the joggers at rancho
and direct them to that fine, wide PGL road which goes up
and down hill more than adequately for a good workout?
Sincerely,
Lily Estrada, Docent NROSD
cc
Vrs . Rettencourtt
Nit. View Parks and Rec.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meeting 83-29 Loi, Iluhvcrd;t Pippcnul
Dec. 7 1983 1(150 (reshictt Orbe
Apurliucnf 309
111uunluin Vicw/, CA 94040
3
A) A-two 6,/-ff/3
/1?-.l��.L,�c,,�-u..�-L� i��`^r``..f ��``" 5-��-t-' �/z�L�vr�'`D �f o k-�•• �.✓'�.�/�" �e�
5
• A may. /' .�Ot�l.t' " I„ '/ ,V'C.. .�4,•.'�:.`"„�•� /y�'ti`...Q� L J —
� P
rcity and County of Son .sncisco: Office of City Attorney
'yam George Agnost, WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
City Attorney Meeting 83-29
Dec. 7, 1983
December 5 , 1983
HAND DE
LIVERED
Mr . Arlen Gregorio
. Chairman , San Mateo County Hoard
of Supervisors
401 Marshall Street
Redwood City, California 94063
RE: Hassler Health Home
Dear Mr. Gregorio:
a
It has recently come to the attention of this office that
the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors is considering a
proposal to seek use of the Hassler Home Property as an artists,
community. As you may know , the Hassler property was formerly
owned by the City and County of San Francisco. The Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District purchased the Hassler property from
San Francisco in a negotiated settlement of litigation. That
settlement is memorialized in a written Settlement Agreement
which provides that Midpeninsula will use the Hassler property
' exclusively for public park , open space , and/or public
recreational purposes.
The proposed use of the Hassler buildings and rounds
g g as a
facility for artist studios would constitute a clear violation of
the Settlement Agreement , and San Francisco is prepared to
initiate legal action to enforce its rights thereunder. Enclosed
herewith is a copy of a letter which we are delivering to
Midpeninsula today to indicate San Francisco 's concern.
Moreover , San Francisco would also view any attempt by San Mateo
County to interfere with the aforesaid Settlement Agreement as an
t
5
t.
l
(41 S) SSS-331 S Room 206 City Hall Son Frondsco 94102
I
Mr. Arlen Gregorio 2 , December 5 , 1983
actionable interference with contract. We urge you to respect
the terms of the Agreement under which San Francisco agreed to
sell the Hassler property to Midpeninsula. Please feel free to
contact this office if you have any questions.
Very truly yours ,
GEORGE AGNOST
Comity Attorney
ANDREW W. SCHWARTZ
Deputy City Attorney
AWS/t
cc: Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District
3803d
Meeting 83-29
|
33351 Brittan Avenue, Apt 3
San Carlos CA 94070 �
/
)
Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space District |
/
375 DisteI Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos, California 94022
Gentlemen:
It is impossible for me to attend your meeting this week but I �
should like to present my views on the use of the Hassler
buildings by the artists proposing to establish an art colony at �
!
the expense of those who have voluntarily taxed themselves to
help provide and maintain open space for the use of all taxpayers '
and residents of California.
. When the residents of the Brittan Heights area voluntarily agreed '
|
to tax themselves there was no mention of anyone using the !
property for their personal gain. I AM FIRMLY AGAINST THE }
ARTISTS BEING ALLOWED TO ESTABLISH BUSINESS ENTERPRISES ON THE
PROPERTY IN QUESTION. If they are allowed to do so, then there
is nothing to prevent the commercialization of all open space |
preserves in the state, or possibly in the country. \
PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW THIS PROPOSAL TO BE IMPLEMENTED.
Very truly yours, i
/
Mrs. Annamae Paul
^
�
`
CITY OF SAN CARLO:
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meeting 83-29
Dec. 7, 1983
�2 i1 alter fCleKrX C�CcyYL�l2fiL�6CFl2
Tcicpnonc (415) 593-801 1
December 5, 1983
Chairman Daniel Wendin
Midpenninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle, Suite Dl
Los Altos , California 94022
Dear Chairman Wendin,
At its most recent meeting, the San Carlos History, Arts and
Science Commission voted unanimously to support the efforts of
the San Mateo County Art Council to save the Hassler Health Home
for development of an Art Complex.
Our Commission feels that with such limited space left in San
Mateo County, the "dream for an arts and nature center" at the
Hassler complex should be the overriding factor in the Midpenninsula
Regional Open Space District and Board of Supervisors decision to
maintain the buildings for the Art Center Complex.
We urge you to vote in favor of the Art Complex.
Sincerely,
Lr�Wt/t� � •
R BERT G . LA STR
Chairman
San Carlos History, Arts , and Science Commission
cc : San Mateo Board of Supervisors
San Mateo County Arts Council
M-83-136
(Meeting 83-29
Dec 7, 1983)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
November 28, 1983
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Hassler Restoration Plans
Introduction: At your meeting of November 22, 1983 in San Carlos you heard
presentations by the Arts Council , public officials, staff (see memorandum
M-83-134 dated November 16) , representatives of groups, and the public regarding
the proposal by the San Mateo County Arts Council .
Discussion: You decided that you would not consider taking any action that
night. You voted to place on your December 7 agenda the issue of reconsidera-
tion of your July 27 decision to remove all of the buildings and restore the
site to a natural condition. Without making any commitment that your Board
would change its mind, you authorized your Hassler-San Mateo County Liaison
Committee to meet with the County Supervisors' committee to ascertain to what
extent, if any, the County would be willing to assume the costs and responsi-
bility for the project.
Recommendation: As stated in my November 16 memorandum, I recommend that no
change be made in your Board's previous decision, in which case staff will
continue to proceed as expeditiously as possible to implement that decision.
f
1. Terms of Phase I
a. Lease - 120 days (January 1 - April 30) $1.00 .
b. Security - split costs.
C. Liability - County Lessee/MROSD Lessor .
d. Arts Council additional 500k total 700k. Arts Council
Foundation established.
M,,.ID r1 Roso 5V.a..--
e. County responsibility for defense of
assessment district.
f. No party initiates action on grant modification.
g. County pays demolition costs over 236k - option of going
to bid.
Ly
h. Demolition MROSD - time limit
negotiated. 4c—
i . No renovation during 120 days.
j . Success of fund raising should be mutually agreed by
County and MROSD.
2. Terms of Phase II (Assumption fund raising goal achieved)
a. Long term leaser 25 years renewable. -
b. County County and MROSD determine scope of project compatible
-��� t°"'s with open space use and financial feasibility. Arts
�'�''�� Council will cooperate but not participate in the
d e c i s i o n. c--—\-� Q d-czb— spa�1,• c. o� 4 E
C. County and MROSD have equal financial responsibility for
any roject ovex aand above Arts Co ncil' $$ >bligat' 1n.
C.ov •, e..p..e c9 Qs Sic-i�4 e` p,..�.,e.,,�.}..`\ c .
d. Renovation may being with mutual agreement with County
and MROSD.
e. Grant modification obtained.
f. Assessment district resolved.
g. Arts Council assumes security of building to minimum
standards as agreed by both agencies.
h6
Now
j• b'2-3f�K o...a:�o.b\Q gcr- ea._�cc-\ e�.�......o�:�'.o -. <\oa�o.�t�
1. Terms of Phase I
a. Lease - 120 days (January 1 - April 30) $1.00.
b. Security .- split costs.
c. Liability - County Lessee/MROSD Lessor.
d. Arts Council additional 500k total 700k. Arts Council
Foundation established.
e,"b r1 Rc�so aka--+.
e. County responsibility for defense of
assessment district.
f. No party initiates action on grant modification.
g. County pays demolition costs over 236k - option of going
to bid.
h. Demolition MROSD - time limit
negotiated. kx- ""Jk Co. c.;1 .■�..r.. .4•o,.aaQ•\ @x%ess*..l.
i. No renovation during 120 days.
j . Success of fund raising should be mutually agreed by
County and MROSD.
2. Terms of Phase II (Assumption fund raising goal achieved)
a. Long term leaser 25 years renewable. -
b. County and MROSD determine scope of project compatible
with open space use and financial feasibility. Arts
Council will cooperate but not participate in the
decision. cam , <>-� V � ��� � UN-
-
c. County and MROSD have equal financial responsibility for
any project ove nd above Arts Council' pbligattgn.
C�ov +y e-avet9Qs 5� ' (+�a1K@ ,�..e,.�.�..4.. —,
d. Renovation may being with mutual agreement with County
and MROSD.
e. Grant modification obtained.
f. Assessment district resolved.
g. Arts Council assumes security of building to minimum
standards as agreed by both agencies.
h,
NNW
�• b't..3 6 K, o...,a:\obi¢. gso-- �r c:.r�c c.� c�r2....ro\:�.:-o••• `�a a\o�t�,.
I
Claims 83-23
Feting 83-29
,ecember 7, 1983
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
C L A I M S
'# Amount Name Description
5846 $ 500.00 Boone Cooke & Associates Water System Study-Rancho San
Antonio Oven Space Preserve
5847 54.56 H.S . Crocker Co. , Inc. Office Supplies
5848 1 ,600. 00 Deloitte Haskins and Sells Final Payment for 1982-83 audit
5849 210.00 First American Title Guaranty Co Title Insurance Premium
5850 146. 75 Herbert Grench Meal Conference
5851 4,413. 70 Keogh, Marer and Flicker Legal Fees
5852 37.50 Peninsula Times Tribune Subscription
5853 55.00 Pat Starrett Private Vehicle Expense
5854 500.00 U.S. Postmaster Postage for Peter
' S855 49.52 Alice Watt Private Vehicle Expense
5856 28.50 David Topley First Aid Training
;5857 29 . 71- David Camp Reimbursement for Shop Supplies
5858 2 ,050.00 Portola Park Heights Property Road Repair Costs-Long Ridge
Association Open Space Preserve
5859 76, 750.00 Redding Title Co. Purchase of Chesebrough Property-
Santa Cruz
5860 47,500.00 Ticor Title Insurance Purchase of Cheseb rough Property-
San Mateo
M-83-137
(Meeting 83-29
Dec, 7, 1983) 11
dew
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 1 , 1983
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: L. Craig Britton, Assistant General Manager
SUBJECT: Dedication and Naming of Easements Acquired From The Trust for Hidden
Villa
Discussion: At your November 22 Special Meeting, you adopted Resolution
83-49, authorizing the purchase of open space easements for the 50 acre
Ranch Area and an additional 348 acre Wilderness Area from The Trust for
Hidden Villa (see report R-83-46 of November 17, 1983) . The second part
of the recommendation in that staff report requested you dedicate and name
these easements, but inadvertently this action was not taken at your
November 22 meeting.
Recommendation: I recommend you dedicate the Ranch Area and Wilderness
Area easements as public open space and name them as an addition to the
Rancho San Antonio S Open ace Preserve--Duveneck Windmill Pasture Area.
P P
R-83-48
(Meeting 83-29
Vk of December 7 , 1983)
,qq,lbo
M KC
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
November 28 , 1983
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: C. Britton, Assistant General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; D. Woods ,
Open Space Planner; M. Gundert,
Associate Open Space Planner
SUBJECT: Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan
Introduction: The following is the initial use and management plan
for Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve. Interim use and management
recommendations contained in the original acquisition report were
approved by you at your January 27 , 1982 and February 10 , 1982
meetings (see report R-82-6 , dated January 21 , 1982, and memorandum
M-82-18 , dated January 29 , 1982) . In addition, interim recommendations
were included in the former Incerpi property acquisition report pre-
sented to you at your June 22, 1983 meeting (see report R-83-29 ,
dated June 16 , 1983) . The interim use and management recommendations
contained in those two acquisition reports have been incorporated
into this plan. Because this preserve is at the top of the Plan
for Relative Site Emphasis of District Sites, the next full use
and management review will be in November 1984 .
I . Site Description and Use
The site is comprised of 888 .5 contiguous acres of land located
along Skyline Boulevard and Alpine Road. Centrally located along
the Skyline corridor, the Preserve is bounded by Skyline Boulevard
to the north and east, Alpine Road to the north and west, and
private property to the south (see attached map) .
Open space use of the site is primarily from hikers and equestrians
traveling on the existing road network through the Preserve.
Several special hikes were held on the site in conjunction with
the District's tenth anniversary celebration, and a trail ride
was organized by the Mid-peninsula Trails Council .
Problems on the site tend to revolve around the three reservoirs
on the property, and fishing and swimming occurs in the reservoirs,
especially in the spring and summer months . All three reservoirs
are posted "No Swimming" .
At the time of purchase, several lease agreements were formulated
with the former owners regarding use privileges for several areas
of the Preserve for a two year period. In accordance with the
agreements, the A-frame house and one bedroom cottage on the
Preserve remained rented while the former ranch manager continued
to live in the main ranch house. In addition, the former owners
R-83-48 Page two
retained use privileges for six horses in the stables and grazing
area and recreational use of the northwestern reservoir. The
lease of these areas terminates on January 1 , 1984 with provisions
for the former ranch manager to move to the A-frame house for an
additional three year period and for the former owners to con-
tinue to lease the stables and grazing area for four horses on
a year to year basis. In addition, the family compound area
at the northwestern corner of the property continues under the
original 50 year lease to the former owners.
II . Planning Considerations
The Preserve is located within unincorporated Santa Clara and
San Mateo Counties, with a small portion within the city limits
of Palo Alto. Portions of the property are zoned open space,
agricultural, resource management, and timberland preserve. The
area along Skyline Boulevard is subject to regulations relating
to land use within the Skyline Scenic Corridor.
The District is proposing that a comprehensive master plan be
prepared for the Preserve. Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST)
has expressed an interest in this study and has offered to provide
funds which have been secured through private grant programs .
III. Use and Management Plan
The following use and management recommendations include the
interim plans contained in the acquisition reports and new
recommendations proposed for the year to come.
A. Access and Circulation
Existing Use and Management Plan
1 . The entrance to the site from Skyline Boulevard is
presently open, allowing vehicular entry. A pipe gate
should be constructed at the entrance restricting
vehicular access to patrol vehicles and residents.
Fencing adjacent to the gate should follow District
standards of split rail style to identify the site as
District-owned. Cost is estimated at $1000 and the
project should be completed in the summer of 1982 .
Status : The entrance to the site has been gated and split
rail fencing installed. The gate has remained open since
its installation. However, due to the increasing popularity
of the site and high visibility along Skyline Boulevard,
the gate will now be kept closed and locked to prevent
illegal vehicle encroachments .
2 . A pipe gate should be installed on the road entering
from Alpine Road at the northern boundary of the 20 acre
retained parcel . Cost is estimated at $850 and the
project should be completed in the summer of 1982 .
Status: Materials are in stock and installation is
scheduled for December, 1983 .
3 . The site would be open to equestrians and hikers.
Hiking/equestrian stiles would be installed at the
Skyline Boulevard and Alpine Road intersection and along
Skyline Boulevard adjacent to the Christmas tree lease
area. Cost is estimated at $600 and the project should
be completed in the summer of 1982 .
R-83-48 Page three
Status: The site has remained open to hikers and equestrians;
however, the stiles have not been installed. Materials
for the stiles are available and will be installed in
December, 1983 . Until the stiles are constructed, access
to the site is through the main entrance along Skyline
Boulevard with parking available at the intersection of
Alpine and Skyline Boulevard.
4 . The roads should be maintained for emergency and patrol
access.
Status: The roads have been maintained by the former ranch
manager residing in the main house. Annual road mainte-
nance, anticipated at $750 , should be included in FY 84-85
budget preparation.
5. Perimeter fencing and gate along Skyline Boulevard should
be maintained to restrict off-road vehicle access .
Status: The fencing is maintained to prohibit off-road
vehi cle access to the Preserve.
B. Signing
Existing Use and Management Plan
1 . The three reservoirs should be posted with "No Swimming"
signs .
Status : The three reservoirs are posted "No Swimming"
and the ordinance enforced by the Rangers .
2 . Preserve boundary signs should be placed at appropriate
points .
Status: District boundary plaques have been installed
near all access points .
New Use and Management Recommendations
1 . Preserve boundary signs, wildland signs, and temporary
trail signs should be installed on the site to aid in
circulation. Cost is estimated at $280 with funding
included in the FY 83-84 budget.
C. Brochure
There is no brochure for the site; however, a map of the
site is available from the District office.
D. Structures and Improvements
Over the past two years, the former owners have leased the
ranch area and pond and the former ranch manager has resided
in the main ranch house under the provisions of the Purchase
Agreement. This lease is scheduled to terminate January 1 ,
1984 , at which time the A-frame house was to be leased to the
former ranch manager for an additional three years.
The ranch manager has informed the District he intends to
move off the property in April 1984 and wishes to sublet the
A-frame house in accordance with the lease provisions. Under
that agreement, the District has the right to acquire his
remaining leasehold interest by making a lump sum payment.
Existing Use and Management Plan
1 . A study should be initiated to determine the potential
use of the ranch complex buildings .
R-83-48 Page four
Status: While several student and staff projects have
analyzed the ranch area, the concept of the use study
has been broadened to provide a comprehensive master plan
for the entire Skyline Ridge Preserve. Peninsula Open
Space Trust will provide funding for this study up to an
amount of $50 ,000. These funds are to be provided to
POST by grants secured from foundations such as the
Packard Foundation and San Francisco Foundation.
A consulting firm will be retained by the District to
prepare the master plan. It is planned that a "Request
for Proposals" to conduct this study will be distributed
by December 15, 1983, and accordingly the final master
plan should be completed by November 1984 . Staff will
return to the Board for final approval of the "Request
for Proposals" at your meeting of December 14 , 19e3 , and
again in February 1984, for authorization to execute the
proposed contract. The "Request for Proposals" is attached
(see Appendix B) and is to be considered part of this use
and management plan.
2. The structures in the ranch area will be leased to the
former owners for a period of two years. Following this
period, the A-frame will be leased to the former ranch
manager for an additional three years and the stable
would continue to be leased to the former owner on a
year to year basis.
Status : Since the former ranch manager intends to move
off site in April, the District should exercise its
buy-out rights in the lease agreement for all interests in
the A-frame house. It is anticipated that a buy-out
agreement will be presented to you for consideration at
your December 14 , 1983 meeting.
Starting in January 1984, the stable and grazing area
will be leased on a year to year basis .
3 . The newly acquired residence located to the southeast
should be rented as soon as possible to provide a presence
on the site until long term disposition can be considered.
Status: The house was rented in October on an interim
basis until long-term disposition is considered in the
proposed master plan for the site. The location and size
of this structure could lend itself well as a potential
youth hostel .
New Use and Management Recommendations
1 . Since the former ranch manager does not wish to move from
the main house until April 1984 , he will be allowed to
rent the house and a portion of the garage. In exchange
for rent, he will be performing various clean up and
maintenance projects on the Preserve. The conditions
of this hold-over tenancy would be included in the buy-
out agreement intended for presentation at your December 14
meeting.
2 . The boathouse adjacent to the reservoir at the intersection
of Alpine Road and Skyline Boulevard should be removed
due to its current condition. The residents within the
family compound on the site will continue to have use of
R-83-48 Page five
the reservoir and boathouse area until January 1 , 1984,
at which time the boathouse will most likely be removed.
The project could be coordinated with the California
Conservation Corps and other projects in the Skyline area.
3 . Within the year, the small cottage located in the ranch
complex should be phased out as a rental unit and become
an interim Ranaer field office until the master plan for
the site is complete. The cabin would be used as an
office and for storage of maintenance and field supplies,
fire suppression materials, and rescue equipment.
4 . All other structures in the ranch area will be secure
until completion of the master plan.
E. Natural Resource and Agricultural Management
Approximately 100 acres of land is leased as a Christmas tree
farm fronting on Skyline Boulevard. A fire charred approxi-
mately 10 acres of the leased tree farm area on the site in
October, 1983 . The fire occurred on one of the upper hilltops
within the leasehold area, an area scheduled to be phased out
of Christmas tree production in three years . The California
Department of Forestry, City of Palo Alto, and District Rangers
responded to the fire.
Several student and volunteer research projects have taken
place on the site since acquisition of the property. The
projects have included extensive resource inventories and
site mapping.
The 19 acre chestnut tree area on the southeast portion of the
Preserve was leased for one year to an interested party in
June 1983 .
The dam on the lower reservoir eroded away during the winter
of 1982-83, and there are no immediate plans for rebuilding
at this time.
Existing Use and Management Plan
1 . Resolve the use conflicts with an adjoining property owner,
specifically including discontinuation of horse grazing on
District property.
Status: The horses belonging to the adjacent landowner
were removed from the southeast corner of the Preserve in
April 1982 . No further grazing has occurred in the area
since removal of the animals . Stall will continue to
work with the landowner to resolve minor encroachment and
signing problems .
2 . The 24 acre crazing area was leased to the former owners
for a period of two years.
Status: The grazing area lease terminates January 1, 1984 .
At that time the grazing area will be leased for use of a
maximum of four horses on a year to year basis in accordance
with the terms of the original purchase agreement.
New Use and Management Recommendation
1 . The gates and fenceline adjacent to the Christmas tree farm
are in need of repair. District staff should work with the
lessee to secure the gates and maintain the fenceline sur-
rounding the tree farm.
R-83-48 Page six
F. Visitor and Site Protection
District Ranger staff continues to patrol the site regularly.
In addition, the ranch residents and the Christmas tree farm
lessee provide a presence on the site and aid in alerting
District Rangers of problems.
G. Dedication
The site is dedicated public open space.
Recommendation: I recommend you tentatively adopt the use and
management plan for the Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve as contained
in this report, including the attached "Request for Proposals" , for
the master planning of the Preserve. The use and management plan
will return to you for final approval at your meeting of January 11,
1984 . However, because of time restraints in making the "Request
for Proposals" available to consulting firms, it will be returned
to you for final approval at your December 14, 1984 meeting.
' -•SrS;:<i -v .v ti •��- -- -s- L+r. Ini{y,�ti�...."S-.••�x:��••�•�_.. L. � '�••: :i+.•. Yef. '�>:_�r.� }�
•' �1•�;�:,�;71 7:Ly {{•}L?J f' •� g4{ 4? •~, Y :•�• ::w•/. + •�i♦y♦•• yt__ + '
"��•� � II *V _ r � ^+�• �/�--�"I _.r?gyp', . �!_/�. r _ __r �,` '> �>i t+•.'
RUSSIA"? RIDGE
OPEN SPACE PRE E, . ,
4&
� ry
OPETT- SPACE PRESER16;fi
SK
-A r a Ranch
44
JHou
site of
Fire
=,u�3 �
.
..y .._ _• .,��. .. �. '� `'ate` _- - _ •�'✓' \J.ti-•5i
,ChestnutV.
�� •— - r ��.
r_ Orchard14.
jam!j ..•-� f)
-:01 - - aM �
f _ F'.A
—. —
_ `ter - -..6� _.. .�-...�-_!�_..:.i.... „-1_�_.j'.j ` � C y'• +� J I - '�'{ .
1•�• ` •�"` �'S.�r,'f` , ' APPENDIX A
�° = SITE MAP USGS)
.-,; tom _ � k
r � _ + $ Vie
a° \ s SKYLINE RIDGE
to: _. . �; E
g�. alto: t OPEN SPACE PRESERVE `•
Hills
s f unn c
vale
'ti `•w :».:F=`. �, >•'> o Farm ly Compound f 1
t; s �' • L'��I• � (20 acres)
Rand Area
suo P.ajnente
�. f
-;
(16 acres) 1
Christmas Tree Lease
-•r... - � �a•rsr�ve , pail
a?� Area 23 acres)
yc1L�[�• ,;"OJT:a"- '\ (..' "�'�' (-
'c "I'll, S�R,ns, _- Grazing Area (24 acres) -
s.sw.s
MN;
Scale 1" = 2000 ' North
rf.. •r. - v..
DRAFT Appendix IBI
Request for Proposal
Project Title: Master Plan for Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve
Project Description: The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
wishes to employ a consultant to prepare a master plan for the
Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve. The intent is to plan compre-
hensively for long term open space and recreational use of this
undeveloped site. Emphasis will be placed on maximizing public
recreational use, the preservation of natural features, and creation
of a phased development and management plan.
A consultant will be retained by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District (hereafter referred to as District) and will work under
the direction of the District's Land Manager, or other persons so
designated by the General Manager. The funding for this_ project
has been raised by the Peninsula Open Space Trust (hereafter
referred to as POST) , which has obtained grants from a number of
foundations for the project.
It is anticipated that this project will be awarded and a contract
signed to proceed in early February 1984, with work to be concluded
and approved by POST and the District Board of Directors in November
1964 .
Consultant Qualifications
This invitation is being sent to those landscape architectural,
architectural, or planning firms known to be qualified to perform
the described project. Primary consideration will be given to
those small and medium sized firms which can demonstrate successful
past experience in similar design and management projects related
to public park and open space properties.
The applicant firm shall be licensed in the State of California and
its subconsultants shall likewise be licensed to practice their
particular speciality.
Invitations are going to qualified firms throughout the Bay Area,
but firms within the District may be given priority consideration.
The District is an equal opportunity employer and will require the
consultant to provide evidence of past and ongoing efforts to assure
that no discrimination is made in the employment of persons because
of sex, race, color, religion or the national original of such person,
and of past and ongoing efforts to involve minority business enter-
prises in the performance of its services.
Proposal Requirements
The consultant' s proposal shall be presented in two parts, consisting
of 1) personnel and firm qualifications, and a conceptual project
approach and work program, and 2) a fee schedule. Each is to be
submitted in separate envelopes and clearly identified as stated above.
The proposals can include any information that you feel might aid the
selection committee in ascertaining your qualifications . In addition
to basic information, consultants should present specific written
and/or graphic information relating to their approach to satisfy
the requirements of this project.
Appendix 'BI Page two
DRAFT
The applicant's submittal must include the name of the principal who
would be in charge of the project and would be the District's contact
throughout the project. All subconsultants with pertinent qualifi-
cations should also be identified.
Proposals shall be submitted to the midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District, to the attention of Mr. David Hansen, Land Manager, and
shall be postmarked no later than January 15, 1984 .
Scope of Consultant Services
1) Consultant will complete an analysis of existing natural and
cultural resources and improvements. This should include but
not be limited to:
'Assessment of community's recreational needs through public hearings,
*California Environmental Quality Act site assessment and fulfillment
*Meeting with appropriate permit granting agencies and municipalities,
'Surveys of natural and man-made features, leases, easements, and
utilities in a written and pictorial form.
An initial detailed study has been prepared by a biologist and
is available for review at the District office.
2) The consultant will hold public hearings in the course of the
planning process . The number of hearings will be determined by
the amount of public interest and will include a minimum of one
hearing to solicit input for potential site use and a second to
review and respond to a draft master plan.
3) Various meetings between the consultant and District will be held
as necessary and will include POST when appropriate. Presentations
should be made of both conceptual and final master plans to the
appropriate governing bodies.
4) The master plan should address long-term (50 year) planning for
the enhancement of the natural environment and consideration of
the developed features of the site. It should propose future
uses and improvements which would be consistent with general
District goals and policies, but not necessarily limited to
existing site use and improvement policies . The master plan should
show alternative creative ways of utlizing the site. Scenarios
could include more intensely developed open space facilities
than the District currently manages so long as they do not con-
flict with the District's concept of open space. For example,
future uses which would be compatible could be an equestrian
facility, campgrounds, youth hostel, interpretive center, etc.
Uses which are legitimate recreation uses but which would not
be compatible, however, would be such things as an off-road
vehicle site, shooting range, bandstand, conference center,
multi-purpose ballfields, etc. The plan should address potential
impacts on adjacent park and open space preserves, private
neighbors, and the Skyline Scenic Corridor in general .
5) The master plan shall include design concepts and complete site
plans through drawings, text, maps, and other support materials
showing all the major components of the proposed plan and esti-
mated costs of construction. Significant changes in design of
existing structures and any proposed new structures will require
sketch plans and cost analysis. A detailed phasing plan for
development and implementation of the master plan shall also
be required, including a financial implementation plan.
Appendix 'B' Page three
DRAFT
6) The master plan shall include comprehensive management and
operation plans which may extend beyond the current District' s
management program to include a variety of forms of management
by other agencies or private groups. Consideration should be
given to potential impacts the use plan may have on the District's
current management program and include a realistic feasibility
study for augmenting this management program.
7) Consultant's final report must be received and acted upon by
the District's Board of Directors by November 28 , 1984 . A
detailed timetable of how and when the work will be accomplished
should be provided by the proposer.
Selection Procedure
1) A selection committee consisting of representatives of the
District's Board of Directors and staff, POST, and possibly
local city or county park and recreation departments will
evaluate the proposals.
2) Proposals will be evaluated according to the specificity, clarity
and comprehensiveness of the project plan and its responsiveness
to the described scope of work to be performed.
3) Proposals will be evaluated in two parts . The background material,
approach and work plan will be examined independently of fee
schedule in an effort to more objectively select the most
qualified consultant.
4) Primary consideration will be given to the demonstrated competence
and prior experience of the consultant and the ability of the
consultant to bring adequate staff and facilities into the
project to ensure successful completion of the project.
5) The selection committee will invite three finalists to be
interviewed, allowing approximately 30 minutes for presentation
and questions .
6) The District' s Board of Directors will act upon the recommendations
made by the selection committee and authorize the General Manager
to enter into contract with the selected consultant.
7) POST and its grantors must approve of the consultant selected
by the District, the specific work program, and line item budget.
District Background and Policies
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is an independent,
special district created in 1972 by the voters of northwestern Santa
Clara County and joined by southern San Mateo County in 1976 .
The purpose of the District is to acquire the preserve open space
lands in the foothills and baylands. The boundaries of the District
generally extend from San Carlos to Los Gatos, and from the San
Francisco Bay to Skyline Ridge.
The land is preserved for a variety of reasons, including protection
of flora and fauna, agricultural production, preserving areas of
scenic beauty and the scenic backdrop, shaping urban growth,
ensuring public safety, environmental education, and recreation.
Appendix 'B' Page four
DRAFT
The District follows a land management policy that provides proper
care of open space land, allowing public access appropriate to the
nature of the land and consistent with ecological values.
As land is acquired, the District works to make it accessible to the
public . Initial recreational development is primarily low intensity
recreation such as hiking, riding, and nature study. The ultimate
development is envisioned as that which maximizes recreational
opportunities while insuring protection of important natural values
of open space. This will preclude such facilities as large ball
fields, golf courses or tennis complexes.
The District seeks arrangements with other governmental agencies or
private groups whereby they provide some or all development and
supervision of recreational facilities.
The District currently has 23 preserves totally approximately 14,500
acres . Of these, 8 have public staging areas with trail systems; the
remaining 15 are considered undeveloped.
Site Information - Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve
The 890 acre Preserve is an integral part of a vast amount of public
open space along the Skyline Scenic Corridor. It is located at the
intersection of Alpine Road and Skyline Boulevard, which is a center
point within the District' s Skyline holdings. The site potentially
offers access to over 6600 acres and eight different preserves.
The natural features of the Preserve are those common to the Santa
Cruz Mountain region. The terrain is gentle to steep, and vegetation
types range from oak woodland to Douglas fir forest.
There are a number of improvements on the Preserve, including 1) a
network of roads and trails, 2) a developed water system and reservoirs,
3) an operating Christmas tree farm, and 4) various ranch and residential
structures .
Portions of the Preserve are currently leased and, because some of
these leases are long-term, require special planning considerations.
Attachments:
A) A master plan for the Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve by POST
B) Basic policies of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
C) A U.S.G.S. site map
D) The MROSD all site brochure
Note: Attachments B, C and D to be attached to R.F.P.
Attachment "A"
A MASTER PLAN FOR THE
SKYLINE RIDGE OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
(by Peninsula Open Space Trust)
The Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve lies at the center of a most successful local
effort to preserve a wilderness environment adjacent to an urban area. This 888-acre
preserve was acquired early in 1982 by a public agency, the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District (the District) . Located at the intersection of Skyline, Alpine
and Page Mill Roads and in the center of 7,000 acres of public land, Skyline Ridge
Preserve is the logical focal point for recreational use. The challenge lies in
developing recreational opportunities which best meet the needs of two million
nearby residents and yet still afford a wilderness experience for the visitor.
THE PROPERTY
Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve is located primarily within unincorporated
San Mateo County, with a small portion being within Santa Clara County. (See map
attached) . The land itself is unique. From Highway 35 it rises sharply to a 2,500
foot peak, one of the highest in the Santa Cruz Mountains. From that point, there
are unsurpassed views of the publicly owned wilderness areas to the east and to the
west, and of the ranchlands and vast forested ridges which sweep down to the Pacific
Ocean. Three man-made lakes are found on the property--an unusual water feature in
this part of mountainous California. However, the site may be best known for its
Christmas tree farm which is visited annually by thousands of Peninsula families
as their source for a personally-cut tree.
The property is primarily undeveloped land with two exceptions. First, a cluster
of four houses and accessory structures is located in the western portion accessible
from Alpine Road and is retained as is under a 50 year lease to the former property
owner. Another area has a ranch style house, stable, garage, small rental cabin,
tennis court, and several auxiliary buildings, including a floating dock and a
boathouse on the shore of a reservoir. This general area is envisioned as the site
for the more intensive building oriented uses proposed in a master plan.
POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Because of the enormous opportunities available at Skyline Ridge Preserve,
the District's Board of Directors has it listed as the top priority development
project. Its central location and diversity of landscape make the area suitable
for campsites, picnic areas and multi-use trails. As a midpoint in District
lands, Skyline Ridge could be used as the key place for a ranger station and
corporation yard for equipment and supplies. Portions of the Christmas tree
-2-
farm will provide educational opportunities for study as the eventual-l-y
revert back to a more natural state. And mo.;t important . the location provides
the opportunity to tneet many of the conitnuni.ty 's recreation needs. Possible
facilities include a modest retreat tenter for community groups and businesses;
stables, a riding ring for equestrians, and a natural history center for tide
Santa Cruz Mountains. Although current District policy would preclude some
of these uses, the opportunity exists to lease portions of its property to private
organizations such as POST, the Environmental Volunteers, and American Youth
Hostel, among others. These organizations could assist with development through
fundraising and later by managing the facilities.
Development of the Preserve will require a unique and detailed master plan.
Certain portions of the property, still under lease from the previous owners
for varying terms, will necessitate a plan with a phased approach to development.
In addition, the planner will need to consider the community's long-term needs.
An experienced land use planner should be hired immediately to develop the site
plan so that implementation can begin as the first lease expire. Parameters
for the master plan will be set such as time, costs, District requirements,
tie-in with other agencies and
legal restraints, location and t g
public input, g
groups. The planning-organization would be jointly selected by the District`
and POST. POST will have input throughout the planning process with joint approval
of the final site plan.
PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP
Over the years, the District and the Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST)
have demonstrated what the current Federal administration refers to as a public/private
partnership. As a not-for-profit public benefit organization, POST has recently
turned its efforts to the District's need for help with recreational development
on public open space preserves. Projects have included a $10,000 contribution
to build a parking lot on Montebello Open Space Preserve and most recently POST
was successful in raising $20,000 more than the $50,000 campaign goal to build
a trail on the District's Windy Hill Preserve. Over 100 people also volunteered
to help with the trail building.
Several factors have contributed to POST's decision to seek a grant for
the Skyline Ridge Preserve Master Plan:
1. POST's goal of opening preserves to meet the communities'
recreational needs;
2. Based on the enthusiastic response to the Windy Hill Trail campaign,
the potential of community involvement and identity with District sites
and of POST raising funds for recreational development.
-3-
3. Limited District staff resources and time to prepare the complex
plan this project and site will require;
4. The elimination of Land and Water Conservation Fund monies
traditionally used by the District for development projects;
5. The opportunity to potentially open Skyline Ridge to uses beyond
the District's current policy of limited passive recreation.
The District will send out requests for proposals to planning firms fo
r a plan
that will outline a phased approach to developing the Preserve and will meet the
community's recreational needs. In addition, the information in the report will
provide the basis for determining the means of financing Skyline Ridge's development.
It is anticipated that development will be financed through a combination of private
funding, public funding and fund-raising carried out in the community. The master
plan will be the key document for planning financing, fund-raising, and the
facilities to be developed. It will also determine the feasibility of leasing
portions of the Preserve to private agencies for management, either on a concession
or not-for-profit basis.
Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve can become a hub of activity for recreation
which will make 7,000 acres of open space and wilderness readily accessible to
2 million urban resident living a short distance away.
SAN MATED 92 SAN^•1'��^-.
FRANCISCO
BELMONT
Mtride
IMII)PENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
y,1 BAY
CAYSUL
Sww�1S �a
AE$ERVG'R SAN p�w�
CARLOS eT
tUt �rX SAN MATED
BAYIANOS
...rrr
'*
E }
REDWOOD EAST
Gr'r /
' , _ 1 f-
y r t
San ffdrk75CG EJQewDod Y PALO ALTO-��/ �.�---_� •�.`
VralerV*d Lands Park \'?
�+ ATHERTON c G �-+'•, h'+.. "'�_-�
WHITTEMORE •` r Palo 0
GULCH ram^ f`PALO ALTO aylan05
\ Mud rt
s
P +„MENLO ShoIne
PARK 1 P •STEVENS CREEK
WOODSIDE •b3 NATURE STUDY AREA
Sunny• Park
Tf �^ IF dGosAb;
J i mvideriich
Park �� MOUNTAIN
i
PORTOL�1 ky` � \ VIEW
VALLEY + .
44ro ORNEw00 i Los s+
ALTOS
HILLS Pc LOS
INDY HILL n ALTOS
v �
Foothills f+ SUN AL.E
Park
` Dv Po 280 a5 i
COAL FOOTHILLS OUVENECK ANCHO N
° EK. WINOMIL NTON10
MT.MELYILLE AREA lOS \' PASTURE _ s Ir K
CAFS
TRANCO A"
Rancho San I I
MONTE BELLO Park
RUSSUN RIDGE Antonio Pd y � 1
Sam McDonald PAGE MILL R&
Park AREA
('I �Tf
`SKTUNE -q ` T
RIDGE Skyline PICCHE I
Park RANCH FREMONT ki ts"
Q OLDER &
evens Cr
g be
San Mateo ARATOGA �! k
Memorial Park Park
Creek
GAP Park
Pescad r
RIDGE yf
q � $ARATOGA I
Porfola
Park s COS NOAH Vasona take
WAY Par:
Castle Rock Villa MOnWIv0 y
Park Aroorelum p
Sa
nborn
1♦El ERENO
wG
---------------- LOSGATOS�
KENNEGY .
1fVV41A AREA
BRIGGS
CREEK LIMEK?L%
`E;wG CANYON
® AfSERV
Big E1asn
park MAN2ANITA RIDGE MT. -1[.YHUN
NORTH LiEA
MT. TAATER
SCALE IN MILES 17 AREA
1 0 1 2 3 4 5
R-83-47
(Meeting 83-29
December 7, 1983)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
November 30, 1983
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: C. Britton, Assistant General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; D. Woods,
Open Space Planner; M. Gundert,
Associate Open Space Planner
SUBJECT: Proposed Addition to Long Ridge Open Space Preserve
(Chesebrough Property)
Introduction: The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has been
offered the opportunity to purchase fee title to 80 acres of land
within unincorporated San Mateo County, south of and adjacent to
the Long Ridge Open Space Preserve (see attached map - Parcel A) .
At the same time, an additional 182 acre parcel located within
unincorporated Santa Cruz County adjacent to the Long Ridge Preserve
and the aforementioned 80 acre parcel is proposed for acquisition
by the District and Sempervirens Fund (see Parcel B on attached
map) . Sempervirens Fund would hold fee title, while the District
would receive a conservation easement over this entire parcel ,
including provisions for public access, trail construction,
fencing, and signing where appropriate.
The site is comprised of a series of grassy knolls affording 360
degree views of Monte Bello Ridge to the east and Butano Ridge to
the west. Rock outcroppings and lone oak trees at the tops of
the knolls along the trail route provide picturesque picnic spots
for hikers .
A. Description of the Site
1 . Size, Location and Boundaries
The two parcels are located adjacent to each other and
directly south of Long Ridge Open Space Preserve. The parcels
straddle the San Mateo-Santa Cruz County line and the Dis-
trict's Sphere of Influence boundary. Parcel A, the western-
most of the two parcels, is located within unincorporated
San Mateo County and is within the District 's Sphere of
Influence. Parcel B is located within unincorporated Santa
Cruz County, just outside both the District's boundary and
Sphere of Influence. However, Parcel B does border the
District's boundary (Skyline Boulevard) to the east and the
District's Sphere of Influence boundary to the west. In
following sections the two parcels will be discussed as a
whole unless otherwise identified.
R-83-47 Page two
The property is bounded by Skyline Boulevard to the east, the
District's Long Ridge Open Space Preserve to the north, and
private property on the remaining sides . Skyline County Park
is located directly across Skyline Boulevard to the east, and
Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve is located approximately 1000
feet to the southeast. In addition, Portola State Park is
located . 75 miles to the west.
2 . Topography, Geology and Natural Landscape
The property is comprised of a series of grass covered knolls
extending from Skyline Boulevard to the western boundary of
the site. South of the grass covered knolls is a series of
canyons with steep side slopes . Vegetation in the canyons
and south facing slopes is characteristic of vegetation in
the area--oak, bay, and fir trees .
Geologically, the site is characterized by sandstone parent
material with an occasional rock outcropping on the knoll
tops and hillsides.
Elevations on the site range from 2693 feet at the highest
knoll top located in the northeastern corner of the site to
approximately 1720 feet in the southwestern corner of the
site. Two creeks that are the headwaters to Oil Creek are
located in the southern areas of the site.
B. Planning Considerations
Parcel A, located within unincorporated San Mateo County, is zoned
timberland preserve (TPZ) , a zone designed to protect commercially
viable timberland. There is no developed timber plan for the site.
Parcel B, located within unincorporated Santa Cruz County, is
zoned UBS 100. This designation means "unclassified building
site" with a minimum lot size of 10 acres; however, actual lot
size is dependent upon terrain, slope, and accessibility.
Both parcels are adjacent to but outside the District boundary,
and therefore, no designation was assigned on the District' s
Master Plan.
C. Current Use and Development
The site is undeveloped with the exception of a dirt road which
winds through the grassland area in the northern half of the
site. The road is gated at Skyline Boulevard several hundred
feet north of the Charcoal Road-Skyline Boulevard intersection.
The road runs into Ward Road to the west where it is also gated.
There are no structures on the property except for a grouping
of cattle pens in the northeast corner. A well is located in
approximately the same area and, except for a six inch round
opening which creates no public hazard, is secured.
The property is grazed by cattle owned by an adjacent land owner.
The grassland appears on initial inspection to be heavily grazed,
with the owner providing supplemental feed for the cattle on the
site. The number of cattle grazing on the site has recently
been reduced.
R-83-47 Page three
D. Potential Use and Development
Parking for approximately six cars could be accommodated at a
roadside Pullout located several hundred feet north of the dirt
road entrance to the site from Skyline Boulevard. Additional
parking is available at the CalTrans parking area located at
the intersection of Highways 9 and 35, one mile to the south and
at the Grizzley Flat parking area approximately two miles north
along Skyline Boulevard.
The dirt road on the property ties in well with existing and
potential public trails in the area. The entrance to Charcoal
Road from Skyline Boulevard at Skyline County Park is several
hundred feet south of the gated entrance to the subject property.
Charcoal Road is an integral connection in the 7 .6 mile Saratoga
Gap to Page Mill Road trail, thereby enabling visitors to gain
access to the subject property from the Saratoga Gap area or
the Page Mill Road area preserves (Monte Bello and Los Trancos
Open Space Preserves) . The property acquisition also aids the
future route of the planned major north-south Skyline trail .
The potential for a long loop trail is also possible upon com-
pletion of two smaller connections . The connecting trail between
the Grizzley Flat parking area and Canyon Trail (Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve) and a short trail connection between the southern-
most road on the Lona Ridge Preserve and the road on the subject
property would, upon completion, enable visitors to hike a 6-7
mile loop trail . Beginning at the Grizzley Flat parking area,
the trail would follow the proposed connection across Skyline
County Park to Canyon Trail. Once across Stevens Creek and
Table Mountain, Charcoal Road would bring visitors to the
subject property. Following the road on the subject property
across the grassy ridge for a distance of . 75 miles , a connecting
trail several hundred feet in length would link the trail to the
road which runs the length of Long Ridge Preserve, thus taking
visitors back to the Grizzley Flat parking area.
E. Interim Use and Management Recommendations
1. The existing road will be maintained for patrol purposes.
Ili 2. Preserve boundary plaques and wildland signs will be placed
at visitor entry points and where appropriate. The cost
will be approximately $35 .
3. The existing gate on Skyline Boulevard will be replaced with
a District pipe gate and hiking stile. The cost will be
about $1000 .
4 . The property will remain open to public use, and District
ordinances and District Ranger enforcement of the ordinances
will apply to Parcel B.
5. Staff will seek to continue the grazing agreement with the
adjacent neighbor on at least an interim basis. The site
will be incorporated into the grazing plan currently being
formulated with the help of the Soil Conservation Service.
F. Name
I recommend the property become an addition to the Long Ridge
Open Space Preserve and be known by that name.
R-83-47 Page four
G. Dedication
I recommend the 80 acre parcel (fee title) be dedicated as public
open space. I further recommend the 182 acre conservation ease-
ment also be dedicated.
H. Terms
The parcels proposed for acquisition are covered by two separate
purchase agreements, as attached:
Parcel A The eighty (80) acres within San Mateo County would be
acquired in fee by the District at a total price of
$190, 000 ($2,375 per acre) . The contract Provides for
a 25% down payment of $47 ,500 with the balance of
$142,500 payable over five (5) years at 7% interest.
Parcel B The one hundred eighty-two (182') acres within Santa
Cruz County would be acquired in fee by the District
at a total price of $430,000 ($2 ,363 per acre) . The
contract provides for a 25% down payment of $107,500
with the balance of $322 ,500 payable over five (5)
years at 7% interest.
Concurrently with close of escrow, Sempervirens Fund would pay
the District $123,000 ($675 per acre) for bare legal title to
Parcel B. This figure is based on a 25% down payment of $30,750,
with the balance of $92,250 over five (5) years at 7% interest.
The attached Agreement of Purchase and Sale of Real Property
details the conditions of this resale of Parcel B. Since this
parcel lies outside the District's boundaries and Sphere of
Influence, it is more appropriate that Sempervirens Fund hold
fee title to the property in anticipation of future transfer to
the State of California as a part of the Skyline to the Sea Trail
and side connection to Portola State Park or to the District, as
appropriate. The Agreement provides that the District would have
a recorded conservation easement over the entire parcel and the
responsibility for management of the property for the foreseeable
future.
The purchase price for Parcels A and B is in accordance with the
District's appraised value. The payment by Sempervirens Fund for
bare legal title to Parcel B is based upon the value of the open
space easements acquired by the District from Hidden Villa (the
most recent transaction required a payment of $665 per acre) .
The amount of cash from the District required to close escrow is
$124 ,250 and would come from the New Land Commitments budget
category.
Recommendation: I recommend that you adopt the following Resolutions :
(1) Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Purchase
Agreement, Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance
of Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute
Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of
the Transaction (Long Ridge Open Space Preserve - Lands of
Chesebrough--San Mateo County) .
(2) Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Purchase Agreement,
Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant
R-83-47 Page five
to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and
All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the
Transaction (Long Ridge Open Space Preserve--Lands of Chesebrough--
Santa Cruz County) .
(3) Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District Authorizing Acceptance of an Agreement for
Purchase and Sale of Real Property, Authorizing officer to
Execute Grant Deed for Interest in Property Being Released,
Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Con-
servation Easement, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute
Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing
the Transaction (Long Ridge Open Space Preserve--Sempervirens Fund) .
I also recommend that you tentatively approve the interim use and
management recommendations contained in this report and name the
property an addition to the Long Ridge Open Space Preserve. It is
further recommended that you indicate your intention to dedicate
Parcel A (fee title) as public open space, and dedicate conservation
easement title to Parcel B.
- -.x..'a /r!•. - :•1• l�:•�..:JS•j' :Jr:I.1::• �9'�J •Z. '♦.. •.S ......_...:•};.}::�:�.a.... .j'
- P •at
`)' �' r.! • •rah ;rar-..:• r Les - =a R i
J tes � 1•�
�l 1•
Imo`
f
9 v a s
t :.
�O e EL I
' 4
rau
= SKYLINE••RIDGE �=:` /i' _ -
Pr�tScRVE __ �.�-7�1 i�,V'/� �`�^'♦ :C y �'•i i•ceaw� #
l i
�.t:' lw��:,�T:: -:.isr _• ...\. '.��/ 1 t P+v'rt,:! fi 3 6pC1ltA
J� �`�!, .- - l� - ra X:.~ ��`'G�OC��--•�� /��'�^.•� 1 _ � 'a eo.r� �. f'ft V,' r J
31
•:;_ �� --ter= � � `� ': ,,:2,'• i [ .=•.. _ °g
2�� _ _~.'S� /�� 2"J..- _ - ':�::;':'•• ":''~.�.•::4wa+a !� ' '�''' fri�reN � �
y y:. . l i ` p u�227
/ �,� - ��,�, a'•:s:.;:::r':3 .s•_. :� t .-`�,'�.�. war+::` .
1
:'(..
- - PARK
_ICING AREA;--'*17
-�r
ZN
..y
er
:,•
a _
r
•r� -
` •f
J � �
.1
__ •�
i'
•'tip-.'-
•'i 4
.J
- '.tr v: -�•i- - "'�' •�, •i• :::=:?'.-'''fs�ti•i--i:•i:•-�1:'.'•::.;y_::---rs.•:�i.:i-
.,; '�.•.f. . .. -- �; s +� DISTRICT :.';'...BOUNDARY
X.
,•.. .r.:'.•e..+. _ _ �. �•;ij:. 'i;=t:: ::.:=its'.:.
IL •l i'
y 41- �`iti:• - i.•;.
- -_���--� :,: :��:-�: :••:::: � _ SKYLINE•COUNTY- P R
Te
-
7'
V
r -
r
a -
'S'
v 1'r
':a t
_ ..
3
•I KOJ
I
O:
3
47-
y
i fLy
1
-�- LO G��RID•.E PRESERVE
b I V -w�•�
a� 1
-
_ =`% •tit:.'•::
'... . ..
PARCEL A - �• .�::':-::':
=a`�' '" `_ % - i- .:::: ::... _ . .. .�: :s'•::::: SARATOGA�GA*
(80 ACRES 1, .•r - ::1':`:::.:
ti
= =':$v _''' i J .• 1;,. \, FEE TITLE _ PRESERVE
va`'b `'r pOd .w•••• • • •. . . •►. . . "„`lfi:.••:r::•' _•r_•,
- -_.: - 'G4 ^ram— t = �azar�.,'�-. ._ '� -..••• ••..... ... .. w -�:�a�. :%.••:.:•..-.::c_•7•:::�••
•oar -J% ✓`�� `,'
_• '� as •3, r _tax PARCEL B :r
(182 ACRES) i .p
•._
E
P02T0�, CC�iS_ERVATION EASEr
ra ogarsr+Rsrt
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
BOUNDARY 4 �
300f�g-
,`�• ,/9- _ - r.���V r t —� Site Map
LONG RIDGE
OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
.::..�: ,_:ram _ y'� `• (_'�� ts r �._ � -
-::': :/ Scale 1" = 2000' North
i
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
P4 D N PtSUL A REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
I PE I
AUTHORIZING C A CEPTANCE OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT,
,
AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE CERTIFICATE
OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT, AND
AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY
AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPRO-
PRIATE TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (LONG
RIDGE OPEN SPACE PRESERVE--LANDS OF CHESEBROUGH--
SAN MATEO COUNTY)
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District does resolve as follows.
Section One. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained
in that certain Purchase Agreement between Paul M. Chesebrough et ux. ,
and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, dated November
14, 1983, a copy of which is attached hereto and by reference made
a part hereof, and authorizes the President or appropriate officers
to execute the Agreement on behalf of the District.
Section Two. The President of the Board of Directors or
_ other appropriate officer is authorized to execute a certificate of
acceptance to any deed (s) granting title to said property.
Section Three. The General Manager of the District shall
cause to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the seller.
The General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all
other documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing of
the transaction.
Section Four. The General Manager of the District is
authorized to expend up to $5 ,000 to cover the cost of title insur-
ance, escrow fees , and other miscellaneous costs related to this
transaction.
Section Five. The sum of $190 ,000. 00 is hereby ordered
to be withdrawn from the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
1982 Negotiable Promissory Notes Acquisition Fund for this purchase.
r.
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the
undersigned individuals, hereinafter called "SELLER" and the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereinafter called
"DISTRICT. "
1. PURCHASED PROPERTY
SELLER agrees to sell to DISTRICT, and DISTRICT agrees to
purchase from SELLER, SELLER'S real property located
within an unincorporated area of the County of San Mateo,
State of California, consisting of 80 acres, more or less,
and commonly referred to as San Mateo County Assessor's
parcel number 085-160-050, being more particularly
described as follows:
The East 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4; of
Section 2 , Township 8 South, Range 3
West, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian.
TOGETHER with any easements, rights of
way, or rights of use which may be
appurtenant or attributable to the afore-
said lands, and any and all improvements
and/or fixtures attached or affixed thereto.
2. PURCHASE PRICE AND MANNER OF PAYMENT
The total purchase price shall be One Hundred Ninety
Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($190 ,000 . 00) payable in
the following manner:
a District shall a the sum of Forty-Seven Thousand
pay Y
Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($47,500. 00) in cash
(upon close of escrow as hereinafter provided) to be
disbursed as follows:
i) To Paul M. and Nessie Chesebrough: Three Thousand
Eight Hundred Thirty and No/100 Dollars ($3,830. 00) .
ii) To Elaine Chesebrough: 'Twenty-One Thousand Eight
Hundred Thirty-Five and No/100 Dollars ($21,835. 00) .
iii) To Meryl Chesebrough: Twenty-One Thousand Eight
Hundred Thirty-Five and No/100 Dollars ($21,835. 00) .
z
Chesebrough Agreement Page Two
b) The balance of said total purchase price of One Hundred
Forty-Two Thousand Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars
($142 ,500. 00) shall be in the form of three promissory
notes all secu
red
b a First Deed of Trust recorded d
against the subject property, payable as follows:
i) Eleven Thousand Four Hundred Ninety-Two and No/100
Dollars ($11,492 . 00) shall be evidenced by a
promissory note payable to Paul M. and Nessie
Chesebrough, as community property, which shall be
paid in five annual principal installments of Two
Thousand Two Hundred Ninety-Eight and 40/100 Dollars
($2 ,298. 40) , or more, together with accrued, tax-
free interest, at the rate of seven percent (7%)
per annum on the unpaid balance, and continuing
until said principal and accrued interest are paid
in full.
ii) Sixty-Five Thousand Five Hundred Four and No/100
Dollars ($65,504. 00) shall be evidenced by a
promissory note payable to Elaine Chesebrough, as
separate property, which shall be paid in five
annual principal installments of Thirteen Thousand
One Hundred and 80/100 Dollars ($13 ,100. 80) , or
more, together with accrued, tax-free interest, at
the rate of seven percent (7%) per annum on the
unpaid balance, and continuing until said principal
and accrued interest are paid in full.
iii) Sixty-Five Thousand Five Hundred Four and No/100_
Dollars ($65 ,504. 00) shall be evidenced by a
promissory note payable to Meryl Chesebrough, as
separate property, which shall be paid in five
annual principal installments of Thirteen Thousand
d 80 100 Dollars ($13 100. 80) or
n Hundred an , ,One l
more, together with accrued, tax-free interest, at
the rate of seven percent (7%) per annum on the
unpaid balance, and continuing until said principal
and accrued interest are paid in full.
3 . TITLE AND POSSESSION
Title and possession of the subject property shall be con-
veyed to DISTRICT at the close of escrow by Grant Deed,
free and .clear of all liens , encumbrances , judgments, ease-
ments, taxes, assessments, covenants, restrictions, rights
' ions of recor
d excep
t:
and Condit
__ ,r
:✓r �� �� �
Chesebrough Agreement Page Three
a r the fiscal year in which this escrow closes
Taxes �o �.
y
shall be cleared and paid for in the :Wanner required by
Section 4986 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
b) A land conservation agreement by and between Paul M.
Chesebrough and the County of San Mateo, dated March 7,
1966 and recorded June 24, 1966 in Book 5180 official
records, Page 400 , Instrument Vo. 76420-Z .
4. COSTS
DISTRICT shall pay all escrow, recording, and customary
title insurance charges and fees incurred in this trans-
action. SELLER shall be responsible for, and pay all
costs of any reconveyance of Deed of Trust, full release
of mortgage, payment of liens , discharge of judgments , or
any other charges, costs, or fees incurred in order to
deliver marketable title to DISTRICT.
5. COMMISSIONS
DISTRICT shall not have any obligation to pay any real
estate agent ' s commission or other related costs or fees
in connectign with this transaction.
6. ACCEPTANCE AND TERMS OF ESCROW
DISTRICT shall have thirty (30) days , following the date of
execution by the last individual SELLER hereunder, to accept
and execute this Agreement, and during said period this
instrument shall constitute an irrevocable offer by SELLER
to sell and convey the aforesaid real property to DISTRICT
for the consideration and under the terms and conditions
herein set forth. As consideration for the tender of this
offer, DISTRICT has paid and SELLER acknowledges receipt
of the sun of Ten and No/100 Dollars ($10. 00) .
On condition that this Agreement is accepted and executed
by DISTRICT, as above provided, this transaction shall
close through an escrow to be conducted by Title Insurance
and Trust Company, 333 Marshall St
reet, Redwood
dwood City,
California 94063 (Escrow No. 467328-RWC) , or other such
escrow holder as may be designated by DISTRICT. Time being
of the essence this escrow shall close on or before December
31 , 1983, or later upon written agreement of the parties
hereto.
7. ACCRUAL
The provisions hereof shall accrue to the benefit of and
bind the respective heirs , devisees, assigns or successors
in interest of the parties hereto.
i
.,. rr, G(.���
Chesebrough Agreement Page Four
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE SELLER:
DISTRICT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Paul M. Chesebrough
Stanley Norton, District Counsel
Nessie Chesebrough
ACCEPTED FOR RECOMMENDATION:
Date:
L. Craig Britton, SR WTk
Land Acquisition Manager
Elaine Chesebrough
APPROVED AND ACCEPTED:
Date:
President, Board of Directors
Meryl Chesebrough
Date:
ATTEST:
District Clerk
Date:
��f.t.,�,.�4A
1
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE MTDPENILiSULA REGI DISTRICT
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT,
AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE CERTIFICATE
OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT, AND
AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY
AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPRO-
PRIATE TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (LONG
RIDGE OPEN SPACE PRESERVE--LANDS OF CHESEBROUGH--
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY)
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District does resolve as follows :
Section One. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained
in that certain Purchase Agreement between Paul M. Chesebrough et ux. ,
and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, dated November
14, 1983, a copy of which is attached hereto and by reference made a
part hereof, and authorizes the President or appropriate officers to
execute the Agreement on behalf of the District.
Section Two. The President of the Board of Directors or
other appropriate officer is authorized to execute a certificate of
acceptance to any deed (s) granting title to said property.
Section Three. The General Manager of the District shall
cause to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the seller.
The General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all
crow necessary or appropriate to the closing of
documents in es e
other o yg
the transaction.
Section Four. The General Manager of the District is
authorized to expend up to $5 ,000 to cover
the cost of title insur-
ance, escrow fees, and other miscellaneous costs related to this
transaction.
I�
Section Five. The sum of $430,000. 00 is hereby ordered
to be withdrawn from the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
1982 Negotiable Promissory Notes Acquisition Fund for this purchase.
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is rude and entered into by and between the
undersigned individuals, hereinafter called "SELLER" and the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereinafter called
"DISTRICT. "
1. PURCHASED PROPERTY
SELLER agrees to sell to DISTRICT, and DISTRICT agrees
to purchase from SELLER, SELLER'S real property located
within an unincorporated area of the County of Santa
Cruz, State of California, consisting of 182 acres,
more or less, and commonly referred to as Santa Cruz
County Assessor' s parcel number 88-021-07, being more
particularly described as follows:
All that portion of Lots 1, 2 , 3 and 4
and the South 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4,
and the South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4
of Section 1, Township 8 South, Range 3
West, Mount Diablo Base and Meridan
lying Southerly and Westerly of the
Southerly and Westerly line of State
Highway 55-A, known as Skyline Boulevard.
Excepting therefrom the lands conveyed
by Paul M. Chesebrough, et ux, to
Marcella Jane Tucker by Deed recorded
December 31, 1964 in Book 1667, Page 69,
official records of Santa Cruz County.
TOGE`.:HER. with any easements, rights of
way, or rights of use which may be
appurtenant or attributable to the afore-
said lands , and any and all improvements
and/or fixtures attached or affixed thereto.
2. PURCHASE PRICE AND KANTNEI? OF PAY_4&\-T
The total purchase price shall be Four Hundred Thirty
Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($430,000. 00) payable in
the following manner:
a) District shall pay the sum of One Hundred Seven
Thousand rive Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($107,500. 00)
in cash (upon close of escrow as hereinafter provided)
to be disbursed as follows :
,Jll�
V"I
Chesebrough Agreement Page Two
i) To Paul M. and Nessie Chesebrough: Eight Thousand
Six Hundred Seventy and No/106 Dollars ($8,670.00) .
ii) To Elaine Chesebrough: Forty-Nine Thousand Four
Hundred Fifteen and No/100 Dollars ($49,415.00) .
iii) To Meryl Chesebrough: Forty-Nine Thousand Four
Hundred Fifteen and No/100 Dollars ($49,415.00) .
b) , The balance of said total purchase price of Three Hundred
Twenty-Two Thousand Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars
($322,500.00) shall be in the form of unsecured notes
as follows:
i) Twenty-Six Thousand Eight and No/100 Dollars
($26 ,008.00) shall be evidenced by a promissory
note payable to Paul 14. and Nessie Chesebrough,
as community property, which shall be paid in
five annual principal installments of Five Thou-
sand Two Hundred One and 60/100 Dollars
($5 ,201.60) , or more, together with accrued,
tax-free interest, at the rate of seven percent
(7%) per annum on the unpaid balance, and con-
tinuing, until said principal and accrued interest
are paid in full.
ii) one Hundred Forty-Eight Thousand Two Hundred Forty-
Six and No/100 Dollars ($148,246. 00) shall be
evidenced by a promissory note payable to Elaine
Chesebrough, as separate property, which shall be
paid in five annual principal installments of
Twenty-Nine Thousand Six Hundred Forty-Nine and
20/100 Dollars ($29,649.20) , or more, together with
accrued, tax-free interest, at the rate of seven
percent (7%) per annum on the unpaid balance, and
continuing until said principal and accrued
interest are paid in full.
iii) One Hundred Forty-Eight Thousand Two Hundred Forty-
Six and No/100 Dollars ($148,246.00) shall be
evidenced by a promissory note payable to Meryl
Chesebrough, as separate property, which shall be
paid in five annual principal installments of
Twenty-Nine Thousand Six Hundred Forty-Nine and
20/100 Dollars ($29,649.20) , or more, together
with accrued, tax-free interest, at the rate of
seven percent (7%) per annum on the unpaid balance,
and continuing until said principal and accrued
interest are paid in full.
�'
I --_
Chesebrough Property Page Three
3. TITLE AND POSSESSION
Title and possession of the subject property shall be con-
veyed to DISTRICT at the close of escrow by Grant Deed,
free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, judgments,ents ease-
ments, taxes, assessments, covenants, restrictions, rights
and conditions of record except: Taxes for the fiscal year
in which this escrow closes shall be cleared and paid for
in the manner required by Section 4986 of the Revenue and
Taxation Code.
4. COSTS
DISTRICT shall pay all escrow, recording, and customary
title insurance charges and fees incurred in this trans-
action. SELLER shall be responsible for, and pay all costs
of any reconveyance of Deed of Trust, full release of
mortgage, payment of liens, discharge of judgments, or any
other charges, costs, or fees incurred in order to deliver
marketable title to DISTRICT.
5. COMMISSIONS
DISTRICT shall not have any obligation to pay any real
estate agent's commission or other related costs or fees
in connection with this transaction.
6 . ACCEPTANCE AND TERMS OF ESCROW
DISTRICT shall have thirty. (30) days, following the date of
execution by the last individual SELLER hereunder, to accent
and execute this Agreement, and during said period this
instrument shall constitute an irrevocable offer by SELLER
to sell and convey the aforesaid real property to DISTRICT
for the consideration and under the terms and conditions
herein set forth. As consideration for the tender of this
offer, DISTRICT has paid and SELLER acknowledges receipt
of the su-m of Ten and No/100 Dollars ($10. 00) .
On condition that this Agreement is accepted and executed
by DISTRICT, as above provided, this transaction shall
close through an escrow to be conducted b Redding Title
g Y g
Company, 223 River Street, Suite E, Santa Cruz, California
95060 (Escrow No. 400741-TPK) , or other such escrow holder
m•
as may be designated by DISTRICT. Time being of the
or before essence this escrow shall close on e December 31
1983, or later upon written agreement of the parties hereto.
7. ACCRUAL
The provisions hereof shall accrue to the benefit of and
bind the respective heirs , devisees, assigns or successors
in interest of the parties hereto.
Chesebrough Agreement Page Four
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE SELLER:
DISTRICT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Paul M. Chesebrough
Stanley Norton, District Counsel
Nessie Chesebrough
ACCEPTED FOR RECOMMENDATION:
Date:
L. Craig Britton, SR IVIA
Land Acquisition Manager
Elaine Chesebrough
APPROVED AND ACCEPTED:
Date:
President, Board of Directors
Meryl Chesebroug
Date:
ATTEST:
District Clerk
Date:
__ _ _ �
� �I
I
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AN AGREEMENT FOR
PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY,
AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE GRANT DEED FOR
INTEREST IN PROPERTY BEING RELEASED,
AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE CERTIFICATE OF
ACCEPTANCE OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT, AND
AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY
AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPRO-
PRIATE TO CLOSING THE TRANSACTIO14 (LONG RIDGE
OPEN SPACE PRESERVE--SEMPERVIRENS FUND)
r I
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
does resolve as follows:
Section One. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained
in the attached Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property
between Sempervirens Fund and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
r ' District, dated December 2 , 1983, a copy of which is attached hereto
and by reference made a part hereof, and authorizes the President
or other appropriate officers to execute the Agreement on behalf of
the District.
Section Two. The President of the Board or other appropri-
ate officer is authorized to execute a certificate of acceptance of
the Conservation Easement being acquired by District.
Section Three. The President of the Board or other appro-
priate officer is authorized to execute the Deed granting to
Sempervirens Fund the property being conveyed by the District.
Section Four. The General Manager of the District shall
cause to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to Sempervirens
Fund.. The General Manager further is authorized to execute any and
all other documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing
of the transaction.
Section Five. The General Manager of the District is
authorized to expend up to $2 ,000 to cover the cost of title insurance,
escrow fees , a e miscellaneous and other mis llaneous costs related to this transaction.
_
F
'x h and o� Directors finds that fee title
Section Si The Bo a.
to this property has not been dedicated and the granting and releasing
of this property is in accordance with the Basic Policy of the District
and is not detrimental to the open space character of the Long Ridge
Ooen Space Preserve.
I
AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of
1983 , by and between the KIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN
SPACE DISTRICT, a public district, hereinafter referred to as
"DISTRICT" and SEMPERVIRENS FUND, a non-profit corporation,
organized under the laws of the State of California, hereinafter
referred to as "SEMPERVIRENS. "
W I T N E S S E T H
T•:�?EREAS, SEMPERVIRENS was organized as a non-profit, public
benefit corporation to solicit, receive and hold gifts, legacies ,
?Avises and conveyances of real and personal property, and raise
funds for the purchase of real and personal property for public
nark, recreation, conservation and open space purposes, primarily
within the counties of San Mateo and Santa Cruz , and
i.'HEREAS, the property, assets , profits and net income of
SaMPER.VIRENS are irrevocably dedicated to said purposes and no mart
of the profits or net income of SEMPERVIRENS shall ever inure to the
benefit of any director, officer, or member thereof or to the bene-
fit of any individual, and
Irk _
r WHEREAS, DISTRICT was organized as a public agency under the
Public Resources Code of the State of California, to wit: Article 3,
Division 5 , Chapter 3 , Section 5500 et seq. "Regional Park, Park
and Open Space and Open Space Districts" to acquire and manage
public open space and recreation lands primarily within portions of
the counties of San Mateo and Santa Clara, and
WHEREAS, DISTRICT is entering into an agreement to purchase
certain real property (hereinafter "Subject Property" or "Property")
in an unincorporated area of Santa Cruz County owned by Paul M.
Chesebrouah et ux. thereinafter "Seller") , a copy of which Purchase
Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein
by this reference, and
WHEREAS, the purchase of said Property is of mutual benefit
to the parties hereto and to the public in that said acquisition
as implemented by this Agreement has natural beauty and scenic,
open space and recreational value which will be protected in per-
petuity, and
Aareement for Purchase and
Sale of Real Property Page Two
I-MEREAS, the purpose of this Aareement is to provide for
funding to purchase said Property for open space and recreation
purposes , to establish the initial and final vesting of the Sub-
ject Property and designate the responsibility for the management,
patrol and maintenance of said Property.
NCW THEREFORE, subject to DISTRICT'S prior acquisition of
the Subject Property, it is mutually agreed -as follows:
1. PROPERTY
DISTRICT agrees to sell to SEMPERVIREINOS, and SEMPERVIRENS
agrees to purchase from DISTRICT that certain 182 acre
parcel of land located in an unincorporated area of the
County of Santa Cruz, State of California, commonly known
as Santa Cruz County Assessor's Parcel Number 088-021-07
as more particularly described in the Purchase Agreement
attached hereto as said Exhibit "A. "
2. PURCHASE PRICE AND TERMS
The total purchase price for the Subject Property shall
be the amount of One Hundred Twenty-Three Thousand and
No/100 Dollars ($123 ,000 . 00) , payable to DISTRICT in
the following manner:
a) Thirty Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty and No/100
Dollars ($30 ,750. 00) shall be paid to DISTRICT
in cash at the close of escrow;
b) The balance of Ninety-Two Thousand Two Hundred
Fifty and No/100 Dollars ($92 ,250.00) shall be
in the form of an unsecured note payable to
DISTRICT in five annual installments of Eighteen
Thousand Four Hundred Fifty and No/100 Dollars
($18,450. 00) , or more, together with accrued
interest at the rate of seven percent (7%) per
annum on the unpaid balance, and continuing until
said principal and accrued interest are paid in
full.
3. CLOSE OF ESCROW AND COSTS
It is agreed by the parties hereto that escrow shall
close concurrently and in accordance with Paragraph 3
of said Purchase Agreement through an account with
Redding Title Company, 223 River Street, Suite E,
Santa Cruz , California 94060 , Escrow Number 400741-TPK,
or other such escrow holder as may be designated by
the parties hereto. Said escrow to close on or before
December 31, 1983.
Agreement for Purchase and
Sale of Real Property Page Three
It is further agreed that all normal escrow fees and
title insurance costs , if required as a part of this
transaction, shall be paid and satisfied by DISTRICT.
4. TITLE
DISTRICT s sh
all ac uire fee title to the Subject
a S ect Property
7 Pe
in accordance with said Purchase Agreement, and concur-
rently DISTRICT shall convey fee title to the Subject
Property to SEMPERVIRENS, subject to existing easements ,
encumbrances and other clouds on the title as accept-
able to the parties hereto. DISTRICT, in conveying fee
title to SEMPERVIRENS, shall retain a Conservation and
Open Space Easement (hereinafter "Easement") upon, over
and across the Subject Property. Said Easement as re-
tained by DISTRICT shall be in the form labeled Exhibit
"B" as attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
DISTRICT shall have the option under this Agreement to
repurchase the Property for the sum of Five Thousand
and No/100 Dollars ($5 ,000.00) plus an amount equal to
all reasonable and necessary expenses incurred by
SEMPERVIRENS by reason of ownership. (All such expenses
must be submitted to DISTRICT for approval in advance
of payment by SEMPERVIRENS, which approval shall not be
unreasonably withheld by DISTRICT. In the event DISTRICT
shall deny the approval of any such expenses , SEMPERVIRL-IS,
may at its option, demand that DISTRICT accelerate its
option to repurchase the Subject Property and thereafter
DISTRICT shall have the entire responsibility for said
Property in accordance with this Agreement. ) In the
event DISTRICT exercises the option to repurchase,
5EMPERVIRENS shall retain a public trail easement across
said Property in a general east-west direction intended
to serve eventually as a portion of a connection between
the Skyline to the Sea Trail through Big Basin and
Portola State Parks and Sanborn County Park (Santa Clara
County) . This option may be exercised only by DISTRICT
during the period from January 1, 1989 through December
31 , 1993 and shall lapse thereafter. The exercise of
this option by DISTRICT and the conveyance by SEMPERVIRENS
shall not extinguish SEMPERVIRENS remaining obligation,
if any, with respect to the promissory note executed
pursuant to Paragraph 1 of this Agreement. At the time
of conveyance of fee title to DISTRICT as provided herein,
DISTRICT shall dedicate the fee title interest in and
to said Subject Property in the manner provided in
Paragraph 5 hereinbelow and this Agreement shall ter-
minate and be of no further force and effect.
Agreement for Purchase and
Sale of Real Property Page Four
5. DEDICATION
Upon acquisition of the Property by the parties hereto,
the DISTRICT shall officially dedicate its interests
or rights in and to said Property pursuant to Sec. 5540
of the Public Resources Code of the State of California.
6. HOLD HARMLESS
It is agreed that DISTRICT shall defend, hold harmless
and indemnify SEMPERVIRENS, its officers , agents and/or
employees from any and all claims for injuries to per-
sons or damage to Property which arise out of the pro-
visions of this Agreement and which result from negli-
gent acts and/or omissions of DISTRICT and its officers ,
agents and/or employees.
It is further agreed that SEMPERVIRENS shall defend,
hold harmless and indemnify DISTRICT, its officers,
agents, and/or employees from any and all claims for
injuries to persons or damage to Property which arise
out of the provisions of this Agreement and which result
from negligent acts and/or omissions of SEMPERVIRENS and
its officers, agents and/or employees.
In the event of the concurrent negligence of DISTRICT,
its officers, agents and/or employees and of SEMPERVIRENS,
its officers , agents , and/or employees then the liability
for any and all claims for injuries or damage shall be
apportioned according to the "California Theory of Com-
parative Negligence" as presently in effect or as may
hereafter be modified.
7 . MANAGEMENT
Subject to review by SEVIPERVIRENS , DISTRICT shall be
responsible for all management, operation, patrol,
maintenance and site protection (including fencing,
gates, signing and road maintenance) of the Subject
Property as long as said Property is used and devel-
oped in accordance with the Conservation and Open
Space Easement as described in said Exhibit "B," pro-
vided, however, that in the event fee title to said
Property is transferred to DISTRICT in accordance with
Paragraph 4 herein, DISTRICT shall be responsible for
all management, operation, patrol and maintenace with-
out regard to use and development.
Agreement for Purchase and
Sale of Real Property Page Five
8. ORDINANCES
As long as said Property is developed and used in
accordance with Exhibit "B" and this Agreement is in
full force and effect in accordance with Paragraph 4
herein, DISTRICT ordinances shall apply and be enforced
by DISTRICT.
9. PUBLICITY
SEMPERVIRENS and DISTRICT shall share equal recognition
on all open space, nark or public facility signs, bro-
chures and all other public information about the site
so long as this Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real
Property is in full force and effect in accordance with
Paragraph 4 herein.
10. AMENDMENTS
This Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property
may be a.-nended in writing at any time by mutual consent
of the parties hereto.
11. SURVIVAL OF COVENANTS
All covenants of DISTRICT or SEMPERVIRENS which are
expressly intended hereunder to be performed in whole
or in part after the close of escrow and recordation
of the Grant Deed, and all representations and war-
ranties by either party to the other, shall survive
the close of escrow and be binding upon and inure to
the benefit of the respective parties hereto and their
respective heirs , successors and permitted assigns.
12. BINDING ON SUCCESSORS
The provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and
bind the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.
SEMPERVIRENS FUND MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN
SPACE DISTRICT
BY: BY:
Press ent, Board of Directors President, Board of Directors
DATE: DATE:
By: ATTEST:
Vice President, District Clerk
Board of Directors
DATE:
CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE EASEMENT
Recitals
;-Z-H EREAS,
1. The undersigned, SEMPERVIRENS FUND, a California non--
profit corporation, hereinafter called "GRANTOR," is the owner
of the fee simple estate in and to that certain real property
hereinafter called the "Subject Property," situated in the
County of Santa- Cruz, State of California, more particularly
described in Schedule "A" attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference.
2. I:: is the desire of GRANTOR to grant to MIDPENINSULA
REGION.'ML OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a public district, hereinafter
came; "DISTRICT', " a conservation and open space easement on,
Upon, over, across and under said Subject Property pursuant to
Chapte, 6. 5 (commencing with Section 51070) of Part 1, Division 1,
Title 5 of the Government Code.
3. GRP?N^sOR and DISTRICT recognize the scenic, aesthetic
and special character of the region in which their respective
properties are located, and have the common purpose of con-
serving the natural' values of their respective properties by
the conveyances of an open space easement on, over, and across
the Subject Property which shall conserve and protect the animal,
fish, bird and plant population and prevent the use or develop-
ment of that property for any purpose or in any manner which
world conflict with the maintenance of the- Subject Property in
its natural, scenic, open and wooded condition.
20.7 THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, receipt of which
is hereby acknowledged,
GRANTOR hereby grants to the DISTRICT an open space easement,
urn, over and across the Subject Property in perpetuity on the
following terms and conditions:
1 . RESERVATION OF USE BY GRANTOR
GRANTOR R reserves the right to use the Subject Property in
. q
any manner consistent with the stated purposes , terms , conditions ,
restrictions and covenants of this easement and with existing
zoning and other laws , rules and regulations of the State of
California and the County of Santa Cruz , or the agency having
Jurisdiction, as such laws , rules and regulations may hereafter
from time to time be amended .
"+ r
..... ......
Conservation and .,pen Space Easement Page Two
GRANTOR further specifically reserves the right to do the
following, such right in no way to be considered as a limitation
of the general reservation of right described in the preceding
parac-raph:
(a) Build fences and gates of a rustic nature and
erect signs as necessary to maintain security
of the property;
(b) Construct and maintain trails for hieing and
riding within the easement area, including
both internal trails and connecting trails
with adjacent DISTRICT land, such latter trails
to be planned under mutual agreement with
DISTRICT regarding location;
(c) Remove diseased and/or dead plants and trees
and remove such timber as may be required for
fire prevention, or public health and.. safety
(including a program of controlled burning) ;
(d) Plant native species of plants;
(e) Use motorized equipment for building the above
referenced fences, gates and trails and to
maintain and service the property;
(f) Engage in scientific research and/or gathering
of specimens of nature in such a way as to not
jeopardize the natural and scenic character of
the property; and
(g) Engage in compatible agricultural uses
including cattle grazing, as determined by
DISTRICT.
2 . LIMITATIONS ON USE BY GRANTOR
G?.A\TOR covenants and agrees for itself and its successors
an assigns, except where contrary to the above described rights
spec =ically retained, GRANTOR shall not do any o the fo?lowing:
(a) Erect , construct, place or maintain or authorize
the erection, construction, placement or main-
tenance of any improvement, building or struc-
ture or any other thing whatsoever on the Subject
Property other than such improvements, buildings,
structures, or other things existing on said
property at the time of the granting of this
easement unless approval is first obtained from
the DISTRICT for erection of such improvement,
building, or structure.
EX H1131T
Page A af�
Conservation and Open Space Easement Page Three
(b) Use or authorize the use of the Subject Property
for any purpose except as open space and for the
continued current use of the property for educa-
tion and recreation, including but not limited
to hiking, riding, picnicking, and other related
activities.
(c) Use or authorize others to use the Subject
Property or any portion thereof as a parking lot,
de
storage area or dumpsite or otherwise deposit
�
or authorize to be deposited on said Subject
Property or any portion thereof temporarily or
otherwise anything whatsoever which is not
indigenous or natural to said Subject Property.
(d) Cover or cause the Subject Property to be covered
in whole or in part with any asphalt, stone, or
concrete or other material which does not con-
stitute natural cover for the land, and shall not
otherwise disturb the natural cover for the land.
(e) Fish, trap, hunt, capture, kill or destroy or
authorize the fishing, trapping, hunting,
capturing or destruction of fish or aquatic life
of the Subject Property except in conjunction
with scientific research and/or for health or
safety purposes.
(f) Hunt or trap or authorize the hunting or trapping
of animal life on the Subject Property. Pursuant
thereto, GRANTOR, its successors or assigns, shall
not trap, kill, capture or destroy or authorize
the trapping, killing, capturing or destruction
of animal life on the Subject Property except
under prior written permission of the County of
Santa Cruz for health and safety purposes only.
(q) Divide or subdivide the Subject Property or
otherwise convey (other than under threat of
condemnation) a portion of such property less
than the whole to one or more parties or convey
said Subject Property to two or more parties
each of whom acquire title to less than the
whole of the Subject Property. As used herein
"party" means and includes the person, corpora-
tion, partnership, or other legal entity capable
of holding title to real property.
(h) Cut, uproot or remove or authorize the cutting,
uprooting or removal of timber or trees or other
natural growth found or located on said Subject
Property except as may be required for fire
prevention, elimination of diseased growth, or
construction and maintenance of foot trails.
EXHILAi
Page__` __ off_
Conservation and Open Space Easement Page Four
(i) Excavate or grade or authorize any excavation or
grading to be done or place or authorize to be
placed any sand, soil, rock, gravel or material
whatsoever on Subject Property except for con-
struction and maintenance of trails.
(j) Operate or authorize the operation on the
Subject Property of any motor bike, trail bike,
,-
o cart or oche_ rotor driven or rotor powered
g
vehicles except those motor vehicles reasonably
necessary for the use of GRAAYTO:? for the
accomplishment of the purposes for which the
Subject Property is used pursuant to the terms
and conditions, restrictions and covenants set
forth herein for the Subject Property.
(k) Place any advertising signs of any 'Sind or
nature on the Subject Property except for
identification and directional purposes con-
sistent with the use of the Subject Property
as further provided herein.
(1) Plant vegetation on the Subject Property except
for approved soil management, erosion control,
reforestation and landscape screening; all
vegetation so planted shall be native California
vegetation indigenous to the area.
(m) Excavate or change the topography of the Subject
Property except as allowed and approved in
accordance with the terms and conditions hereof.
(n) Allow the use of firearms or dangerous weapons
on the Subject Property by the public.
(o) Authorize the use of fireworks or _pyrotechnics
on the subject property.
(p) Play or perform or allow the playing, or per-
formance of loud and disturbing a-molified music.
(q) Build, light or maintain, or authorize others to
build, light or maintain any open_ or outdoor
fire.
(r) Mine, extract, sever or remove, or permit or .
cause to be mined, extracted, severed or removed
any natural resource found or located on, above,
or under the Subject Property in a manner that
would jeopardize or alter the natural scenic
character of the property, or to otherwise
engage in any activity on the Subject Property
which will or may destroy
the n a'_u=al and scenic
characteristics of the Subject Property.
EXHiBi' ' j&
Page
of
Conservation and open Space Easement Page Five
3. LIMITATIONS ON USE BY DISTRICT
The DISTRICT shall have the right to enter upon the Property
at anytime to perform those tasks reasonably necessary for
neriodic inspection of the Property and to carry out DISTRICT'S
ma.-agement, operation, patrol, maintenance and site protection
(including fencing, gating, signing and road maintenance) , and
enforcement of DISTRICT ordinances in accordance with the provisions
of that certain Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property
between the parties hereto, dated December 7 , 1983.
4. PUBLIC TRAIL
GRA�=R hereby conveys to DISTRICT a nonexclusive easement
for public pedestrian and equestrian access, where necessary (as
such access may be determined by DISTRICT from time to time) , and
for vehicular access solely for DISTRICT by its officers, agents,
and e=---;Ioyees and invitees for patrol and maintenance and agricul
tural our-poses (it being understood that DISTRICT shall have no
right to restrict GRANTOR'S own use of said easement for pedes-
trian a--d equestrian access or for vehicular access by GRANTOR
for patrol and program related purposes),.
5. _=NFOP_,CE_XENT
GR-A-NT-OR grants to DISTRICT, the right, but not the obligation,
to enter upon the Subject Property for the purpose of removing any
building, structure, improvement or other thing whatsoever con-
structed, erected, placed,. stored, deposited or maintained on the
Subject Property .contrary to the stated purposes of this easement
or to any term, condition, restriction or covenant of this easement
or to prevent or prohibit any activity which is contrary to the
stated purposes, terms , conditions, restrictions or covenants of
this easement which will or may destroy the natural and scenic
characteristics of the Subject Property, subject however to thirty
(30) days written notice to GRANTOR by DISTRICT before commencement
of anv action on the part of DISTRICT under this paragraph.
The stated purposes, terms , conditions , restrictions and
covenants set forth herein and each and all of them may be
specifically enforced or enjoined by proceedings in the Superior
Court of the State of California.
6 . MUTUAL INDEMNITY
Each party shall indemnify and hold harmless the other from
an-i and all claims arising out of activities conducted by or under
auspices of the indemnifying party.
7 . CONDEMNATION
In the event that any portion of the Subject Property is
sought to be condemned for public use, this easement and each and
e%,er%, term, condition, restriction and covenant contained herein
S*- =11
terminate as of the time of the filing of the complaint in
cz)—d--7-nation. The GRANTOR shall be entitled to such compensation
EXHIBIT
Page S- of
Conservation and Open Space Easement Page Six
for the taking as it would have been entitled to, had the Subject
Property not been burdened by this easement; provided, however,
4- each and every stated term, condition, restriction and covenant
of this easement shall be observed by GRANTOR, ,its successors or
assicros, during the pendency of such action and provided further
twat in the event such action is abandoned prior to the recordation
of a Final Judgement in Condemnation relative to any such property
or portion thereof and not actually acquired for a public use, the
Subject Property shall, at the time of such abandonment, or at the
t i_e it is determined that such property shall not be taken for
;:' lic :_e, once again be subject to this easement and to each and
e er-. stated purpose, term, condition, restriction and covenant of
this ease ent; provided, however, that if the Subject Property is
soPh� to be acquired, appropriated, or condemned for a use incom-
patible :pith this open space easement as defined herein, by any
ot=v.r public or quasi-public entity, the presumptions contained in
v�tion 121-0.680 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 5542. 5
of the Public Resources Code may be asserted by DISTRICT to protect
its i^terest in the Subject Property, and preserve the open space
character thereof..
3 . ENFORCEABLE RESTRICTION
easement and each and every term, condition, restriction
anf co7enant contained herein constitutes an enforceable restriction
r avant.. to the provisions of Section 8 of Article XIII of the
California Constitution and Chapter 6.6 (commencing with Section
51070) of Part 1 Division 1, Title 5 of the Government Code and
shall bind GRANTOR and its successors and assigns and each and all
of them and is intended to run with the land.
:INSULA REGIONAL OPEN SEMPERVIRENS FUND, a
SPACE DISTRICT, a public California non-profit
District: Corporation:
B_ By
President , Board of Directors President, Board of Directors
Date Date
By
Vice President,
Board of Directors
Date
_c,t Clerk
SCHEDULE A
CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE EASEMENT s
Situate in the County of Santa Cruz , State of California and
Described as Follows :
All that portion of Lots 1, 2 , 3 and 4 and the South 1/2 of
the I'iortheast 1/4 , and the South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 1, Township 8 South, Range 3 West, lit. Diablo Base and
Mleridan wing Southerly and Westerly of the Southerly and
Westerly line of State Highway 55-A, known as Skyline Boulevard.
Excepting therefrom the lands conveyed by Paul M. Chesebrough
et ux, to Marcella Jane Tucker by Deed recorded December 31, 1964
in Book 1667, Page 69, Official Records of Santa Cruz County.
APN 88-021-07
EXHIBIT
Ad-
Page --L of
N
oe"... : 8 ;
MIDPENI:NSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: L. Craig Britton
Assistant General Manager
SUBJECT: F.Y. I.
DATED: 12/2/83
M-83-137
V (Meeting 83-29
Dec. 7, 1983)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 7, 1983
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: L. Craig Britton, Assistant General Manager
SUBJECT: Dedication and Naming of Easements Acquired From The Trust for Hidden
Villa
Discussion: At your November 22 Special Meeting, you adopted Resolution
83-49, authorizing the purchase of open space easements for the/50 acre
Ranch Area and an additional 348 acre Wilderness Area from The Trust for
Hidden Villa (see report R-83-46 of November 17, 1983). Th�' second part
of the recommendation in that staff report requested you dddicate and name
these easements, but inadvertently this action was not ta, en at your
November 22 meeting.
Recommendation: I recommend you dedicate the Ranch Arep and Wilderness
Area easements as public open space and name them as a addition to the
Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve--Duveneck Windm ll Pasture Area.
t
n
'"".'
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 OISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE 0-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965-4717
November 29, 1983
Mr, Arlen Sreyorio, Chairperson
Board of Sucervisors
County of Can Mateo
590 ::a.,;i l tan
Redwood City, CA 94063
Dear Arlen:
Following our Board meeting of Tuesday, November 22, I have continued working
with our Co=ittee to try to explain what we mean by having San Mateo County
responsible for the entire Arts Council project. It is not possible to give
you a single answer. Instead, it depends on one's perspective of the role, if
any, that '4idpeninsula Regional Open Space District should play in such a project.
The proposed project is clearly outside the normal scope of our activities and
benefits the entire County, not just the portion within the District. While
there is probably more than one way to approach this, and ideally the County
would reimburse all of our costs to date, I think that the following will
generally cover the range of our thinking.
r At a -inimum, the MROSD and the County would split the cast of acquisition
(detailed on Attachment A) after applying the grant and assessment district
Y r-� would be sole] responsible for dealing
d thereafter r h Count wou
p. o�_e s, but the ea to the y Y g
G
a effective December 6 1.,$3
risks, a ective
and r s ,with .h� Arts Council and for all costs ,
(such as the grant and refunding the assessment district contribution). The
ind=-r,ities we would require are summarized in Attachment B, including the way
we would propose handling of the assessment district refunds.
The `' 10SO would transfer the entire property to the County in fee subject to
the ease:-ents outlined in Attachment C. The District would accept the property
buoy ,J4-h the buildings removed and the site restored at any time within five
dears , with the District contributing $236,000 towards the demolition and
res tn-r$-ion.
rrl _r, I have tried to take a reading of how our various Board members feel
abc. _ this subject but I think that I can only be sure of majority support for
=ne =_Dcroach outlined, because it, like the Edgewood project, is something we
woult gave done from the beginning.
�__ - = >e _ :+a-a. r g_y � ':•s.ors Katner;ne D MY.Barbara Green,Nonette G Hanko.Richard S B,snoo.E04v1,G Shetlay,HarryA Tu-er.aan.e1 G
r �
Mr. Arlen Gregorio
November 29, 1983
Page Two
It is clear to me that the majority of our Board wants to decide this issue
once and for all at our meeting on December 7. There is little support for
further delay. We ask that the County make the best possible proposal prior
to our meting, and then, as we have all been saying, it is up to us to
decide.
Sincerely,
Daniel G. Wendin, President
Board of Directors
cc: MROSD Board of Directors
., H A S S L E R
i Attachment A
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Expenses (excluding staff time):
Cost of property $3,528,767
Out-of-pocket acquisition costs (appraisals,
engineering, legal escrow services, etc. ) 128,243
Total acquisition costs $3,657,010
Site protection contractual services through 11/83 42,129
Site restoration engineering, asbestos & PCB removal, etc. 65,823
Total holding costs through 11/83 $ 107,952
GRAND TOTAL COSTS THROUGH 11/83 $3,76�4,962
Reimbursements
Land and Suter Conservation Fund Grant** $1 ,100,000
Hassler Benefit Assessment District 300,000
County contribution 100,000
Total Reimbursements $1 ,500,000
Net Total Costs through 11/83 $2,264,962
COSTS OF COUNTY PARTICIPATION
A. Whole project becomes a County project from the beginning:
County's initial cost*: $3,764,962
County receives income from federal grant and Assessment Dist. 1 ,500,000
County's Net Cost $2,264,962
B. Project becomes a joint project from the beginning--modeled
after Edgewood:
Total acquisition costs $3,657,010
Less grants & Assessment District 1 ,500,000
Net Acquisition Cost $2,264,962
District contribution (50%) 1,132,481
Net County acquisition cost* $1 ,132,481
Plus holding costs 107,952
Total County Net Costs $1 ,240,433_
*Includes $100,000 refund from MROSD
**Does not include $9000 loss of interest due to delay in receiving grant.
HASSLER
Attachment B
CONDITIONS OF TRANSFER
County of San Mateo will indemnify and protect Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District ("District") against the following risks:
1) Loss of some or all of Federal and/or State grant funds.
2) Reimbursement to District of all costs associated with necessary or
appropriate refunds to members of Hassler assessment district (City
of San Carlos) and any other costs incurred by District arising out
of the assessment district, including legal fees.
3) Reimbursement of all costs and loss arising out of legal action or
threat thereof by Sorgdrager (District's low-bid demolition contractor) ,
including legal fees.
4) Reimbursement of costs incurred by District as a result of District's
inability to adhere to its time schedule and other provisions of District's
agreements with City and County of San Francisco.
5) Reimbursement of site safekeeping costs and increased demolition costs
incurred after December 5, 1983 in event agreement with County is not
reached.
HASSLER
Attachment C
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Easement Restrictions and Covenants
1 . Typical conservation/open space easement in favor of Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District over the 273 acres surrounding the building area,
allowing only low-intensity public recreational use and development.
2. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to have site, design, development
and use and management review and approval over all low-intensity public
recreational facilities proposed by County and within the 273 acre area.
(County to develop area for low-intensity public recreational use within
five years of transfer.
3. Uses on 20 acre building area limited to public park, recreation, open space,
cultural and historical restoration purposes unless other uses expressly
approved by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District in writing.
4. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to have reversionary right in the
event Arts Council proposal fails for any reason. In the event of rever-
sion, entire property to be returned to Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District with buildings removed and site restored to natural contours.
MROSD to pay County $236,000 (current demo bid) if such an event occurs prior
to the lapse of 5 years from the date of transfer.
5. Entire site to remain open for public use and enjoyment (except during time
of restoration, when building area to be closed because of public health
and safety concerns).
6. As a part of building restoration, road access to be improved and maintained,
not only for cultural and historical restoration purposes, but also for
public access and parking for all site users.
7. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to share equally in all publicity,
signing and brochures for site use, facilities and development.
SAN MATED COUNTY
AQTeS
,COUNCIL
AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR A
CREATIVE CENTER FOR THE ARTS AND NATURE
November 28,1983
TO: Board of Supervisors
San Mateo County
Directors, Midpeninsula Regional (sent individually to
Open Space District home addresses)
FROM: Barbara Wiesner
Public Relations/Funding
Enclosed are copies of letters of support for the pro-
posed Creative Center on the Hassler Home property.
Enc is:
Twin Pines Park 1219 Balaton Avenue____ Belmont.�Califgrnia
��C"�'„ .l��
i
FOOTHILL COLLEGE
October 27 , 1983
San Mateo County Arts Council
1219 Ralston Avenue
Belmont , CA 94002
Attention : Barbara Wiesner
Dear Sirs :
At the invitation of my colleaque , Mr. Karl Schmidt , I visited
and toured the Hassler Homes ite recently . I was struck immedi -
ately with the many possibilities and potential these buildings
presented in ;Hite of their disrepair and vandaiization . I was
reminded that the buildings dnLI the facilities would be and
could be most adaptable to many fine arts activities and events .
The many large rooms , plenty of natural light and window space ,
ample and convenient utilities , large open outdoor spaces pro-
tected and surrounded by the main buildings , etc . are such that
one could believe that the structure was originally intended
for such art activities .
The dormitory facilities and the small rooms ad
open rooms lend themselves to the potential for a retreat-like
ret to large ,
treat-like
arts facility that would be most ideal and unique . There is
room, in my estimation , to carry on several types of activities
at one time . For instance , it could serve as a retreat center
for large musical performance groups , both instrumental and
vocal . It could house as well , drama and dance groups . Also
there is plenty of space to provide overnight facilities for
such organizations . At the same time , it could be a retreat
center for individual artists of all kinds , ie •
Paintersculpto
composers , writers , poets , etc . who would be in residences
to the Academy in Rome . Italy where the Prix de Rome recipients
spend a year of concentrated work and study .
All of this of course , does not take into account the ideal
setting both in terms of it ' s availability to large metropolitan
and cultural areas , and because of its natural serenity and beauty .
I hope that the efforts of the Council and the many volunteers
who have a vision for this facility will be able to who are responsible for the ultimate fate of these buildings thatE
this could become a center for the arts that would be
many of the famous international centers . the envy of
� facilities would serve In addition , these
the arts communities of the Bay Area
and Northern California in a mLinner that is inconceivable and
impossible at the present time .
Sincer '1y Will
ou
Jb'hn Mortdrotha '
(I i v i c i n n .,F C: ... ..
November 19, 1983
Barbara Wiesner
Hassler Project
c/o San Mateo County Arts Council
1219 Ralston Ave.
Belmont. California 94002
Gentlemen3
r
I wish to urge you to preserve rather than
demolish the Hassler Home buildings for cul-
tural use in such an increasingly rare en-
vironment which inspires and nurtures
creativity, which would make an invaluable
contribution to this most exciting arm in
which to live.
Very sincerely yours,
He Cassiman
924A Mountain View Ave.
Mountain View, Calif.
94040
it
fi
t
7777
777
r ) 9 k
williem k. )anningi-ivparintandant of ochoolt
No er 22, 1983
Ms. Jackie Speier, Supervisor
San Mateo County Board of Supervisors
County Government Center
Redwood City, CA 94063
Dear Jackie:
Again--thank you for your support to our program of cleaning out hazardous
chemicals from our schools. Again--thank you for the picture and your
gracious words.
What I'm writing about tonight is the Hassler property. I'm strongly in
support of the Board's position that those magnificient--albeit decrepit--
buildings be restored and used by the people who have bought them--those of
us who live within the Mid-Peninsula Open Space District.
I made my feelings known to the MPOS District Board at their July meeting
through a brief letter and my personal statement. The replacement costs of
those buildings is immeasurable. Their ultimate use--unknown. We cannot
let them be demolished.
Unfortunately few residents have had the opportunity to walk through that
property. Signs tell us not to trespass, so few of us have had the
advantage of seeing firsthand what is at stake.
It is sad to see the disrepair, the vandalism, the destruction that has
occurred there. But close inspection reveals a sturdiness not to be found
in modern structure.
Those grounds abound with exotic plants--not so many that are native to the
area. They require some care, and they should be cultivated because they
contrast the native with the imported species. The horticultural treasures
are important as are the architectural, a great place for junior garden
enthusiasts. The animal enclosures, pens and buildings could provide youth
with 4-H and other animal husbandry opportunities.
I envision a time in the future when the citizens of the area will be very
grateful to this Board for preserving this place as a center for learning, a
center for culture, a center for the healthy development of our citizens of
all ages. To tear it down and degtroy the potential there would be
criminal. I have spent the day with a group of enthusiastic and involved
teachers in an environmental education workshop at Coyote Point Museum.
They were grateful for Coyote Point Museum and what that facility holds
forth for all of us. The question arose "What will happen to the Hassler
property?" Clearly, they wish it to be kept for future generations to use.
What uses will be made of it? We cannot decide that at this time. I would
333 MAIn STREET-REDWOOD CITY,CA 94063•(413)363-5400
like our options kept open till we see what is needed, what is possible and
what is affordable.
Again, thank you for your concern over this matter.
i
Sincerely yours,
Walter Smithey, Coordinator
Math; Science and Environmental/
Energy Education
WS/kw
cc Ruth Waters
F I ,_j0LI_
Canada Road, Woodside, CA 94062 (415) 364-8300
g
OFFICERS 14 November 1983
A.CRAWFORD000LEY
President
WILLIAM W.CROWELL
Vice President
MRS.CHARLES B.KUHN Barbara Wiesner
Vice President
Twin Pines Park
JACQUES M.LITTLEFIELD
Secretary/Treasurer 1219 Ralston Avenue
HADLEY OSBORN Belmont, CA 94002
Executive Director
BOARD OF TRUSTEES Dear Barbara
ADOLPHUS ANDREWS,JR. Regarding security at Filoli, while we have an
MRSSTC.MAI ARBUCKLE, S . electronic system in the main house we ref
ERNEST C.ARBUOKLE,SR. Y r Y
MRS.WILLIAM W.BUDGE primarily upon resident staff. This 654 acre
GEORGEA.DITZ,►R. estate has 21 structures and our perimeter fenc-
MRS.MILO S.GATES
EDWARD M.GRIFFITH ing is incomplete and inadequate. Thus before
WILLIAM L.LOWE resident staff was in place there were repeated
MRS.
REN E V.
MacBRIDE
ETCALF instances of theft and vandalism. Even a firmly
MRS.LAWRENCE V.METCALF
MRS.W.BURLEIGH PATTEE affixed sun dial in the center of the gardens
MRS.PHILIPM.RER7SON
EDWIN A.SEIPP,JR• r was taken. However, now that several of us live
MRS.CHARLES SPALDING on the property (myself, the Garden Superintendent,
MRS.ROBERT J.STEWART the Maintenance Superintendent, both assistants
MRS.E.E.TREFETHEN,JR. P
REVETT B.WALLACE one senior gardener and one retired gardener) , we
GORDON M.WESER have had no serious problems. Casual trespassing
still occurs, but we are much more likely to notice
NATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD them and have them leave the property. The crime
DR.►.E.WALLACE STERLING prevention department of the San Mateo County Sheriff ' s
Chairman office definitely agrees about the value of resident
MRS.I.H.BARNES staff.
MRS.PETER BING
MRS.HENRY S.BOWLES
MRS.DOUGLAS CARVER The value extends well beyond security, however.
LLAHCH HICKERAIN Duringlast Sunday's unusually heavy downpour, I was
ALLEN L.CHICKERING Y Y Y p
MRS.ERASTUS CORNING 11 able to check out the house (two of the windows had
MRS.ROBERTGREEN
).LOWELL GROVES
PP P leaked and I mopped u � the water before damage was
bf dOWELL i
S.WELLINGTON S.HENDERSON done) , and 0 other reside
nt staff) , cleaned culverts
MRS.HENRY C.ISAACSON,SR.
MRS.ELSAUPPMANKNOLL and a couple of blocked drains. Should a pipe break
WARREN M.LEMMON or an electrical fire start, the presence and prompt
GEOLDREDM LIVERMORE
THIAS actions of responsible staff can prevent severe pro-
DR.MILDRED MATHIAS
da
mage,ama a which is f o course
why people
Y r e en
JOHN R.MAY P Y g y p p gage
MRS.PETER McBEAN housesitters.
MRS.W.W.MEIN,JR.
STUARTG.MOLDAW Finally, residents are responsible for the routine upkeep
MIL IA WREDESALKIND and sightliness of their living areas and in addition
MRS.WILLIAM WREDEN g g
JOHN YEON they accomplish a great deal of work on the property
that otherwise would not get done. Should you have any
property of the National Trust questions, please be in touch.
for Historic Preservation
administered by Filoli Center STerel r,
Hadley Os bo n
Executive D rector
i
t l0
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965-4717
December 1 , 1983
Board of Supervisors
County of San Mateo
590 Hamilton
Redwood City, CA 94063
Dear Chairman Gregorio and
Members Of the Board:
Attached for your information are draft minutes from our Board's
November 22 Public Hearing in San Carlos regarding the Hassler
property.
Sincerely yours,
Herbert Grench "
General Manager
HG:ej
Enc.
cc: MROSD Board of Directors
Herbert A Grench,General Manager Board of Directors.Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green.Nanette G Hanko.Richard S Bishop.Ecwarc G Shel'ay,Harry A.Turner.Daniel G Wendin
» Novo Enterprises 160 Seale P. to Telephone "
Incorporated Avenue Ca._ .4301 •(415)3327-302$
.v
ti
20 July, 1983' .
Nonette Hanko
Midpeains0a Regional Open Space District _-
-• 375 Distel Circle
.! Los Altos, California 94022
'ti t �,• •- ; ��,, o ,• w a`, ". ,+'I ., .. +Y.i� .. - s •may ` �f• ', •.�_...
41
Dear.V4 s s Hanko ` ' • ' s� r:-
I was —requested by Rrth Waters of the Twin Pines Art Center to look over _
the Haszt'ler propel and evaluate the feasibility of using it for artists
studios and limited public use. I am a licensed general contractor with
experience in rehab-1iitation and remodeling. of commercial,and residential
structures. I toured the property with Ruth Waters and Barbara Weisner
and, quickly noted several things:
1: The property is being vandalized, evidently on a continuing basis,.
and much of the equipment and fixtures, especially electrical,
are being destroyed or stolen. Although much of the equipment is
old'it is adequate for the uses envisioned. However, the age of
•„•iy T
the equipment -means' that if it is damaged it will most likely
have to be'replaced as parts are probably no longer available. .
On the heavy electrical switcbghar and copper cable this will be
: ,quite expensive.
Z. If some of the buildings are to be demolished, this should be
done only after the buildings that remain are renovated, as parts
from the demolished buildings can be used to repair the. others.
` . 3.. The buildings themselves could be made useable for a fraction of
their replacement cost. The structures are sound, the roofs, _
walls, foundations, and walks are all in quite good condition.
non-}mass public use the buildings are more than up to code.
In my personal •view as a general contractor .and also aecnber of the .
I su
Sierra. Club and the Wilderness Society pport the goals of the Open
1
Space District in helping to preserve land for recreation and environ-
mental uses. In this vein I think that the Open Space District has a
priceless asset in the Hassler buildings. I use the word "priceless" in
almost its literal sense as given the state of the economy, both public
and private, likely, to prevail for the foreseeable future, it will be
Impossible to ever replace these buildings. Given the needs of an ex-
panding population for varied forms of recreation and cultural activities,
the Hassler'buildings represent an extremely cost effective means to
meet those needs. The buildings themselves occupy a very small portion
of the total property and should not pose any problem to, or be incom-
patible with, the mandate of the Open Space District.
Sincerely yours,
go 000C
. . - • . . Thomas W. Novotny .
Vice President, Construction Division
TWN:p?s
cc: Ruth Waters -
Barbara Weisner
ti
2390 fit. Middlefield Rd #8
Mt. View, CA 94043
December 3, 1983
San Mateo County Arts Council
1219 Ralston Avenue
Belmont, CA 94002
Attentions Barbara Wiesner
Gentlemen:
After seeing a number of slides of the beautiful complex of
buildings of the Hassler property, set in the natural surroundings
of the foothills, I thought what a splendid idea it would be to
have available to art organizations in this area a unique facility
such as this.
The possibilities these buildings present is exciting to
think about. Rehearsal space is greatly needed for visiting and
local performing arts groups, as well as working studios for
individual artists. Apparently there would be space here for
seminars and workshops for both arts and nature groups. Also, I
understand it has overnight facilities, and could easily be
developed into a retreat center for writers, poets and artists of
all kinds. The site and setting is unique and beautiful for a
facility of this kind.
I believe it would be a boon to all those working in the
arts and the environment groups in our area if plans could be
worked out for these existing buildings to become a great center
for the arts. I believe it could pay for itself in the variety
and scope of its uses as well as being a feather in our peninsula
hat to have an art center of this caliber.
Sincerely yours,
(Mrs.) Robin Heckscher
(Member of the arts)
December 3, 1984
Mr. Herbert Grench
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
373 Distel Circle
Los Altos, California 94022
Dear Mr. Grench:
We would like to again express our wishes that you keep Hassler as open
space, without buildings. This was the understanding when we formed a
Special Assessment District (for which we are now paying) and we expect the
buildings to be demolished.
As defined by Mr. Les McCargo (Department of Parks and Recreation, State
of California) in his letter of 7/27/83 to you, open space is for "public outdoor
recreation for the active participation of all". The Arts Council activities
certainly do no fall in this category.
Nearly everyone is aKK
-
work in another fie. pt,
reason for taxpayers V.
long-term funding to -4,4 dl&
Nk I
We urge MPROSD t( Imhof—
on December 7. WF.
Sincerely, VUDPENIINSULA REGIO[�AL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
TO: Board of Directors
(Mr. and Mrs. R. Gra
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: F.Y.I .
3331 Britan Avenue i
San Carlos, Californi DATED: 12/7/83
KELLER AND DASEKING, ARCHITECTS
WALTER L. KELLER, A. I.A.
WILLIAM H. DASEKING, A.I.A.
File No. 8321
Document No. 00001063
December 2 , 1983
David Wm. Hansen, Land Manager
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos , CA 94022
RE: SITE RESTORATION - FORMER HASSLER HEALTH HOME FACILITY
Dear Dave,
In accordance with your request, I have reviewed the Cost Plan for
the construction work to establish a Creative Arts Center at the
above project, prepared by Adamson Associates , dated November 18,
1983 ,
This is a preliminary cost estimate , as stated in Adamson' s letter ,
as a firm building program has not been established. Drawings and
specifications have not been prepared and this makes it extremely
difficult for anyone to prepare an accurate detailed cost estimate.
The mechanical and electrical estimates were prepared by JXC Elec-
tric. The estimates for the single family and the duplex residence
were prepared by General Contractors and not Adamson Associates .
Adamson Associates is a very knowledgeable and reputable con-
struction cost planning firm. I recommend them highly. However ,
important items are excluded from the estimate which have to be
considered in any rehabilitation/remodeling project. Thus , the
total construction cost would be increased.
If ownership is retained by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Dis-
trict or San Mateo County, these buildings are public structures .
Therefore, they must meet all legal requirements relative to public
bidding and construction. Adequate construction documents (drawings
and specifications) must be prepared by a licensed architect and
consulting engineers . These documents must be submitted for bidding
to licensed General Contractors . Bonds must be obtained and a appro-
piate legal agreement must be prepared and executed. The informal
manner of construction proposed by the Arts Council representatives
does not meet any of these requirements .
FK11E
[D] 825 OAK GROVE AVENUE - MENLO PARK, CALIFORNIA 94025 TELEPHONE (415) 322-5366
David Wm. Hansen -2- December 2 , 1983
In my opinion, the following items are necessary and must be taken
under consideration:
1. Site Work : The underground utility piping (gas , water , sewer
and heating) have been existance 45 years and will undoubtably
present a number of problems . Our consulting engineer , in an
educated guess, believes that a great number of the pipe will
have to be replaced . The water pumps will have to be replaced .
All water piping will have to be flushed out and pressure
tested .
2 . Structural: There are many unknowns ; however , by the very
nature of the buildings being long and narrow with few interior
partitions and a great many windows , means there are structural
inadequacies based on current code requirements . There is very
little information as to the important details for
construction; such as the type of sheathing or bow it was
nailed . This is important to the seismic resistance of the
structures . By observation, the amount of shear walls , if they
can be classified as such , are inadequate . The roof and floor
diaphrams are not likely to meet current structural
requirements .
3 . Energy: Thermal insulation and double-glazing of the windows
were not included in the estimate. The statement was made that
"there are so many windows , thus it would be a waste of money
to pump insulation into the walls" . This approach does not
answer the problem, the State Building Code , Title 24 , requires
certain energy conservation standards . The building envelope
would have to be designed to meet the component packages for
this Climate Zone. This means a certain amount of insulation
must be installed in the ceilings and walls and that there is
an allowable maximum glazing area; or , as an alternate, the
building envelope must be so designed to be equalivalent to
these standards . The Hassler Buildings have an excessive
number of windows and no thermal insulation in the walls and
ceiling.
4 . Fire Protection/Sprinkler System: A fire sprinkler system may
be needed. This will depend somewhat on the interior designed
proposed and the subdivision of the building.
5 . Handicapped Requirements : The Uniform Building Code and Title
24 State Building Code provide for certain minimum standards .
In particular , at Hassler , the entrance ramps do not meet the
code requirements . The maximum slope of a ramp permitted is 1
ft. rise of 12 ft. of horizontal run. Intermediate landings
must be provided at intervals of 30 ft. of horizontal run. The
toilet room layout and access to these facilities do not comply
to the code. They would have to be remodeled accordingly.
David Wm. Hansen -3- December. 2 , 1983
6 . Plumbing: It is very doubtful that plumbing fixtures and fit-
tings would be usable. Undoubtably, new fixtures and fittings
would be required and must of the piping would have to be
replaced.
7 . Heating: The two boilers are of uncertain age , it now appears
after a preliminary investigation that these boilers are not
the original; thus it is difficult to guess their age . An
educated guess would be that the original boilers were replaced
after 25 years and these boilers are approximately 20 to 25
years old. Regardless , the boilers would have to have a
hydrostatic test to determine water tightness . This still does
not assure the boilers are usable. Only when they are fired up
and put into services can it be determined if they will
function without leaks in the system. All of the steam supply
piping in the buildings , storage tanks and boilers must be
insulated. The original insulation was asbestos material and
has been removed. The boiler controls will have to be replaced
as they do not meet current code and safety standards . The
adequacy and safety of the boilers must be demonstrated to an
insurance company that regularily issues boiler insurance.
8. Electrical : New transformers will be needed as the original
contained PCB and have now been removed. All new lighting
fixtures , switches and convenience outlets would have to be
replaced.
In summary, the Adamson Associates estimate, although very thorough
in it' s limited scope and considering the amount of information to
base the estimate on, is incomplete. A reasonable guess , would be
that the estimate should be doubled. Thus Option A, instead of
being $26 .00 per sq. ft. , should be at least $52 .00 per sq. ft. The
1.5 million total cost would increase to 3.0 million. The other
Options would increase accordingly.
Should you have any questions or coments , please call .
Sincerely,
WALTER L. KELLER, AIA
WLK/smk
'Th
e, dim
SAN MATEO TIMES AND DAILY NEWS LEADER
THE ADVANCE STAR
J. HART CLINTON
Edrtor aped I'mblierAer
%'IrXJI R. WllRon John H. Russell Thomas A.Powell Bernard M. Hour
.1luneyisy Eddor News E,'deeor Cer Edilor
Y Editorial Editor
em,t, ,h* A w, M,nt��nOfmn,rh,Tirrnu prtr14 the intoner l nnI xryi,q
:rpr.i u,M�/opa.y MuJr..g�M�rnn„ih.Tl.�pr oy....n+...in not'W"Mme,Mew'.;l TAr drub,'
C.Ir.-8nr M+Mao Friday,Dec.2, 1993
Convert Hassler
buildingsto other , ,.,
use if possible,
�
When the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Purchased from the city and county of San Francisco the former
;Hassler Health Home complex for use as an Open Space a
Pe Pa area.it
'Obtained more than a dozen buildings located on the 293 acres in the
,,bills off Highway 280 and Edgewood Road near San Carlos.
Now the district board faces this question:What shall we do with
rho buildings?Shall we call out the bulldozers and demolish the
structures?Or should we cooperate with the San Mateo County Arts
Council and possibly permit the council to convert some or all of the
building;Wr use as an arts and nature center?
We think that buildings capable of renovation and conversion to
some constructive use should not be arbitrarily demolished--merely
10 ckar the land for open space.
Ope4 space district General Manager Herbert Grench has raised
a number of considerations,reported in The Times Nov.25,which
he kels are persuasive reasons to demolish the buildingsa
the site comppletely:He contends,for example,that th rea clear
containing the buildings"is the very heart of the property and
potentially the most important area for open space use."
He also sees some potential incompatibility of"arts center uses
with quiet open space uses of the site."
Despite such objections,we think it would be a mistake for the
district to rush into a decision for demolition of the old tuberculosis
sanitarium structures. Nancy Jalonen,executive director of the Arts
Council,is now canvassing community support for realizing the
coutIO's long-standing goal of establishing an arts and nature center
on the site.
This requires time. Meanwhile,we h pe the district board will
put the brakes on and reconsider its earlier tentative decision for
demolition. After weighing all faciors involved in ultimate use of the
.ire,we bQPe it will afrec to cooperate with the Arts Council.
i�
DRAFT AGENDA ITEMS
Meeting Date: Dec. 14, 1983
//IIA
FT r3
me on Lead Report
Category = i Ti_*?e Tit a geida A�soo-risibility Status
(min-)
Final Ad tion Costanoan Way
OBWAR � l lfl & E1 Se no 0 S P. U & M Plan David v d
t
3 S Site phasis Dist David
L
S Skyl ne Ridge & M Plan David
i 2nd eading !
2 S Fi al Adoptio of Sierr Azul David
Us & Managerr, nt Plan t
14B41AR C QA Guides in s
''� asolution Dav?
.
Addition to R ncho !
NBWAR SF' 20 Cr ig Cra g/David
Resolution ;
t
f
3
i
i
4
t '
{
V
.1s M
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
Nove-Tber 30, 1983
Suzanne Brillhart
Sandra Blackburn
Debbie Powell
47599 Zunic Drive
Fremont, CA 94035
Dear. 'its. Brillhart, Ms. Blackburn, and Ms. Powell:
In behalf of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District, I want to thank you for your
letter of November 8 regarding becoming lost on Canyon
Trail. The members of the Board received a copy of your
letter and expressed their regret that your hike on Novem-
ber 5 was anything less than pleasant.
Once the weather permits, a new sign will be installed at
the junction in the trail where you became lost. I under-
stand that a member of our Ranger staff has already
contacted you about the sign.
Thank you again for taking the time to inform the Board
about the problems you encountered on C nyon Trail.
Sin rely,
I f
L. Craig Bri on
Assi�'` ant General Manager
LCB: ej
cc: MROSD Board of Directors
Herber[A Grencri Gene a,Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green.Nonefte G.Hanko,Richard S.Bishop.Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Tumer.Dan,el G A*nd
^laims 83-23
eeting 83-29
December 7, 1983
l MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
I
C L A I M S
# Amount Name Descrij2tion
5846 $ 500.00 Boone Cooke & Associates Water System Study-Rancho San
Antonio Oven Space Preserve
5847 54.56 H.S. Crocker Co. , Inc. Office Supplies
5848 1,600.00 Deloitte Haskins and Sells Final Payment for 1982-83 Audit
5849 210.00 First American Title Guaranty C6-T tle Insurance Premium
5850 146. 75 Herbert Grench Meal Conference
5851 4,418. 70 Keogh, Marer and Flicker Legal Fees
5852 37.50 Peninsula Times Tribune Subscription
5853 55.00 Pat Starrett Private Vehicle Expense
5854 500.00 U.S. Postmaster Postage for Meter
5$55 49.52 Alice Watt Private Vehicle Expense
15856 28.50 David Topley First Aid Training
5C 29. 71,: David-:.Gamp Reimbursement for Shop Supplies
5858 20050.00 Portola Park Heights Property Road Repair Costs-Long Ridge
Association Open Space Preserve
5859 76, 750.00 Redding Title Co. Purchase of Cheseb:�ough Property-
Santa Cruz
5860 47,500.00 Ticor Title Insurance Purchase of Cheseb rough Property-
San Mateo
i