Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19890628 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 89-16 Meeting 89-16 dA, 410 MR MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT OLD MILL OFFICE CENTER,BUILDING C.SUITE 135 201 SAN ANTONIO CIRCLE,MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA 94040 (415)949-5500 REGULAR MEETIN .7 BOARD Of DIRECTORS G : 00 P .M .� 201 San Anronic Circic Wcdnesday SuYe C-135 june 23 , 1989 A G E N D A Mountain View, CA ! 6 : 00) * ROLL CALL CLOSED SESSION (Land Negotiation and Livigarion Ma Try ( 7 : 30 ) WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - - Public— ADOPTION OF AGENDA BOARD B"SINESS ( 7 : 4Y — introduction of Now Docents -- D . Hansen 17 : 53) 2 . Final Adoption of the Prelirinacy Us, and Managemenc Plan, for the Carss Property Adlition cc 7he Mt . Umunhn- Area oE Sierra Azul Opin Space Prcs�ryv -- D. Hansen Mco ) 3 . Proposed Board Trails Policy Csyniztno -- 1. Hankc ( 5 : 15 ) d . interim .use, and Hanaqement for the Mt . Ununhus Aroa of Sierra Azul Open Space Qcserve - - D . Hansen 000) 5 . Progrcss Report on Open Space Voiunteeu Program -- D . Hansen M25 ; 6 . Agrearent Correcting Easement and 3ranc of Licanso for Fencing at Furisima Creek Rcdwoods and E! Cortw do Madera Craa� Open Space Presdrvus - - C . Britton Posolurion cf the Board cf Direcunrs of th� Hidpeninsula Regional Open Space District lachorizing Acceptance of A fa;reemenr Correcting Easeymnr anJ Grarr of Licens& for Fencing, Authorizing Officer co Exe-utn Aqruox�Lr , and kurhcrizing Geneyal Hanager rn Fxecuto Any and All Orher Documents Necessary or Appropriaza co 73osing of r&, Transaction (Purisima Creek Fedwocds Op on Space Proserve and E! Corte de Hadera Creek Open Space Prusarve) ( 9 : 35) 7 , Award cf Contract for Skyline Ridqe Open Space Proserve Dvveiopmen7 Project - - D . Hanson 0 : 45 . S . kncaprance of Insurance Coverage for 1989-199C -- j , Fiddes 113 : vc ) 9 . .......,p ,. ,.,,:_,e of Medical BEnefiz Revisions in Distrin ' i Fring,, Bcnwfit Plan - - j . Fidde-,' 11"Men Gmwk General Manager;Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Robert McKlbbin,Teena Henshaw,Edward Shelley,Nonette Hanko,Gerry Andeen,Richard Bishop Meeting 89-16 - Page two (10 : 10) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS -- Directors and Staff CLAIMS CLOSED SESSION (Land Negotiation and Litigation Matters) ADJOURNMENT *NOTE: A Closed Session on land negotiation and litigation matters will j be held at 6 : 00 P .M. The Board ' s regular public meeting will begin at 7 : 30 P .M. Times are estimated, and items may appear f earlier or later than listed. Agenda is subject to change of order . **TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: When an item you 're concerned with appears on the agenda, the Chair will invite you to address the Board at that time; on other matters you may address the Board under Oral Communications. An alternative is to comment to the Board by a Written Communication, which the Board appreciates. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to 3 minutes. When recognized, please begin by stating your name and address. We request that you fill out the form provided so that your name and address can be accurately included in the minutes. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ML Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT OLD MILL OFFICE CENTER,BUILDING C,SUITE 135 201 SAN ANTONIO CIRCLE,MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA 94040 (415)949-5500 NOTE: The following written communications relate to the District's draft Trail Use Policies and Guidelines . The draft response prepared by staff for Board consideration (see over) mirrors the actions recommended in Director Hanko 's report R-89-96 for the agenda item on the establishing a trails policy committee . The text of the response letter will be used for all the attached communications commenting on the draft trail use policies and guidelines . Herbert Grench,General Manager;Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Robert McKibbin,Teena Henshaw,Edward Shelley,Nonette Hanko,Gerry Andean,Richard Bishop I I or MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT OLD MILL OFFICE CENTER,BUILDING C,SUITE 135 ` 201 SAN ANTONIO CIRCLE.MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA 94040 (415)949.5500 June 30, 1989 Ray Abrams 524 Lakemead Way Redwood City, CA 94062 Dear Mr. Abrams: At our June 28 meeting, the District ' s Board of Directors reviewed your letter regarding the draft trail use policies and guidelines that were presented by staff at the May 18 public workshop. The Board appreciated your comments and will give them serious consi- deration as we continue studying the issues surrounding trail use. No Board action has yet been taken on the staff draft. i Another action at our June 28 meeting was to appoint a committee consisting of Directors Ed Shelley, Bob McKibbin, and myself , to identify what the trail use issues and problems are and to report back to the full board. The committee ' s first meeting (organiza- tional) will be held on Thursday, July 20, beginning at 7 : 30 P.M. at the District office. Discussion will be on 1) setting up a frame- work for future public discussion on issues and problems; 2) a review of additional resource materials provided by staff and public; and 3) a schedule of dates for future committee meetings. No action or recommendations on the draft plan shall take place by either the committee or the Board until the committee' s deliberations are completed. Since your comments and suggestions will help the Board address the diverse needs and concerns of various trail users, we want to invite you to attend future meetings of the committee. Please call our office at (415) 949-5500 if you wish to receive notice of time and place. Sincerely, Nonette Hanko, Vice-President Board of Directors NH/ma cc: Board of Directors Herbert Grench,General Manager,Board of Directors.Katherine Duffy,Robert McKibbin,Teena Henshaw,Edward Shelley,Nonette Hanko,Gerry Andeen,Richard Bish0R_ _ 3-S?CNSc ACTION-PROPOSED BY STAFF _ ?,_a-d President Acknowledge/Respond WRITTEN COMMUNICATION D'_rector Acknowledge/Respond Meeting 8 9-1 6 S:al` Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Drae: Response Attached _ Sc.." to be Directed to Prepare Draft ..aspcnse For Board Consideration per -card Directive(s) . :2r June 9 , 1989 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Board Members : I wish to voice my opinion against any type of restrictions being placed on runners who use the trails in the midpenin- sula region. Especially the ban of running on trails that are less than 4 feet in width. Runners should have the same rights as hikers or bird watchers in the Districts Preserves . They cause very little erosion damage and are far less offensive then the horses that are allowed in these areas . If restrictions are put on runners the same restrictions should apply to ALL of the users of these preserves . These areas were set aside for public use and are funded by the general public . Thank you for considering my opinion. Sincerely, Ray Abrams 524 Lakemead Way Redwood City, CA 94062 I R6gPnSS� -CTiOti PROPOSED B,7,,11e�,..d WRITTEN COMMUNICATION. __ Board Prs:-ident Acnnowle Meeting H9-16 � DirectorJ_�Acknowl. JUri2 2H , 1989 � Staff \c':nowledge/Respond _ Draft Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft June 9 1989 Response for Board Consideration per , Beard Directive(s) No Response Necessary _ Other -- Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Members of the Board: I would like to express my opposition to the current proposal which would ban runners, mountain bikers and equestrians from open space trails less than four feet in width. As a frequent user of the trails in question as a hiker and runner and as an active member of the Friends of Hidden Villa,I appreciate both the unique value of these trails to the above mentioned groups, as well as the traffic and erosion problems which these users can cause. My first concern is that the various types of users should not be grouped together and treated as one body. The traffic and erosion problems caused by a mountain bike are very different from those generated by a jogger. Second, I feel that not all of the trails less than four feet in width should be addressed as one.The erosion and traffic problems vary greatly depending upon terrain and accessibility of the trail. Many of the steeper and more heavily used trails certainly need both protection from the users and some measure of traffic control,while some of the more remote and well terraced trails are in no danger, and see little use from visitors that are not in one of the groups which are proposed to be banned from them. My personal interest is regarding the banning of runners. I understand and support the banning of bicycles and horses from certain select trails,but not based purely on the width of the trail. (What standards of measurement will be used?What defines the width of a trail?) I feel that a runner poses no more safety hazard or danger to the environment than a fast hiker. I have witnessed instances of discourteous runners who force others off of trails, as I have encountered discourteous hikers who do the same. The issue is one of manners, rather the safety or absolute compatibility between the hikers and joggers. When does a fast walker become a jogger? If the minority user group were to be eliminated, many of the higher tails would be closed to hikers. I feel that this proposition is vague and unenforceable with regard to foot traffic on the trails. In reality, this is not an "Us versus Them" problem. We must encourage an attitude of sharing a great resource and of husbandry of the open space-rather than trying to legislate and control the behavior of the many open space visitors. As I have seen on the trails of Hidden Villa and the Windmill Pasture area,only with the cooperation of the many users, and constant loving care will we preserve the great resource of the Open Spaces for all to enjoy. Sincerel , obert Anex 321 Walsh Road Atherton, CA 94025 I RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF 'RITTEN COMMUNICATIONS and President Acknowledge/Respond eting 89-16 irector Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached _ Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft June 9, 1989 Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) 1':Oa_"'d of Directors No Response Necessary "id Peninsula I:egional Open Space District _ other Old Mill Gffice Center fountain View, Cry 94040 Dear `.embers of the Board: I attended the public meeting on '`.ay l8-th where the Board presented i4:5 trail use muidelin.es. I have strong disa -reements with your proposal to restrict running on Open .Spy, ce trails. I am the president of the Palo Alto Run Club, a 160-member runners organization sponsored by the City of Palo Alto lrecreation Depprtr-.ent. I have enjoyed runnin,T on the many trails in the District paa.rks, and Rancho 'an ;'�ntonio Park in particular. The members of the Run Club want the Open Space parks to be ke_>t available .for use and enjoyment by all users in a. safe, responsible mann-er. To that end, the Run Club belives that a more effective solution to the increase in accidents at �tancho and other oarks is a. cempaic-n to educate all park users on trail etiquette. This could be implemented with improved siinage aaad bulletin boards at trail heads, and detailed trail maps that would promote usar �e of outl-Tinr_r, less-frequented trails. 1'.n effective trap mi,rht also indic- to the z-ore congested are�:.s, such as the trails immediately adjacent to the farm at Rancho Park, where younu children congregate to view the farm animals. Finally, we believe the G_en Space District should make a more concerted effort to inform the public about proposed changes in trail use policy, etc. , throe rh the local news a-:ers acid radio stations. The Run Glub is willing to work frith the :;_yen . ,)ace District to :gut to tether an educ_ tion cam,)-�ij~n to educate runners and other trail use s on trail etiquette. Cur clu, wo>>ld also '_ielp to build a.1 terne to trail_ routes at sites where con, estion and conflicts occur between runners and hikers, such as the farm at Rancho -ark. A gref-:.t number of the Pun Club's members enjoy using the trails at the various Open Space District narks for run .in.;- , hiking, and nature walks. ° e trust the :F.,o,3.rd of Directors will not act hastily to impose trail use restrictions, when an educ;.tion _,rop;ram is the }yore practical, equitable solution, lease put my name on your mail.inr: list so my i,roup can stay informed of future meetin-s on this issue. Thank you. Sincerel-7, John Bird Design ��u 212 High Street Palo Alto,CA94301 John Bird 415.325.0665 The Run Club RESPONSE ACTION PP.CP_OSED BY STAFF Board President Acknowledge/Respond WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS _ — j'Director Acknowledge/Respond 4 Meeting 8 9-1 6 Staff Acknowledge/Respond f June 2 8 , 19 8 9 Draft Response Attached { _ Staff to he Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration pei.- Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary Other_, June 9 , 1989 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Board Members : I wish to voice my opinion against any type of restrictions being placed on runners who use the trails in the midpenin- sula region. Especially the ban of running on trails that are less than 4 feet in width. Runners should have the same rights as hikers or bird watchers in the Districts Preserves . They cause very little erosion damage and are far less offensive then the horses that are allowed in these areas . If restrictions are put on runners the same restrictions should apply to ALL of the users of these preserves . These areas were set aside for public use and are funded by the general public . Thank you for considering my opinion. Si7;rely , / Robert Blackburn 2605 Spring Street Redwood City, CA 94063 i WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS _ Meeting 89-16 RESPOssE ACTION PROPKSEb M S:AF= � June 28 , 1989 _ board President Acknowledge/Respond Director Acknowledge/Respond Board of Directors Staff A_knowledge/Respond I Midpeninsula Reg. Open Space District Draft Response Attached 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 _ staff to be Directed to Prepare ➢rafr. Response for hoard Consideration per Mountain View, California 94040 3 atd Ditecti•:e(s) No Response Necessary Other__ Dear Sirs, _J I'm writing this letter to express my disapproval of the current proposal before the board that would ban running on all trails less than 4 feet wide. This seems to be a very arbitrary decision that would deprive thousands of peninsula residents of their right to use the Open Space areas in a sensible and safe manner. Do runners cause more trail erosion than hikers in lugged boots? Are trails 3 and 1/2 feet wide always more vulnerable to erosion than 4 toot traiis? When does waiking become jogging? Is jogging running? Will there be radar traps to ensure non-running? Will I be arrested if I wear my running shoes on Windy Hill? If certain trails are fragile or have problems between hikers and runners, ban running (or hiking) on only those trails. As an environmentalist I applaud the existence of the Open Space District but I also see this proposal as being irrational and unenforceable. As a recreationalist (runner, mountain biker) I'm outraged about it. Don't blow it. Don't approve this proposal - identify the problem and tell the public. A compromise solution must be available. 1 Sincerely, Desmond . Cahill 265 Canyon Drive Portola Valley, California 94025 I i 5as?CSSF ACTION PROPOSED dv `FF WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS __ 3,aard President Acknwlede and Meeting 89-16 _ ::_reccor Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Staff Acknowledge/,Respond Daft Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Resxnse for Board Consideration per 3card Directive(s) C:^er V y �Gvr�c�U SGv� � i v��1O a G P,v► C•P - /I &"WV 61clOC17f 0 C11 i �Q 1n P5 �/UUcS Gwe �G�vvaw (. -elf vclUlr OP �_ (/U�,l� c.✓l� S(�rl� -y�-�_ �irc�(S wi� 0'��S �� � ( s dux 0,/v j- �X7 Ave VU0 P7 0 C,,5 e- Lcx� Zee �� RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF v�7✓���I ( ,9 _ Board President Acknowledge/Respond I li y j/1 W/ll(JUfGC� _ Director Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond l (U V V/ lam- ( �U I Draft Response Attached _ Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft /7 563 //Z� � Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary Other WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Meeting 89-16 -peat June 28 , 1989 ..4- sp Eid cZ G�recrr aeal GT -tl r)e (mot((<-(i,19 a K d KUrrn I i- -f ro116 of dvr r7lid Poi,415v(6-. Thl's rs one, OF my fnv-bole uchVi ft CtKd Q='55ab% t i fy tz i f /S oVre maces rec scn _�7 love I/ViAg Vi crt� r(�;a,. �'ee( 1, am ccur .tlo us- fio cxk?yove T r�,�y *eef o,, e fry it eVeh r - a4i rvrc�sl' n e rn se a hour fi�kr�� come o f i� a had a�ee fti.e �� a� l2 ul�v should e al�owe� .-�o LAse if e1 cs a �Ye v'l4� .Z woutd no wG-►-, f vU f�2Crs� �o nod a ,� v�n�n oY) -�Kai /5' /cuss -►'hah feet`- �/�► VVidt- ,/ Z -�'�l-�� yo�t '1�z tzcaj v J T'SPOVS'c ACT PROPOSED BY STAFF WRITTT :OMMUNICATIONS I ��?F - Me e t i r, d 9-1 6 __ Board President Acknowledge/Respond June 28, 1989 _ Director Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond ` Draft R_spons=_ Attached Staff to he Directed t0 Prepare Draft Response for 3oard Consideration per Board Direc_ive(a) No Response Necessary Other June 9 , 1989 I Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Board Members : I wish to voice my opinion against any type of restrictions being placed on runners who use the trails in the midpenin- sula region. Especially the ban of running on trails that are less than 4 feet in width. Runners should have the same rights as hikers or bird watchers in the Districts Preserves . They cause very little erosion damage and are far less offensive then the horses that are allowed in these areas . If restrictions are put on runners the same restrictions should apply to ALL of the users of these preserves . These areas were set aside for public use and are funded by the f general public . Thank you for considering my opinion. Sincerely , � 1 Chris Carter 237 Canyon Drive Portola Valley, CA 94025 } WR7 ;N COMMUNICATIONS skUss �.clzc v,u��o;G�> B� srA� Meeting 89-16 _ 6oard President Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 _ Director _ Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond 6/8/89 Draft Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Board of Directors, Board Directive(s) Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District _ No Response Necessary 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135, Mountain View, CA 94040. Dear Directors: To say that I am disturbed by the possibility of having trails under 4 feet closed for running on the lands of the Open Space District is an understatement. As I understand it, the purpose of our parks and preserves is to provide Penninsula residents the opportunity to occasionally get out into the woods for recreational purposes. Runners are not a nuisance, they don't destroy trails any more than hikers, they don't litter, and by god they don't make noise. The only possible reason one might oppose runners is that because they move fast, and could conceivably collide with someone on a narrow trail with blind corners. Having hiked on most of the trails in the preserve system, I have found few with blind corners, and have never experienced anything but courtesy from runners. Hikers, on the other hand, leave orange peels and cigarette buts lying about. I have even seen some fools smoking on Windy Hill on a windy summer afternoon! Surely this preposterous course is being pursued due to the complaints of a few individuals who don't like running or runners. The whims of these few should certainly not be the basis for a radical curtailment of the utility of OUR parklands. I myself am unable to run on hills because of a knee problem from a ski injury. Those who are fortunate enough to be able to run on the trails have every right to. Banning running is an ill advised action, and will surely brook a spectacular outcry, and almost certainly law- suits. I will encourage and support any actions to fight this ridiculous notion. Personally, I would rather give donations to causes like buying more land than to waste it fighting ridic- ulous laws. incer 265 Canyon Dr. Portola Valley, CA 95014 (415) 851-7193 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS R_SPDXs A.CTl0N PROPOK ;T_a-= ( Meeting 89-16 Board President Acknowledge/Respond J U N _ June 28 , 1989 Director _Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond ?oaf Draft F,es?once At[ncSed C w Staff to be Directed to Prepare p e Draft Response for Board Consideration per w� O Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary ` J�t ' ;�► 9��` Other — - Mir(ptn l� ge �w..j Ur•� K D:r�ri�� i is l ., f �C• • L7tar s 1 rs _- have ,j us+ h tceow_ CwSK #4 1 C hL/4 o f e -;:..r a! S Coe i+ 'l'.s l/ r`,�//' itw '1- .4 4:!14 114015 4. Sw..�.�..� j "S+ 6r.,.�4f �.. ,„y 4444•.-Ai ve +A64- 'i /orf,t of pLq(• t"*y I� b�rr••e../ - -*... ��atar4't * F �s.ir OWE Ptvks k-P n Cr t'�s f i w t"s . �•►t ova.--o or b ;j +*,d ' "s Iteale 1e&ems 4,b L& 44.4-sww Kik,&rs a..a C•s�pla:r;.,1 r4v Sono ) o pte". = Aw.e jofsv'/ 'Host +tea as ter Y-cars " 40,44 eye./k•O a rsa•..t f� it i/•v.S 4,4 M. h•rt• w `{'M t o&, n �ssa�y . uu•'• � wlw4 exc�a••�s pltss.►..'F 9�iafs . "10 1 vK �Ns�ws/�� /�tKf•f S{L�► 4 4s+�A'h<Tioh b,& -%P" itt 4-tv9 tr.ys: .T •. -Poo a./ .Kf v* a 'Pose- .F /oa •60*4 4oy N)„5 . d; Mri/l �r,s/ i O •Le �.. sf �+,. � :!s{�s wi// C.�•�v�irin 'tt,s;Is arc '6o ta:A or n..- 4„ A -*ne&jA: JAC •t ncws�, te�►�r Asps: d� �.�. s'rt s �t o rs .., "� -bra:�. I 2 e -re fie 0►� s d trth �f' barC1sI TIru -6f 4 la t 41rC*Jvlh o rr w )Q ,%f—p{ peer4v _ + :�k *c i s �[wy f�;►, tt.�► I'tt '� a yp�s "40 1 tow" f G 044�- iVvs t..,.� Or*" Tp oe,+.s 7ntn► 1� 4 a," rAi� s C 1 1k tTtI.a cv;A s ;IA% au/ wh otK�em� sqc 5*::rn :Af c &P ;01 wh tver inCreo6401 � e.w s:mole. no�e� s., "t'•R, � s���tcsfft a.v/ P�'�►•Ps a haw n+in�r *as�t�d�iuns ar. ti�n�oir+ Ir;less S'i �a�riLf. �,.�srr,iJM bias �� b3 yeNrs L .�/,' � i.` �•. �'• t � «f. . ..� �..a !1 A�1 I�i -�1 '�°• .Fs-/ +{ • versa `Wf IYW' "! � - • �" �y xn M� 4 sn #y 4At n .. 44 z. -4 JL Aw a m>r , 5•.. n �.:. .«W r+. '' it a F+.' :d :, .°04, 41 P• � �„ .fir •i 'i y.. � '»r , 1�. s'' t� `•' � .'^7{ ar� �. ,.,� d K � to wr ..•"fit ,1�'!1 � ': r•.`� �� Nt ^'.j„ �1..• N rr'i �_,�. �"''• � a `*!x .� !� n•�, A� i. owl � � � t ,R"� �� .� � a � w� I .�F .; , r F � , M ." ,vim �,.+� ► x�� ,., r •� eff dot top 31 IWO Ic .w; rry&�M� •' j F^+ �.w .i" - ,4' !r'+ f d'IF .adr• � .� a�R: a'A • , i,, �_ ,,1^: 4'a.a .t +'� 44 F f� "R• t i i i 7�f�jy wN� �Jli� 4° -w4* 7.IId fee 1 "If�Mlw1)? //.�.iw -M,+A • Avg of/ VWV 4 j1+sue vl ofaod VW 'r 4119 iv!r"MI l? jv y-p two s; J"ft "V& ru s sr orn Alio 9 .���� s}N •t'ti ��► tt✓•�.►�� � t�►«•d •�tvn Vsww�''� - *)A y,p/ .�! .r• 9 t� +r• • mI yi M4 • � Q v •s �•-,d y f•s vtt * f �''�-S S» �hsyl 9 f Q 1 it M , 1 Jk rY. r1 k� i . 1-4 ty 141 !f � l - � ♦ NM t.�. I + 1 i i RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF � Board President Acknowledge;Respond Director_ Acknowledge/Respond WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 1 Staff Acknowledge/Respond i Meeting 8 9-1 6 3 Draft Response Attached ! June 28 , 1989 _ Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Re:;ponce for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary June 9 , 1989 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Board Members : I wish to voice my opinion against any type of restrictions being placed on runners who use the trails in the midpenin- sula region. Especially the ban of running on trails that are less than 4 feet in width. Runners should have the same rights as hikers or bird watchers in the Districts Preserves . They cause very little erosion damage and are far less offensive then the horses that are allowed in these areas . If restrictions are put on runners the same restrictions should apply to ALL of the users of these preserves . These areas were set aside for public use and are funded by the general public . Thank you for considering my opinion . Sincerely , 13 o f eow� RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STA WRITTEN COMM, -CATIONS Board President Acknowledge/Respond Meeting 8 9-1 6 Director Acknowledge/Respond June 28, 1989 Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached 262 Ventura Avenue Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Palo Alto, CA 94306 Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) Other June 5, 1989 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Directors: I am writing to express my opinion regarding the proposal, Draft Policies And Guidelines (May 1989) , which you are currently considering approving for use in the MROSD. I believe that hikers have been unfairly singled out for first-class citizen status relative to runners. Statistics which have been shared with the public (via local newspapers) regarding the accident rate in the District seem to indicate that few if any accidents have occurred which involve runners colliding with hikers. Furthermore, the overall accident rate seems to be exceedingly low (15 accidents over 3 years and 1, 000, 000+ visits implies less than 0.0015%) . While some runners (and walkers) have knowingly been discourteous to other users of the trails, and have perhaps intimidated or endangered others, it would be an unjustified over-reaction to restrict the access of runners to trails in the MROSD. Runners do not endanger others by their very presence on the trails if they use the trails with common sense and courtesy. While some walkers may not welcome the presence of others unlike themselves on the trails, this alone is not sufficient to justify second-class status for an entire group of users that has a long history of safe trail use. The bias of the Draft proposal is quite obvious in that no suggestions for safe and courteous trail use by hikers and walkers have been included. Even a brief survey of the users of the trails would discover that some hikers have been known to use the trails discourteously by walking 2, 3,4-abreast along a trail, implicitly or literally refusing to walk single file, making it impossible for a runner (or other user) to pass unobtrusively. In addition, hikers wearing headphones may be unable to hear or respond to warnings given by other users approaching on the trail. And, while users of all types may occasionally wish to pause along the trail, this does not mean that stopping in the middle of a trail is courteous or safe behavior. Parties standing in the middle of a trail can present themselves as an unexpected obstacle and an impediment to safe and unobstructed progress of other users of whatever speed. Finally, just as being a runner does not imply that one is an unsafe, discourteous trail user, being a walker does not mean one is beyond rudely pushing past a slower walker. A regular trail walker recently related to me that she had been muscled off the trail by some fellow walkers. Unfortunately, we can not police good manners. But through a truly aggressive education program we should be able to increase awareness of regulations and heighten people's sensitivity to the experience of other users. Trail signs detailing regulations and brochures to be picked up on the trail are apparently not getting the job done to the district's satisfaction. So, why does the proposal not suggest improved educational measures? For example, problems with school teams running on the trails in large groups might require that the district send a ranger to meet yearly with local coaches and their athletes to explain the district policy on this issue. Perhaps in the most heavily used parks the district could consider a kiosk at the point of entry to the preserve where each driver must stop to pick up a brochure and hear the ranger emphasize the most important trail etiquette points. The cost of this surely couldn't be more prohibitive than that required to hire additional rangers and outfit them to roam 200 miles of trails in search of errant, unlawful runners. Restriction of runners from trails less than four feet wide would create a trail system virtually empty of users in many areas. On most of the trails far from parking lots one is more likely to encounter a runner than a hiker simply because it takes significantly more time for the hiker to cover the same distance. Were we to ban runners from these trails we would have a significant portion of our trail system almost entirely UNUSED. If the trails are not meant to be used, then why does the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District exist? Lest we forget, the vast majority of users of the trails in the district would appear to be enjoying their open space experience. (In fact, it might be interesting to calculate complaints divided by total visits. ) Unfortunately, people are less likely to write in or call about an enjoyable visit than about an unenjoyable one, yet their experience is no less relevant. Increasing complaints are likely to be quite closely tied to an increase in the number of visits to the preserve system. Though we might all like to go back to the days when fewer people enjoyed the trails, times when we were freer to enjoy the trails alone, the facts of life in a heavily populated urban area require us all to SHARE the trails with other users. It has been noted that the references and sources cited at the end of the Draft proposal deal almost exclusively with bikes, and that none deal specifically with runners. It would appear that runners have been inexplicably included in the "dangerous" category with cyclists. Runners and hikers should not be considered separately. The accident statistics in the district do not support such a distinction with regard to access. Instead runners and hikers should be considered equal, being more alike than different in terms of their mo*".ivations for using trails and their actual impact on the land, on the district, and on other users. Sincerely, Joanne A. Ernst RUNNERS ALERT!!! YOUR RIGHT TO RUN ON TRAILS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN _ SPACE DISTRICT IS IN IMMEDIATE DANGERI THE CURRENT PROPOSAL BEFORE THE BOARD OF THE DISTRICT PROPOSES TO BAN RUNNING ON ALL TRAILS LESS THAN 4 FEET IN ` WIDTH. THIS WILL PREVENT YOU FROM RUNNING ON FAVORITE TRAILS IN MANY OF THE DISTRICT'S PRESERVES, INCLUDING; o RANCHO SAN ANTONIO o WINDY HILL o EL SERENO o LOS TRANCOS o SKYLINE RIDGE o MONTE BELLO o MT. UMUNHUM o RUSSIAN RIDGE o FREMONT OLDER o PURISIMA CREEK REDWOODS THE SITUATION IS URGENT!!!! Rom': ?tiERS MUST ACT NOW TO MAKE T::EIR Z'GICLS 1HE„Ri3. YOU LAN HELP BY: o Writing a letter to the Board of Directors of the District expressing your opinion on the proposed guidelines. Send letter to: Board of Directors, Midpcninsula Regional Open Space District, 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135, Mountain View, CA 94040. To obtain a copy of the proposal call the district headquarters at (415) 949-5500. The district is soliciting public opinion on the proposal until mid-June, so get your letter in today. o Circulating a petition fellow runners and friends of runners. p among Completed petitions can be mailed to the Board of Directors at the above address. Additional petitions can be obtained by calling (415) 857-1422. o If you don't have time to write you can register your opinion by calling David Hansen or Del Woods at the District Headquarters (415) 949-5500. o Vo ecr your help to organiz t to protect runners' rights by cal `ng Joanne Ernst at (415) 857-1422. PLEASE HELP! YOUR RUNNING FREEDOM DEPENDS ON YOUR ACTIONS TODAY. WRITTEN C OMMUN I C I DNS Meeting RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF 8 _ Board President Acknowledge/Respond Junee 2 8 9-1989 6 _ Director Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond GREGORY C. GRET5CH Draft Response Attached _ Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft P.O. Box 1049 Response for Board Consideration per Cupertino, Ca. 95015-1049 Board Directive(s)Other Other 408-725-1952 6-9-89 -- Dear Sirs; I feel that it is an outrage that the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Board of Directors would even consider banning running on trails less than 4 feet in width. I tell you this - if the Board is an elected body then any of them that vote for this proposal I will make it a point to vate against them next time they come up for reelection. If they aren't,then I will make sure that my representatives in the state and local government know how I feel. Lly, SinceGreg Gretsch WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 'E,710N PROPOSED BY STAFF Meeting 89-16 Board President Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Di rec edge/Res p,l nd Staff Acknowledge/Respond Allen E. Hastings Draft Response Attached 31340 Grove Ave. Staff to be J)irected to Prepare Draft Palo Alto, CA. 94303 Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) June 4, 11389 No Response Necessary Open Space District other Suite C-135 )40 Dear Sirs: This letter is in response to your draft policies and guidelines dated May 1989 and a telephone conversation with Jane Saltman, a consultant in your office. I have read the draft and it looks like far more restrictions are being suggested than are needed. To be more specific: I have been running at Rancho San Antonio for years, three days a week, winter and summer, and have fallen more in love with the place as time goes by. It is ideal for training for the Dipsea race, and I hope to be running there when I'm eighty. My wife of 33 years usually joins me there two days a week, as do various friends. None of us can believe that you want to keep runners from being able to use trails less than four feet wide. (Item 5, Page 15). I strongly believe that some training/education on trail etiquette, as you suggest, will solve almost all the problems of runners on narrow trails. In your guidelines you say "it is assumed that all users will follow trails etiquette", but at San Antonio I don' t recall seeing any notices about who has the right-of-way on the trails, and I believe some posted information would really help. In boating, the most elementary course covers the right-of-way rules for boats. Personally, I find it good training for my legs to stop or slow to a walk when approaching hikers or horses, and then pick up speed when safely past. They seem to appreciate it when I do that, and say "Excuse me", and a short "Hi" as I go by. With the stables gone, meeting horses has become much less of a problem, but most runners still remember not to spook a horse. Most of us learned not to run through the stabled, and there wasn' t a lot of education needed. You should also comment on large groups of fast- moving runners being very intimidating to hikers, and that they should be especially courteous. The signs keeping bicycles off of the trails above Deer Hollow Farm need to be bigger, and mayby a note about other parks where mountain bikes have more access (Fremont Older?) would be appropriate. I' ve had bikes coming head on in the narrowest parts of Wildcat Canyon, and seen them out of control coming down the steep pitches of the Power Line Road. No way could they stop in any reasonable distance. Maybe just threatening to confiscate the bikes would solve the problem. Again, education seems to be lacking. 1-m sure we can figure out a way for runners and hikers to share even the narrowest trails at San Antonio. It will just take some education, and maybe some peer pressure. Get the Stevens Creek Striders and other clubs involved, and the high school track teams. And let me know if I can help. By the way, your ranger staff and Mary at the farm are really good people. I hope they know we appreciate them. Sincerely, WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Meeting 8 9-1 G NSE ACTION PROPOSrD BY S'LAFF June 28, 1989 _ Board President Acknowledge/Respond _ Director__ Acknowledge/Respcld Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached 137 Alberta Ave. Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft San Carlos CA 94070 Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) June 9, 1989 No Response Necessary ' Other Board of Directors ^ Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Suite C-135 201 San Antonio Circle Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Board: It has come to my attention that the Board is considering a proposal to severely restrict access to Open Space District trails by runners and joggers. I want to register my strong objection to any such proposal. I have been a frequent runner in the area now known as the Rancho San Antonio Open Space District, dating back to the time when it was used only by runners and a few. birdwatchers. I have watched the area grow to what it is today: a well-managed, well-maintained retreat from the urban morass of Silicon Valley. I have never had a problem on any of its roads and trails with any other foot traffic. Indeed, it is the bicycle riders who I fear. Yes, the foot traffic density is significant in Rancho San -Antonio, but I observe that almost 50% of the traffic in the first mile from the parking area is comprised of runners and joggers, and perhaps 75% of the much less dense traffic on the narrower trails beyond the Farm is comprised of runners and joggers. To prohibit access to these higher trails to runners and joggers is to eliminate the majority of visitors to those areas. Is that the real objective of the proposal before you? And a more practical question: exactly how would you differentiate between fast walking and slow jogging? I suggest that any such prohibition against runners and joggers is doomed to arbitrary judgements by a Park Ranger who has better things to do, and in the end the prohibition is unenforceable. Bicycles are easy to identify, impossible to conceal, and dangerous on the trails. Joggers are difficult to identify, easy to conceal (by simply slowing down) , and not obviously dangerous. I am sure that common sense will prevail, both in your deliberations and also out on the trails. I thank you for your splendid work in creating maintaining, and expanding the Open Space District. Regards, John Hawkes RES. ...z;E _-CTION PROPOSED BY S:AF: Board President Acknowledge/ResponS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS _ Director Acknowledge/Respond Meeting 89-16 _ Staff Acknowledge'Respond June 28 , 1989 Draft Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per June 7, 1989 Board Directivc(s) No Response Necessary Other Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Sirs : I am writing because of my great concern about the proposed restrictions regarding running on Open Space trails . I feel that this is an extremely unfair and prejudiced proposition. Why should one group of Open Space users be prohibited in favor of another. Why should someone who walks or runs at a fast pace be treated differently that someone who walks more slowly. We should be proud that we have such an active population who thoroughly enjoy using the trail system, rather than penalizing people who run. I sincerely hope that you will remove any language restricting runners ' use of the Open Space trail system. Sincerely, Na?Cy,�Jacobsen 163 Greenmeadow + Palo Alto, CA 94306 I RE ?OSSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF T TE N COMMUNICATIONS Board President Acknowledge/Respond feting 89-16 _ Director �_Acknouledge/Respond 6/6/8 9 June 28 , 1989 ( Staff A.k owledge/Respond ! }�� Drat Response Attached t Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Board of Directors ffff Response for Board Consideration per !!! Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Board Directive(s) No Fesponse Necessary 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 — y Mountain View, CA 94040 other Dear Sir or Madam: I understand you will be considering a proposal to ban runners from the Rancho San Antonio park. I STRONGLY OPPOSE such a ban, for several reasons. It would punish the many for the fault of a few. It would be very difficult to enforce fairly. (Who decides whether one is running or walking?) There are relatively few places to run safely in the Santa Clara County. To reduce that is a mistake. I urge you to decline this proposal . Sincerely, Thomas E. Kilbourn 183 N. France St. Sunnyvale, Ca. 94086 I WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989 RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF _ Board President Acknowledge/Respond Director Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached June 14, 1989 Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary Other Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Re: Proposal to Ban Running On All Trails Less Than 4 Feet in Width Gentlemen: With respect to the above, I am writing this letter to express My strong opposition to the proposal. If runners are to be excluded from running on trails less than 4 feet, then horses should also be banned. Please count my vote as a no to the proposal. sincerely, Name (Print) : _ dL,e 6� jk", l � Address: City, State, Zip. — ra l-- 4-1 1a « o I i ->?:SSE ACTION PRO?OSED BY STAFF J /� Boar: President Acknowledge/Respond 111 ��� Dire_tor Acknowledge/Respond j y Staff Acknowledge/Respond yT Draft Response Attached S_aff to be Directed to Prepare Draft ^�+ �� / 7' ? s.cnse for Board Consideration per — Bca:c Directive(s) WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989 [� �-v/ Jai✓ t�/v/ � �.cL�/ ..f��� �' _ /3 s. . ` %tom/ Prf' / �.�+,►v /f u l;/,•--.C'/��;(�. �� ate"f��?'r y c� ���_ ,A 7,C ✓c- �/ �'"�{�„y:��✓ /�'A rat' �t�tilfi �.✓/' / e c'j dam✓ .� f P of S 1 A—Y 4,zkicw ledge(,e sp on2 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Staff Ac',—1 e d ge/Res pond Meeting 89-16 Attached June 12, 1989 June 28 , 1989 icy Ste to h? Dite-,tA to Prepare Dt,,ft Re�-,Pons, 'or ?oard Consideration per "',,atd Dir-ctive(s) No �es:)onsa Necessary 318 Town and Country Palo Alto, California 94301 A—- Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite 135 Mountain View, CA 94040 OFFICERS Douglas Latimer Honorable Members of the Board: Chairman Norman Klein We are writing in behalf of the Board of Directors Race Director of, and the hundreds of trail runners who annually Helen Klein Co Race Director prepare for and participate in, the Western States 100 Tony Cosby-Rossmann mile Endurance Run. We emphasize that the two of us are Secretary also residents of the District, living in Redwood City Gary Towle, M.D. and Palo Alto, and have personally run hundreds of miles Treasurer on the trails of the District's open space preserves -- BOARD OF as have many other Western States runners, pacers, and DIRECTORS crew members. Tony Cosby-Rossmann John Demorest Norman Klein we are writing to comment upon your staff's recent Douglas H. at Bob LKelley concern with trail running within the District's imer Robert Lind, M.D. preserves. We seek to preserve the ability of trail Marion 0. Livermore runners, alone or in small groups, to use all trails Charles W. Savage within the district. The natural trails are essential to Bill Stainbrook Gary Towle, M.D. us. They provide the challenge and primitive experience Betty Veal, R.N. we seek in our athletics, and enable us to take the long runs that connect several open space preserves to produce distance and variety. Before turning to our comments, however, let us briefly describe our own event and our qualifications as the managers of it. Perhaps our experience and perspective can aid your Board in its management of the open spaces we treasure. The Western States 100 is considered the premier trail running event in the nation, and likely the world. Although it is the most demanding in its various challenges of all the trail runs, it is also the nation's largest (370) in annual participants. We run in a variety of natural conditions ranging from snowy Sierra passes and slopes, across the transalpine forests and meadows of the high country, and then through the oaks, grasses and riparian environments that remind us of scenes on Windy Hill or in Rancho San Antonio. While some of the Western States Trail is dirt road, most of it �Iro k4e ctird No,irmn K4eim 1.14-39 MUM RiWl Go..t, RmTeive Geigeoe, '--A- "�-'U) 014-6-�� Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District June 12, 1989 Page 2 remains the historic track that is usually less than two feet wide. Much of the trail is steep. Even on the day of the Run itself, as well as in the many training activities preceding, we share this trail with hikers, horsemen and horsewomen preparing for the Western States (Tevis Cup) Trail Ride, and other recreational users. Despite the challenging nature and restricted quality of the Western States Trail, we have been able to conduct our annual Run and the months of training leading up to it with virtually no complaint from the public or the public agencies (U.S. Forest Service and California State Parks) who actively govern the Trail. We especially value our use of the Granite Chief Wilderness Area in the Tahoe National Forest which, as you know, must be administered with the highest sensitivity for protection of wilderness values and the wilderness experience of all users. Even though we usually have our full complement of 370 runners traversing Granite Chief, we have been able to secure support from Congressional leaders and the Chief of the Forest Service for our continued use of Granite Chief, and have earned what we consider commendable "report cards" from the Forest Service after each year's event. Our success in sharing a difficult trail with other users, and in traversing a national wilderness area with no discernible adverse effect, has not come by accident. Although most trail runners bring the advantage of being inherently respectful of the land and courteous to other trail users, we have found that our most effective management technique lies in public education. In our briefing books, training runs, pre-race seminars, and performance rules, we emphasize the need to respect the Trail and its other users -- and the seriousness with which we view transgressions on this ethic. In the 16 years since the first man ran the entire Western States Trail, neither we nor (to our knowledge) the Forest Service or State Parks have received one complaint about runners' use of the Trail. Now applying our experience as both participants in and managers of the Western States Endurance Run, we offer the following observations to guide your Board: 1. There is no inherent conflict between use of narrow trails by trail runners and other users such as hikers or equestrians. 2. Public education is the most important management technique with which to eliminate the risk of conflicts. 3 . Beyond public education, we would support reasonable restrictions of size, time, and trail width when dealing with organized events or large groups; but such measures should not be I Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District June 12 , 1989 Page 3 necessary for runners not in large groups or organized events. May we also point out two other observations with respect to some of the possible restrictions on trail use outlined by your staff. 1. A distinction between "hiker" and "runner" will prove difficult to enforce. When training for uphills in the Western States Run, we concentrate on developing a "power walk" technique that could best be described not as running but vigorous hiking. Conversely, often hikers will break into a jog or run to put some variety into their hike. (Endurance runners also carry water and supplies, just as hikers do. ) 2 . An attempt to prohibit "running" on certain trails will require rangers to become policemen, refereeing the legality or illegality of what are essentially natural activities for beneficial users of the trails, and detract from the rangers' and the public's perception of the rangers as educators and guides. In conclusion, we find it difficult to imagine that the District faces a problem from trail running that cannot be overcome by a modest but effective program of public education (reminders of the "rules of the road" posted at each trail entrance, and in the District' s maps and trail brochures) , and more direct regulation only of organized or large group events. May we conclude with one final point drawn from our experience at Western States. The Trail from Squaw Valley to Auburn is now the focal point of some of the sharpest debate about the future of the public lands: as places of recreation and renewal, or of intense resource extraction. Trail runners, speaking through the Western States Endurance Run, have become an important voice for preservation and conservation of the recreational values that this District has served so well . In addressing the activities of trail runners within your jurisdiction, please keep in mind that they form one of your most supportive and effective constituencies. Respectfully yours, Douglas Latimer Chairman Antonio Cosby- ossmann Secretary 44RITTEN COMMUNICATIONS P£SoI.., �.. _ _ S£ ACTIO:Q PROPOSED BY STAFF Meeting 89-16 — Board President Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 — D:-ector Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond Board of Directors, Draft Response Attached Mid peninsula Regional Open Space District _ P g P P Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per 201 San Antonio Circle Board Directive(s) Suite C-135 — 1.0 Response Necessary Mountain View, CA 94040 — other Board Members, I have discovered that there is a proposal before your Board to ban running on many of the trails in some of the Regional parks and open spaces in the area. I enjoy the use of the parks and in particluar like to run in the Rancho San Antonio preserve. Exploring a beautiful new area while I run seems the ideal running experience and the proposal as I understand it would needlessly constrain the trails open to me as a runner. I can only guess the motivations of someone drafting such a proposal but running seems a benign and safe activity for runners and those around them. I suspect that some might be reacting to the growing number of people using the regional parks and identifying runners as the cause of "crowding." I think that it would be unfortunate for one peaceful group of park users to be punished because of population growth in the area and the overwhelming popularity of these parks and preserves. Please disapprove this proposal Todd Logan 1898 Anthony Ct., Mt. View, CA 94040 i r�Er r r.crioD BY STAFWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS President Acknowledge/Respond Meeting 89-16 or _ wde/RespoJune 28 , 1989 Acknowledge/Respond i Response Attachedto be Directed to PrepaDraf nse for Board Consideration prDirective(s) sponse :'sec?scaryJune 9 , 1989 — -" Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Board Members : I wish to voice my opinion against any type of restrictions being placed on runners who use the trails in the midpenin- sula region . Especially the ban of running on trails that are less than 4 feet in width. Runners should have the same rights as hikers or bird watchers in the Districts Preserves . They cause very little erosion damage and are far less offensive then the horses that are allowed in these areas . If restrictions are put on runners the same restrictions should apply to ALL of the users of these preserves . These areas were set aside for public use and are funded by the general public . Thank you for considering my opinion. Sincerely, i _ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF Loare President Acknowledge/Respond WRITTEN COMMUNICATION,,. Director Acknowledge,'Respond Meeting 89-16 Staff -'.cl;nowledge(Respond Drait Response Attached June 28.1989 staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft 11,e s p...ue for Board Consideration per Loard DirecLive(s) No Fe8ponse Necessary Other P ORTOLA VALLEY TRAILS COMMITTEE 765 Porwia Rd,Ponola Valley,C4 94025 The MROSD Board of Directors Old Mill Office Center Bldg C.Suite 135 201 San Antonio Cir Mountain View,CA 94040 Dear Directors Andeen,Bishop,Duffy,Hanko,Henshaw,McKibbin,and Shelley, We, the Portola Valley Trails Committee, have Education and Enforcement reviewed the MROSD's Draft Policies and We cannot see how the goals of educating Guidelines. We think that the document was well users and enforcing the rules are attainable with researched and well thought out. current funds. ❑ Some of us even think that giving hikers We cannot fully support the document until our preference to trail use and closing trails to concerns are addressed. However, we will certain users because of maintenance problems follow the progress of its implementation. are excellent courses of action. However, we DO have some concerns. Sincerely, The PVTC, Namely, those centering around the following topics: DICK ANDERSON BO GIMBAL Trail Widths JEANErrE HANSEN Your widths for non-bicyclist trails seem somewhat stringent. It has been our experience HILDA MaCKAY with Portola Valley trails that equestrians, hikers, JOE QUILTER and runners are compatible and can use narrow HELEN QUINN,chairperson without incidences. Furthermore, should the guidelines be faithfully In behalf of the committee, followed the Razorback Trail in the Windy Hill Preserve would be limited only to hikers-in spite of the fact that the Windy Hill Loop trail was built by funds donated by local people who believed that the entire loop would be used not HILDA MaCKAY,PVTCf-eaetary only by hikers but also by equestrians and runners. ❑ June 10, 1989 ESPONSE A.cTiON PRO?OSED By STAFF td President Acknowledge/Respond • ector Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Draft Response Attached Meeting 89,16 Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft June 28 , 1989 Response for Board Consideration per Board D_rective(s) No Response Necessary _ Other 765 PORTOLA RD --- PORTOLA VALLEY,CA 94025 PORTOLA VALLEY TRAILS ASSOCIATION The MROSD Board of Directors Old Mill Office Center Bldg C,Suite 135 201 San Antonio Cir Mountain View,CA 94040 Dear Directors Andeen,Bishop,Duffy,Hanko,Henshaw,McKibbin,and Shel- ley, We, members of the Board of Directors of the Portola Valley Trails Association, read the MROSD's Draft Policies and Guidelines. We appreciate your staff trying to strike a proper balance between bicyclists, equestrians, hikers, and runners. We'll be interested in seeing your approach to implementation and enforcement. Sincerely, The PVTA Board of Directors, KATHLEEN DORR LEO HOENIGSHAUSEN JOHN LESLIE HILDA MacKAY JOE QUILTER JO SCHRECK LENGRE TSANG PEGGY YOUNG In behalf of the board, XudL.� /V41�6 &W HILDA MacKAY,AITA Secretary June 10, 1989 P.LSPO':SF. ACTION PIlOP05EU a'i 7T .- WRITTEN COMMUNICATION _ Board Presidant AckncwledgeNespond _ Director_ Acknowledge/ .espo: Meeting 8 9-1 6 Staff Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Draft Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft James W. Martini Response for Board Consideration per 1310 Hull Drive Board Directives) _ No Response Necessary San Carlos, CA 54�17(1 _ other June 13, 1989 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Suite C-135 Mountain View, California 94040 Dear Board of Directors. I understand that there is a proposal before you to ban running on all trails less than four feet wide. As an avid runner trying to stay off the streets and sidewalks of the peninsula I find this proposal against better judgment. On just about any Saturday and Sunday mornings I run on dirt trails anywhere from Purisima Creek area to the Monte Bello trail system. I enjoy the trails over concrete from several reasons. 1 ) no cars, 2) less car exhaust, .=) peace and quite, 4) softer running surface, 5) and of course better scenery . As a midpeninsula resident and tax payer I feel that denying access to the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District trail systems .less than four- feet wide is a ludicrous idea. Please keep the "Regional Open Space" OPEN. ;Sincerely yours, ames W. Martini 1 I r fTTEN COMMUNICATIONS RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF ting 89-16 — Board President Acknowledge/Respond June 28, 1989 — Director-Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached Edit"n 14,avericl� — Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per 419 Greendale Way, 2Lpt. 2 Board Directive(s) San Jose, CA Q5129 — No Response Necessary Other Midpeninsula Regional. Open S,,-)ace District old Office Center, 3uilding, C, Suite 135 201 San Antonio Circle !,1ountain View, CA 94o4o June 15, 1989 Dear Sirs, I understand from 4161-.onding your meetin�-_�- last nig'A that you are no"E. " going forward wit!., your draft policies and guideLines as they are written, but still I feel a need to express my openion on then as you nay still be considerin,r the as your starting point in i,,,ial.ing new -policies and guidelines. Because of the tone of this document, and sorne assumptions tliat it see. s to embrace but not substantiate, I would ur.e you to table t,,is document until some basic usage studies are done. T am especially surprised to find that one of the underlying assunp- tions is that runners are harder on the trails than hikers. 1oth runners and hil"ers expend, on average, the sane ,,,,,-,ount of calories per mile, and so would impart the sa.-Ile a-r.iount of force to t.­.e trail. I would also thin?, that tie runner out for a workout would be the least lijl�-ely source of oft' trail. dam ale. You just don't cut corners t'erou_g1-1 poison oah- when you nre wearing shorts, and there is too muc1-, of a ris.'�: of injury, and w1lat is point of cuttin�7, corners w1r,.en you are out to run a distance? "ou also touc,h on erosion errobie ­zs caused by all trail uses. Yes, I have sewn so:,,ie hillside erosion caused by ;;eople using unaixtaorize,'11 trails, but r�ost o:L,- the erosion on t e trails/roads themscives is caused by water running over t"-.e trai-1s. It wouild probably be a greater liej_p t'-Ie,,-i i-," you, wo-uld rej,-,ulate it not to rain. Also I see no -,Mention o--," the hazard.,_,, of radio/tat e head,-;lone ie. I < w usa,-,, E;., icy clist, wit-�-tout he allj�'t a -,�, - I I:ith a ,ea� dset c o v o:L­ a f,,- bot: ears in San .,Lrtonio only a couple L2 t1tat is an accil'.71ent aaitin,-, to ha-)pen if 1 ever one. In closinC I would ask you to see run-_.er,,� for ,,Ahat t.,-ey are: neo-,­,le w'eIo liave very hard and consistantl'; to -I.tt,,,,in their of a .­.ealt�lier body. e challonCe ourselves to excell, all T challenge you to do ti-e aa:­,e .,iit1` this isoue. Yours truely, RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF Board President Acknowledge/Respond _ Director Acknowledge/Respond _ Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached 6/2 0/8 9 Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary R E. TRAIL CONFLICT 1 _ Other DEAR MROSD: FACTS: HIKERS & HORSE RIDERS VIEW MTN BIKERS AS GOING TOO FAST. MTN BIKL ERS VIEW THE OTHERS AS GOING TOO SLOW. CONFLICT: EACH GROUP WANTS OTHER GROUPS OFF THE TRAILS. ANSWER: AREA #1 : MONTH #1 : lst WEEK OF MONTH: HORSES ONLY 2nd WEEK HIKERS ONLY 3d WEEK MTN BIKERS ONLY 4th WEEK HORSTS ONLY MONTH #2 : 1st WEEK OF MONTH: HIKERS ONLY Snd WEEK ETC ETC AREA #2 : SAME APPRORCH THIS PROCEDURE WILL PLEASE ALL' ! ! Ken McCullough } �.......rWm— , Telephone: 353 1008 KENNETH E MCCULLOUGH 14305 LONGER►DGE RD LOS GATOS CA 95030 I i I � RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY Board President Ackno•ledge and WRITTEN C OMMUN I CAT I Director Acknowledge/Respond Meeting 8 9-1 6 Staff Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Draft Response Attached C _ Staff to he Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per 985 Hibiscus Lane Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary San Jose, CA 95117 T other June 9, 1989 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Sir: The current proposal to ban running on narrow trails is ridiculus. Next thing you know, we won't be able to walk on those trails, either. I am not a runner, but I cannot imagine that running damages trails or is dangerous to anyone or anything. Because of that, I cannot support banning running on trails less than 4 feet in width. This week, I hiked in the Frement Older preserve, and saw numerous runners and joggers. None were causing damage or were in my way as I walked through the preserve, on the contrary, they were quite friendly. As a citizen of San Jose, I urge you to reject this proposal to restrict running in preserves in the Bay Area. Sincerely "x Dean Mulla I I WRITTi COMMUNICATIONS Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989 Y.ES?'OI:S kC?IO1 PROpOScD BY STAFF LD-re resident acknowledge%RespondAknowledge/Respond r—ckt.owledge/Respond esponse Attached June 9 , 1989 to be Directed to Prepare Draft se for Board Consideration per Directives) onse Nacessary Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Board Members : I wish to voice my opinion against any type of restrictions being placed on runners who use the trails in the midpenin- sula region. Especially the ban of running on trails that are less than 4 feet in width. Runners should have the same rights as hikers or bird watchers in the Districts Preserves . They cause very little erosion damage and are far less offensive then the horses that are allowed in these areas . If restrictions are put on runners the same restrictions should apply to ALL of the users of these preserves . These areas were set aside for public use and are funded by the general public . Thank you for considering my opinion. Sincerely, �'• t a. William O' Brien 3561 Altamont Way Redwood City, CA 94062 I I RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Board President Acknowledge/Respond Meeting 89-16 Director_Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Kurt M. Oppenheimer Board Directive(s) 10 Loma Lane, San Carlos, CA 94070 No Response Necessary Other June 14, 1989 Board of Directors Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Sirs: I am writing to voice my objection to closing trails in the mid-peninsula to running and jogging. I feel that ALL county trails should be open to all forms of walking, hiking, jogging, and running. Unlike mountain bikes, I can not see how any harm to the county lands can occur if these activities are confined to existing trails. I also question how this would be enforced unless all walking, hiking, jogging, and running is restricted. I state this because what is a brisk walk for some is a bard run for others. Therefore, would this ban be enforced on the speed a person travels or on the type of clothing worn? If a total restriction is enforced by closing the trails only to horse travel, this would limit access to these public areas to a select few that can afford this form of entertainment. I strongly urge the board to reject this proposal. Sincerely, 2"A Kurt M. Oppenheimer WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS _ Meetina 89-16 RESPONSE ACTION I'Y.OPO5Ell BYS'fA•r Board President Acknowlc�ge/Res?cnd June 28 , 1989 Director AcknowledgelRespond Staff Acknowledge/Respond Drat Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare ^raft Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) E No Response Necessary n„ R 1 3/ 'Q q -1 a S s �� aA k y e�Lv b1�c P a rwX4 AkL � a p a a�.vt a�i (suck 64 owt -J'vt -dt4�.w t,�n� � cf�a�- w�?A,d.un%.Pry �-v►c�- U l 5 A v 1 M `�'19✓) '�� r2�a(Wood C,,' r ( A I , .R_ £SPO' -c ACT_ON F RO_PO S"D BY STA FF F boa rd d Pre sident t A ckno 1 ea 8 e/R es P and ON`— Director at_ k cowl e d e n P es £ / _n W. d P Staff Acknowledge/Respond ............. • Draft Response Attached Staff to he Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary Or he 1492 Chukar Court Sunnyvale,California 94087 408/733-0486 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONN. ~' Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 210 San Antonio Circle , Suite C-135 `- ~'= ' :'.''•` Mountain View CA 94040 Dear Board of Directors , I am writing in regard to the proposed ban of joggers/runners on selected trails in the district parks . I am very opposed to this ban . I understand the concern regarding the '} saftey of park guest ; however , I do not think that runners are a threat to anyone ' s saftey or well- .j being . Most joggers are extremely considerate of the rights of individuals using the trails . If there have been problems because of a few incon- siderate runners , the ban of all runners from cer- tain trails seems extreme and unjust . While considering this matter , please preserve the rights of everyone to enjoy the trails jr at the parks , whether they be walkers , bird-watchers or joggers . ank y u , D niel. TA Powers C n 9 June 1989 :=r:• M. r� 'ti:i RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF _. Board 'President Acknowledge/Respond WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS _ Director _ Acknowledge/Respon Meeting 8 9—1 6 Staff Aoknowledge!Resrond June 28 , 1989 Draft Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary June 14, 1989 Other Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Re: Proposal to Ban Running On All Trails Less Than 4 Feet in Width Gentlemen: With respect to the above, I am writing this letter to express my strong opposition to the proposal. If runners are to be excluded from running on trails less than 4 feet, then horses should also be banned. Please count my vote as a no to the proposal. Sincerely, Name (Print) : 9)eLC-wi": �css Address: I /�- City, State, Zip: v RESPONSE ACTION PROP—FD BY STAFF _ Board President Ac dge/Respond WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Director Ac-noaledga/Res and f2 Meeting 89-16 — P Staff Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Draft Response Attached _ Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) _ Other_ �� ll rt� LC) r S l `A eh in Ae l` -no l P �.► �Da� � r�;s �►'r'c,� / 1 J G i � I ro k" v r iv(- r w 7 10 P/wh FL Cr hsc, C1 sllg-37 5 7 r Y Q T ;S L�Le r IS �o vOic � h-. i1 1 Ir g p p r d v4 ( a T V d Y' 0 rd O S Q run» ih � n � � �5 IPSs ��a � L} feet Ih L(e YPSer,./\PS. ;S 5 a i PYr le, j e c1 �'l y PdC C} �T �j a lot-)5 (%.*; +d Q � V, L, � �n � er1 Y : CSTCti Y r)PQSLD BY STAFF _ 2° E idant knuw7ed c-�Re s,>ond WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Board [� Director _ Acknoaled; Meeting 89-16 4tafs Ackn w2edfejpe,pond SeiResperd June 28 , 1989 Pr Rc , r;_ .,ttared Staff to DE. Directed co Prepare Draft R.rspo:nse for :;,>;trd Cnsic'serstionper n }`,e:sFc,r, .0 fte.cesary Qt^e=r ----- WIttIAM B. REULAND • 1509 Gretsl tans • Mountain'view, uH a�+u-+v June 8, 1989 Board of Directors Mid-peninsula Openspace District 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Gentlemen: I would like to ask you to consider my thoughts concerning any restrictions to joggers, bicycle riders, equestrians uestrians or hikers in the Fremont Older tha t the Board may have under consideration. The use of this open space by all of the users mentioned is not heavy, and the difference in the ecological effects from any particular user is not significant. Therefore, attempts by one group of users to exclude any of the others is simply an attempt to have the space all to themselves. I enjoy riding a bicycle in the Fremont Older on Tuesday nights with a group of professional people from area corporations including Lockheed, Watkins-Johnson and The Electric Power Research Institute. We are the largest group using the space at that time, but we meet and get along very well with the very few equestrians and walkers we happen to pass . We recognize that groups like yours often have to deal with the effects of our crowded communities. Also there are a few vocal individuals that consider their activities more important than those of others. I have heard these people using arguments that simply are not true to solicit signatures for petitions. However, the purpose of the Openspace is to be just that, open. We are homeowners in the communities surrounding the Fremont Older and it is the only place left where we can meet with daylight time left to ride trails. I don't think that Openspace use restrictions on any of the users mentioned are warranted. Would you please let me know of any open meetings that you are having where you plan to discuss this issue. Sincerely, RESPONSE AMON PROPOSED BY STAFF WRITTEN COMMUNICATIC Board President Acknowledge/Respo Meeting 89-16 Director Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached — Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Peter Richert Response for Board Consideration per 427 W. Virginia St. Board Directive(s) — No Response Necessary San Jose, CA 95125 — Other 14 June 1989 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Distict 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Board: Please DO NOT close trails in Rancho San Antonio to runners. Please leave the trails in this park and in other open space preserves open to runners, including trails less than 4 feet wide. I and many of my friends greatly enjoy running on these trails. It is very important to us to have places to exercise where we can enjoy the beauty of nature, and where we can get away from dangerous cars, smog, and noise. Runners are very conscientious and respectful of the environment, and we appreciate open space as much as hikers and other naturalists. Please consider this letter and the other letters and petitions you receive from runners when you make your decision regarding trail use on open space preserves. Thank you, Peter Richert i WRITTEN COMMUN7 LIONS RESPONSE I:CTIOy FRO?CSED By S_ Meeting 89-16 Board President Ackrcrledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 _ Director _Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary Other 1091 Morton Court Mountain View, CA 94040 June 12 , 1989 Board of Directors Mid-peninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Road, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 91040 I love the open spaces of this area. I have used their trails both hiking and running and would not want to lose the option to do either. Please continue to allow running on the trails. And be assured, I would made the same appeal if hiking was about to be disallowed. Yours Truly, Stanley Robbins ! -SPONS ACTION PRO?OSE D SY STAFF Board President Acknowledge/Respond WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Director Acknowledge/Respond Meeting 8 9-1 6 Staff Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Draft Response Attached June 9, 1989 Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft "Response for Board Consideration per B Nathaniel Sterling Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary 790 La Para other Palo Alto, CA 94306 (415) 494-1498 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 RE: Draft Trail Use Policies and Guidelines (May 1989) Dear Board Members: I have reviewed the Draft Trail Use Policies and Guidelines for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District dated May 1989. 1 agree with the basic policy proposed in the draft that, "The District will endeavor to provide a variety of satisfying trail use opportunities on each open space preserve." However, I believe a number of the proposed implementing policies and guidelines will have the opposite effect--that of reducing satisfying trail use opportunities. My specific concern is that of a runner. For the past 5 years I have run regularly early on Sunday mornings on various district trails, and have been grateful for the opportunity. The proposed guideline definitions state that the motivations of runners in general "range from mild exercise to endurance." Actually my motivations, and that of all others I know or run with, are the same as the draft ascribes to all other users, whether hikers, equestrians, or bicyclists--those of reflection, nature study, and exercise. I don't think it is fair to characterize a person who enjoys running on district trails as one whose main interest is to get a good workout, and then consign that person to the fireroads or other "trails" exceeding 4 and in some cases 5 feet in width. If that were my only interest, I could run on paved city streets near home. I enjoy and appreciate the natural, scenic, regenerative qualities of the open space, which is why I seek it out. Is the problem really so great that you are forced to ban runners from the regular district trails? The draft states that the greatest concern is "for the safety of slower trail users who might be frightened or pushed off a trail, or possibly injured, by those traveling at faster speeds. It is believed that many users may be intimidated by such conditions and as a result will no longer use certain trails." (emphasis added) Is this speculation to be the basis of district policy that will disenfrachise many of the district's greatest supporters and users? In my years of running, I have never encountered a situation where there has been any sort of a problem with people passing on a trail. In fact, it is extraordinarily rare--at the times when I normally i run--that I encounter any other people at all, except for those who I 'm running with. But based on speculation that others, if they were on the trail, could be startled and intimidated, the draft proposes to keep me off the regular trails altogether. A more logical approach, if there is in fact a problem, is not to try to regulate trail use, but to educate trail users as to trail etiquette and safety, as the draft suggests. But that is all that should be done, until it can be shown that the problem is more serious and is not being solved by this obvious solution. If it appears the problem is intractable, then I would consider other policies. But before going to the extreme of banning many users from numerous trails, I would explore other less drastic alternatives. My early Sunday morning experience certainly indicates to me that low use times of day could be identified and all uses permitted then. Certain times of day or week could be designated for specific uses on a permanent or rotating basis. Some preserves that are typically low-use could always be available for all uses. I 'm sure other equally obvious or more creative solutions could be devised by your staff that are workable and that don't violate the proposed policy to provide people (including runners) with a variety of satisfying trail use opportunities on each open space preserve. I urge you to reject the draft guidelines and to take a more sensitive and flexible approach to the problem. Sincerely, Nathaniel Sterling I� I RI TTE N COMMUNICATIONS RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF .•ie e t i n g 8 9-1 6 _ Board President Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 Director Acknowledge/Respond _ Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary Other June 18, 1989 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Old Mill Office Center Building C, Suite 135 201 San Antonio Circle Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Board of Directors: I am writing you as a bicyclist and runner who agrees that there are certain trails that should probably be closed to bicycles and/or horses (but not any to runners) . However, I believe that the principal deciding factor in closing a trail should be the number of complaints, and not solely other factors such as width. There are many trails where encounters between different users occur infrequently enough not to be a problem. For bicyclists, it is very important to keep open those trails which make connections to fire roads and to access points from public roads and other public lands. Please do not enforce arbitrary rules on we users by adopting a set of guidelines which may severely limit your ability to judge trail closures on the merits of each individual situation. I THEREFORE OPPOSE YOUR ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED MAY 1989 TRAIL USAGE GUIDELINES. To date, I have thoroughly enjoyed my running, hiking and bicyling experiences in MPROSD preserves. The lack of excessive regulation and development is refreshing, and I have never been bothered by different types of users. Sincerely, cl: CARL STOFFEL 1 606 Chimalus Drive Palo Alto, CA 94306 WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989 i WESTERN WHEELERS BICYCLE CLUB. INC. P.O. BOX 518, PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA 94302 RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF Board President Acknowledge/Respond ` _ Director Acknowledge/Respond _ Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration _per Board Directive(s) June 1 8, 1989 _ No Response Necessary Board of Directors — Oti:er Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Old Mill Office Center Building C, Suite 135 201 San Antonio Circle Mountain View, CA 94040 SUBMISSION OF PETITION FROM BICYCLISTS Dear Board of Directors: I am pleased to enclose a petition signed by 34 persons who, by signing, are supporting the continuation of the District's open and equal access to MPROSD trails by all users; and that when usage decisions are made, that they be made on the circumstances specific to each trail. On behalf of the Western Wheelers Bicycle Club and Responsible Organized Mountain Pedalers (ROMP) , I gathered the names on this petition at the Palo Alto Bicycle Fair, held on Friday, June 19 , 11: 30 AM to 2 : 00 PM. Sincerely, CARL STOFFEL Secretary CS PETITION IN SUPPORT OF EQUITABLE TRAIL USAGE POLICIES FOR OFF-ROAD BICYCLISTS IN THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT We, the undersigned, support the continuation of open and equal access to MPROSD trails by all users. We urge that trail usage decisions be made on a case-by-case basis, and not by overly-restrictive blanket guidelines which have little relationship to the actual situation on individual trails. We support efforts to educate all trail users on the necessity of safe trail etiquette. Signature Address Print Name ��t%co_\V1vkA� G."Jity/State/Zip "C7 Signatur4 ze A41 Address qy 2gt Print Name g/,,& g6I Lj! G City/State/Zip aet.�A CA Signature Address 2I)841 S W L ti1 S&AV CT"' Print Name tJ City/State/Zip JI) Si nature Z Address 2W Cc Neoi2b W. Print Name tkoMXS (R%ekt-L City/State/Zip LO 2K CX yO2T Signature Address 7 SIVeC&LVf� C f Print Name City/State/Zip /yJ,-,5,,4_o 6g& , CA ��f3c�Il Signature Address Print Nam I C. (% City/State/Zip 6K, CA j Si nat a Address 116 2 Print Name L o5A`< vY— City/State/Zip V Vr_—W C Si 9 n a t u Address "A- loll Print Name ry City/State/Z CEO' 9Yayd i 1 Ak6 N CO-e Fn l�- PETITION IN SUPPORT OF EQUITABLE TRAIL USAGE POLICIES FOR OFF-ROAD BICYCLISTS IN THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT We, the undersigned, support the continuation of open and equal access to MPROSD trails by all users. We urge that trail usage decisions be made on a case-by-case basis, and not by overly-restrictive blanket guidelines which have little relationship to the actual situation on individual trails. We support efforts to educate all trail users on the necessity of safe trail etiquette. Signature Address LA CA LLf C7 Print Name 0 City/State/Zip ffic, ALTb, (A gcl3a� Signature <� Address Co 57 Sew C-­� Print Name 2�tr City/State/Zip _>/4 Signature Address - Print Name TCity/State/Zip 7a �A� CO Si nature Address uP- 1 STtk Print Name AAIA),q LjtjT14 EAl City/State/Zip 111nel-2:211 F-Te,--),(?,4 Signature Kyrvo Address -1. C.A6Ttu-iot j -1"er,r, Print Name -111`'t NGL-I�'I City/State/Zip C C�, gSCy(oo Si nature Address WF; Print Namewqlww City/State/Zip� ,CA elw� Si natu Address 3222- 5ke6=.r GrccL' LA'Ad- Pri nt Name,4A C i ty/State/Zi p ��,�'jo ruvm CA- q 406 4 Signature Address [99,'l AAovi4-2,r LAx-- Print Name toy&t City/State/Zip - Ag2oF-r0!4 A- 9�7G eviv '49-6 &C�jx F&,�- tol1(0 PETITION IN SUPPORT OF EQUITABLE TRAIL USAGE POLICIES FOR OFF-ROAD BICYCLISTS IN THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT We, the undersigned, support the continuation of open and equal access to MPROSD trails by all users. We urge that trail usage decisions be made on a case-by-case basis, and not by overly-restrictive blanket guidelines which have little relationship to the actual situation on individual trails. We support efforts to educate all trail users on the necessity of safe trail etiquette. Signature Address Ar'> Print Name/<I&/ C �f�_ City/State/Zip Signature�..�L - ('O�Z�U Address 21�— �6 � Ayef-r . Print Name ,7.060 3 Gp City/State/Zip 5� � CA s Addre Signature ss e Print N e. City/State Zi S Signature Z4 Address C74/Grrs1,4,, Print Name ,Sa Ssy City/State/Zip e)s' A�-T 64 q9o� � I Signature Address /'/d --7� jiAvp Print Name /n �,�, City/State/Zip ,��'/� cc Signature Address 32.S 61nn UT Print Name ► - HfI90ft. City/State/Zip Sari Coat �c�sfo 1 Signature44-2G",� Address Print Name City/State/Zip Signature Address Ale— Print Name Saw ,HS" Ci ty/State/Zi p P fe36� t PETITION IN SUPPORT OF EQUITABLE TRAIL USAGE POLICIES FOR OFF-ROAD BICYCLISTS IN THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT We, the undersigned, support the continuation of open and equal access to MPROSD trails by all users. We urge that trail usage decisions be made on a case-by-case basis, and not by overly-restrictive blanket guidelines which have little relationship to the actual situation on individual trails. We support efforts to educate all trail users on the necessity of safe trail etiquette. Signature Address 1��� �c._P S�f • Print Name -/j1/ltG���lZC ©JCJ City/State/Zip�7-0'✓'QV �4ola I Signature Address 36 Um f� Print Nam L City/State/ZipCanUI 0 ;70 . / Si natur v,� Address /'ZD�/l/c� Print Name 16J5 City State/Zip sG ir�hc�lcn}C. �e Signature Address' Print Name City/State/Zip v � Signature �� Address Print Name 'T-(v--. City/State/Zip C)YZ P CA S Si nature Address �� (�2 ��� k)e Print Name 00A*Ak City/State/Zip MA (� S� tJO MCA" 1150 3CD Signature Address Print Name City/State/ZipiGl�iyGa Signature C-- Address Print Name City/State/Zip PIT J( , C&Av A-K4,v 15kC4j Vi�l f PETITION IN SUPPORT OF EQUITABLE TRAIL USAGE POLICIES FOR OFF-ROAD BICYCLISTS IN THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT We, the undersigned, support the continuation of open and equal access to MPROSD trails by all users. We urge that trail usage decisions be made on a case-by-case basis, and not by overly-restrictive blanket guidelines which have little relationship to the actual situation on individual trails. We support efforts to educate all trail users on the necessity of safe trail etiquette. Signature Address �{Jv /o,vi� /Nr�cf p Print Name, d �`, Q City/State/Zip �,LZa /moo Signature s Address ��G ,` ��e 7 Print Name i ��City/State/Zip 'io �l�G C/�} � �Olj Signature Address Print Name City/State/Zip Signature Address Print Name City/State/Zip Signature Address Print Name City/State/Zip Signature Address Print Name City/State/Zip Signature Address Print Name City/State/Zip Signature Address Print Name City/State/Zip i -,7RITTEN COMMUNICATIONS eeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989 June 12 , 1989 To: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District old Mill Office Center RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF Building C, Suite 135 V Board President Acknowledge/Respond 201 San Antonio Circle Director Acknowledge/Respond Mountain View, CA 94040 Staff Acknwledge/Respond c/o Board of Directors Draft Response Attached Staf f Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) From: No Response Necessary Douglas Thomas Other 146 Branbury Dr. Campbell, CA 95008 (408) 866-4755 Ref. Draft Policies and Guidelines; May 1989 Dear Sirs, I have read Staff's proposed draft of "Policies and Guidelines" for trail use within your district and, for the most part, feel it is well written. However, I take exception to the fact that the mountain bicyclists, as always, suffer restrictions that are beyond what is necessary! As you probably are aware, I have been fairly active in past years as an activist in favor of the Mountain Cyclist and have spent many hours at my computer writing letters and attending meetings. Unfortunately, I feel that too many my efforts and letters have fallen upon deaf ears or have been, at times, undermined by certain individuals on the MROSD Staff. Once again, the following comments represent the general feelings of the REAL Mountain Cycling community and how we are suffering because of a few Mountain Rambols. The following are important points that I request you carefully consider before finalizing your guidelines. 1. 95% of the mountain cycling community is conscientious and not often heard about (non-conflict conditions with sharing of trails) because we prefer to ride alone or with one other person. 2 . 95% of us have never had any conflicting encounter with other trail users. 3 . 95% of us prefer to ride in out of the way places, areas that typically have minimal trail use. 4 . Approximately only 1% of us are politically active and, therefore, not heard of enough. We are relatively new to the user community and are certainly are not as well organized as some of the other user groups (eg. hikers and equistrians) . (MROSD1) 5. Many of us have invested $1, 50p to $3, 000 in our bicycles and, because of the investment, would like places to use our equipment. The cost of the bicycles is representative of the fact that we are serious and committed to the recreation we have chosen to enjoy. 6. There are certainly more bicycles than horses and bicycling is a sport that can be enjoyed by many people and is not restricted to the affluent. When will the transition of fair representation to the population of the cycling population take place? 7. If rangers would close heavily multi-use areas to cyclists and issue tickets to violators, the negative incidences would probably decrease. Therefore, the bad "press" would also decrease! 8 . The fact that staff predicts that certain areas may have increased usage in the future as the basis for closing trails now is not objective and fair thinking! If a trails trend is to become heavily used, then that is the time to review the usage, potential for accidents, and act accordingly in terms of placing restrictions on multi-usage. 9. Most cyclists prefer SINGLE TRACK TRAILS, PERIOD! Please reconsider the 4 foot minimum and 75 foot line of sight policies (page 4 of the guidelines) . Staff's movement is in the direction of taking away our premium riding areas! 10. We feel that the "Jones Trail ; walking only" test case did not work because MROSD staff would not and will not actively monitor it and write enough tickets to make violators conform. Please remember that this was our statement from the very beginning when the walking zone was dictated by MROSD Staff and the Board! At one time, automobile commuter lanes were a new and novel idea and work today because traffic control was willing to identify "Hot Spots" and enforce the law by writing tickets. 11. 1 feel that the Staff's attitude and objective has been to close trails and let the cyclists fight the political battle to re-open them. I feel this would have i happened n the beginning vV i had opposition not been organized by such clubs as ROMP. 12. Negative incidents are the ones that get "press" and, unfortunately, is not representative of reality! 13 . Many trail users, equistrians and hikers included, feel that we have and can continue to share the trails with only a minimum of incidents. We also feel that the frequency of incidents will decrease as public education increases and when staff is willing to write more tickets for violations. (MROSD1) The foregoing is not just a collection of my own thoughts and perceptions but represent a large number of mountain cyclists. I can support this statement with the fact that, in the past, I have taken time to conduct surveys and present my findings to staff. The purpose of this letter is not to offend anyone, but to make it very clear and direct that I would like to preserve places to ride in peace and solitude! Spending countless hours at meetings or transporting my bicycle for hours, via automobile, is not why I got into mountain bicycling and only ask for fair treatment! In closing, I feel that there have been times where the Board has been very objective and fair in their decisions. I feel that Staff still need to accept the fact that there is a heavy population of Mountain Tli .CITr 1 i c vc .- ho ;re career Professionals and have a lot to lose if they cause an accident where negligence is obvious. We are taxpayers who have a right to be heard, and NEED places to ride that are close to homes! We we are responsible and courteous. Many of us are parents who teach their children to be courteous and responsible. We are here to stay, will not be gone within a few years, and can co-exist with other trail users! Thank you for your consideration, Douglas Thomas (MROSDI) WRITTEN COMMUNICATION' RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF j Meeting 89-16 Board President Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 1989 _ Director — Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response.Attached Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft June 14, 1989 Response for Board Consideration r Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary Other Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View. CA 94040 Re: Proposal to Ban Running On All Trails Less Than 4 Feet in Width Gentlemen: With respect to the above, I am writing this letter to express my strong opposition to the proposal. If runners are to be excluded from running on trails less than 4 feet, then horses should also be banned. Please count my vote as a no to the proposal. Sincerely, I Name (Print) : r` ar eac— /L�lSs�l�'IZQ Address: _ e City, State, Zip: - i / _ Board President Acknowledge/P.espond _ Director Acknowled• spond 1 Staff Acknowledge/Respond Drat Response Attached 20901 Wardell Rd. _ Staff to be Directed to Prepare Drnf; c Response for Board Consideration per Saratoga, CA 95070 Beard Directives) g No Response Necessary 1 198 June 0 9 Other f Midpeninsula Regional Open ace District WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 201 San Antonio Circle Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, This letter is to inform you of my concern with the Draft Trail Use Policies and Guidelines under consideration by your board. I am a runner, and I run on the trails at Rancho San Antonio on a weekly basis. I have reviewed the May 1989 Draft Policies and Guidelines document that your office sent very promptly. First, I must complement the authors. The document is well done and is presented very clearly. Much of the proposal I am in favor of. However, I do not agree with the provision prohibiting runners from trails less than 4 feet wide. I have run on such a trail at Rancho on Thursday evenings for a long time, and I have never encountered a hazardous situation. Trails this narrow are too narrow for horses or bicycles, but I have never seen a horse or a bike on the narrow sections. I have encountered many runners and several walkers and have not had trouble passing on the trail. Rancho San Antonio is a very pleasant and popular open space. It is my observation that at least on Thursday evenings most of the people at Rancho are runners - my estimate would be at least 75%. 1 don't feel that it would be in the best interest of the community to ban the principal users. I enjoy my evening runs more than any other runs of the week. I would be very disappointed to see this opened space not available to runners. f i Thank you, � 1 i yj•,, Jim Whalen I P.:.S?O`iSE ACTION PROPOSED BY SFAF'F Board President Acknow-12dge/Respond Director Acknowledge/Respond Staff Acknowledge/Respond WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Draft Response Attached Meeting 89-16 Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft , June 28 , 1989 Response for Board Consideration Per Board Directives) Nc Respcnse Necessary Williams Manufacturing over METAL CRAFTSMEN 929 WASHINGTON STREET SAN CARLOS, CALIFORNIA 94070 (415) 591-2822 June 9 , 1989 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle , Suite C-135 Mountain View , CA 94040 Dear Sirs , I oppose banning running on all trails less than 4 feet wide for three reasons . They are : 1) An undo restriction on the rights and 'privileges of the many citizens who run in these areas . 2) The restriction is unenforceable . Can you tell the differance between a walker whose standing still vs a runner whose standing still ? 3) What constitutes running vs walking . Check the Olympics , the race walkers do faster per mile averages than 90% of the runners in the world . How do we write that into law? Speed limits on the trails? In conclusion , I believe the answer to this situation is common courtesy on these trails , not more laws . Yours truly , �. Anthony D . Williams rT_SPCJNSE ACTIOs PROPOSFD By STAFF - - -_ Board Presid?nt Acknowledge/Respond Director —Acknowledge/Respond Staff Ac%:ncwledge/Respond WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Draft Response Attached , Meeting 89-16 staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft ll�,nn 2 �1 9 8 9 Respnnsz for Board Consideration per dy Board Directive(s) l� _ N0 Respensa Necessary Other /1/c� Q�, /�aL/Gy /7S nl New yGR Cl T/ s /-T I//i2/ TeNOL 710 'A1.6 V (/1fE /ry ��' l..I>9y', GJi7X/ 72sAl l2 Cc tlR T�S�'r /� �1�/D 41&/ ;:-o L.� PV)ss Z� G?S J h,DG /'�!v✓ �' TU iJvGi CGLL1IlUN S �� 17,44IV71-�/N /`0116VS }IVIQ f/G/2.? S 01" / oN ,()12y &pjl 09�r ¢� rooT Ti�,9fflc /JCS' 6-Z/6h'7, 0,-' GJ/gy S� A S ' oV7 Y, NW-' ✓4//!/ Q-ISX 1141VIY1N41 Az,o�y W0111- 166- 71/e 001/1/44"7 0s)�Xe / //-- 7121 G 714r,,W-r 1�,2r2 gN/JvOi,G1I4?QF G1,-1,1 A7 7,�5- 07f/4o,-2 01 6-5 Gr11/ri S�`�T /y/lLlklcl `'/ )/-1/G �r,2 f����S S ll�7�i9r/ �• ioiliry pe fj GG 0A-t DDfI?fr-.t,2 OAOX,/Z �fj� ,I��FS %' ,Qh L�S. 7f��N>z y G u � ebb" Ty6 vr v �e w!idPG ''nfLnsul"_i Peoion Qo er Old Mill Office Center.. {,1 an / t,o :ii o t+Cir-c le ML};_i is tai r V1 c:2w. C1 r24(2 Boar:1 o.f L i ec+ or s Fear Board member -s , RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF Bo ard Pre side nt Ackn owledge/Re spo nd Directo r Acknowle dge /Respond Sta ff Ackno wledge/Respond Draft Response Attached Sta ff to be Dire cte d to Prepare Dr aft Response for Board Consider ation per Bo ard Dire ctive(s) ho Respon se Necessar y Other T Wis to br_' a to your- .ttent- - - o -f '.!r• ; Y' ! 1SFfit_t'on e that. ha s val.tm, in Y _,1 L;_ to Sa'lmrr'.i other cro jects an d , , _. i ti s of _ti.5 4.ioi:'_ h`471that the board will make Its elf a,.!a re o -f =his par=' , dtv=.-1! - a. . an a_oui rino i t e7r obtain : - ccsement s JUN 131989 the '!ery . ._. t.` -_ r ce is ,;_at south 92 and on he 'o.'_' ?a.. side :+ Hidh - _i:je5 the untouched he a a ers o -f i1btst t 1 _an- o' 4Y 3 h2 pa•.'-_ic.. ...=!'i''1 _ L -� 3 3_h. i-r - ilei' _.:l_Q5 - a $i7 -._, ae''. f.�+= to c�; �. _'�i.' a way ; ACT the ,_:rh '- hi. _ -- the ea...= - 1 -he Mur- ewa ,of :2t i or for ri:-ea 4��p� ,tea �► MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT OLD MILL OFFICE CENTER,BUILDING C,SUITE 135 201 SAN ANTONIO CIRCLE,MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA 94040 (415)949-5500 u=-�,�n T Rr'SPOIJSE PREPARED BY STAFF FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION i kit Dove P.C. Box 298 E1 Granada, CA 94018 Dear Mr. Dove : The Districts ' Board of Directors received your letter of June 8 , 1989 regarding the desirability of the property located at the southwestern corner of Skyline Boulevard and State Highway 92 . This property is a very exquisite, gently rolling parcel of vacant land that offers sweeping views of the San Hateo. County Coast and Pacific Ocean. The District is very interested in protecting the integrity and scenic beauty of this property, and it appears that portions of the property might be ideal for the future Bay Area "Ridge Trail . " Although the District does not own any adjacent land, this property is very near Burleigh-Murray State Park. It might be appropriate for you to also contact the state about this property and its desirability for acquisition consideration. This property would certainly be a welcome addition to the open space and recreation resources of the midpeninsula area. You can be assured that the District will be watching this property relative to ownership changes and development pressures . Thank you for your continuing interest in the District and its open space program. Sincerely, Nonette Hanko Vice-President, Board of Directors ITH:LCB:cac Herbert Grench,General Manager;Board of Directors.•Katherine Duffy,Robert McKibbin,Teena Henshaw,Edward Shelley,Nonette Hanko,Gerry Andeen,Richard Bishop RESPONSE ACTION PROPOSED BY STAFF � �^ Board President Acknowledge/Respond o t 1V�gg _ Director Acknowledge/Respond _ Staff Acknowledge/Respond Draft Response Attached _ Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft i Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(s) No Response Necessary Other CREEKS OF LOS ALTOS 881 Parma Way Los Altos, Ca. 94022 948-6383 6-7-89 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle , Suite C-135 Mountain View, Ca . 94040 CREEKS OF LOS ALTOS wants to express their strong support for MRSOD 's aquisition of Neary Ridge. This area contains the only I undisturbed portions of the headwaters of both Hale Creek and Permanente Creek and your aquisition will provide much needed protection of these valuable resources . In addition, the ridge is a perfect candidate for aquisition as it links Rancho San Antonio Open Space and Windmill Pasture at Hidden Villa. There f could be no more appropriate use of MRSOD funds then for protection and preservation of this unique ridge and its riparian headwaters ; aquisition will be of benefit to all of us in the Mid-peninsula. Thank you for your consideration. 1 C�.�Q-titer Valerie Kobal own"W"K MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT OLD%PHLL OFFICE CENTER,BUILDING C,SUITE 135 • 201 SAN LNTO�NIO CIRCLE,MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA 94040 (415)949-5500 June 29 , 1989 Valerie Kobal c/o Creeks of Los Alt.os 881 Parma Way Los Altos , CA 94022 Dear Ms . Kobal : Thank you for your Ji.:re 7 letter to the Board of Directors regarding the "Neary Ridge" (Vidovich property) . As you know, the portion of that property adjoining the District ' s Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve is one of the most desirable parcels of open space still -with-in private hands . An existing trail system through the property connects Deer Hollow Farm to the District ' s Windmill '1-asture Area . The "Neary Ridge" adjacent to Olive Tree Lane and the southerly extension of that ridge down to Ravensberry Avenue p ays heavily in the visual quality of the District ' s preserve . The front, northerly sloping portion of the property is a very important part of the viewshed and scenic backdrop for Los Altos , Los Altos Hills and portions of Mountain View, Palo Alto, and Sunnyvale . Because of the extrerely important open space aspects of this property, you can be assured that the District will be moving swiftly to appraise this property and hopefully, if the price fits within budget constraints , to conclude negotiations for potential purchase off this very high priority property for open space and recreation purposes . Thank you for your support of the District ' s open space programs . Sincerely, Nonette Hanko Vice-President, Board of Directors IIH: LCB :cac Her:;-ert Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Ka=,Brne Duffy,Robert Mc'Kibbin,Teena Henshaw,Edward Shelley,Nonette Hanko.Garry Andeen,Richard Bishop t »' MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT OLD DRILL OFFICE CENTER,BUILDING C,SUITE 135 + 201 SAN ANTONIO CIRCLE,MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA 94040 (415)949.5500 June 29 , 1989 Valerie Kobal c/o Creeks of Las Altos 881 Parma Way Las Altos , CA 94022 Dear Ms . Kobal : Thank you for your June 7 letter to the Board of Directors regarding the "Neary Ridge" (Vidovich property) . As you know, the portion of that property adjoining the District ' s Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve is one of the most desirable parcels of open space still within private hands . An existing trail system through the property connects Deer Hollow Farm to the District ' s Windmill Pasture Area. The "Neary Ridge" adjacent to Olive Tree Lane and the southerly extension of that ridge doTran to Ravensberry Avenue plays heavily in the visual quality of the District' s preserve . The front, northerly sloping portion of the property is a very important part of the viewshed and scenic backdrop for Los Altos , Los Altos Hills and portions of Mountain View, Palo Alto, and Sunnyvale. Because of the extremely important open space aspects of this property, you can be assured that the District will be moving swiftly to appraise this property and hopefully, if the price fits within budget constraints , to conclude negotiations for potential purchase of this very high priority property for open space and recreation purposes . Thank you for your support of the District ' s open space programs . Sincerely, Nonette Hanko Vice-President, Board of Directors !IH: LCB:cac ii Hert-rt Grereh,Genera!Manager,Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Robert McKibbin,Teena Henshaw,Edward Shelley,Nonette Hanko.Gerry Andean,Richard Bishop I RESPONSE A(:T10N PROPOSED by S -- ---- WRITTEN COMMUNICAT S Board President Acknowledge/Respond Meeting 89-16 Director Acknowledge/Respond June 28 , 19 89, / _ T T Staff Acknowledge/Respond / � �s / �r� J VDraft Response Attacted _ Staff to be Directed to Prepare Draft Response for Board Consideration per Board Directive(&) No Response Necessary Other Ld nT/L-L CFCi<<= Cam- /VT�, 1�1 eu/YTm (V q'/E 4(l CA VOyv 47 't `, v / �� MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT OLD MILL OFFICE CENTER,BUILDING C,SUITE 135 201 SAN ANTONIO CIRCLE,MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA 94040 (415)949.5500 June 29 , 1989 Martin Day. 326 West 8-1 New York, N'. Dear Mr. Davy The District ' s Board of Directors received your letter on June 9 , 1989 regarding potential residential development of "Devils Canyon" in San Mateo County, The District ' s adjoining Long Fridge Open Space Preserve, containing over 900 acres , is tranquil and very popular with local hikers . The District is extremely interested in protecting the integrity and scenic beauty of the surrounding area, and we recognize that Devils Canyon itself is * 7 geologically unique. In fact, District rangers are often involved in rescue operations in this area. This property would certainly be a desirable addition to the Long Ridge Open Space Preserve. You can be assured that the District will be watching this property relative to ownership changes and development pressures . Thank you for your interest in the District and its open space program. Sincerely, Nonette Hanko Vice-President, Board of Directors P?H:LCB :cac cc : MROSD Board of Directors Hertaert Grench,Genera!Manager,Board of Directors,Katherine Gutsy,Robert McKibbin,Teena Henshaw,Edward Shelley,Nonette Hanko,Gerry Andeen,Richard Bishop i MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT OLD MILL OFFICE CENTER,BUILDING C,SUITE 135 • 201 SAN ANTONIO CIRCLE,MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA 94040 (415)949-5500 I I i June 29 , 1989 i Martin Davis 326 West 85 Street New York, NY 10024 Dear Mr. Davis : The District ' s Board of Directors received your letter on June 9 , 1989 regarding potential residential development of "Devils Canyon" in San Mateo County. The District ' s adjoining Long Ridge Open Space Preserve , containing over 900 acres , is tranquil and very popular with local hikers . The District is extremely interested in protecting the integrity and scenic beauty of the surrounding area, and we recognize that Devils Canyon itself is geologically unique. In fact, District rangers are often involved in rescue operations in this area. This property would certainly be a desirable addition to the Long Ridge Open Space Preserve. You can be assured that the District will be watching this property relative to ownership changes and development pressures . Thank you for your interest in the District and its open space program. Sincerely, ts. Nonette Hanko Vice-President , Board of Directors NH:LCB: cac cc : MROSD Board of Directors I Herbert Grench,General Manager,Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Robert McKibbin,Teena Henshaw,Edward Shelley,Nonette Hanko,Gerry Andeen,Richard Bishop R-89-93 (Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT June 21 , 1989 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; J. Nicholas , Docent Coordinator SUBJECT: Introduction of New Docents The 1989 spring training program for new volunteer docents is completed. The trainees each have completed 60 hours of classroom study and field exploration. Training sessions have been conducted by staff , docents , and local community members with special expertise. Foothill College scheduled a one unit geology course at our request, and Dr. Sam McGinnis presented a session on wildlife of the preserves. The trainees were instructed in basic principles of ecology and were introduced to the flora, as well as the human history, of the preserves . As part of their training, the trainees are scheduled to attend the June 28 Board meeting to observe the public meeting process and to be introduced to the Board. We welcome to our group of District docents the following trainees: Roger Cairns , Sunnyvale Claudia Kelly, Santa Clara Pat Carlson, Palo Alto David Koffman, Menlo Park Diane Chambers , Sunnyvale Lucille Mason, Sunnyvale Pat Dentinger, Cupertino Sally Mentzer, Redwood City Deirdre Digrande, Menlo Park Jan Murphy, Palo Alto Donna Gallagher, Sunnyvale Frank Smith, San Jose, Daniel Gill , San Jose April Stewart, Menlo Park Julie Goodenough, Woodside Joanne Vinton, San Carlos Eric Hansen, San Jose Therese Welter, Cupertino Leslie Jacobsen, Menlo Park R-89-99 (Meeting 89-16 June 28, 1989) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT June 22 , 1989 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager; D. Woods , Principal Open Space Planner; S . Marioni, Associate Open Space Planner; C. Bruins , Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Final Adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Carss Property Addition to the Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve Recommended Actions : 1 . Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Carss property addition to the Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve , including the naming, as contained in report R-89-42 . 2 . Indicate your intention to withhold the property from dedication as public open space at this time. 3 . Authorize the Vice-President of the Board to sign a demolition contract in the amount of $14 , 700 with BB ' s Grading Service of San Jose for the removal of all structures and debris from the property. Discussion: At your March 8 , 1989 meeting, you approved the acquisition of the 60-acre Carss property addition to the Mt . Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve (see attached report R-89-42 dated February 28 , 1989) . You also tentatively adopted the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the addition, including naming the property as an addition to the Mt . Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve , and indicated your intention to withhold the land from dedication as public open space at this time . The property has been vacated and the three trailers have been removed by the seller. The District is now arranging for the demolition of the dilapidated two-story house and clean-up of the site as anticipated in the plan. Staff contacted three contractors to solicit informal bids on the demolition and clean-up project. One contractor declined to bid, and the remaining two proposed prices of $17 , 000 and $14 , 700. Bill Botsch of BB ' s Grading Service of San Jose was the low bidder at $14 , 700 . He has com- pleted other similar projects for the District , including the former Perretta house demolition and clean-up of the former Alsberge property. Mr. Botsch has always done an excellent job and works well with the ranger staff . R-89-99 Page two Legal Counsel has advised staff that it is not necessary to go through the formal advertising and bidding process for this type of project; however, the amount of this contract is beyond the General Manager ' s expenditure authority. Therefore, a copy of the proposed demolition contract is attached to this report with the recommendation that the Vice-President of the Board be authorized to execute the contract on behalf of the District . In accordance with your adopted Land Acquisition Notification Procedures , final adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan was deferred until after close of escrow to allow further time for public comment. Escrow on the Carss property closed on June 20, 1989 . Staff has received no further public comment. R-89-42 (Meeting 89-06 March 8, 1989) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT February 28 , 1989 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager; D. Hansen, Land Manager; D. Woods, Principal Open Space Planner; W. Goggin, Real Property Representa- tive; A. Cummings, Environmental Analyst; S. Marioni, Associate Open Space Planner; C. Bruins , Administra- tive Assistant SUBJECT: Proposed Addition of Carss Property to Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve Recommended Actions 1. Adopt the accompanying 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 (Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, Lands of Carss) . 2. Tentatively adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan recommen- dations contained in this report, including naming the property as an addition to the Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. 3 . Indicate your intention to withhold the property from dedication at this time. Introduction The proposed acquisition consists of a 60 acre parcel of land located east of Mt. Umunhum in the headwaters of Guadalupe Creek. Barlow Road passes through the property, connecting Mt. Umunhum Road with upper Woods Road. The property is bordered on three sides by District lands . It is visible from Mt. Umunhum Road and contributes to the scenic backdrop of the Sierra Azul range. Barlow Road is a potential trail and patrol route linking Mt. Umunhum and Woods Roads. This property is one of a number of inholdings in the Guadalupe and Rincon Creek drainage areas below Mt. Umunhum. It is within the San Francisco Bay Area Ridge Trail corridor. I R-89-42 Page two 1 . Property Identification Property owner: Estate of Scott T. Carss Size: 60 acres 2. Location and Boundaries (see attached map) Regional setting: Unincorporated Santa Clara County, east of Mt. Umunhum and south of Guadalupe Creek Road access: Hicks Road to Mt. Umunhum Road to Barlow Road, a privately owned and maintained dirt road; unimproved roads enter the southwest and southeast corners Boundaries : Bounded by District properties on the west, south, and southeast; private properties on the remaining sides Nearby public lands: Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve; Santa Clara County' s Almaden Quicksilver Park is two miles from the property Nearby landmarks: Mt. Umunhum, located approximately one-half mile east and 1 ,000 feet above the property 3 . Topography and Hydrology Prominent topographic features : Guadalupe Creek flows through the northwest corner of the property Elevation range: 1, 800 feet in northeast corner to 2, 680 feet near southwest corner Slope steepness : Steep slopes averaging 45 percent Slope exposure: Primarily north-facing Watershed: Forms a portion of the Guadalupe Creek watershed 4 . Geology and Soils Seismology: San Andreas Fault located approximately three and one- half miles southwest in Los Gatos Creek Canyon Soil classification: Highly erodible Los Gatos-Maymen soils Soil stability: No active landslides noted 5. Flora and Fauna Plant Communities: Mixed evergreen forest, chaparral, and riparian in the deeper part of the drainages R-89-42 Page three Dominant flora: Manzanita, toyon, yerba santa, baccharis , poison oak, madrone, and canyon oak Common fauna: Deer, bobcat, and feral pig 6 . Visual Qualities Viewshed: Contributes to scenic backdrop of Sierra Azul ridge below Mt. Umunhum Vistas: Mt. Umunhum to the west, El Sombroso to the northwest, and Guadalupe Creek watershed to the east 7 . Existing Improvements A nearly completed two-story residence occupies the relatively flat area below Barlow Road. The steep slope behind this house is covered with debris . There is a trailer in the front yard. Two other trailers and a horse corral are located on the ridge above the road. A surface-laid water system supplies water to the homes. In one spot, a water pipe is suspended over the road. 8 . Existing Use Tenants live in the upper trailer, but under a settlement with the estate, they will move out before close of escrow. As a result, two of the three trailers on the property will be removed, leaving one that is in poor condition near the house. The cost of demolishing the house, which is in poor condition, and removing the debris is estimated to be $10, 000 . Barlow Road, a well-graded dirt road, connects Mt. Umunhum Road with Woods Road and serves as an access road for neighboring property owners . 9 . Planning Considerations Political boundaries: Unincorporated Santa Clara County; outside District boundaries but within District' s sphere of influence Zoning: Hillside (requires a 20 to 160 acre minimum lot size, depending on slope) ; because of the steep slope, the property could support only one home site Master Plan rating: Not rated, similar areas nearby rated medium to low for composite open space resource value Use and Management Plan review: Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve Use and Management review scheduled for April 1989. Regional plans: Woods Road has been identified by the Bay Area Ridge Trail Council as part of the corridor connecting the Mt. Umunhum Area to Almaden Quicksilver County Park. Barlow Road connects with Woods Road. R-89-42 Page four 10. Potential Use and Management Barlow Road could become part of a future trail route connecting Mt. Umunhum Road with Woods Road. Together, the two roads could provide a rugged, five mile loop trip especially suitable for equestrians and mountain bicyclists. Longer trips would eventually be possible by continuing along Woods Road to El Sombroso to connect with trails from the north and south. These loop routes will not be possible until further District acquisitions can occur in the area. 11. Preliminary Use and Management Recommendations Signs: Install private property signs and boundary plaques Road: Maintain for patrol Site Emphasis designation: Conservation Management Unit (CMU) Site Clean-up: Except for the removal of two trailers, the estate would have no clean-up responsibility other than those related to potential hazardous substances . The District will arrange for all other demolition and property clearance activities . The estimated cost is $10, 000. 12 . Name The property should be named as an addition to the Mt. Umunhum Area Of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. 13. Dedication I recommend that you withhold the property from dedication as public open space at this time. This would allow for a trade of development rights or sale of a portion or all of the property if the District is not successful in acquiring other necessary land in the area. 14 . Terms The total purchase price for the 60-acre parcel is $225,000, payable on an all cash-basis at close of escrow. The average per acre cost is $3 ,750. The probate appraisal of the property was $235, 000. The $10, 000 difference between the probate appraisal and the agreed purchase price should cover the cost of building demolition and property clean-up. 15. Fundina A full explanation of this funding summary is contained in report R-88-86 dated July 19, 1988 . The $5.689 million in cash budgeted for this fiscal year is expected to be spent as follows : R-89-42 Page five Previously Approved Acquisitions this Fiscal Year $3 , 641 , 464 (Including the Garza et al . property included earlier on this agenda) Carss Property Acquisition Recommended for Approval on this Agenda 225, 000 Remaining Cash Balance for Future Acquisitions this Fiscal Year 1, 822 , 536 Total $5, 689, 000 The District ' s new fiscal year will start on April 1, 1989, a change from the past July 1 date. This means that some of the $1. 82 million remaining will be rebudgeted in the new year. The targeted $8 million in Proposition 70 net receipts for this fiscal year would be for the following projects (based upon 98 .5% reimbursement after state overhead charges) : Teague Hill Open Space Preserve $6, 402 , 500 Previously Approved Acquisitions this Fiscal Year (Including the Garza et al . property included earlier on this agenda) 1, 416, 026 Carss Property Acquisition Recommended for Approval on this Agenda 221 , 625 Remaining Balance for Future Acquisitions to be Designated this Fiscal Year (40, 151) * Total $8, 000,000 * Although this particular acquisition overspends the Proposition 70 funds budgeted for this fiscal year, there is a remaining $1, 000, 000 in the fund for the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve that has been included in the proposed budget for the 1989-1990 fiscal year. Therefore, funds are still available for this project. i r �s s •. .• ILA TWO _ NOW , � 6 I l0 qqPOP .111 �ti .� �. ,.-� 4...,,•�: boa IY A. 050 M 2 �° � • � 1 •• 1 i ._ IN VG ll <<w �� ITT � �� f 1. 1►^�`vl //��' J�� J ,ap °t` ( '( ✓ i� ,1`� M ON, �� r .`�a,�, Tip!J .'1�L11���" n • J7!+ ►?� �� �' ` ,,�1 ; irk �� ..r � �� IVS SUN"512M1-�a �J -•••• �.\l�� �� • II N LA Ilk ST Mpao IM OR �� ,`� _` �t� �� i 1\ill►� ��'� � ��r�`,J\� /a������ 1(l�iM� .�... ,/'�.-`...�✓��'^./'�d q,11ORN �✓ f�wd.� i •- • : • ti .�� � aa�--- >aa^'.,'�,'4. "r il' �t 11� �,,..:t�!s►� �a � �'.r�b�r� ..,.�� I� 01 Holim i I DEMOLITION CONTRACT The following agreement made this day of 1989 between Owner: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 hereinafter called DISTRICT, and BB's Grading Service - Bill Botsch 1091 Myrtle Street San Jose, CA 95126 hereinafter called CONTRACTOR, defines the services and scope of the demolition work of the 2-story house, mobile homes, other structures and miscellaneous materials; and clean-up and removal of all vehicles, junk, garbage, and debris in the surrounding area on the former Carss property at Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, Santa Clara County, California as follows: A. SERVICES: 1. CONTRACTOR will .obtain all required permits, including but not limited to, the Health Department septic tank closure permit and the Building Department demolition permit. DISTRICT agrees to pay any fees associated with permits required. 2. CONTRACTOR will be responsible for the pumping out of the septic tank, if necessary. 3. CONTRACTOR will arrange for the disconnection of all utilities now serving the structures. 4. CONTRACTOR will demolish and remove from the site all structures in the project area including the 2-story house, mobile homes and all associated out buildings, materials, and other debris on site. 5. CONTRACTOR will clean up and remove all materials, debris, vehicles, junk and garbage from the property. 6. CONTRACTOR will dispose of all debris at a licensed refuse facility. CONTRACTOR will present all dump receipts to DISTRICT upon or before completion of project and prior to payment. 7. CONTRACTOR will rough grade the building site to minimize erosion. 8. CONTRACTOR agrees that all work will be completed in a workman- like manner according to standard practices. 9. CONTRACTOR agrees to notify DISTRICT 24 hours prior to starting work. 10. CONTRACTOR agrees to notify DISTRICT of completion of the project for inspection prior to removing heavy equipment from the work site. 11. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete project and submit a bill for payment within 60 days from execution of this agreement. I Demolition Contract - BB's Grading Service Page 2 B. COMPENSATION Within thirty (30) days after satisfactory completion of project, DISTRICT will pay CONTRACTOR $14,700.00 (Fourteen Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars) . C. LIABILITY 1) CONTRACTOR agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, its employees, agents, officers, and Board of Directors from any and all negligent acts caused by CONTRACTOR or bodily injury occurring to CONTRACTOR while traveling to and from and upon the DISTRICT's property. 2) CONTRACTOR shall provide DISTRICT a Certificate of Insurance evidencing the existence of Public Liability Insurance in an amount of not less than FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($500,000.00) which shall include, but not be limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury and damage to property resulting from all operations under this Contract, use of owned or non-owned automobiles, trucks, equipment, products, and completed operations. By MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Vice-President, Board of Directors Date: By CONTRACTOR Bill Botsch Date: R-89-96 ,_.meeting 89-16 AA� June 28, 1989) le Alm&10 0M MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT OLD MILL OFFICE CENTER,BUILDING C,SUITE 135 201 SAN ANTONIO CIRCLE,MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA 94040 (415)949-5500 June 20, 1989 To Board of Directors From : Nonette Hanko Subject : Charge to Trails Policy Committee Dear Colleagues : In support of Ed Shelley's idea for the development of a Board Committee on Trail Policies , I wish to offer a few suggestions as to the Committee's charge. I recommend that the first charge be to 1.) define the issues and problems and return for Board concurrence. Once the Board adds ,changes ,or otherwise agrees as to the "issues "; the Committee would then be further charged to 2.) recommend solutions for Board consideration. Public hearings could be conducted by the Committee on such subjects as : a.) the staff draft policies , b.) ( using the draft policies as example ) surveys of Board, trail users, ranger staff,as to what are the problems and what are solutions , c.) environmental impacts , d.) enforcement, e.) questions of liability. The committee should receive all letters pertaining to the draft policies. Now that the draft policies have captured the full atten- tion of our trail-using-public, it now appears timely for the Board to be involved in the development of policies. However, I believe it is also important for us to recognize the amount of time and thought that our staff has already given to the process. In our appreciation of staff efforts to date, we should encourage them to continue with their creative recommendations. Herbert Grench,General Manager;Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Robert McKibbin,Teena Henshaw,Edward Shelley,Nonette Hanko,Gerry Andean,Richard Bishop R-89-100 (Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT June 22, 1989 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; C. Bruins , Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Proposed Board Trails Policy Committee At your June 14 , 1989 meeting, staff proposed a process for review of the draft trail use policies and guidelines (see report R-89-91 dated June 8 , 1989) . Instead, you adopted the creation of a Board committee in concept and placed the committee appointments and specific charge to the committee on your June 18 agenda. Given the circumstances of intense public reaction to the draft, staff supports this approach and the general direction outlined in Director Hanko ' s June 20, 1989 report to you. Staff is open to re-examination or clarification of the trail use issues . Although the current draft policies and guidelines can be set aside or reviewed as you see fit, much background material is available, which can help speed up the committee ' s task. Extensive material is available for the committee including: a) written summaries from the March 7 , 1988 Trail Use Needs Assessment Workshop; b) our consultant' s research into other agency trail use problems and solutions; c) trail user profiles; d) ranger field logs and accident reports; and e) all letters and testimony from the public expressing opinions about the issues . I urge you to use this research, as well as the feedback from the public and staff . R-89-101 (Meeting 89-16 AA, June 28 , 1989) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT June 21 , 1989 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; D. Woods, Open Space Planner; S . Marioni , Associate Open Space Planner; C. Bruins , Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Interim Use and Management Plan for the Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve Recommendation Action: 1 . Tentatively adopt the Interim Use and Management Plan for the Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve as contained in this report. Introduction: The Use and Management Plan for the Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve was last reviewed on March 12, 1986 (see report R-86-19 dated March 3 , 1986) . You adopted the plan at your April 16 , 1986 meeting (see report M-86-40 dated April 8 , 1986) . Since the last review, there have been 36 property additions to this area. The Mt. Umunhum Area is now comprised of 5972.35 acres , including a 358- acre leasehold area, a 40-acre open space easement, a nine-acre road easement. The 36 additions are : Grantor Acreage Acquisition Report North 31 . 00 R-86-24 dated April 10 , 1986 North (1/2 Int) 143.00 R-86-24 dated April 10, 1986 Rader (1/4 Int) .00 R-86-32 dated June 2, 1986 Allen (1/4 Int) .00 R-86-68 dated Aug. 19 , 1986 Cothran 358 . 00 R-86-107 dated Nov. 6 , 1986 La Croix 337 .78 R-86-113 dated Nov. 17 , 1986 Milner 1 . 00 R-86-119 dated Dec . 2 , 1986 North 181 . 90 R-86-121 dated Dec. 4 , 1986 Jamison 40 . 00 R-86-125 dated Dec . 11 , 1986 Howatt 160.00 R-86-131 dated Dec . 16 , 1986 Miller 160. 00 R-86-131 dated Dec. 16, 1986 R-89-101 Page Two s Schofield 38 .12 R-86-131 dated Dec. 16, 1986 Western Title 78 .00 R-87-51 dated Mar. 19, 1987 Maas 114.95 R-87-101 dated July 1, 1987 Perreta 10.00 R-87-139 dated Aug. 31, 1987 Lin 40.00 R-87-140 dated Sept. 3, 1987 Marden 20.00 R-88-38 dated April 6, 1988 Keith 13.00 R-88-39 dated April 7 , 1988 Hergerton 27 .63 R-88-42 dated April 18, 1988 Upper 77 . 37 R-88-47 dated May 2, 1988 McNamara 114.64 R-88-78 dated July 7, 1988 Lazenby 96. 56 R-88-90 dated July 18 , 1988 McPherson 26.66 R-88-113 dated Sept. 21 , 1988 Witt 157.00 R-88-41 dated April 19, 1988 Brennan 112.00 R-88-98 dated Aug. 3, 1988 Bean 40.00 R-88-129 dated Nov. 2, 1988 Laurie 169. 30 R-88-149 dated Dec. 1, 1988 Young 12. 81 R-89-09 dated Jan. 4, 1989 Fontana 157 .38 R-89-07 dated Jan. 4, 1989 ` McClellan, G. 160.00 R-89-33 dated Feb. 15, 1989 McClellan, W. 160.00 R-89-33 dated Feb. 15, 1989 Garza 40.00 R-89-40 dated Feb. 28 , 1989 Carss 60.00 R-89-42 dated Feb. 28 , 1989 Alsberge 160 .00 R-89-65 dated March 14, 1989 Fletscher 167 .14 R-89-52 dated March 14, 1989 Fletscher 20.00 R-89-52 dated March 14, 1989 Sciarrino 160.00 R-89-53 dated March 15, 1989 Luckhardt 35.00 R-89-56 dated March 16, 1989 After re-examining the area boundaries within the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, staff recommends boundary adjustments to ease the Use and j Management Plan review process (see attached Map A) . It is recommended that portions of the preserve west of the Mt. Diablo section line and south of Soda Springs Road be incorporated into a new area. The new area would then encompass the Mt. Thayer area to the northeast, Cathedral Oaks area to the west, and the Maas, Bean, Cothran, Milner, and Western Title additions to the south. All of these portions of the preserve are most accessible from the Los Gatos Creek corridor, either from Soda Springs Road, Alma Bridge Road or Summit Road. The La Croix addition, located north of Mt. Thayer, should be combined with the proposed Kennedy Limekiln Area and will be incorporated into the second reading of that Use and Management Plan. Portions of the existing Mt. Umunhum Area to be combined with the Cathedral Oaks area and Kennedy Limekiln Area are included in this review. In the future, they will be reviewed with their respective areas. Site Description and Use: The 5, 912-acre area of the preserve is generally bound by Almaden Quicksilver County Park to the north, El Sombroso and Mt. Thayer to the west, Barret Canyon to the east, and Summit Road to the south. The preserve boundaries are irregular and non-contiguous with many intervening private properties. Portions of the Mt. Umunhum Area includes the Rincon t I I I R-89-101 Page Three Creek, Guadalupe Creek, Herbert Creek, and upper Los Gatos Creek watersheds. Plant communities are extremely varied, ranging from dry chaparral to redwood and fir forests. The trail system is primarily comprised of old roadbeds. Trail use is minimal on the major portion of the preserve due to the inaccessibility of most of the trails. Mt. Umunhum Road, up to the gate located a short distance past the junction of Loma Prieta Road, is occasionally used by hikers and bicyclists. These users often report that neighboring property owners attempt to discourage this use. Trails located in the upper Los Gatos Creek corridor are used by local equestrians who gain access through intervening private properties. Illegal access by off - road vehicles is a problem throughout the preserve, but has decreased significantly over the past few years. The District gates placed on Mt. Umunhum Road near Bald Mountain have sharply reduced illegal activities on the upper portions of the preserve. These activities include off -road vehicle use, illegal camping, and shooting. Planning Considerations: The Interim Use and Management Plan for the Mt. Umunhum area surplus federal property (see report R-86-20 dated March 12, 1986) outlined a planning process for the former air base facility and surrounding area of the preserve. The process provided for a six month planning period for the School of Business at San Jose State University to investigate the feasibility of utilizing the facilities for a conference center. Upon completion of that study, the District was going to initiate a master planning process, which would take up to one and one-half years. The master plan would address recreational, educational, and commercial uses of the site. Before the planning process could get underway, the Department of Defense was asked to investigate the former air base site for the presence of toxic materials. They determined there were such materials present. The Corps of Engineers then conducted a preliminary study outlining the scope of a proposed toxic removal project. The Corps of Engineers has just completed a detailed plan for the removal project and is beginning the design and construction(destruction) phase. They are requesting funding for the removal project in the 1990 fiscal year, which begins in October 1990. It is hoped the removal of the toxic materials will be completed early in 1991. At that time, San Jose State University will presumably begin their phase of the planning process if they have not started it earlier. In 1987, the National Weather Service proposed using a portion of the preserve and the large block building on Mt. Umunhum for the purpose of constructing and operating a highly sophisticated radar system (NEXRAD). During the past two years, the Weather Service and District evaluated and negotiated various aspects of the proposal. Concurrently, the Weather Service negotiated with nearby property owners for other local sites to use. The District has been notified that a site adjacent to the preserve has been selected for the NEXRAD facility. In 1988, the Youth Science Institute (YSI) made a preliminary proposal to use an area at the end of Reynolds Road for an environmental education R-89-101 Page Four program. Staff worked with representatives from YSI for over six months to refine the proposal . A neighborhood workshop was held on-site in anticipation of preparing a specific Use and Management Plan for the Reynolds Road portion of the preserve to accommodate the YSI proposal . YSI has since deferred their plans while investigating other potential locations on District lands, which may prove more desirable to both parties. The majority of the preserve is designated Conservation Management Unit (CMU) . The area near Reynolds Road and adjacent to Mt. Umunhum Road between Hicks Road and Loma Prieta Road is not. CMU' s are managed primarily for conservation and viewshed. They will be managed for public recreation when use limitations can be alleviated. Patrol and maintenance will be at a minimum necessary for resource protection and public safety. Site maps and signs , except boundary signs, will not be available (see Revised Open Space Use and Management Planning Process, adopted February 5, 1987 , report R-87-34 dated February, 5, 1987) . Use and Management Plan: The attached chart "A" summarizes the existing Interim Use and Management Plan. It also incorporates new and revised recommendations addressed in this report. The chart indicates the status and anticipated completion of each project, as well as current and projected funding information. A. Access and Circulation Access to the Mt. Umunhum Area is generally difficult because of irregular boundaries, numerous intervening private properties, and unclear public access rights on some of the interior roadways. Reynolds Road and Mt. Umunhum Road are the two major corridors for public access . Reynolds Road ends at the preserve ' s northwest boundary; there is less than a few hundred yards of public trail here. Visitors may hike here, but its limited size and lack of trails makes the site less inviting. Mt. Umunhum Road is open for bicycling and hiking to the ridgetop, where a gate is located on the preserve boundary of an intervening private property. Parking space is limited to a few small roadside pullouts at both Reynolds Road and Mt. Umunhum Road. Views of the surrounding hillsides and valleys are spectacular. Public access on Cothran Road via Wrights Station Road, unpaved portions of Alamitos Road, Soda Springs Road, and Loma Prieta Road is not encouraged. Staff is currently not aware of recorded public easement rights, but the public may have unrecorded prescriptive rights on these roads. Trail use of Woods Road and Barlow Road are encouraged only on those portions crossing District lands. New or Revised Use and Management Recommendations None. B. Signing Frequent changes in the preserve ' s boundaries resulting from numerous additions have made it difficult to implement and maintain the signing R-89-101 Page Five program. An attempt is made to place boundary signs at all points of entry along preserve boundaries. Boundary plaques are located at more obscure points of access. Wildland signs are placed where there is a significant amount of public access . If trails or roads lead off the preserve, signs are usually placed on the boundary, indicating that private property is ahead. If trails are obviously going to lead visitors onto private property, signs are placed at the beginning of the trail, indicating it is not a through trail. There are a number of places within the preserve where neighbors have placed there own private property or no trespassing signs. These signs make it difficult for the public to identify the property as open space. In most cases, these signs are being placed on roadways where neighbors claim to have a right of way or easement. These signs should be removed and replaced with a District sign prohibiting vehicles if trespassing vehicles are a problem. The area at the end of Reynolds Road is a good example where no trespassing signs need to be removed from District land. In addition, the private property signs around the lease area at this same location need to be replaced with more appropriate District lease area signs. Public use on the District 's road easement between Hicks Road and Mt. Umunhum is still discouraged by preserve neighbors. These neighbors repeatedly paint a no trespassing notice on the road easement near the junction at Hicks Road and harass visitors on the road. In addition, visitors who venture up the road toward the upper portion of the preserve easily become confused as to what is public and private land. Since the easement road and District owned lands adjacent to the road are open to public use up to the junction of Loma Prieta Road, sign wording needs to be clearer, and the no trespassing notice on the road needs to be removed. New or Revised Use and Management Recommendations 1. All trespass warning signs will be removed from the area at the end of Reynolds Road and all other locations that are clearly within the preserve boundaries. 2. Lease area signs will be placed on the boundary of the lease area at the end of Reynolds Road. 3. A sign prohibiting all motor vehicles will be placed at the end of the paved portion of Reynolds Road. Staff will obtain concurrence from neighbors using the road for residential access. 4. Trails leading off of the preserve and onto private property will be signed "Not a Through Trail, " with "Stop - Private Property Ahead" signs placed at the preserve boundaries. 5. The area surrounding the structures located near Hicks Road (former Hergerton property) will be signed "Closed Area" until a tenant is placed in the residence or the structures are removed. R-89-101 6 The painted no -trespassing notice on the beginning of the District's Mt. Umunhum Road easement will be removed. 7. A sign indicating a portion of Mt. Umunhum Road is open for hiking and bicycling use will be installed near the entrance to Bald Mountain. C. Brochure The site maps available to the public are continually being revised to reflect boundary changes to the preserve. The Mt. Umunhum Area is so large now that it requires three standard 8 1/2 by 11 maps to show all the lands at the scale used for other preserves. For this reason, the area is being remapped at a reduced scale in order to provide a single source of information for the entire Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. Parking, trails, and roads will not be emphasized on the portions of the preserve designated CMU, in accordance with Open Space Management policies pertaining to planning and management of CMU lands. New or Revised Use and Management Recommendations 1. Revise site map to provide a single map showing the entire Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. D. Structures and Improvements Many of the additions to the Mt. Umunhum Area have required or still require considerable clean up of debris and removal of substandard structures. Some of the debris and structure removal was completed by previous owners under terms of the acquisition agreements. These include the former Opper, McNamara, Bean, Witt, Brennan, and Maas properties. Other additions have been cleaned up by District staff or under staff supervision. These include the former Perretta, Alsberge, Marden (partially complete), and McCoy properties. Additions that still require debris and structure removal include the former Sciarrino, Carss, Baldwin -Wallace (Bald Mountain and Woods Road area), Marden, McClellan, Fidelity National Title -Cothran, and Keith properties. The acquisition agreement for the McClellan property provides for debris and structure removal to be completed by the former owner by June 30, 1989. There are two locations where structures remain and disposition has not been determined. The first, the former Hergerton property located near Hicks Road at the bottom of Guadalupe Creek, has a house trailer, attached living unit, water storage tank, and barn. To help protect these structures from possible vandalism, staff has been looking for a tenant. The remote location, poor condition of the trailer and attached unit, and the need for adding a pressure tank system for the water supply, has discouraged most prospective tenants. The second location is in the Herbert Creek watershed on the former Alsberge property. A cabin was removed from this addition, but a large barn remains on the upper portion. It is in good condition and would be very difficult and costly to remove. There has been some R-89-101 Page Seven interest expressed by a neighbor in using the barn for storage purposes, but this may not be possible due to the steepness of the access driveway. A tenant is desirable to prevent potential vandalism. The status of the former air base facility will be addressed in the proposed Master Plan, which is anticipated to be completed in 1992. In the meantime, the area surrounding the facility is closed to the public. Under special conditions permits are issued to individuals needing access for various studies being conducted or access to communication facilities. otherwise, because of the presence of toxic materials, public permits are not being issued. During the 1985 Lexington Hills fire, the service road and water supply lines between Austrian Gulch and the air base facility were severed. The building area has been without a water supply, but water is transported to the site for the use of the caretaker. The water rights to the springs in Austrian Gulch terminated at the time the District acquired the site. A water tank is located near the preserve boundary just above the main part of the complex. There is a temporary oral agreement with the adjacent property owner to fill the water tank using his private water supply in order to provide some degree of fire protection. New or Revised Use and Management Recommendations 1. Make a formal agreement with the adjacent property owner near the former air base facility to provide water to the tank above the main part of the complex. The water will be used for fire protection and water service to the District' s caretaker residence. 2. Continue to search for a tenant to occupy the structures near Hicks Road (former Hergerton property) for a period of six months. If a tenant cannot be found, the structures will be removed. Particular attention will be paid to salvaging the barn materials since this building is in good condition. 3. Debris will be removed from the area around Bald Mountain and on Woods Road where the road passes under the high tension PG&E lines. This recommendation was not included in the preliminary use and management plan when the sites were acquired because the boundaries were unclear. 4. Gates will be installed at Hicks Road at the driveway entrance to the former Hergerton property. 5. Search for an enterprise tenant to lease the barn on the former Alsberge property for a period of six months. If a tenant can not be found, the structure will be removed. Particular attention will be paid to salvaging materials, because the building is in good condition. R-89-101 Page Eight E. Natural Resources Management Off-road vehicle use and grading activities have damaged areas of the preserve. Restoration plans for these disturbed areas will be included in the resource management plan for the area. Because boundaries are changing relatively rapidly, the scope of such a restoration project is also growing rapidly. Included in this plan may be a provision for the removal of a garbage dump, which is located below the air base facility. The plan is pending the formation of District resource management policies, which are scheduled for review in August, 1989. A priority schedule for site resource management plans will be included in the policies. The resource management plan for the Mt. Umunhum Area will focus on restoration, and wild fire management. Since the 1985 Lexington Hills fire, the California Division of Forestry (CDF) has been interested in an ongoing fire management program. This could include housing seasonal work crews at Mt. Umunhum to manage the fuel load and maintain fire breaks. The condition of areas graded either by past property owners or for emergency fire breaks during the Lexington Hills fire have improved significantly. Vegetation is growing back quickly, and the badly scared roads and pads are much less visually obtrusive. The burned area of the preserve has also recovered remarkably fast. New or Revised Use and Management Recommendations 1. Recontact CDF in an effort to encourage an ongoing wildfire prevention program to be conducted throughout the preserve. F. Special Activities The Youth Science Institute (YSI) has expressed an interest in using the buildings and surrounding area near Reynolds Road. The proposed program focuses on gardening and small farming practices. It would be available for educational purposes to local school programs and organized groups or informal visitation by the general public. The proposal has been deferred to allow time to investigate another potential site. A star has been placed atop the block building at the former air base facility by the Air Force Sergeants Association during the Christmas season for the past two years. The star commemorates Vietnam War soldiers who are still missing in action. The Association would like to continue the practice and has been granted a permit to display the star at an earlier date this year. An individual has expressed interest in flying non-motorized model glider planes at Bald Mountain, and staff agreed to permit this use on a trial basis. Designating a long term use like this before the site is master-planned is premature. It is most likely a compatible use since potential trail use in this area should remain low for quite some time. Page Nine R-89-101 S I New or Revised Use and Management Recommendations 1. Special permit will be issued to the Air Force Sergeants Association to place a commemorative star atop Mt. Umunhum. 2. Permits for model glider planes will be issued on a case by case basis. G. Visitor and Site Protection The site is patrolled on a regular basis, usually once or twice a week. Staff has been negotiating for over a year with the Santa Clara County Sheriff ' s Department for supplemental patrol services . There is currently an acceptable draft agreement, which is subject to County approval . When initiated, the District will be able to contract for Sheriff 's patrol on an as-needed basis, generally in the evenings and on weekends . A caretaker resides at the former air base facility. His presence has been very beneficial in deterring illegal activities. He has also tt conducted site maintenance tasks, including work on Mt. Umunhum Road. 1. A formal contract will be executed with the Santa Clara County Sheriff 's Department to provide an appropriate level of patrol and supplement the existing District patrol of the area. H. Site Naming The site has been named the Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. I. Dedication Status A 142.24-acre area immediately surrounding the former air base is the only portion of the preserve which is dedicated. No other portions of the Mt. Umunhum Area are recommended for dedication at this time. This will allow for boundary line adjustments in an area where additions are occurring relatively frequently and master planning is yet to start. J. CEQA Compliance Staff has completed an Initial Study for the projects included in this Interim Use and Management Plan. All elements of the plan are considered Categorically Exempt. The District prepared a negative declaration following a court ruling on the toxics clean-up issue on the former air force base facility at the summit of Mt. Umunhum. Chart A MT,MHM AREA - USE AND ASAN M LAN SUMMARY June 22, 1989 Project , !Budgeted ,Projected Wroposed • - � � mml t i cn'S Planning Tasks -- .04186; in r; 1 an-sduxbLUsl 9. i. a 2 Prepare Master Plan ;Following removal of toxic material and ; i ; 92-93 =San Jose State study 3 ma%ntezuulagreements, _ ,Mt Umnhum Rd agreement needed 4 Resource <Management Plan I Pending Distract Resource Mgmt policies,I , , Pending w. .. _ ,...,._..._.__ lemphasize fire.,.management,,&,restoration I 5 Review MMAD proposal ;Adjacent site chosen by NWS ; , Complete 6 Monitor site clean-up =harden, Sciarrino, Carss, Keith, Fidelity, i 89-90 Bean, ,Opper, Peretta, Alsberge, Witt, Fletscher, McNamara, & Brennan are complete , , .__.._.7 Investi gate access, rights Mass access resolved, by acquisition t - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - AnticipatedNeworRevisedRecommendations - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8 Investigate soaring request !Model glider planes allowed by permit , , , 89-90 9__Disposition of_structures Mergerton &_Alsberge__tenant being sought , 1 , 1 ; ,.897,90__ _. 10 Review YSI proposal ,Deferred while investigating other sites , ; 89-90 r 11 Water system agreement ,Initial agreement reached with neighbor , ; , 89-90 w_ -- 12 Fire t program 1Recontact CDF about,proposed program , ;_ ( _89- _._____ 13 Monitor site clean-up ,Woods Road and Bald Mtn areas ; , 89-90 Subtotal _ _ 0 __ 0 _ Capital Improvements ___ 1_Install boi signs [New acquisitions,, ; 500 ..;_ SDQ. 2 Construct fences/gates/stiles ,Kidwell (pending litigation), Brennan, , 1400 , , 89-90 ;Reynolds Rd (dropped), Oden firebreak 1 , , 89-90 ...-. - Anticipat 1 . -or.Revised da - -. -_ 3 Construct fences/gates/stiles I.Bergerton driveway 700 , , 89-90 4 Install lease area. signs Meynolds Road lease area. , , 89-90 5-Instal.3._.cS area_s gns (He tm,Improvements-_ W 6 Install visitor use sign ,Mt. Umunhum Road near Bald Mtn , 200 ; 90-91 7 Install no vehicle signs ,Reynolds Road area at end of pavement , ; 89-90 Subtotal Subtotal 26O0 700 i Special Maintenance and Projects 1 Contract with iff's Dept. ;Tentative approval obtained , 10000 , owing ,. ���..M�..�..Si,t•.e �n-up ... .. _ . ._ *K�w�:l.ln.. 'ate-li ,Cars(IOIlfl+Q?t 10000 , _ ��.nP�:n iMarden, Keith (500), Fidelity Nat'l still, 500 , Pending ,pending; Peretta & McCoy complete , , , Pending 3 Contract with caretaker ,.Services in lieu,-of :rent 4 Repair PG&E pole ;At summit; partially complete , 1500 , , 89-90 5 Reseeding of graded areas 110pper, McNamara, Peretta , ; , Complete r,____ _ _.__brRep]ace,_.gate/stileI McCoy service. , 1200 .,_ (__ }..._. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Anticipated New or Revised Recommendations - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7 Repair caretaker residence ;Paint exterior 700 ; , 89-90 ' ,Bald... ain and Woods.Road area., 1 1000 .. .:.: .... ._w ,Hergerton (10000) , i , Ongoing 9 Water system ,Meter and valve 1200 ; , 89-90 ..10_ ve trespass-signs.._. __ -_11nterior.-road,-and,.I er-Mt_. ram.Rd _ Subtotal 35100 1000 and Projects rail maintenance Subtotal ;Includes road maint.agr 3000 ; 3000 oa 504.vA.i w....m5{Ifl , .i 6500 6000 R-89-102 (Meeting 89-16 A. AdIL, June 28 , 1989) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT June 19, 1989 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; J. Escobar, Acting Operations Supervisor; L. McGuire, Volunteer Coordinator; C. Bruins, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Progress Report on Open Space Volunteer Program Introduction: At your November 9 , 1988 meeting, staff presented a progress report on the new Open Space Volunteer Program (see report R-89- 131 dated November 2 , 1988) . As you requested, the following is a summary of program activities and goals since last November. No Board action is being requested at this time . Discussion: In report R-88-131 , seventeen projects were identified for completion during the next five years . Eleven of those projects have already been achieved. In addition, special projects not specified in the report have been accomplished. The eleven successful activities are: 1) scouting projects and events; 2) special clean-up events; 3) staffing of information booths at fairs , conferences , and other special events; 4) continuation of court-mandated work programs; 5) joint trail construction and resource management projects with groups such as the Trail Center and the Sierra Club; 6) development of public relations and recruiting tools , including a slide show; 7) establishing methods of recognizing and rewarding volunteers; 8) development of a crew leader training program; 9) planning of periodic special resource management projects such as invasive plant removal, revegetation, and tree planting; 10) production of a quarterly newsletter; and 11) ongoing outreach to local businesses , organizations , and special interest groups to develop support for District projects . R-89-102 Page Two Between October 8, 1988 to June 17, 1989, a total of 190 individual volunteers provided 1054 volunteer hours to the District. Many of the volunteers returned to work on more than their initial project. This report provides details on the project areas listed above. The various special projects that have exceeded the projected level of service are also included in this report. A. Trail and Resource Management Projects Currently, primary focus of the Open Space Volunteer Program is to involve volunteers in one-day service projects on a targeted District preserve. This aspect of the program has grown from a bimonthly to a monthly event. As described in report R-88-131, the first "Trailbuster' s Day" was held at Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve on October 8 , 1988 . The second event was held at Monte Bello and Los Trancos Open Space Preserves on December 3, 1988. Thirty volunteers reseeded unofficial trails slated for restoration, built split-rail fences to block off areas being restored, and performed extensive trail maintenance on both the Fault and Stevens Creek Nature Trails. In a cooperative venture with Chris Romano, "Folks for Oaks" Director, staff coordinated a special tree planting project at Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve on January 28 , 1989. Chris donated over seventy-five oak seedlings and special protective cages. Twenty-three volunteers planted the seedlings in the Rancho San Antonio entrance meadow and in the Mora water tank area. Volunteers also removed invasive coyote brush from a half-mile section of the Rogue Valley Trail. On a rainy March 4th date, ten hardy volunteers performed extensive work on the Whittemore Gulch Trail . Volunteers built switchback barrier fences, restored trail tread, and reconstructed switchbacks and drain dips. Staff organized two projects for the fourth Annual California Trail Days on April 22, 1989. At Los Trancos Open Space Preserve, thirteen volunteers worked on rerouting the Fault Trail. Volunteers, District field staff, and a trail consultant built about 300 feet of new trail and two new switchbacks. The group installed a culvert with rock walls to improve drainage, and cleared brush for new trail construction. Volunteers also restored trail tread on both the Franciscan and Lost Creek Trails. At Fremont Older Open Space Preserve, eleven volunteers restored one- fifth of a mile of the Seven Springs Loop Trail, rebuilt a switchback and drainage channel, and constructed approximately 50 feet of switchback barrier fence. In addition, three other Trail Days projects sponsored by other organizations took place on District preserves. R-89-102 Page Three Another project was held at St. Joseph's Hill Open Space Preserve on May 20. Twelve volunteers restored over three-tenths of a mile of the Jones Trail , built two new switchback barrier fences, and repaired a third. on June 17, eleven volunteers removed about one and a half acres of invasive coyote brush at Monte Bello Open Space Preserve. B. Special Clean-up Event The District assisted with the joint East Palo Alto and Palo Alto Marsh Clean-up Day on June 10 by providing vehicles and field staff to supervise projects on District property. About forty people participated at one of two District project sites. Director Hanko attended the opening ceremonies. At the Ravenswood site, one crew removed all the tires from the Bay Road and Cooley Landing area. Household trash and miscellaneous debris was also removed. At the railroad spur slated to be acquired by the District, volunteers cleaned up refuse, filling three dump trucks. The District' s participation in this event not only helped East Palo Alto and Palo Alto stage a successful community event, but fulfilled the District' s desire to have a volunteer clean-up project in the baylands area. This will probably become an annual event, with the District playing a larger role in the future. C. Crew Leader Training The District co-sponsored the first annual "Trail Crew Leadership Training" with the Trail Center in early June, 1989. The program consisted of two parts: an evening "theory" seminar held at the District headquarters and a full day "hands-on" field session at Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve. Nine instructors from the District, San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Department, the Trail Center, and the Santa Cruz Mountains Trails Association shared their expertise. Almost half of the 32 participants were from the District's Open Space Volunteer Program. The training was designed for both novices and veterans. It included a general introduction and overview of the District and the Trail Center, philosophy on stewardship and outdoor volunteerism, a discussion on team leadership and dynamics , and technical instruction on safety considerations, brush clearing, drainage standards, trail tread restoration and new construction standards. All participants received a comprehensive packet of reference and resource material to aid trail crew leaders. The training program provided learning experiences and challenges for all levels of participants , in addition to being a fun and productive opportunity to continue the important work being done on the new North Canyon Trail at Pulgas Ridge. R-89-102 Page Four D. Public Relations and Ongoing Outreach The volunteer coordinator has staffed booths to provide information about the new Open Space Volunteer Program, recruit volunteers , and distribute District brochures. She has also made numerous public presentations, including a presentation as part of the "Bay Area Open Space Preservation" workshop at Stanford University on January 29. She made a presentation to San Mateo Volunteer Center staff to better acquaint them with the District and the volunteer program, and to assist them in making referrals. A newly developed slide show on the volunteer program was presented at the State Trails Conference, and the volunteer coordinator also served on a panel about trail volunteers at the Park Rangers of California Trails Clinic. Periodic press releases have been published announcing special volunteer field events. We have also had a new listing on the volunteer program published in the American Hiking Society' s "Helping Out in the Outdoors" magazine, a directory of volunteer and intern opportunities on American public lands. This extensive directory is distributed to individuals, schools, and libraries all over the United States and overseas . E. Volunteer Newsletter Two quarterly issues of the "Volunteer Voice" have been published to date, and the third issue is scheduled to be published by July 1. The newsletter lists a schedule of events, gives information about the District and volunteer activities, and serves as an information exchange. F. Volunteer Recognition The "Volunteer Voice" newsletter now has a special section called "Volunteer Spotlight, " which recognizes outstanding volunteers . Additional forms of recognition and reward have included the following: a) raffles with special merchandise from REI for all participants who attended one of the first two field projects; b) colorful California Trail Days patches for participants of both the Skyline and Foothills region projects; c) copies of the group photo of the California Trail Days Foothills crew to all participants on that project; and d) thank-you letters to participants after each field event. G. Youth Projects The Open Space Volunteer Program has arranged special projects for youth groups. On November 19, 1988, a fifteen-member Boy Scout troop worked on a clean-up project at Monte Bello in conjunction with a campout excursion that weekend at Black Mountain. A fourth grade class from Temple Beth Am raked the "whole access" Redwood Trail at Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve on April R-89-102 Page Five 30, 1989. This activity provided the class with an opportunity to perform a valuable service project and made the class aware that people of different abilities use trails to enjoy the outdoors . H. Court-Mandated Work Programs A court-referred volunteer helped the District field staff construct a split-rail fence. He did such a good job on this assignment that he was asked if he wanted to become an open space volunteer. He agreed, and a special volunteer contract has been drafted and approved for him to begin work on the long-awaited fire engine restoration project. J His mechanical and electrical skills will be an asset in restoring the District ' s 1948 Dodge Power Wagon for use in parades and other related functions. I. Other Projects Several Sierra Club volunteers are developing a draft project proposal for "Skyline Ridge Christmas Tree Farm Reforestation" . To help prepare the proposal, the group has met with District staff, performed extensive research, and spoken with local experts in the field. With guidance and approval from the District, they plan to establish an "adopt-a-ridge" pilot program. This program will have many components: collecting acorns from the planting sites; specially processing and storing acorns tested positive for viability; conducting the actual planting which is scheduled for winter, 1989; and performing monthly follow-up maintenance. The actual planting will incorporate three special test plots so that a resource management study can be conducted. Data will be collected on the survival rates for each planting procedure. The Sierra Club San Mateo County Group will fund the purchase of planting supplies. Approximately fifty people have volunteered to help on this exciting resource management project. A volunteer has written an excellent report on the geology of Russian ti Ridge Open Space Preserve. This report will be included as background information in the resource management plan for Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve. The report will be useful as a guide for docents as well as staff in understanding the geology of the area. Staff has recruited a volunteer to develop a survey to determine the number and location of various public agencies and organizations that may be willing to distribute District brochures. Open Space Volunteer Program Future Staff plans to continue organizing monthly volunteer field projects and accommodate as many special project requests as time and resources will allow. Volunteers and members of special interest groups have expressed considerable interest in establishing both an "adopt-a-trail" program and a trail safety patrol program. However, fulfilling the current Open Space Volunteer Program objectives will be a long and time-consuming process. R-89-102 Page Six Many hours of preparation are necessary for both the half-time coordinator and the District field staff to organize volunteer events. The open space management staffing and overall future of the District studies will help identify the direction this program will take. A priority need is the completion of a comprehensive plan for District volunteer services by both the docent and volunteer coordinators as outlined in the 1989-1990 Action Plan. R-89-98 AA. (Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT June 22 , 1989 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager; W. Goggin, Real Property Representative SUBJECT: Agreement Correcting Easement and Grant of License for Fencing at Purisima Creek Redwoods and El Corte de Madera Creek Open Space Preserves Recommended Action: Adopt the Attached Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpenin- sula Regional Open Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement Correcting Easement and Grant of License for Fencing, Authorizing Officer to Execute Agreement , and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve and El Corte de Madera Creek Open Space Preserve) . Discussion The Kings Grove, Inc . is a privately held corporation that owns approxi- mately 1 , 150 acres of land lying between El Corte de Madera and Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserves . It provides rural , wooded homesites to its shareholder members . Access to the westerly portion of the property is provided by Tunitas Creek Road; this road also serves the District ' s Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve . Access to the easterly and southerly property is via Star Hill Road and a private easement within and along the boundary of adjoining land owned by the District. The easement was originally established by a 1969 agreement between The Kings Grove , Inc . and a predecessor property owner . Included in the easement were rights for a roadway, public utilities , and a water pipeline , all of which were constructed several years before the District acquired the property from The Alan Hosking Ranch, Inc . A 1985 survey of the easement indicated that while most of the road and waterline lie within the easement described in the 1969 agreement , some portions are outside the described easement . At the time , staff felt that the established use patterns and their negligible effect on District interests made formal redocumentation of the easement superfluous . R-89-98 Page two Subsequently, a post and rail fence was constructed by the District at an access point to Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve along Tunitas Creek Road. Because no fencing or other physical boundary markers existed, the fence was inadvertently located on adjoining lands of The Kings Grove, Inc . After the error was discovered, discussions with The Kings Grove, Inc. representatives resulted in a proposal to confirm formally the location of the corporation' s easement facilities in exchange for a license permitting the District to maintain its fencing on The Kings Grove, Inc. property. The attached agreement recognizes Kings Grove ' s rights to its roadway and utilities in their actual location and legalizes an inadvertent encroachment of the District improvements upon The Kings Grove , Inc . lands . Two maps are attached which indicate the license agreement area and the road easement alignment area in relation to the Purisima Creek Redwoods and El Corte de Madera Creek Open Space Preserves . ------- ----------- 1AIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE U1_TRIC:T ®� EI Corte de Madera ®pen Space Preserve .:max +„titk,,,� - }a�.,as,s < ""M+.e"^ x3' --•�.^^x t tS..3.a..3�.:_� } \ ►cfx � +� � HUDDART PARK k s ` PUR I S I Ma CREEK REDWOODS 0 S A� #. .. .ti"�c <{g'` '�. •+Mcrs .`<' ;�<t•3> �• !. } $ }>i ... .... Wkll J 4t' i Y � I ai �f `; {<. �'a%✓`�i� 33 .y < f � ti 'T-saudG ,i ,. � �' � .t i `f a u: T SKYLINE BOULEVAPD ; ti 4 POINT SANDSTONE FORMAT I ON ;' o R ,/n fi ` wf f ' Skilra P vna s! x dfg/ 'Zvi HIKERS AND RUNNERS ONLY �� �✓ t a r � \ ON TRAIL 0 T SANDSTONE FORMATION Y _ .. LAI-I � �— METHUSE TRA[LHEAD (CM02)` VISTA POINT ' ROAD EASEMENT REALIGNMENT: GORDON r �\ IAi ITRAILHEAD (CM03) GORDON MI LL y �� Lam- , 1 ...r • . '/� �� � S��r� TRAIL' 10 �'-'• > . . -� )���:, ,�oo�Jj(�` ," � 1 %O-°'/�I '� � � 'a",�'.i ors M,� `�'`* WUNDER77, L I CH PARK -:.- �� ,I '" i ,l` ri ��-; i f�-� ()� ��..�--- � •�:�,tyg',i%.::`i•>w;; Fj�' "`%�3� ,r} ' �. - µ �.�'� /� /;'//i r I�'_.�� `( � • ,::yhr !{• rf"t+wx],}�•1*.w„a'�;�F:,;'? �x �r"•, - ` -' _;� ��, � ''��� J�, c � /f.° � `:; LAWRENCE CREEK i TRAILHEAD (CM06)t l ' _ , .LA4IRENCE CREEK ] t mi LA HONDA CREEK U S.P. - �i:!1iI�:,�L,��k-!kI,��..Ir"�!t��,iII�.Ii.�I..�:; er, �. ;.;-�,:..�.1:.`.�"�-.�-�.;:-,:...,,,.:-..�..::.-.,7�*i,1,.�:,-,.�:1;y-...--:l.,..::.L:,."..�::.,::::.:..l1:,..:..�m;;-':.-:;-,i�::i:::.,�.,;!.:..'q41:K.!,.�.,,l!!::AI:*X�,:..:..::;i:..-,"�;;:,,-...,::-.i1-M;x:�:..,.�:�..:,.Ij Ij�Lv��:,..-.*,.*:..:�,.-.:..�,1:�:;..,..:*�:,,--;,::..,�.,;.,.:�,:.I"-.':....:,:�:.:,;;.:%`:�.,....�I.,�.;.1.%.,:-I..::;.:,:�::.�::.-.:,�.,..:--.,�.I,:.�:`-:iX�:,.i�:j:-.-.)�:.*:'.�.,-�..: '':,, :t'III)i'i:i�(NS!)L�4 R (;tUNAL ()PI:N 4!'�iCi: UliltlCT i t fF I..:.,l.:,,,.�.:-..�7:�,!�I---,,.:�.,:-�..�:-..:,-:.:..��k,::.--�1,m:L;�.��,i I.-,.�.":.,t.:.--,:l�...:...:..::'.,(.,:-.,-..I:"��:.:-:;77�...,1.,:."-::.�I.,;-..:.I,..:..,,:..::,,.:/;.-.",,.;.,LL.:,-.-*�,r.,�:..,.:,.--.1.m,:�-;7..I-i­,,,­.::..:!',I.I1 I:lI—...�,i,1..,.,1,�.I:.".�*.:­:-..-:;:-�:...,....:,.,!..,N�,..�;-,-..-.,.�.:::...N. .�:��-:-�-..:�,.�.�:*:�'--j,i-.'.,,:.,.._kI.,.�.:.:--Z�,�,..,.,-.N,,�:-t I":,..-.�,,�..-e,,..:..:�-II-..1"i:I--.,�2�:,.:..-:-�,l. -\:.-��,i.i:,.i:i�:.&.;:I-�::..,I;,�;-�:",�:*,.�.,:7�dD;-/i,i.�,,-.-��.l:7.-�!�i i: -0��.-I-.:,.-,:i�-�:;o���.--:.-..I�,-�:/Iii,I,,--�`,�lr-::.!"l i]0.�:I.]-.N--),.:�I.-1i�l,,.�:-O 1:#.:N-,::E�����..`=��I.:;;*:-i��.;-.:h-,,�-�..:-:1-"' ..:�r:.."�,\-,::�:��.�XI::-- -�.-r.....��-,k,.;a:-:.,,-1 I:.:.�..,,,".:�,-,.;;'.,1I.]-.,��-i-�0.."o!�,I.I.f,,�.�-.:I. --u,, �N .mc Purisinia Creek, R� r�W o �' 00en Space Pres�etve , . .��.:;;�i.�.::I.".-,,,I,::.I��.0-��,.��I;..",.-.-::'�..-.�,:."-i�.:o�..,..*;.�.,I.��,::....:�:l,:',;, !,j::l..I..,--1.,,,-i::..:-,":t-.,�0)- �-�:_I.�:(..::�i::.,��:..::'.1 1.1�.:i-:-..�.�.:\:0.k.::,,�,�bL,�:..,,:--,:..m�.,.:.o�;.'�,j;.":�.:,::ix��.y`i.!..:(;�-i�:�-f:.�::],-::::----,.7�?.,,�;::.:;\.:I--.:.%,:��-,.;,,.4,�:�,:,..-, i:.,�,,�....i:I..i:!;::��,'�:.7A":,-.::j�i,�,���.,,:.i;.:�.m.,:.�-].,�.�,...:l���,...---:�:;-,��"�.-M.I-��.e%�,:-,,.:l'1::1'...,�,!.:�i-1:�I.I_.!-..:!L:;..,�;��" t.. i + /�LPE. `USC Rf=STAURAN;1- + I " . HIKING ONLY .r. I � WH 1 TTEMORE GULCH TRAI L�,.::: to ,�,,:,�.,.. r ::... . . .... ..: . .... HIKING AND EQUESTRIAN ONLY 3,a ,+` �r ~} %�� WHITTEMORE GULCH PARKING/ACC�5S.�t.:..1i,.1-..:�-,�,....�':!..,.:�.:::�!-1,�,�..-.'-. V�:.-.,-.,.�,1%.,-:':�,1i-.i9.:,..,%.:�l.m::,..*:-,�..:i.::-".,,:- ..-�-.C." �� D.,..-.-.-"�!:.-�.::-.�-.I..L,,..:,.�.�-,�.�I v—..,,.:� -j j:I..-i..��1I:a�,:::-,.- (CLOSED SEASONALLY TO EQUESTRIANS -r". �� - 1 + �'"4� ELEV. 2000' i �'-.%.-:.;.*.-..7�,I:.G*:,.�.;..1..:-I­�_*-.. Lk .. �.. .. _ ; RD MASKER - S, },.. % -,- -..- \ . 0.+N,,,#.' i SM 1836 rt S, t ve ¢ , i _� _ PRIVATE PROPERTY, l i' •_,_ 0 --,��:..l L�./I..-.:-/,.,L..-:�..�i..-...,-. .' mo<e. �J \`>.,,, ..SKYLINE BLVD GATE C� a r _� �/� % ( ;" f` IL.::�-A"--,-.�,:,.:;1�)::.:-..,I. t T ♦ 'tir�,�s sn ni �� )s `� -_C9° �'• SODA GULCH TRAI L f :,i: k' ; st'c...`....]x�t1x.R .: { \ z € y ,, 1•�..::.•��;,� h��"� `L \ �� `-. f J�,i / .�s >, i KINGS �1TN `:':( :. �P ram .• _ ! (HIKING-ONLY f t." a HUDDART PARK s i i ,", >`11 FIRE STATION r f�' H�IGGINS-PURISIMA,.- -N - ` `,� \:T , .,.. PARKING / ACCESS "--�' ``- � ._ ('rec1�,,,� - `, ., 3., ' l - . 0 0 �, __� w T J \ €; a ; ELEV 4 t _` �`�.- /- ROAD MAR'r:ER SM 16.65 r ? _ \ _. c, - l t` 4r :i 1 ✓ 1 \ Lid ` >' / ��1 j;`0UN7A1tY—^ �1 \;j q hi+'?,i tf CLOSED AREA'. , , s . x �/ I' � : ! i l ` R H t .� .: �,` !� ty�....\ ,,, Y:� \ .. \' l i, ! .�/ 1' �`✓ - �1 ,7� r wl''.:•�lr,,,..�. :.:,. ...«,a..w °r;..;.:� r l + - " LI\\`L L+ 1 \ . - :. '�KINGS MTN. ROAD s k T f�r �., LICENSE AGREEMENT AREA •'t =;_ ,.$z M l r,s:: r ,.: k ♦rt f) \_ �„.r' — _ y ;�s r Ia r ,r",i.?n - ! ,. .._ } „' r! :. s >t: PURISIMA CREEK/RED�r100D TRAIL 1 f e:i.�fr t .;i,1 3� ..�_;i' �. :. ti t. v....::...._ .:V, `� \ ``l 1 '.:t� ' ,�4' - l= f= n T ,, J M_,<f ses�° t Zrr.(�1tt);Yi >x NG CCLSS `L`V e OOO Ct ! " A �' P RKI / A F '. ': : '� ..... , , . EEK ROAD N'",, ,i.. > , •:vu11M . , t ;t : TUNITAS CR #� s _ . , x; x ..f'4.;.,. ,.. ::::. :::: .I Y...;:.:L.i'„ .... L.. T :;;;:1T,:, c: ,. - '.::. rrr)" { nn..{{ .;.:tr`: F ,�"3 �.' 4 .�,;. 1 •_ } � \ ,,M AI#..::,. y,k G .,. S T ., - .1 ...... ::... J....... ..:LL:. ....,,.,....!:: x :� {:S s t :::....., .,.}. s p :. :..,. ,:...... . : . i z >:. r s..,.s w 7 } 3 j. L,...,.. t. { I s.. 4k-. , :......:7.... .... r .. ... Z 3 .. f:.. ..._. \. F..... ;., # ::: `:•r`, \� : fit �b l ! : , \ h .. c: -:: - �.—__ _., .._ ...:....L.. .. r.:;1. .. ..::.::, ;ie:< .-.: - ,:.... .,,.,..._ , :.,C. „ -.a l.. .. .;r. .-"., ...lk ":...."_.'.�`3.,..,- ..........3... ..r :..: ._..... ..... ...�,__,i� __-_ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AGREEMENT CORRECTING EASEMENT AND GRANT OF LICENSE FOR FENCING, AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT, AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTIOAI (PURISIMA CREEK REDWOODS OPEN SPACE PRESERVE AND EL CORTE DE MADERA CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE) The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve as follows : Section One . The Board of Directors of the Midpenin- sula Regional Open Space District does hereby accept that certain F Agreement Correcting Easement and Grant of License for Fencing between The Kings Grove , Inc . and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District , 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 General Manager of the District shall cause to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to The Kings Grove, Inc . The General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all other documents necessary or appropriate to the closing of the transaction. Section Three. The Board of Directors finds that the easement correction and licence for fencing are in accordance with the Basic Policy of the District and are reasonable and necessary for the management of Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve and E1 Corte de Madera Creek Open Space Preserve. * * * * * * * * * * * AGREEMENT CORRECTING EASEMENT AND GRANT OF LICENSE FOR FENCING THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a public district (hereinafter "District") , and THE KINGS GROVE, INC. , a California Corporation (hereinafter "Kings Grove") : Recitals WHEREAS, pursuant to an agreement between Kings Grove; and Marjorie S. Price and Longueville H. Price, Jr. (predecessors in interest to District) , which Agreement was dated May 29, 1969 and recorded on July 8, 1969 in Volume 5662, at page 207, Official Records of San Mateo County, Kings Grove reserved an easement for ingress and egress and public utilities , and water pipes within a 10 foot wide strip of land described in said Agreement; and WHEREAS , it has subsequently been determined that the roadway providing ingress and egress and public utilities and water pipes serving the property of Kings Grove actually are located partially within and partially outside the 10 foot wide strip of land described in said Agreement, although still entirely upon real property now owned by District; and WHEREAS , District has heretofore inadvertently constructed a fence upon property owned by Kings Grove; and WHEREAS , District and Kings Grove desire to amend the easement reserved in said Agreement to correct its location and to define their respective rights and responsibilities in connection with said easement and with said fence . NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions and mutual covenants herein contained it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto, as follows: I . The easement rights reserved in Section 2 of said 1969 Agreement (5662 OR 207) shall be null and void and be superseded in their entirety by the terms of this Agreement. II . District hereby grants to Kings Grove a non-exclusive easement and right of way for the construction, reconstruction, removal , and use of an access roadway, public utilities, and an underground water pipe line within the boundaries of that certain real property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof . The easement is granted by District and accepted by Kings Grove upon the following terms and conditions: and License - The Kings Grove, Inc . Page 2 A. Thv Irlasement herein granted is appurten, ,---int to and for the LLnefit of Grove ' s adjoining real property. B . Kings Grove hereby acknowledges District ' s title in and to said r ai property �aescribed in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and agrees never to assail or to resist said title . C . Upon completion of any of its works hereunder , Kings Grove shall rromp-tly restore as near as possible the surface of the ground to the condition in which it was prior to the commencement of said work and leave said real property in a clean and presentable condition, free from waste. D. Except in case of ordinary maintenance and emergency repairs , Kings Grove shall give District at least ten (10) day' s notice in writing before entering upon said real property for any work in connection with construction, reconstruction, repair or removal or performing any work on or in connection with Kings Grove ' s facilities. In no event will Kings Grove remove or damage any tree, shrub, or similar vegetation without first obtaining District approval in writing. E. Kings Grove expressly agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless District, its directors , officers , and employees from and against any and all loss , liability, expense, claims , costs , suits , and damages , including attorneys ' fees , arising out of Kings Grove ' s operation or performance under this easement . III . Kings Grove does hereby give to District a revocable license for the construction, reconstruction, maintenance, removal and use of a post and split rail fence upon a portion of Kings Grove ' s property along Tunitas Creek Road, San Mateo County as shown on the drawing designated Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof . The license is given by Kings Grove and accepted by District upon the following terms and conditions : A. District hereby acknowledges the title of Kings Grove in and to the real property occupied by said fence and agrees never to assail or to resist said title. B. Said License may be revoked by Kings Grove at any time upon giving to District 120 days previous notice in writing of Kings Grove ' s intention so to do, and upon the expiration of said 120-day period all rights herein given to District shall immediately cease and terminate. Upon such revocation and the giving of such notice , Kings Grove may record in the Office of the County Recorder of said County of San Mateo, a notice of such revocation and of having given notice as hereinbefore provided; the recital of such facts in such recorded notice shall be conclusive proof of the truthfulness thereof . Prior to the expiration of said 120- day period, or upon any termination or revocation of said License or of any of the rights of District hereunder, District shall promptly remove from said real property at District ' s own expense the fence and shall restore said real property to as near its original condition as possible. Agreement and License The Kings Grove, Inc . Page 3 C . The construction, reconstruction, maintenance, removal and use of , and all work upon or in connection with, the fence shall at no time and in no way *whatever interfere with the operations of Kings Grove; the location of the fence, the construction, reconstruction, maintenance and removal thereof and all work in connection therewith shall be done and made under the supervision and to the satisfaction of Kings Grove, and the construction, reconstruction, maintenance, removal and use of any facilities or improvements of Kings Grove, present or future, upon said real property shall at all times be paramount to any rights of District under this License. D. Upon completion of any of its works hereunder District shall promptly restore the property to the condition in which it was prior to the commencement of said work and leave said real property in a clean and presentable condition, free from waste, and if District fails so to keep said real property then Kings Grove may perform the work as reasonably necessary at the expense of District, which expense District agrees to pay to Kings Grove upon demand. E. In the event the fence interferes with the future use of the property by Kings Grove, then District at its own expense and cost, upon receiving 120 days written notice from Kings Grove so to do, will immediately proceed to remove the fence and in the event that District fails so to do, said work may be performed by Kings Grove at the expense of District, which expense District agrees to pay to Kings Grove promptly upon demand. F. To the extent permitted by law, District expressly agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Kings Grove, its directors, officers, and employees from and against any and all loss, liability, expense, claims , costs, suits, and damages , arising out of District ' s operation or performance under this License. G. District agrees to assume all risk of damage to the fence and to any other property of District or any property under the control or custody of District while upon the property of Kings Grove. H. All rights herein given to District are subject to all existing rights , rights of way, reservations and easements by whomsoever held in and to said real property. IV. All notices required hereunder shall be served upon the District at: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Old Mill Office Center Building C, Suite 135 201 San Antonio Circle Mountain View, CA 94040 Attn: Herbert Grench, General Manager (415) 949-5500 Agreement and License - The Rings Grove, Inc. Page 4 Fxnd upon Kings Grove at: The Rings Grove, Inc. 10 West Orange Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Attn: Duane Atkinson (415) 876-1303 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement, in duplicate, the day and year first above written. District: Rings Grove: MIDPEIiINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE THE KINGS GROVE, INC. , DISTRICT, a Public Distract a California Corporation President, Board of Directors By:. 1),A�ca* Duane E. Atkinson, President ATTEST: District Clerk Date: _ i I . i f EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION That certain real property located in the State of California, County of San Mateo, more particularly described as follows : Parcel One • A Strip of Land of varying width, the westerly line of which is identical to the boundary line between Point "A" and Point "B" as said points and boundary line are described and designated in that certain Agreement between Marjorie S. Price and Longueville H. Price, Jr. , 1st parties, and The Kings Grove, a Corporation, 2nd party, dated May 29, 1969 and recorded July 8 , 1969 in Volume 5662 of Official Records at Page 207 in the office of the Recorder of San Mateo County, and the easterly line of which lies equally five feet easterly of and parallel with the following described line : Beginning at said Point "A" ; thence South 080 23 ' 42" East 45.16 feet; thence South 100 38 ' 14" West 82. 94 feet; thence South 020 33 ' 41" East 110 . 58 feet; thence South 090 49 ' 57" West 47 . 99 feet; thence South 230 36 ' 49" West 52 . 11 feet; thence South 300 04 ' 31" West 119. 97 feet; thence South 190 21 ' 58" West 50. 60 feet; thence South 080 42 ' 48" West 128 . 06 feet; thence South 060 43 ' 11" West 130 . 09 feet; thence South 340 55 ' 09" West 24 .09 feet; thence South 420 26 ' 57" West 238 . 34 feet; thence South 350 48 ' 28" West 49 .72 feet; thence South 270 57 ' 31" West 19 . 26 feet; thence South 190 46 ' 46" West 37 . 32 feet; thence South 050 42 ' 23" West 128 . 84 feet; thence South 220 09 ' 07" West 43 . 03 feet; thence South 350 03 ' 50" West 44 . 05 feet; thence South 190 41 ' 35" West 124 .74 feet; thence South 090 18 ' 38" West 79.14 feet to the south line of Section 18 , Town- ship 6 South, Range 4 West, M.D.B.& M. Said easterly line shall be lengthened or shortened so as to terminate northerly in said boundary line (5662 OR 207) and southerly in the South line of said Section 18 . Parcel Two• A Strip of Land of varying width, the general southerly line of which lies equally five feet, at right angle measurement, easterly, southerly, northerly and parallel with a line beginning at a point on the south line of Section 18 , Township 6 South, Range 4 West, M.D.B.& M. at the southerly terminus of the course described in Parcel One above as having a bearing of South 090 18 ' 38" West and a length of 79.14 feet; thence from said point of beginning South 120 10 ' 43" West 16 .09 feet; thence South 270 17 ' 40" West 18 . 12 feet; thence South 610 34 ' 34" West 25. 55 feet; thence South 800 30 ' 25" West 26 . 86 feet; thence South 890 19 ' 23" West 25. 62 feet; thence North 800 59 ' 03" West 48 . 44 feet; thence North 800 12 ' 38" West 61. 68 feet; thence North 850 07 ' 09" West 98 . 50 feet; thence North 100 46 ' 16" East 23 feet, more or less to a point on said south line of Section 18 designated herein as Point "C" . The general northerly line of said strip shall be the south line of Section 18 , lying between said Point "C" and the point of beginning of the above described general southerly line . / Schematic EXHIBIT "B" Redwoods Oaks Assumed ' Property Line / c Wire fencing (approx. 75' ) to be installed by MIROSD • Lands of Kings Grove Lands of Split rail fencing MROSD installed by MROSD i MROSD pipe gate f ' MROSD stile (� ? I 1 0 Tuni tas Creek • Road I F-• �v' G Oa 300 a fr 3 urc /') � � r R-89-94 {Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989 WL 64e 14�bl MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT June 21 , 1989 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; D. Woods , Principal Open Space Planner; M. Gundert, Open Space Planner; C. Bruins, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Award of Contract for Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve Development Project Recommended Actions: 1 . Accept the bid of $570 , 885. 87 from WSP Trucking, Inc. of Alviso for the Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve Development Project. 2. Authorize the General Manager to enter into contract for performance of the work. Discussion: At your July 27 , 1988 meeting you authorized staff to solicit bids for the public access improvements to Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve (see report R-88-93 dated July 20 , 1988) . You also reviewed and approved plans and specifications for the entire project. Staff sent plans and specifications to two local contractor ' s exchanges and advertised the project in two newspapers and a local trade journal. Staff also sent about 40 bid solicitations to qualified contractors who have either expressed interest in bidding on District projects or were identified by the various consultants designing the project. Seven contracting firms requested sets of plans for the project. Staff telephoned the seven firms to encourage them to submit bids on the project. The public bid opening was held on Friday, June 16 , 1989 . WSP Trucking submitted the only bid. Staff feels the bid is a responsible and reasonable one. The lack of other bidders is due ------------------- R-89-94 Page Two primarily to the time of year; the size of the project requires a larger work force than many firms have available this late into their busy season. Cost estimates for the individual components of the project were prepared by the various design consultants. Staff has compared the cost estimates for the individual components with the cost estimate received from WSP Trucking. The bid submitted by WSP differs by only $10,000, or two percent above the original cost estimate. WSP Trucking has worked on a number of projects for Santa Clara County, including the Monte Bello Road bypass through the Picchetti Ranch Area of Monte Bello Preserve. District and County staff were very pleased with the quality of work and sensitivity to the natural landscape exhibited by WSP Trucking. R-89-97 (Meeting 89-16 June 28 , 1989) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT June 23 , 1989 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General. Manager PREPARED BY: J . Fiddes , Administrative Services Manager SUBJECT: Acceptance of Insurance Coverage for 1989-1990 Recommended Action: Accept the public entities difference-in-conditions , volunteer accident , and fidelity bond insurance coverage bid totalling $11 , 695 from Flinn, Gray & Herterich based on the quotations shown on Exhibit A from, CIGNA, 11.�Tierican Surplus , Insurance Company of North America (INA) , and Chubb for the period of July 1 , 1989 through March 30 , 1990 . Staff has not completed its analysis of the two umbrella liability bids submitted as of the writing of this report . The recommended action for umbrella liability coverage will be relayed at your June 28 meeting. Discussion: As noted at your March 28 meeting, it was financially advisable for the District to continue coverage under its umbrella liability , public entity liability, volunteer accident , and fidelity bond coverage through June 30 ( see report R-89-58 dated March 212 , 1989) . You accepted the package (liability and property) and automobile insurance bid package totalling ng $66 , 838 from Flinn, Gray & Herterich at your March 28 meeting. Flinn, Gray & Herterich of Palo Alto , the District ' s insurance broker , has submitted another bid package totalling $30 , 773 . The coverage period is July 1 , 1989 through March 20 , 1990 . The bid information is : 1) umbrella Liabilit�L _y Coves e CIG14A has quoted $19 , 078 for the District ' s $5 million-limit umbrella liability coverage . On a. twelve-month comparison basis , the bid is an 8 . 5% increase over the 1988-1989 premium of $23 , 411 . 2) Public Entities Difference-in-Conditions Coverage : American Surplus Insurance Company has bid $7 , 7116 . On a twelve-anonth comparison basis , the bid is an 18% decrease from the 1988-1989 premium, of $12 , 552 . R-89-97 Page two 3) Volunteer Accident CoveK4_ge : INA (Insurance Company of North bid $250 , the same premium amount as the 1988-1989 fiscal year. 4) Fidelit Bond Cove a e: Chubb' s premium bid is $3 , 729 . On a twelve-month comparison basis , the bid is the same as the 1988 1989 premium of $4 , 965. The above bids are the only ones that Flinn, Grey & Herterich could secure for the District. The Local Agency Self-Insurance Authority MASIA) has bid $25, 300 (excluding taxes and fees) for the period of September 1 , 1989 through August 31 , 1990 . LASIA would prorate this premium for the months of July and August 1989. LABIA is a statewide joint powers agency authorized by the California Legislature to provide excess liability and reinsurance coverage to California public agencies . LASIA coverage is based on a common policy with a September 1 start date for all participating agencies; the policy is provided by American Reinsurance. Staff is still analyzing the two umbrella liability bids and coverage differences of the two policies . On a dollar-to-dollar twelve-month comparison, the American Reinsurance would cost the District $26 , 084 (including taxes and fees) , while the CIGNA policy would cost the District $25 , 393 , a difference of $691 . R-89-97 EXHIBIT A INSURANCE COVERAGE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 1989-1990 COVERAGE COMPANY BID QUOTATION Public Entity Difference- American Surplus $ 7,716.00 In-Conditions Insurance Company Volunteer Accident Policy Insurance Company $ 250.00 of North America (INA) Fidelity Bond Chubb Insurance Company $ 3,729.00 $11,695.00 8 9__9 51 t ing 8 9 'T June 28 , 1981� MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT June '23 , 1989 i . MO. Board of Directo.-s FRO14: H. Grench , Gen­ral Mana{jer SUBJECT; Adoption of Medical Ben.,&fir Revisions in District ' s poring(_ Benefit Plan Reconmmended Actions : 4 Set , effective July 1 , 1989 , the base single mned Cal pri_�­:rnium coveraqe rL,.Ite at $11.5 . 20 per ronth and the base fa-alily medical preniur'. covt-rage rate at $25v . 33 per month . ment of any add 4 t 4 A,17horiz­ pay- _L _L __=al rate increase amount above ontr ' bution levell' s .lrrenT:ly paid by &mployees f:r(-.,7­ July 1 , 1939 cl T f any T_hrouglh Septei,,ther 30 , 1-990 . - Santa Clara CounT' Y m s changes in th,�: Santa C'lara County Preferred 1013 Plan T i­ay n�.x­d to r-eturn to You to discass coverage,, and/or pre,,T,,,iur? C111EM" -16,S t 0 DiscusSion: h t e D- Sl.4ct ' s Fringe Benefit P' an , w- - ch w�_-nt into e- ffi c 11 October 1 , Sr , requires that the Board set annually the, basr_-' sin(Ile prerriium rate and the base, family premiu.m rate for basic rledical insurance- coverage for General liana ear appointees . hi it t'i, entitl'?d Di5,,:r'Lct Fr" -Inge Benef-_t Plan, shows the July 1988 - June 1989 and the June 1989 - June 199`D -,:)rf-_,miums for the Distra.ct ' s medical plans . I recc-mi-i',end that the July 1989 -- ji-ine 1990 base single prf-,Miur", ra_ tL- be seT7 at, $115 . 20 p _ onth and the base family premium, rare be set at $252 . 33 per month . Thi I is single base rate would cover the ent ' re cost of -,he Kaiser alld Taklc-;care preen ium-,s_ The base family rate would cover the. entire cost of the Kaiser plan for a fatri-ily . The, Santa Clara County Preferred 100 Plan single and fal-rllily pre.miumis increased 47 . 7% and 40% , respectively, over the July 1988 -- Jurt�: 1989 rates , coripared with an average 1.4 . 9% increase for Kaiser and an average 16 . 6% incruas-e for, Takecare . The Santa (Tara County Pre-ferred 1,00 Plan premiue,is incr - ask:�d 130% last year . The District , as a Santa Clara Count l subgroup for irledical coverage' , can- not change its open enrollment date to July I frog,, October 1 . S i n C t­ e'en- ploye,_'-s can only change health plans during the open enrollment peyLic�d , nd since so e enployE�es may base ti"e-Li- decisions on selection of healtl-i plans at least partially on cost to the: :, 1 am again re�'­ommending that the R- 89-95 Page 2 District pay any increase in a current employee ' s current medical contri- bution for the period from July I through September 30 . The additional cost to the District would be $1700 . This recommended adjustment is not intended to set precedent for future years nor suggest a change in the Board ' s adopted fringe benefit plan. Because of the skyrocketing premium increases for the Preferred 100 plan, Santa Clara County is in the process of looking into the plan and possible ways to reduce costs . According to county staff , not enough subscribers in the plan are using preferred providers . The county may make some ad- justments in the plan to make it less attractive for those individuals using non-preferred providers . There are no specific details at this time , and it will probably be mid--July before more definite information is known. Discussions are also taking place at the county regarding the possibility of changing the open enrollment date to July 1 . Your Budget Committee net to review the new medical premiums , decided to support my recommendation, and will be able to report to you at the June 28 meeting. R-89-95 1 i DISTRICT FRINGE BENEFIT PLAN EXHIBIT A June 28, 1989 F MEDICAL PLANS I July 1988-June 1989 July 1989-June 1990 Percentage Monthly Annually Monthly Annually Increase SantaClara County ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Preferred 100 Plan Single (4)* $121.56 j $1,459 $179.57 $2,155 } 47.7% Family (4) $257.19 $3,086 $360.26 E $4,323 40.0% Kaiser ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- ------------ Single (3) $89.00 $1,068 $102.62 $1,231 15.3% Family (4) $220.36 $2,644 $252.33 $3,028 14.5 Takecare ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- ------------ Single (16) $98.70 $1,184 $115.20 $1,382 16.7% Family (9) $239.40 $2,873 I $278.75 $3,345 16.4% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------� *Number in parentheses indicates the number of General Manager appointees currently enrolled in each plan. BASE SINGLE PREMIUM RATE FOR JULY 1988-JUNE 1989: $100.00 BASE FAMILY PREMIUM RATE FOR JULY 1988-JUNE 1989: $ 25.00 RECOMMENDED BASE SINGLE PREMIUM RATE FOR JULY 1989-JUNE 1990: $116.20 RECOMMENDED BASE FAMILY PREMIUM RATE FOR JULY 1989-JUNE 1990: $252.33 E DENTAL PLAN Premium for July 1989-June 1990 is $47.76 monthly. The July 1988-June 1989 monthly premium was $42.07. 100% of premium to be paid by MROSD. 0 oe MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM June 28 , 1989 TO: H. Grench, General Manager FROM: J. Fiddes, Administrative Services Manager SUBJECT: Follow-up from June 23 Fringe Benefit Meeting at Rancho San Antonio Ranger Office All of the field staff , save one open space technician, were in attendance on June 23 at the second meeting we had scheduled for staff to discuss any questions they had regarding this year ' s fringe benefit coverage. No one attended the first meeting scheduled for Wednesday morning, June 21 at the main office. Various field staff members posed questions and commented on the District' s Fringe Benefit Plan. The following three statements basically summarize the discussion: 1) The District should cover the premiums for a health plan in which an employee is able to select his/her own doctor and not be tied to any particular clinic or medical facility. 2) The District' s current plan is particularly disruptive to employees with families since they may have to change health plans each year depending on what the selected base family plan is and what the employee contribution amounts are for the other plans. 3) Some members of the group felt that the District should provide and cover the full premiums for families for both Kaiser and Takecare. Under the current benefit plan (as opposed to when the District covered all premiums no matter what plan) employees do not have any control over the increased percentage they pay if they select the non-base medical plan. As I mentioned during our meeting Monday, I told the field staff that I would relay their comments to you. I also told them that I felt you would relay their comments to the Board. In response to the question you asked during our discussion: 1) Two employees, both with families, switched from Blue Cross to the Santa Clara County Preferred 100 Plan in October 1987 . This was the first year of the Fringe Benefit Plan. The base single and the base family medical premiums that year were based on the Santa Clara County Preferred 100 Plan. Both Takecare's and Kaiser's premiums were less than Preferred 100 for the single employee. Employees with dependents selecting Takecare or Kaiser or choosing to stay in Blue Cross (which at that point was closed to enrollment) were responsible for paying premium difference from the Preferred 100 amount. 2) In July 1988, Blue Cross was phased out. An employee with dependents switched from Blue Cross to the Preferred 100 Plan. An employee without dependents switched from Blue Cross to the Preferred 100 Plan. In October 1988 during the open enrollment period, an employee without dependents switched from Preferred 100 to Takecare. This was the year we started to see Preferred 100 take great premium leaps. In 1988-1989, the base single medical rate ($100) set by the Board covered both Kaiser and Takecare single coverage. Employees selecting the Preferred 100 Plan had to contribute $21.56 per month toward their coverage. The base family medical rate ($225) covered Kaiser. Employees with dependents selecting Takecare coverage had to contribute $14.40 per month, while employees with dependents selecting the Preferred 100 Plan had to contribute $32.19 per month. As you can see, we haven't had a great deal of switching between health plans to date. Until we know what coverage adjustments Santa Clara County proposes to address the costs of the Preferred 100 Plan, I cannot speculate whether the eight employees currently in Preferred 100 will change health plans this year. I do know that some of the Preferred 100 participants want to have the ability to select their own doctor(s) and medical facility. If, in the future, we see a growing difference between the Takecare family premium and the Kaiser family premium, which I assume will continue to be used to set the base family premium, we may also see more health plan switching on the part of our employees with dependents. a+aMI,WX14 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: F.Y. I. DATE: June 28 , 1989 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT OLD MILL OFFICE CENTER,BUILDING C,SUITE 135 201 SAN ANTONIO CIRCLE,MOUNTAIN VIEW,CALIFORNIA 94040 (415)949.5500 June 21 , 1989 i I i i I i Mr . Bob Hennessy D ecutive Director San Jose Conservation Corps ?�'n-n Senter Road San Jose, CA 95111 D--::r 1,11r. Hennessey: Thar'il- you for your April 19 , 1989 letter about the San Jose Conservation Corps and its desire to do more projects for the strict, Herbert Grench, the District ' s General Manager , has ir—, med me that the District will continue to use the Corps , and t^at District Open Space management staff have been in touch with y,)-i and Pam Prodger of your staff . I understand that a creek restoration project has currently been identified that n.ay utilize State grant funds to cover projected expenses . The San Jose Conservation Corps should be very proud of the services it is providing to various public and private sector organizations , and particularly to the youth of the south bay. Sincerely, Gerry' B. Andeen, President Board of Directors GBA%ma V'cc : Board of Directors Herbert Grench,General Manager,Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Robert McKibbin,Teena Henshaw,Edward Shelley,Nonette Hanko,Gerry Andeen,'Richard Bishop f i Alta California Special Districts Seminars presents A one-day seminar for SPECIAL DISTRICT DIRECTORS, MANAGERS AND STAFF Summer 1989 Schedule July 17 KINGS BEACH, CA (North Lake Tahoe Conference Center, 8318 North Lake Blvd. ) August 1 REDDING, CA (Shasta Dam Area PTID Senior Community Center, 1525 Median, Central Valley) August 21 SALINAS, CA (Salinas City Hall, Conference Room, 200 Lincoln) 10 :00 A.M. - 3 :00 P.M. Tuition: $45 . 00 per person ( Includes handout materials; does not include lunch) Topics to be covered include: Special District law Brown Act District Administration, including administrative codes, personnel policy manuals, records retention and destruction, and government code sections that apply to special districts Board of Directors : powers, procedures Types of meetings: what, where, when The instructor, BettyHarrison-Smith has been active in the Special Districts field for eighteen years. She is a Director on the California Special Districts Association, the Northern California Special Districts Association and the Special District Insurance Authority. She also serves as a Director on the Shasta Community Services District Board. She is the Office Manager for the Law Offices of Harrison Smith, and is an instructor at Shasta College in Redding. For further information, contact the instructor at 916-246-1222 . Recommended by the Northern California Special Districts Association I ALTA CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICT SEMINARS Enrollment Form Mail with full payment to Alta California Special Districts Seminars, P. 0. Box 367 , Shasta, CA 96087 Name Phone Title District Address Check which seminar attending: Kings Beach July 17 Redding August 1 Salinas August 21 (Make checks payable to: Alta California Special Districts Seminars) In order to receive handout material, Enrollment Form must be received one week prior to seminar. (Cancellation Requests : Cancellation requests must be received at least one week prior to seminar, in order to receive refund. ) Post Office Box 367 / Shasta, California 96087 / A16-246-1222 OPEN SPICE D08T(ROCT S(P[EaKS 00 -,A UP[PE[R HEIM (QUARUTY LAMM QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION HELD ON JUNE 1, 1989 WITH HERB GRENCH, GENERAL MANAGER, MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT. QUESTIONS ASKED BY CONCERNED CITIZENS OF LOS ALTOS HILLS. - How important is the Upper Neary Quarry lands as a potential property purchase? Answer: *Clearly,It Is one of the most desirable pieces of private[arid to be acquired for open space.* e If the Upper Neary Quarry Open[arid is ultimately purchased by the Midpeninsula Open Space District,how do you envision this property fitting Into the already established San Antonio and Windmill Pasture Preserves? Answer:"It will certainly serve as a critical trail and open space corridor linking these open space preserves.* - If purchased,would these lands become a headquarters area? Answer:"It will not become a headquarters area." - How would the public get access to this property? Answer'. "The regional access would continue to be through Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve at the end of Cristo Rey Drive In Cupertino.* - A question has been raised In the newspapers: Why didn't the Open Space District purchase this[arid when It was on the open market? Answer: "To my knowledge this property was never on the open market. We started trying to acquire this property many years ago from Mr.Neary. He appeared never to be interested in selling to the District. Concentrated efforts during the last 2 years with Mr.Vidovich have not proved any more fruitful." - Can the Midpeninsula,Regional Open Space District afford to purchase this property and would you? Answer: "Based upon our preliminary estimate of value,the ridge portion of the property would be affordable under the current county density or the similar density allowed by Proposition B. It Is not dear whether the District could afford It at the density allowed by Proposition C. If after the election the completed formal appraisal confirms that the ridgetands are affordable,I am prepared to recommend to the District's Board of Directors that the District move promoly to enter Into formal naMiations to&Wulre that mrtio13 of the property," OO LIP-11 118—)(0 H "n 64-\l'"C',V CATEGORY PRESENT LOPER'S PROPOSAL ALLOWED USES Residerdial/Agricultural Residential/Agricultural Residerdial/Agrioiltural ResideollallAgrioullural LOCATION OF HOMES Not On SbM over 30% Not on ridge top IS on ridge 24 on edge NUMBER OF HOMES- 7 Upper/2 Quarry 7 Upper/19 Quarry 15 Uppinfill Quarry 24 Upper/19 Quarry SIZE OF HOMES Unknown 6,000 sq. N. Max Floor Area 15,000.34,000 sq.ft. 16.000-34.000 sq.R. Max Floor Area-lot deperderA. Max Floor Area-lot dependen! MAX DEVELOPMENT Unlrtown 15,000 sq ft MDA 23.000-53.000 so.R. 23.000-53.000 sq.ft. Max Area-lot dependent Max Area-lot dependent MIN LOT SIZE Ur*nown 10 Acres minimum 12 was loacres PUBLIC OPEN SPACE None unless purchased None unless purchased None:100 was private None NEW ROAD Not needed Not needed New mad up two of cliff Now road up lace of cJifI QUARRY CLOSURE Limiled by Material Developer has agreed to close Developer has agreed to close Developer has agreed to close CREEK PROTECTION State Water Bd.Decides State water Bd. Decides State Water ad.Decides Stale Water 8d.Decides Please vote YES on the CITIZEN'S MEASURE B and NO on the DEVELOPER'S MEASURE C. DBv/ ,,. 4..OPER CLOSES QW&RY1 The TIMES-TRIBUNE reported on Saturday,June 3rd that owner John Vidovich has closed the Neary Quarry and has not renewed the lease with Patton Brothers. Patton Brothers Is moving ail their equipment out. And why hasn't the lease been renewed? Because Mr.Vidovich wants to develop the Quarry as soon as possible and does not want to be encumbered with a long term lease to hold up development. Wouldn't we all do the same If we could make the profit from 19 homes in Los Altos Hills? SO WHY VOTE FOR MEASURE C? IT SERVES NO PURPOSE EXCEPT TO DESTROY THE RIDGE WITH 15 HOMES. WEASURF. e 0S CaD®QSIED a V: The SAN JOSE MERCURY-NEWS, The COMMITTEE FOR GREEN FOOTHILLS, The HORSEMAN'S ASSOCIATION, RURAL and hundreds of residents of Los Altos Hills Including the following: Sharyn B. Adkisson Thomas Fikadat :.Alice Phillips Andrew and Grace Allison Bonnie and Don Finsthxait Joyce Phillips Joseph and Geneva Anaya Don and Gladys Fiske Mr and Mrs. Kenneth A. Plough Merlyme and Or. Philip G. Arai Barbara Flury Jim and Jane Plummer Christine and Geoffrey Bate Doris and John W. Fordahl Margot Pratt Fiona Bate Gait Fondahl Horner and Prosser Proft Carolyn and Alan Beunbaeh Connie Fraser Herbert Prosser Merry Belden Stacy and Margaret French Marcia Reborn Betsy Bertram Delme Fry Neerja Raman Kenneth H. Bileki Kevin and Barbara L. Gartner Anne Magner Raphael Anne and Peter BJorklund Edward and Artemes Ginzton Mrs. S. Rauwendsat Irene J. Black Raye and Susan Girouard Lauri Reed Jim and Joan Bliss Joseph and Elizabeth Goodman Hilt Reiser Barbera Bogomilsky Carol and Bernon Gottlieb Paul and Daniette Reneau Angie and Matt Boissevain Harold and Corona Green Nona Roe Chris Boissevain Watt Gregorwich Dave Roos David and Margot Botsford Eleanor Breslin Eleanor B. Cropper Ellen Rosenfeld Bill and Evelyn Gunning Annemarie and Lars Rosengreen Ruth Burman Carol and Dexter Make Cat and Alberta Rossi Bill and Barbara Bunting Mr. and Mrs. Robert Hatch Virginia and Halsey Royden Eugenia Bus Christian S. Horn 'Dr. and Mrs. George Rugtiv Mr. and Mrs. Joachim Busch Ooni and Sid Hubbard Suzanne Schmitt Jonathan and Russell Butner Mr. Ronnie JayH sett Dr. Alfred and Brenda Butner Etty Dot and Bob Schreiner Laura and Sara Byrne Marguerite err Richard NuynenMarc Peter Schubert Eleanor and Don Cameron Marjorie K and Dr. Mare Kaufman Pauline Schulze Marjorie Kellogg Steve Shapiro Ginger Campbell Andrew and Linda Kirk Bill Siegel Robert M. and Steven C. Carico Michelle and Stephen Ktescvewsky Eric and Brigita Silins Denise Del Carlo Art and Edie Lachenbruch John and Linda Sims Kenneth and Kiet Carter Java and John Leffingweit Mr. and Mrs. Walter Singer Mrs. S. Chan Werdelt and Joyce Lehr Am Warren Smith Curtis V. Chan Karen and John Lames Dr. Harold Chatted Elton Snider Lucile and Don Leonard Ruth B. Spengernberg Lawrence C. Chu George and Am Limbach Ursula and Merman Spector Ms. Wendy Allyn Cockey Lois and Sam Logonja Anne Spencer Christie Cole Dr. Charles and Dr. Jane Lombard Jeanette Spitzer Helena and David Cote Libby Lucas Arthur and nd Sheito Stabenow Ed Collins Richard Maher Walter and Glades Starr Tom and Jun Conlon Sandra and Paul Markoff John X. and Dorothy Stefanki Mrs. Elizabeth Cottle Emily (Mrs. Howard) Martin Mary and Wallace Stegner Nancy and Jitze Couperus Tom and Lucy McCarthy Fran Stevenson Lois Crozier-Hogle Terry and Hub McDaniel Jeff and Meredith Struthers Dan and Liz Dena Ellen and Jim McKenzie David, Jean and Megan Struthers Barbara end Anthony Danlnxk Eve Meek Kenneth and Nancy Stuart Elayne Dauber James J. Mitchell Mary and Bob Stutz Robert and Hazel Davis Joan Moeller Susan L. Sutton Joanne and Doc Dochnahl James and Angola Mongillo Sandy Tanaka Mrs. Jun Stough Droste Mrs. J Mullen u Mr. Throop Faith Duhri � Morris• F. MNishiguchi Mr. and Mrs. Kart Tiefert Pearl Deborah and RayDuHamel Frank and Lynn Nunl eY Anne Tuggle Marilyn, Jim Sue and Ron OUHamel d a Mrs. Harriet O'Neil ..Richard and Dina Turner Ann A. Duwe Scott Overstreet ;'Daniel G. Wendin Joan and Les Earnest Jim and Les Patmore Julien and Thomas Williams Lily Estrada David and Jeff Patmore Luis and Gina Yaraz Marjorie W. Evans General and Mrs. John W. Pauly Mr. and Mrs. Paul Fair Mrs. Nora Pettigre Dale and Thomas Fante Mrs. R. J. Pfeifer NOVLOMED�`-Bv Telephone any of these numbers If you have questions on Measures B or C. We'll be available up to election time. 948-8317,948-6948,941-2586,948-4052 or 9415157. o 1� o FRR2 Please vote YES on the CITIZEN'S MEASURE B and NO on the DEVELOPER'S MEASURE C DEVELOPER CLOSES QuARRY1 The TIMES-TRIBUNE reported on Saturday,June 3rd that owner John V'idovich has closed the Neary Quarry and has not renewed the lease with Patton Brothers. Patton Brothers is moving all their equipment out. And why hasn't the lease been renewed? Because Mr. Vidovich wants to develop the Quarry as soon as possible and does not want to be encumbered with a long term lease to hold up development. Wouldn't we all do the some If we could make the profit from 19 homes in Los Altos Hills? SO WHY VOTE FOR MEASURE C? IT SERVES NO PURPOSE EXCEPT TO DESTROY THE RIDGE WITH 15 HOMES. GYIL G �MG3C �� C [r DOG3�l © V: The SAN JOSE MERCURY-NEWS, The COMMITTEE FOR GREEN FOOTHILLS, The HORSEMAN'S ASSOCIATION, RURAL and hundreds of residents of Los Altos Hills including the following: i Sharvn B. Adkisson Thomas Fiksdat Alice Phillips Andrew and Grace Allison Bonnie and Don Finsth:4ait Joyce Phillips Joseph and Geneva Anaya Don and Gladys Fiske Mr and Mrs. Kenneth A. Plough Merlynne and Dr. Philip G. Armi Barbara Flury Jim and Jane Plummer Christine and Geoffrey Bate Doris and John W. Fondaht Margot Pratt Fiona Bate Gail Fondaht Joanne and David Proft Carolyn and Alan Baumbach Connie Fraser Herbert Prosser Merry Belden Stacy and Margaret French Marcia Raborn Betsy Bertram Delme Fry Neerja Raman Kenneth H. Bilski Kevin and Barbara L. Gartner Anne Wagner Raphael Anne and Peter Bjorklund Edward and Artemas Ginzton Mrs. S. Rauwendaal Irene J. Black Raye and Susan Girouard Lauri Reed Jim and Joan Bliss Joseph and Elizabeth Goodman Hilt Reiser Barbara Bogomilsky Carol and Bernon Gottlieb Paul and Danielle Reneau Angie and Matt Boissevain Harold and Caren Green Nona Roe Chris Boissevain Walt Gregorwich Dave Roos David and Margot Botsford Eleanor B. Gropper Ellen Rosenfeld Eleanor Breslin Bill and Evelyn Gunning Annemarie and Lars Rosengreen Ruth Buneman Carol and Dexter Hake Cat and Alberta Rossi Bill and Barbara Bunting Mr. and Mrs. Robert Hatch Virginia and Halsey Royden Eugenia Bus Christian S. Horn Dr. and Mrs. George Rugtiv Mr. and Mrs. Joachim Busch Doni and Sid Hubbard Jonathan and Russell Butner Suzanne Schmitt Dr. Alfred and Brenda Butner Mr. Ronnie Jay Hugsett Dot and Bob Schreiner Etty and Richard Huynen Peter Schubert Laura and Sara Byrn Marguerite and Dr. Marc Kaufman Pauline Schulze Eleanor and Don Cameron Marjorie Kellogg Steve Shapiro Ginger Campbell Andrew and Linda Kirk Robert M. and Steven C. Carico Bill Siegel Carlo Michelle and Stephen Klescvewsky Eric and Brigita Sitins Denise Det Carlo Kenneth and Carter Art and Edie Lachenbruch John and Linda Sims ' Mrs. S. Chan Jann and John Leffingwett Mr. and Mrs. Walter Singer Curtis V. Chan Wendell and Joyce Lehr Ann Warren Smith Dr. Harold Chatland Karen and John Lemes Ellen Snider Lawrence C. Chu Lucile and Don Leonard Ruth B. Spangenberg George and Ann Limbach Ursula and Herman Spector Ms. Wendy Allyn Cockey Lois and Sam Logonja Anne Spencer Christie Cole Dr. Charles and Dr. Jan Lombard Jeanette Spitzer Helena and David Cote Libby Lucas Arthur and Sheila Stabenow Ed Collins Richard Maher Walter and Gladys Starr iom and June C.onion Elizabeth Cottle Sandra and Paul Markoff Jahn X. and Dorothy Stefanki Mrs. Eliza Nancy and tze Cottle Emily (Mrs. Howard) Martin Mary and Wallace Stegner Lois Croziertze Co erus Tom and Lucy McCarthy Fran Stevenson Dan and Liz Dana Terry and Hub McDaniel Jeff and Meredith Struthers Barbara and Anthony Danluck Ellen and Jim McKenzie David, Jean and Megan Struthers B Earbarlayne Dauber Eve Meek Kenneth and Nancy Stuart James J. Mitchell Mary and Bob Stutz Robert and Hazel Davis Joan MoetLer Jeanne and Doc Dochnhl Susan L. Sutton James and Angela Mongillo Sandy Tanaka Mrs. June Stough Dresie Mrs. J. F. Mullen Lewis Throop Faith Duhring Morris Mishigunhi Mr. and Mrs. Karl Tiefert Pearl, Deborah, and Ray DuHamet Frank and Lynn Nuntey Anne Tuggle Marilyn, Jim, Sue and Ron DuHamet Mrs. Harriet O'Neil Richard and Dian Turner Ann A. Duwe Scott Overstreet Daniel G. Wendin Joan and Les Earnest Jim and Lee Patmore Jutiene and Thomas Williams Lily Estrada David and Jeff Patmore Luis and Gin Yanez Marjorie W. Evans General and Mrs. John W. Pauly Mr. and Mrs. Paul Fair Mrs. Nora Pelligra Dale and Thomas Fante Mrs. R. J. Pfeifer 'LIN"W L INIE85QQ Telephone any of these numbers if you have questions on Measures B or C. We'll be available up to election time. i 948-83179 948-6948, 941-2586, 948-4052 or 9415157. o ' — Please vote YES on the CITIZEN'S MEASURE B and NO on the DEVELOPER'S MEASURE C 8FIFEM8 (OUT (ON UPPER BOXY (Guyffiflv UNDS QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION HELD ON JUNE 1, 1989 WITH HERB DRENCH, GENERAL MANAGER, MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT. QUESTIONS ASKED BY CONCERNED CITIZENS OF LOS ALTOS HILLS. - How important is the Upper Neary Quarry lands as a potential property purchase? Answer: "Clearly, it is one of the most desirable pieces of private land to be acquired for open space." - If the Upper Neary Quarry Open land is ultimately purchased by the Midpeninsula Open Space District, how do you envision this property fitting into the already established San Antonio and Windmill Pasture Preserves? Answer:"It will certainly serve as a critical trail and open space corridor linking these open space preserves." • If purchased,would these lands become a headquarters area? Answer:"It will not become a headquarters area." • How would the public get access to this property? Answer: "The regional access would ounfinue to be ihrough Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve at the end of Cristo Rey Drive in Cupertino." A question has been raised in the newspapers: Why didn't the Open Space District purchase this land when it was on the open market? Answer: "To my knowledge this property was never on the open market. We started trying to acquire this property many years ago from Mr. Neary. He appeared never to be interested in selling to the District Concentrated efforts during the last 2 years with Mr. Vidovich have not proved any more fruitful." • Can the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District afford to purchase this property and would you? Answer: "Based upon our preliminary estimate of value,the ridge portion of the property would be affordable under the ci,iffgnt county densiW or the similar density allowed by PaMsition B. It is not dear whether the District could afford it at the density allowed by Proposition C. If after the election the completed formal appraisal confirms that the ridgelands are affordable, I am prepared to recommend to the District's Board of Directors that the District move 12mmoly to enter into formal 13gMiations to acquire that portion of the progerty." CATEGORY PRESENT COUNTY STATUS MEASURE *B MEASURE T* DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL ALLOWED USES Residerdial/Agricuftural Residential/Agricultural Residential/Agricultural Residential/Agricultural LOCATION OF HOMES Not on slopes over 30% Not on ridge top 15 on ridge 24 on ridge NUMBER OF HOMES. 7 Upper/2 Quarry 7 Upper/19 Quarry 15 Upper/19 Quarry 24 Upper/19 Ouarry SIZE OF HOMES Unknown 6,000 sq. it. Max Floor Area 15,000-34,000 sq.ft. 15,000-34,000 so.ft. Max Floor Area-lot dependent Max Floor Area-lot dependent MAX DEVELOPMENT Unknown 15,000 sq ft MDA 23.000-53,000 sq.ft. 23.000-53.000 sq.ft. Max Area-lot dependent Max Area-lot dependent MIN LOT SIZE Unknown 10 Acres minimum 12 acres 10 acres PUBLIC OPEN SPACE None unless purchased None unless purchased None;100 acres private None NEW ROAD Not needed Not needed New road up face of cliff New mad up face of cliff QUARRY CLOSURE Limited by Material Developer has agreed to close Developer has agreed to close Developer has agreed to close CREEK PROTECTION State Water Bd.Decides State Water Bd. Decides State Water Bd.Decides State Water Bd.Decides Please vote YES on the CITIZEN'S MEASURE B and NO on the DEVELOPER'S MEASURE Cl. CITIZENS FOR REASONABLE DEVELOPMENT (OH UPP' ER NEARY QUARRY LANDS IN A QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION WITH MR. HERB GRENCH, GENERAL MANAGER, MROSD, ON JUNE 1, QUESTIONS WERE ASKED BY A GROUP OF CONCERNED CITIZENS OF LOS ALTOS HILLS. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS ASKED WAS THE FOLLOWING: Can the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District afford to purchase this property and, would you*? ANSWER: "Based upon our preliminary estimate of value, the ridge portion of the property )mould be affordable Unde[ thg cUrrent cgul3ty density or the similar density allgwed by Propgjitign B. It is not clear whether the District could afford it at the density allowed by Proposition 0. If after the election the completed formal appraisal confirms that the ridgelands are affordable, I am prepared to recommend to the District's Board of Directors that the Qisldgl m Ily 1p e0jer into formal negotigligng to W4uire Ihat portion of the propeM," PLEASE JOIN US IN VOTING FOR MEASURE B. PRESERVE THE RIDGE FROM THE DEVELOPER'S MEASURE C. NOTE:Councilman Slegars letter in support of Measure B was paid for by CITIZENS FOR REASONABLE DEVELOPMENT 4 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT June 26, 1989 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Jean H. Fiddes, Administrative Services Manager The Exhibit A' s for two of this week' s agenda items were inadvertently left off during Friday' s packet reproduction. Enclosed are: Exhibit A for report R-89-97 , Acceptance of Insurance Coverage for 1989-1990 and Exhibit A for report R-89-95, Adoption of Medical Benefit Revisions in District's Fringe Benefit Plan JF/ma CLAIMS No. 89-12 Meeting 89-16 MIDPENINSULA PEGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: June 28, 1989 REMSED C L A I M S Amount Name Description 2841 8,700.00 Bill Botsch Grading Service Denolition and Cleanup 2842 18.00 California Native Plant Society Membership 2843 25.00 California Park and recreation Society Directory 2844 107.02 Clement Camn cations, Inc. Subscription 2845 203.88 Sheryl Marioni Cochran Reinbursement;;­;.Sffninar Expenses 2846 38.46 Dennis Danielson Reirbursenent--Field SunDlies 2847 5,500.00 Deloitte Hasldm and Sells Audit 2848 3,080.00 Dillingham Associates Architectural Services 2849 37.45 Emergency Vehicle Systems Vehicle Parts 2850 12.00 Federal Express Corporation Express Mail 2851 150.00 First American Title Insurance Company Reconveyance Fees 2852 49,634.00 Flinn, Gray & Her-terich Insurance 2853 33.71 Foster Brothers Security System Keys 2854 425.00 Greenbelt Alliance Sims 2855 343.58 GreW,'s TV - Appliance & Video Dishwasher 2°C5 131.10 Herbert Grench Reirbursemnt--Out-of-Town Meeting L)7 283.55 Virg Harldns Sites Sign Frame 2858 81.01 Hengehold Motor Co. , Inc. Van Pental 2859 1,112.00 ITT Corporation Office Machines 11aintenance 2860 39.26 1 latthew Ken Reimbursement--Field Supplies 2861 52.47 !,bbil Oil Company Fuel 2862 116.51,,- Ibnogram. Sanitation Sanitation Stmplies 2863 33.02 Northern Energy Propane Gas 2864 455.75 Office Club Off-ice Supplies 2865 39.95 Panel Publishers Resource Document 2866 46.55 Pitney Bow-es, Inc. Ifleter Rental 2867 9.93 Regal Dodge Vehicle Parts 2868 11.40 Rokon International, Inc. Vehicle Parts 2869 10,000.00 County of San 11a"L-eo Security Deposit for Tunnel Project 2870 300.00 Santa Clara County Environmental Underground Storage Tank Pen-nit Health Services 2871 313.51 Scribner Graphic- Press Business Cards 2872 1,113.23 Shell Oil Conparrj Fuel and Repairs 55.88 Tri City Lock Ck—,nmany Repair Services 2874 95.85 Del lbods Private Vehicle Expense 2875 492.42 Xerox Corporation Maintenance Agreement * Fz.erpencv Cheek Issued on June 22, 1989 fleeting 89-16 1 .SED Date: June 28) 1989 # Amount Name Description 3 1,885.89 Ewrgency Vehicle System Vehicle Equipnent Installed 2877 1,203.27 Peninsula Oil Cf.=any Fuel 2878 8,920.00 . E. R. Sheehan Equim-rent Rental and Consulting Fees 2879 3,350.00 Stevens Creek Qua=ry Discing. 2880 9510.00 Home Depot Electrical Materials 2881 224.13 Petty Cash Postage, Local Business 11—beting, Expense, Mrs and %. veloning, Maps, Office Supplies and Private Vehicle Expense 2882 63.67-,c--,- Country Gourmet Local Business ')Iteting 2883 7,321.00 Pacific Bell Relocation of Telebhone Lines--Alpine Road Emergency Check Issued on June 28, 1989 CIAims No. 89-12 Meeting 89-16 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: June 28, 1989 C L A I M S Amount Name Description 2841 8,700.00 Bill Botsch Grading Service Demolition and Cleanup 2842 18.00 California illative Plant Society Membership 2843 25.00 California Park and Recreation Society Directory 2844 107.02 Clement Communications, Inc. Subscription 2845 203.88 Sheryl Marion Cochran Peimbursement--Seminar Expenses 2846 38.46 Dennis Danielson. Reimbursement--Field Sunnlies 2847 5,500.00 Deloitte Haskins and Sells Audit 2.848 3,080.00 Dillingham Associates Architectural Services 2849 37.45 Emergency Vehicle Systems Vehicle Parts 2850 12.00 Federal Express Corporation Express flail 2851 150.00 First American Title Insurance Company Reconveyance Fees 2852 49,634.00 Flinn, Gray & Herterich Insurance 2853 33.71 Foster Brothers Security System Keys 2854 425.00 Greenbelt Alliance Sims 2355 343.53 Gregg's TV - Appliance & Video Dislyo7asher 2856 131.10 Herbert Grench Reimbursement--Out-of-Tom Meeting 2857 233.55 Virg Harkins Signs Sign Frame 2858 81.01 Hengehold Motor Co. , Inc. Van P.ental 2859 1,112.00 IBit Corporation Office :Machines Maintenance 2860 39.26 Matthew Ken Reimbursement--Field Supplies 2861 52.47 Mobil Oil Company Fuel 2862 116.51r ibnogram Sanitation Sanitation Supplies 2863 33.02 Northern Energy Propane Gas 2864 455.75 Office Club Office Supplies 2865 39.95 Panel Publishers Resource Docir ent 2866 46.55 Pitney Bowes, Inc. Meter Rental 2867 9.93 Regal Dodge Vehicle Parts 2868 11.40 Rokon International, Inc. Vehicle Parts 2869 10,000.00 County of San Tlateo Security Deposit for Tunnel Project 2870 300.00 Santa Clara County Environmental Underground Storage Tank Permit Health Services 2871 313.51 Scribner Graphic Press Business Cards 2872 1,113.23 Shell Oil Company Fuel and Repairs 2873 55.83 Tri City Lock Co=any Repair Services 2874 95.35 Del Woods Private Vehicle Expense 2875 492.42 Xerox Corporation Maintenance Agreement Emergency Check Issued on June 22, 1989 l.lajans PDo. o::-1G Meeting, 89-16 Date: June 28, 1989 Amount Name Description 6 1,885.89 Errrgency Vehicle S�rstem Vehicle Equipment Installed 2S77, 1,203.27 Peninsula Oil Company Fuel 2 878 8,920.00 E. R. Sheehan Eaui nt Rental and Consulting; Fees 2379 3,850.00 Stevens Creek Quarry Discing MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT June 26, 1989 TO: Distribution FROM: Jean H. Fiddes, Administrative Services Manager The Exhibit A' s for two of this week' s agenda items were inadvertently left off during Friday' s packet reproduction. Enclosed are: Exhibit A for report R-89-97, Acceptance of Insurance Coverage for 1989-1990 and Exhibit A for report R-89-95, Adoption of Medical Benefit Revisions in District ' s Fringe Benefit Plan Distribution: H. Greneh D. Hansen D. Topley J. Fiddes M. Hale C. Cyrier C. Britton J. Escobar S. Norton JF/ma mm"m�. MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: F.Y.I. DATE: June 28 , 1989 I i �-aan ra ticioco (fllroaaiclr Tuesday,June 27, 989 - Y Hazards 'lar By John 471derinuth San Francisco have been buoyed by cal runoff from tine golf course course construction would d str ' Chronicle Peninsula 11tweau the knowledge that Mayor Art Ag- could endanger Crystal Springs Ices- the habitat for the endangered bay nos supports the golf course propos• ervoir,which sul lrlics drinking wa- checkerspot butterfly, two typoslof Stan !Mateo County is gear- al, said San Nlateo County Supervi. ter to San Francisco and most of the rare arachnids and a variety of u,V- ing up for fight over its plan to sor Anna Eshafl. Peninsula. common plants,said Roberts: J.,nvi- ut a 160-acre public golf course _: ronmentaiists then suggested ti ait P P g � ga!£ course also would mean on long-untouched land near "When we talked about the wa- the destruction of trees,plants and the county look to the watershed the Crystal Springs Reservoir. imals, would serve as a wedge to open the pristine watershed to fur- "We were accused of renegirig tershed site for the golf course, lie Robert Trent Jones,one of the' A a they development and would bring an(an)agreement when we anuesM),cl country's premier golf course archi the Edgewood Park plan, Roberts tects, has prepared three possible Cri tics sexy more traffic through tl e quiet cen � P A A said. "1 we say anything aaiift designs for a $5-million, 16-hole ter of Woodside,critics say. g this, all those charges will corne up se course that would run along the " oi �c� � Dtf enars of Calf Course again." west side of Canada Road from Edgewood Road to the Woodside would destroy Proponents of the golf course That does not mean the et 6 border. claim Woodside residents are more ronnaental groups will not abject to plants, concerned about their prospective the specific design of the course, The county faces formidable traffic problems than potential en. Roberts said. obstacles before the first player can . tee u however. The problems in- vironmental damage. Wild Site R P asked What can I do to facilitate elude ownership of the land,opposi- this?"'Eshoo said. Woodside supported the coun It is hard to picture a 'golf tign by area residents and possible ty's attempt to put a golf course in course in the woodlands i t it disputes with environmentalists As far as we're concerned Edgewood park, a site that was ' right now, our response would be more environmentally sensitive but present stale, disrupted only,,try an The most basic problem is that`` positive," said Wright in San Fran- also farther from Woodside, said occasional dirt maintenance road. the county does not own the land,It' Cisco.';. i Brush covers the low rolling*hllls, Lennie Roberts of the Committee is part of the San Francisco Water ., The preliminary`negotiations for Green Foothills. which are bordered liy barbed wire 'Department's southern watershed are almost complete,and Eshoo said fences bearing green and yelloNv — an area that has remained un- a decision on the use of the water Environmentalist have had lit signs that warn: "Trespassing;-Loi- spoiled despite a wide range of de- shed land could be made by mid-Ju- tie to say about the watershed golf tering Forbidden By Law.San Fran- velopment proposals over the years. ly. Golf course proponents would course plan, partly because they Cisco Water Department." _,. ,o, "The water department always then have to contend with the town were so involved in keeping the golf The landscape could change has been strongly protective of the of Woodside,whose council opposes course off two other sites. water resource and concerned quickly if San Francisco grants its the plan. In 1970 :environmental groups expected approval of the- 'golf about the increased costs ... with 'For years the Water Depart- blocked a plan to build a golf course course plan. Although the project more public access (to the area)," ment has gone to great lengths to on privately owned meadows the would still be subject to a state-re- said San Francisco Deputy Mayor , keep people out, and it's amazing county planned to acquire along,: quired environmental review, the Douglas Wright. that now in one fell swoop they will Upper Crystal Springs Lake. They,', golf course could be in business by A 1965 master plan for the wa.` institute a use that will bring thou- suggested that the county instead, late 1 1 if there are no unforeseen tershed,however,designated about sands of people to the area," said consider building the course at problems, said Christy, San Mateo 4,000 acres for eventual recreation- Nancy Alexander,Woodside's plan- Edgewood Park, which the county County's parks and recreation di- al use, including golf courses, said ning director. bought from the state college dis- rector. David Christy, San Mateo County's In a June 6 resolution opposing trict in 19€0. "We're looking to get this golf parks and recreation director. `, the golf course plan, the Woodside Ali environmental study of the course built and not lost in anyone's The county's negotiations with ' Town Council warned that cheini- park, however, showed that golf bureaucracy,"said Eshoo. a� <F TOM CAMPBELL ? $' A?,S R '' 1730 LoNaWGRTH HousE OFFICE BUILDING l 'k� WASHINGTori,DC 20515 12TH DtsTFICT,CALIFORNIA �y � '` " (202)225-5411 COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE.SPACE, }� r DISTRIc'f OFFICES: AND TECHNOLOGY ,I 599 NoRTN M4TNILDA AVENUE,SUITE 105 SUNNYVALE,CA 94086 (408)245-4835 COMMITTEE 014 SMALL BUSINESS 414 (415)321-9154 1 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE CO TECHNOLOGY TASK FORCE ON ortgrez o f the *� 4y Sfio(408)438 7985 068 TECHNOLO?�Y AND POLICY �� ` j1� HOUSE COMPETITIVENESS CAUCUS 7� V 7415 EAGLEBERRY STREET,SUITE D CONGRESSIONAL'+UMAN RIGHTS CAUCUS )DU;P of epregerttatcbel GILROY,CA 95020 HOUSE EXPORT TASK FORCE ��"""•• Y CONGRESS!CNAL CAUCUS FOfi NdOMEhS"ISSUES June 20, 1989 Mr. Herbert Grench Midpeninsula Regional Space District Old Mill Office Center Building C 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite 135 Mountain View, California 94040 Dear Mr. Grench: Thank you so much for your letter expressing your support for H.R. 876, "The American Heritage Trust Fund Act. " The House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs held hearings on H.R. 876 on April 6 and subsequently ordered the bill to be reported to the House floor. Although a vote before the full House has not yet been scheduled, your support for the Act will be an important consideration for me once this happens. I do have some questions about the legislation, in particular - how it might affect the federal budget deficit. Thus, I will be very interested in seeing the Congressional Budget Office's cost estimate of H.R. 876 once it is ready, i I do support the principles of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) , and this year, I have asked the House Appropriations Committee to include monies for purchases of several beautiful areas on the Pacific Crest Trail and Cullinan Ranch on San Pedro Bay. On a related matter, I have also written the Committee in support of the Bay Area Ridge Trail Project. t. I know th at David Hanse n of the�1 District has met with ( my district office staff on the project. ) Again, thank you for your thoughts on H.R. 876; this is most helpful to me. Please stay in touch. Best regards, Congressman Tom Campbell TC: jhs I i `g a 7>Y1r x ;`x^i <M w "��, xa,.; ^A 3.r a�. M1 k�.�" Y7y`` o�"i:, y;ia"1 '-� f tk`. :a+w• 2 •.. ,.y,.� . - f ^ems Ir tII 6S C - EpEup,�•S(1/OS£rS g:# , *+K7#?` r .N 7 �; x q...z r4 * fiA" 2r � s ,✓r} �m K' ;r a v� µ a W F ,, d _/ x - T s. ss+ s �,� i,^"�� ,,;+ `� ;t •fi a `F,{l a +.r. �.� Y�. as'k' � "�YF�Z�~<. 5.`�`Y^,��,�d �����``��' — :t — - y �.T_gar r�•fr"£�,.�A,� s?a A .�i t ,'�. M.c� �°� �.' ii�'y � �� � r i s .'.�d �F.M1 t M1tl. J4 :.'�":' y} r: + � x�.a#' �fit ��� w4a °�. � 'rt ,�}} '" +;ar• - <" t..�£}• a. •.... a r.% ads sa-ti4.�i(.,. � � ',;��� +A. . � �� �...w� Y f rn� .' 'N6 ,p� "fix.. —__ _— J"'-; . - "' F E g 41 ILI d"� ,� t ti ,;� �^r{ ��z � Ast : �`��+'" r"*'S'3r.�^ ..S- - � X _.. r.`"�"•'4:'+.`3cirr. a s nd Mtr sFF c r r �Afi +" �4a Ln a s�r�"^.�+��"'' '4 a�'�► m TT�� -:x � ;w( ,��i;�'a,-' �4,*'�.�x+'�,�k�A� P z �n a.r �.�''4i�z `i k fi&r jy, v'w r r• r ret'' yv,r1 $4kAi Swf •fA "i '" S +rht '�'f'� *5 tip,* 4 s W€ el. r•e ' a y a ��.��wa'.� � ;.d.,f•L a4�..W �„ � � � .:o- �, i a y/ /....- o- Jam...."°,.�'� Zr'f-. - r x •+ 3 ':s k y. Al s se r 1 r _ ��yF Tyr L�..,rtc AJ i 'n together then throughout the nation to be- ' itizens are ba nding ndi g g g come stewards of the country's national resources, for ming mig local a land trusts and other conservation-oriented, n nonprofit organizations. These groups share the view that whoever holds title to land has a responsibility to protect it out of respect for the past and for the benefit of future gen- erations. I� � ., i ndividual land trusts usually have several factors in com In reality,the stewardship group's function often is carried o mon:they are committed to long-term management of land and water out in cooperation with public agencies.Nonprofit groups frequently resources; committed to educating the public about natural re- contract with public agencies to manage public lands and conduct sources and the need for stewardship; largely s-elf supporting and education programs for schools and the general public. Moreover, locally based; ran mainly by volunteers; broad'/ representative of nonprofit groups tend to transfer the land they acquire to government ` their communities;acceptable to landowners;like yto stay away from agencies while maintaining a guardianship role. Many nonprofit controversy and adversarial positions; and cooperative with and groups have carved out a niche for themselves as advance acquirers helpful to public agencies. and temporary holders of the land until public agencies are able to Such land trusts and local, nonprofit e•ganizations enable take it over.The Trust for Public Land is an example of this type of people who own land to provide for its well beinc;n perpetuity.They organization.Another,the Sempervirens Fund in California,transfers enable citizens to develop personal bonds with natural areas and to all the land it acquires to the state's parks department. participate more directly in land-use decisions 1-, at affect them. One of today's most challenging land-use issues is agricul- But why land trusts?Critics ask,"If land is to be preserved tural land preservation.This is a particularly difficult function for public for the public, why then isn't it being acquired Uy public agencies, agencies to carry out because farmers are skeptical of state acquisi- which can then be held accountable to the pub':c?" tions,or anything else that restricts their ability to use the land as they Nonprofit groups and land trusts hati e advantages over prefer.Therefore,land trusts have developed a unique and important public agencies when it comes to efforts to r,rctect land for the role in this area;they generally have the contacts and credibility in the common good.First,they can obtain land more c,iickly and at a lower local community that are vital to farmland preservation programs. cost than public agencies through their more inT.Irrate knowledge of In Marin County,California,where development pressures local real estate markets and personal rela`onships within the are severe,the California Coastal Conservancy approved all million community.Second,many local landowners will^ot deal with govern- grant to the Marin Agricultural Land Trust(MALT)in 1984 to develop ment departments, but will talk to a group of neighbors. For this model projects for conserving the land base and the agricultural reason alone, some land might never be """ �;t economy in the coastal area of the county. Conservancy funds were acquired for the public except by the non- profit method. In addition, although costs t k� t ; matched by another$1 million from local �• X � have risen, public funds for natural re- �L: t } s � ,� .- � t sources. The land trust, whose mem source conservation have declined, a' ,, " bers are primarily from the agricultural thereby spurring more nonprofit activity. �` '>- $ ? community, soon found themselves in Nonprofit groups also Can 'Bcar ;ne,nbersof the Foundation.Fromtell,GeorgeAmbrose,Bob an advantageous position to-negotiate achieve land protection goals more eco- Ber,—an.Bob Leland,Ail Tooby and Hulet HornbecK.Four others for the acquisition of local parcels of nomically than many government agen- Were!amera shy.Photo by Neil Havrik land. In the first Conservancy-funded cies because they can call on knowledgeable volunteers.They can project,MALT negotiated a bargain sale for a conservation easement gain land more cheaply by using their growing skills with various on 320 acres of scenic grazing land.Appraised at$360,000, MALT acquisition instruments. Nonprofit groups also are better able to paid$144,000 fro the land. crystallize action on local concerns. Now,the wisdom of this initial grant has become apparent. Further, these local conservation orcanizations often can MALT has carried out several other acquisitions not involving Con- monitor and manage property for the public good better than a servancy funding,acquisitions that have resulted in protective ease- government agency because of greater knowl-edge of the land,and ments on more than 3,000 acres,all of which were completed with full greater energy and commitment to their cause. and willing agreement from the land's owners. Bob Berner, MALT's 20/The Landscape Architect and Specifier Nevis Continued on page 22 Yt Cm M' t ',dY a P' 'q b, 14 � �e 9`+�Y\,*.Y.� h yt � - '�` � ;r Y �`pr�l^y� �• �` 1•{X? '�• 6 � Q�'# '�5 �t 1F� ,¢' . � ��� �. �PC �����"�. �t����.'r `�.,; -�..�y K'; y.��� .� .."t � '*.,l�s�Y l r.��♦, j ; t � ti• � '� � r}t �?d ��y+Yp `s a t ti;� f +�►� t; +" �r�K h, '�s'.;:��>� w f S �`r�S�:�.} � •�`7;4 r�; {I• �'wjs�,}� J� 7•�� � 1` *.'�+��'�,"`�" isr.*.{ '.$c"• '} ;�}'� i z. '.� :Ar.. .." r� i'r} � '}77^'4 .�� (°'f 'ti.!''.r�.��� _ }•• ti.. � , .ak��{ a#. ,��.��q:,'` r `p`..n �!trC}+',t. '�.y�,� ,vb R,'4'4' , .r xrv� +�(;R, t.l'� y,r .•%yr.= � ,�Y �WZw -� :,N.�t � t" psi .\�;, s s �p'+y s .._ 0 I+t t..� .f��- Ss d'•���1Sa• �G ^F\' ,.. �..yx a � a r 3 ° Yy skva.r •tt°��.ay�i,�1 � w':'�t"A.�'s'l { ate'," �" r y x > sk 9. `"^, • ��'� e� '\ >ta';,,A\� ���c x�? ��- � �� .�,:'`� q- J�! 't�, }! a �„' .y�,f V'� s. '� 4.0 >` r��•.ya :} '�� �" 1�. d.i;vr i �r�� y S..`�`"�'!�{, � � -,i� ' � � �P ".�t,•'w 1y .rk t, '; i I '1' ''j� a�� � r� �• ,� ,�� 1� .�. ;,Y. ^�r �+ `r*�+,5�: r r- - �,5�-wcw.s !y'y"{rx 5r m� ,• ,r ° _ _Q`jt'� a 'k^*` a t4 A ♦. .- + � �S "'- �^•- k ^� < „y;'�.�'S_S'-'�""�"°�f.�y'-;; .:,, 'try. �. A ••�'' „+t- 'ar �+ 'a+" �' °,.r,* f• '�rnm;2.. :ki .ems � ,t�y •� �.'• �i� a'i»:.'kxt �",,� �". '^• 3 f• .�ti �''t°'r r .�'. s ,'1Y' ^ni@ y„', �, �' n ��:r r�,':.v.4, '��'r"•�.� `�',' r-�;4'�k""'�r""_ r �r.�'`t .°7�S.sY.n' ;�v - r k Ja.� ij � '7,�t: �:` ...+"ice} "•r'- ". � x+ t ."s �` ♦. .�.f ° .a � �... }y,�"v v� ,.�,�� 'n. •� "µ" •:�Y;c•WS .;3'- x<. r. �.. Ip� $i • 7 ♦ x y .'f,�t' ,,,TJof • ,y,1"t� A ry ��• � 4 ��Y �1 r �+G✓'V t,�E,�,ayr11��'^ a r,. R �:��g k�L,. �.� R r t, #{. � '� f �{♦1.�L � T Ir;`+'• - .,, y"w�: t- t -•� '� 41 'S t.a``..t � ,�. S 11 �° t•� 1 ,iJ �t '$ I`..i�r,Y,,�\h �A.. ,j" K ' V$ •Wr T i r 11t� �'yNR` -t •7-{ M�`.`t: y r �4.'*e•r. r ; � �� +st:� it`ptf+�. }�'�04 f�l a�',�•�° � `e `., F t`,. "�..:e y `tit�ia'"I.;, �f•�e+J .*'���X7,,�a_,,,...1}t��' "'�"I y s r) �.`� a ;fir 1 f Y 1 .. 4/'ytiM,• ,��! .r t'� B` �� ,ii t .f'��a r i ��11 7 .� �.. ., 'r� .;�. 1 , ,a � -_.�. _ '�•- �:�} ��r -4±tll. :.r� .'� If..:�w�iscEt��z �aY.a� _.,_...... ....._.._.._--- ....y..r..4 __..-..... .,..•._.�_ . _.._ _--s"..w._... .i._.c::�_Ji.=..a.,�.:.�..�.4=� .�.a..« i. +s�,..... Land Trusts continued from page 20 vancy typically state that the easo- executive director, believes that ment reverts to the conservancy in the shift in local perceptions is such cases. more important than the acreage Positive easements can of the acquisitions. Local farming provide access, hunting and fish- families,particularly dairy farmers, , ing rights or hiking trails.Negative now believe that agriculture's fu- t easements can prevent activities i ture in the community will con- i such as erecting billboards, filling tinue,and they are more willing to 1 wetlands,cutting trees or develop- invest in farm improvements. ing property.One of the principal Young people also are more anx- i benefits of an easement is that the t ious to buy land in the area for document is crafted specifically to farming, In Merin County, as well I meet resource protection (or s as neighboring Sonoma County, E other) goals on a particular piece wherethe Sonoma Land Trust has ; of prope rty.Easem ents are a f lex- received similar Conservancy as- ible, often cost-effective tool F` sistance, local nonprofit groups When an easement is purchased, find that farmers are beginning to rio"so;ano first acquisi oniniisp,lrsuitcfst-Iva dsn;port,;o the cost is equal tothavafusofthe approach them with new ideas for land consists of a 2,CC0-aye ranch with extensive marshes and roiling hills.Photo by property rights acquired, not the . projects. Neil Flav"ix. full value of the property. F , A growing pressure on California's could harm the resource are acquired. The The most common type of easement allows ; .. land conservancies comes from the area rest of the rights stay with the original land- access,aswhen aproperty ownercan reach south of San Francisco known as Silicon owner, along with title to the land, his land only by traveling over property be- Valley, the sprawling heart of America's Whatever the method, land or in- longing to someone else. Access ease- computer technology research. The sur- terest in the land can be acquired through ments also can be used to open land in the k. rounding countryside, especially the rolling purchase or donation. In addition, land de- public domain to public use,such as the wet hills and wooded coastal mountains of San velopment regulations can require that a sand portion of ocean beaches. Mateo, Santa Clara and northern Santa landowner donate land or interest in land Conservation easements (nega- Cruzcounties is looked upon,as prime devel- before being permitted to alter his or her tive easements that landowners place on opment acreage for expansion. This same property in some way. In California, for their land to conserve important recrea } pressure for development has prompted a example, public access to land must be tional,environmental cr historic values)are vigorous effort for open space conservation, granted as acondition of development within of particular interest in resource protection not the lust of which is the Peninsula Open the coastal zone. programs. By acquiring the easement, the Space Trust (POST). In the past 10 years, Creatively used, alternative acqui- holder is able to control the property rights ` f the trust has managed to protect more than siticn techniques resolve conflicts between that the landowner potentially could use to 13,000 acres valued at more than$12 million development and resource protection ob;ec- degrade the property's resource value.The I for open-spaces use, such as agriculture, tives in a mutually beneficial way,taking the landowner retains title and all properly rights forestry, recreation, wildlife habitat, re- sharp edge off of land regulations so that not specified in the easement. source conservation and scenic preserva- la do,.iners'options are increased and land Public agencies have used ease- tion. POST utilizes an annual operating protection preserved. ments in an on-again,off-again fashion.for budget of $350,000 and a staff of four to The chief technique for acquisition the past 50 years. A 1985 survey showed acquire land, place deed restrictions or of i rite re st is the easement.This is a specially that approximately 500 nonprofit and gov- easer"en's on the land and resell it to public tai'ored document that eithergrants rights to ernment agencies held conservation ease- agencies or private land owners. others (a positive easement)or restricts the ments on 1.8 million acres nationwide.The Interest in these types of acquisi �„.- .7 ,• n�> ; ,,r rya ar°. list of easement holders found in the survey t tions has grown tremendously in recent includes a host of federal, state and local f years, due to high land prices, which have government agencies, as well as national caused public agencies to examine ways of conservation groups such as the Nature making the most of limited funding, and Conservancy. because the reasons that public entities „ Easements often serve more than k '' acquire land have changed. Traditionally, ,r r one purpose. The survey results showed b public agencies purchased land mainly to z - = that 80% of the respondents used ease- } provide services, such as streets, parks, i t`s.-^ j �b "• >. moots to protect scenery visible from public canals,office sites and housing.These sere- = T ; �",--';,' y, n x: �l roads and/or open space characteristics of f ices usually require active public occupation :� � a a to s the community; 73/o used eas_m.nts A secc.'rd properly includes farmland and a errenial of the land. More recently, however, these p � y p protect natural habitat; 52% used them for stream_Here,beavers have moved upstream,cutting p A agencies have acquired land for conserva- down cc-on;voods an the way.Photo by Neil HavIA. protecting freshwater resource areas;37% tion purposes, such as protecting scenic or landowners' realm of actions (a negative of the.respondents used easements to pro- environmental values.In these cases,abso- easement).An easement can be granted for test farm or hay land;33%protected timber lute ownership of the land may not be a specific time period or in perpetuity, al land; 26% for historic/archaeological sites; needed. Control over the land's usage may though"in perpetuity"does not necessarily and 25%used easements to protect grazing £? be enough. mean forever. Most easements have a land. y. -• One method to reach these ends is reverter clause so that if the purpose of the Purchase of development rights r the acquis:tlen of only the necessary inter- easement is abandoned, the easement (PDR) is an acquisition of interest program ests in the land. In other words, out of a goes backto the fee titleholder orto another rather than a tool.The landowner reIainsthe bundle of property rights,only the rights that party. Easements acquired through grants } as with the Cal"rfornia State Coastal Conser- r>>t 22/The Landscape Architect and Specifier News Continued on page 33 RF liter 10 years of promotion and im- Density provement, the revolution in the Drought Avoidance l turf industry finally has spread throughout Akin to texture is-the.overall density of the the couniry. - The revolution. has been- turf. This measure of quality-again leaves. According to Dr. Robert Shearrrran of the caused by the introduction of turf-type tall turf-type tall fescue in,at best,a distant also- University of Nebraska(see LASN Vol.5 No. f fescue plants.propagated by seed. ran status. But the very newest experimen- 4),"Turfgrasses can resist drought stress by tal types are approaching the density of the avoidance mechanisms. Drought Tall fescue, as the name implies, originally ,s �K ; avoidant turfgrasses are capable of continu ! was a variant of the Festuca genus. In the j r s On ing growth under drought stress conditions. i `I spring.with coed`e ti!ity and plenty of water, ;� Y Drought avoidance is achieved by mecha- the leaf of these old tall fescue plants,named nisms such as reduced evapotranspiration -Alta," 'K 31," and then "Fawn," can grow ; z (ET), deep root systems, high root/shoot more than an'inch each day. Maintaining a ratios, ability to redistribute roots, reduced . lawn against such'granny requires frequent tj fillrr .pti radiation absorption,and xeromorphicstruc- . rowing. As a result, even though used t j> ���,J , f j r tures." I w dely for :,aying fields and rough areas, such grasses achieved a limited popularity. This is where turf type tall fescue shines. r,Y, r �y, The plant can go dormant during periods of What occurred during the last ten years is � ,t+=; �} rr t,� �?a r� � i�r��ur! heat stress,much like fine fescues,and the the opening of a whole new market for turf roots penetrate deep below the soil surface. because of tre invention of turf-t grasses B creating a three-foot deep, and some- because Y 9 from this same ta!; fescue plant. 3 t, � ,r ; r r � r,f times deeper, reservoir for water use, ttall fescue slants act as water-savers. P,oduction of turf-type fescue seed has Kentucky bluegrass, a long-time standard. expanded rapic y in the U.S.and primarily in These new types are entering the market But where soil depth is limiting,the broader Oregon. Production of the tall fescue seed in rapidly; many of the turf-type perennial leaves create relatively more evapotranspi- t-at state was a'pproximately 16 million ryegrass varieties have three to four times as ration. In such cases, hard fescue, a fine, pounds as recarn ly as 1983. many leaves per sq. ft. wiry-leafed plant,is more suitable. Turf-type tall fescue is well adapted to a wider variety Now, production from 75,000 acres will be But where tall fescue thrives, a more open of soil types from sand and gravel to clay. harvested in. 1989, which could yield as leaf canopy may help the plants fight dis- Few other grasses offer this versatility. many as 1C0 million pounds. Even so, ease. companies stall sell seed of other species of Durability grass.such as perennial ryegrass and blue- To avoid clumpiness in lawns that receive grass seed,in abundance. Most of this new poor maintenance,it is necessary to reseed In the high maintenance and low use Cate- seed is for new markets. annually. Even in hot areas,where no other gory,perennial ryegrass and Kentucky blue- a grasses survive, the new tall fescue can grass are better choices in cool climates. In In spite of fancy names, such as Mustang, provide a nice lawn with some annual re- high traffic areas under moderate mainte- Tempo'. Bonanza,Mesa,Falcon, Rebel and seeding. - Hance,however, and where any other limit so forth, the tali fescue plant has strengths ing factor exists, such as low PH, poor soil, and limitations. Those responsible for turf Color or restricted water use,turf-type tall fescue is management would do well to learn these ' the logical choice. The newer varieties have limitations and modify their expectations. Dark green,or forest green more accurately, lower crowns and are thus protected from + Consider the strengths and limitations as is all the rage. And the newest varieties such heavy foot traffic and even light vehicle traf- follows. as Monarch,Bonanza,Phoenix,Arid,Mesa, fic, such as golf carts. etc., are clearly the leaders to dark genetic Textures color. Of course,all varieties are green and Turf-type tall fescue is a natural for sports when combined in a mixture will develop a fields, especially in areas with hot summer The quality of a lawn often is measured by pleasant uniform green turf. temperatures. Good maintenance cannot its fineness,but even the most improved turf- be neglected, however. type tall fescues are coarser than the broad- The color of the newest experimental varie- ;- est fine fescue,a distant cousin. Yet in many ties is rapidly approaching that of the best This grass can be a water-saver and there- southern la,,vns,where St.Augustine grass perennial ryegrass and Kentucky blue- fore, it is a democratic grass.; made for is the standard of quality,turf-type tall fescue grasses. But turf-type tall fescue does hold everyone. No longer a concept or a hope, is finding rapid acceptance. It is clearly much its color better in dense shades and this turf-type tall fescue is here and a growing finer bladed than this coarse grass, which discovery is expanding the revolution even component in every seed company's inven- can only be established vegetatively. further. tory. LASN J j 32,1 The Landscape Architect and Specifier News ` ,� .:«... .... ........�.::-a .'�+. 6..".- .- ..,,-... �-. :C .-.•�...2...N:. /vaaL�eLL-. e........ ... �.....vr.,a.a ..,.bui..u�r:h' ..ar.. ..... - ...t Land Trusts continued from page 22 I"+jI � r "�;1�f3'!' r I f 4. PDR programs are designed to protect agri- cu'ture.At least six states have established and funded PDR programs,including Mary w 3 x s _�, �.x fs���� 114 'ard. Massachusetts and New Jersey. In atX. f k !east eight states. local qovernments oper- ate farmland PDR programs.The future use of the lard is limited through easements ors - .' .s deed restrictions. Another type of alternative land r . � acquisition requires the initial fee purchase 1 at of land to be followed by some innovative disposition of property rights. For example, i #, % ^ through the use of teases,selective resales �+ 4•, tF.. or other techniques,some or all of the prop- = gt > erty rights are transferred to another party ether temporarily or permanently. Through post acquisition disposition„ the manage anent costs are recouped and the ability to acquire a particular tract is enhanced. ` Concrete Lake Edge Treatment • Natural and Artificial Rockwork 1 - � t '.. ' � , - ._" ROCK FORMATIONS, INC. 1I 1198 N. Grove St.,Anaheim,CA 92806 ?� 714-630-7774 ccl#476377 Member:CLASS Fund Postage-Paid Reply#56 Tre Suisun R.?rch ir,Sc!ano County is be rg restored 'D under the FourdaGon's Call for your FREE catalog and �naragerr it.Pnoto oy Neil Havtik. ` discover an exciting new line of 3 r WILDFLOWER 1\1IXES. Purchase and lease arrangements ` Designed for every area of California ,. allow the agency to retain title to the land but r� .VL and a variety of garden styles. ; the land is leased for other use under restric i ;r lions that dovetail with the agency's land . 4 ALBRIGHT SEED CO. management objectives. The lease can g 1-800-423-8112 spell out restrictions ( timber harvesting or *�ilc ;&: thinning)or mandate certain actions(proved Suppliers of Turf Crass,Flower,Tree and Shrub Seed. irg pub!C access)that assure the agency's fFT;= ffydro Nlulch and Sentinel Soil Binding Agent. needs for the resources are met. The land - Serving Sacramento • Camarillo • Ontario can be leased back to the original owner, i often as part of a negotiated purchase.The ability to lease back often enhances the _ — _— Postage_Paid Reply#5s__ _ ability to acquire a particular tract,an espe- cially important consideration in land acqui- I si.on programs without general eminent velopment," often clustering development sents a 12-fold increase since 1950. The I comain authority. The ability to lease land on less environmentally sensitive portions of California State Coastal Conservancy pres- back to the original owners allows them time the land while restricting or prohibiting activi- ently works with more than 45 nonprofit I to adjust their activities to the sale. Many ties on other portions. Controlled develop- organizations along that state's coast alone. eases are for resource-based uses,such as ment works best when the site is large The proliferation of community- timber harvesting.farming and grazing. enough to allow development while buffer- based trusts and other conservation-ori- Another approach is to purchase ing important natural areas from its effects. ented organizations in recent years is re- 'ar.d. limit its development by easement or Of course,this method of resource preserva- markable.Nonprofit groups continue to play deed restriction and resell either part or all of tion only works on sites both economically an increasingly important role in the preser- I The restrictions could require that the land and environmentally desirable for develop vation of natural land and providing appro { remain in a resource-based use but need not ment. priate access to it. LASN j or chibit development. Some land trusts There are approximately 600 la nd ^ave combined resale with "controlled de- trusts active in at least 46 states.This repre- To: David Hansen 6/22/89 Mid Peninsula Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Building C-135 Mountain View, California 94040 From: W. David Schwaderer 976 Hurlstone Lane San Jose, California (408)-997-6955 Subject: 6/18/89 Mount Umunhum Loren McQueen Incident For years I monitored Mid Peninsula Open Space District's Mount Umunhum land acquisitions, regularly contacting Jim Boland to determine when I could bicycle the Mount Umunhum road from Hicks Road to the Santa Cruz Mountains ridge line. When Jim finally indicated I could make the journey as a Mid Peninsula Open Space District invited guest, I waited over two years for emotions there to cool and until I could befriend a local resident family, the Wallace family of Barlow road, who would also grant me access rights of the road as a resident guest. I believe I made my first journey on 4/2/89. On that first trip, I met Chris Saenger, Mid Peninsula's Almaden Air Force Base caretaker. Chris was thoughtfully coming to observe my questioning by Daniel Estrada, son of Rick Estrada. However, the explanation of my presence to Daniel was sufficient and completed by the time Chris and I met so there was nothing for Chris to observe. However, Chris mentioned that he had seen me ascending from below and heard Daniel's car motor running and suspected that he might quietly appear in the event that his mere silent presence would temper any potentially inaccurate statements Daniel might make regarding my rights to be there. I was very - pleased that he did this based on my understanding of the historical situation on the summit. For many weeks, I made the trip, usually policing the road by removing rocks and debris on the way up. Occasionally, I was stopped by concerned residents who believed and asserted I was trespassing on the section of road above the first locked gate. However, when I explained my invitation by a local resident, the concern disappeared and I was politely allowed to proceed with no further impediment. This probably would have not been the case if I had suggested I was the guest of Mid Peninsula Open Space District instead of a local resident. Once, I met one of your rangers, Mr. Newburger, near the bottom locked gate. He asserted the Mid Peninsula Open Space District "owned the road" to the top and I had every right to use the road as a pedestrian or bicyclist beyond the first locked gate. On Mother's day I hiked to the summit with my wife, 9 year-old daughter and 10 year-old son. Like all other trips, I ensured everyone remained behind the locked gates on Rick Estrada's property and on Loren McQueen's property. During that trip, other children playing on Rick Estrada's property apparently reported our presence to Rick who soon appeared in his car to investigate. By the time Rick found us on Mid Peninsula's property near the new gate on Loren McQueen's proper,, , we were talking to Chris Saenger and a pleasant individual who had been installing equipment on Mr. McQueen's property. When Rick emerged from his car he was visibly hostile and abrupt, but said very little. Both I and my wife believe Chris's silent presence blunted a potentially abusive situation. On the brighter side, this encounter did allow me to discuss a note that we had sent Rick (attached) the week before. Rick allowed as how he "had no problem with my crossing his property going to a resident's land" . Hence, he knew I had friends on the summit, the Cunningham family at 21691 Sierra Azul, as well as invitations to be there. On 6/18/89, Gordon Ferguson and I made the bicycle journey to the summit ridge line. At approximately 11:30 AM, we reached the summit, left our bicycles in the turnout area, and walked over to Rick Estrada's gate where we drank water and looked through binoculars at the mountain and ocean view. We remained behind the gate and did not leave the road. After a few minutes, a white Chrysler mini-van drove up with a license plate "GRUMP3A" and parked very close to our bicycles. A man emerged and began to belligerently interrogate why we were there. When I explained we were invited guests, he demanded to see written proof. I could produce none other than Linda Wallace's business card. He refused to look at the card, shouted at us "I don't know them. " (the Wallaces) and that we were "liars" (halting all further conversation), walked back to his car and called Rick Estrada and Heather (Saenger?) on his walkie-talkie. I asked the person, who I now believed had to be Loren McQueen, to tell Heather that I was David Schwaderer but she apparently could not remember that Chris had introduced us a few weeks earlier. She and Chris were going bird watching and I was beginning my bicycle descent. I recall that we had discussed camping and the San Jose Family camp. During Loren's walkie-talkie conversation, he indicated that both Gordon and I had been trying to "get through the gate on Rick's property" . As you know, this would not be di-f"ficult for a pedestrian to do, though we were not attempting to do this. Moreover, neither Gordon or I were about to let our bicycles out of our sight. In fact, while we waited for Rick and Chris to show up, I had to return to the gate to get my sunglasses which I had laid on the ground at the base of the gate so that I could look through the binoculars. Finally, on one of my trips I ascended with a companion. After we had been questioned at Loren McQueen's gate by one of Loren's workers, Chris Saenger arrived and asked if we would have gone beyond the gate if no one had been there. My companion indicated that I had warned him to remain behind both gates and neither of us would have gone beyond either. And, on other occasions, I have talked other bicyclers out of crossing onto the properties beyond these gates. The fact remains that I and my bicycling companions are allowed beyond the gate on Rick Estrada's property because of a standing invitation to visit Mary Jo and Tim Cunningham. During the period we waited for people to arrive, Loren McQueen was profane and abusive. A small sample of some of his statements , many of which were shouted at us include: "I am tired of trespassers" . "I hate trespassers" . "Get off my land" . Eventually, Rick Estrada arrived and reinforced Loren McQueen. He seemed to enjoy Mr. McQueen's abusive verbal treatment of us. Needless to say, I was very relieved to see Chris Saenger arrive, though he also arrived with Loren McQueen's worker who had questioned me at the gate on the earlier trip. I do not have the name of this individual, though I recall he lives on the mountain and appears physically strong. The situation began to get very tense, with Mr. McQueen periodically issuing threats of calling the sheriff on his cellular car phone and having us arrested. Try as I did, I could never quite understand what his specific complaiTIt was because of his unwillingness to conduct a conversation. He accused us of trespassing, but we had never strayed from the area Mid Peninsula employees have indicated I could visit. From one of my previous conversations with Chris Saenger, I believed I was actually standing on Mid Peninsula property at the time. None the less, Mr. McQueen shouted at least twice "Get off my land" . Apparently, Mr McQueen believed we did not have the right to use the road to cross his property where it begins, somewhat down the mountain. One of our adversaries indicated that the County Board of Supervisors completely supported Mr. McQueen and that the subject of our "trespassing" had gone "all the way through the county court system and had found in favor of Mr. McQueen" . When I politely asked if he would indicate where his property began, he shouted "Go down to the goddamn county assessor's office and look it up yourself if you want to know. . .I am done talking to these guys [us) , they lied to me. " We were never able to determine what the "lie" was. Rick Estrada also began to explain that "obviously we did not understand the laws of ingress and egress" . Mr. McQueen's employee asked us "Haven't you said enough?". Around this time, Chris Saenger threw his hands in the air and announced "You guys work it out among yourselves" and walked away to talk with someone who had driven up from the direction of the base in a small white pickup truck. At that point I became very concerned because Gordon and I were confronted with the prospect of having to deal with two large, hostile individuals and Loren McQueen who largely remained seated in his car, possibly in arm's reach of a pistol for all we knew. Though I did not expect Chris to become involved because of his situation of having to live on the base, we both felt that Chris's impartial silent presence would have tempered the situation. Hence, with no uninterested party to observe, we felt intimidated and compelled to leave. Conclusion First, our experience is this particular group of landowners is intentionally profane, belligerent, abusive, inflammatory, and menacing to whom they choose to be so. They seem to conduct themselves with impunity. This, combined with the deliberate instability, speed these situations potentially accumulate violence, and the widespread use of weapons in the area, lead me to believe a high probability exists of Mid Peninsula's inviting the public to the Mount Umunhum area will eventually lead to violence including the possible death of one or more of its guests. I shudder to think of the trauma my wife and children would have experienced on Mothers day if this had occurred to them. Second, I believe this particular situation warrants immediate attention. At the very least, I would suggest that any Mid Peninsula employee that stumbles onto such situations at least remain as a silent impartial observer. I tried to contact Chris Saenger to get the name of the individual who appeared with him but Chris has declined to discuss any aspect of the incident with me referring me to Mid Peninsula. While Chris must tread a tightrope on the summit, I remain somewhat disappointed in this particular response though I am deeply grateful for his previous supporting silent presences. Finally, I was not only the invited guest of Mid Peninsula Open Space District, but of two different local resident families as well. Can you imagine the assault that folks are subjected to that are only the guests of the Mid Peninsula Open Space District? I suspect bird watchers and naturalists anticipate a different type of experience than the one that potentially awaits them at the hands of Loren McQueen and his followers. As Gordon put it, we were simply "bullied and shouted off the mountain". Moreover, based on a conversation with Chris Saenger, my 6/22/89 conversation with David Sanguinetti, and two previous conversations with Jim Boland, I believe this incident occurred on Mid Peninsula property. While I suspect this is not the first time or even a surprise to you this has happened, I am curious as to what Mid Peninsula thinks about this continuing situation and what it might propose to do to remove the threat of assault to its guests. I would also appreciate a formal written description of the areas that the Mid Peninsula Open Space District owns in the Mount Umunhum area as well as public access rules. Thanks in advance for your cooperation. Best regards, W. David Schwaderer cc: Gordon Ferguson Linda Wallace Tim Cunningham i I Dear Rick, 4/29/89 My name is David Schwaderer and I am an acquaintance of your neighbor, Mar Jo Cunningham. Mar Jo has invited Y g Y me to visit her and Ted in their new trailer home on the summit which means that I would be crossing your property at your northern gate. I know you have had a number of problems with intruders and trespassers over time and I wanted to assure you that I would be only entering your property as an invited guest of one of your neighbors and have no intention of causing any problems. My stay on your property :could be limited to the time it took me to cross it expediently. If you would prefer, I can let you know in advance that I and possibly a friend will be coming, though I do not have a way to contact you directly. Rick, I do not know if you ever do maintenance on the road but since I would be using it occassionally, I am willing to come up and help you work on the road or the gate in return for the privilege of passage. Perhaps this can help atone in some small way for the insensitivity that you have experienced over the years from others. My number is 408-997-6955. Could I bother you to call so that I can further understand any other concerns you may have on this. Thanks in advance for you consideration. Sincerely, Dave Schwaderer i CLUMS No. 89-12 meetin June 28, 1989 89-16 MIDPENINS REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DIS CT Date:P07ISED C L A I M S Amount Name Description r- 2841 8,700.00 Bill Botsch Grading Service Demolition and Cleanup 2842 18.00 California Native Plant Society Mermberst-iip 2843 25.00 California Park and Recreation Society Directory 2844 107.02 Clement Communications, Inc. Subscription 2845 203.88 Sheryl Mararioni Cochran Reimbursement.;-Seminar Expenses 2846 38.46 Dennis Danielson. Reirnbursement--Field Sunnlies 2847 5,500.00 Deloitte Haskins and Sells Audit 2848 3,080.00 Dillingham Associates Architectural Services 2849 37.45 Emergency Vehicle Systems Vehicle Parts 2850 12.00 Federal Express Corporation Express Mail 2851 150.00 First American Title Insurance Company Reconveyance Fees 2852 49,634.00 Flinn, Gray & Herterich Insurance 2853 33.71 Foster Brothers Security System Keys 2854 425.00 Greenbelt Alliance Sigmas 2855 343.58 Gregg's TV - Appliance & Video Dishv7asher 2"C5 131.10 Herbert Grench Reimbursement--Out-of-To=,m Meeting 2uj7 283.55 Virg Harkins Signs Sign Frame 2858 81.01 Hengehold Motor Co. , Inc. Van Rental 2859 1,112.00 IBM Corporation Office Machines Maintenance 2860 39.26 21a.tthexa Ken Reimbursement--Field Supplies ' 2861 52.47 l bil Oil Company Fuel 2862 116.5D,- Pbnogram Sanitation Sanitation Sunnlies 2863 33.02 Northern Energy Propane Gas 2864 455.75 Office Club Office Supplies 2865 39.95 Panel Publishers Resource Document 2866 46.55 Pitney Bowes, Inc. Pf'eter Rental it 2867 9.93 Regal Dodge Vehicle Parts 2868 11.40 Rokon International, Inc. Vehicle Parts 2869 10,000.00 County of San Mateo Security Deposit for Tunnel Project 2870 300.00 Santa Clara County Environmental Underground Storage Tank Permit Health Services 2871 313.51 Scribner Graphic Press Business Cards 2872 1,113.23 Shell Oil Company Fuel and Repairs 2 S 55.88 Tri City Lock Company Repair Services 2874 95.85 Del goods private Vehicle Expense 2875 492.42 Xerox Corporation Maintenance Agreement Emergency Check Issued on June 22, 1989 i _. Claims No. 89-12 Meeting 80-16 P Date: June 28, 1989 Amount Name Description i 1,885.89 Emergency Vehicle System Vehicle Equiprment Installed 2877 11203.2.7 Peninsula Oil Company Fuel 2878 8,920.00 E. R. Sheehan Eauirment Rental and Consulting Fees 2879 3,850.00 Stevens Creek Quarry Discing 2881 224.13 Petty Cash Postage, Local Business Meeting Expense, Films and Develoning, Maps, Office Supplies and Private Vehicle Expense 2882 63.67,v* Country Gourn-et Local Business Meeting 2883 7,321.00 Pacific Bell Relocation of Telephone Lines--Alpine Read ** Emergency Check Issued on June 28, 1989 I f I