Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19980318 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 98-06 fgional C)pIn ace MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meeting 98-06 SPECIALzMEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA* 7:30 P.M. 330 Distel Circle Wednesday Los Altos, California March 18, 1998 (7:30) ROLL CALL In the event public attendance exceeds room capacity, the meeting may be adjourned and immediately reconvened at the following location: Mountain View Community Center 201 S. Rengstorff Avenue Mountain View, CA ** ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -- Public ADOPTION OF AGENDA *** ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR -- B. Crowder BOARD BUSINESS (7:45) 1. Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for Acquisition of the Russian Convent Of Our Lady of Vladimir Inc. Property; Adoption of Preliminary Use and Management Plan and Naming the Property Mills Creek Open Space Preserve; Indicate their Intention Upon Acquisition to Dedicate the Property as Public Open Space; Authorization for the General Manager to Enter Into an Agreement for Professional Services with Associated Right of Way Services, Inc. for Site Location Services at a Cost Not to Exceed $25,000; and Find by Motion That the Property is Threatened by Development, Subject to Degradation of Natural Resources; and Owned in Fee By an Institutional or Commercial Entity Consideration of Resolution Determining that the Recommended Actions are Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act 330 Distel Circle - Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 Phone: 650-691-1200 FAX: 650-691-0485 - E-mail: mrosd@openspace.org Web site:www.openspace.org Board of Directors:Pete Siemens,Mary C.Davey,Jed Cyr, David I.Smernoff,Nonette Hanko,Betsy Crowder,Kenneth C.Nitz - General Manager:L.Craig Britton i Meeting 98-06 Page 2 Consideration of Resolution Finding and Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity Require the Acquisition of Certain Properties for Public Use, to Wit, for Public Park, Recreation, Open Space and Ecological Purposes for the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve, Describing the Property Necessary Therefore and Authorizing and Directing Its Retained Legal Counsel To Do Everything Necessary to Acquire All Interests Therein (Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir Property) ADJOURNMENT *NOTE. Times are estimated and items may appear earlier or later than listed. Agenda is subject to change of order. TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: The Chair will invite public comment on agenda items at the time each item is considered by the Board of Directors. You may address the Board concerning other matters during oral communications. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to 3 minutes. Alternately, you may comment to the Board by a written communication, which the Board appreciates. All items on the consent calendar shall be approved without discussion by one motion. Board members, the General Manager, and members of the public may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar during consideration of the Consent Calendar. Regional Open .,,ace R-98-36 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meeting 98-06 March 18, 1998 AGENDA ITEM _ I AGENDA ITEM Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for Acquisition of the Russian Convent Of Our Lady of Vladimir, Inc. Property, Determination of Categorical Exemption from California Environmental Quality Act, Adoption of Preliminary Use and Management Plan and Naming the Property Mills Creek Open Space Preserve, Intention to Dedicate Property as Public Open Space, Authorization for General Manager to Enter into Contract for Site Location Services and Finding the Property is Threatened By Development, Subject to Degradation of Natural Resources and Owned in Fee by an 6stitutional or Commercial Entity GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Adopt the attached resolution determining that the recommended actions are a categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as set out in this report. 2. Adopt the accompanying Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Finding and Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity Require the Acquisition of Certain Properties for Public Use, to Wit, for Public Park, Recreation, Open Space and Ecological Purposes for the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve, Describing the Property Necessary Therefore and Authorizing and Directing Its Retained Legal Counsel To Do Everything Necessary to Acquire All Interests Therein (Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir, Inc. Property). 3. Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan recommendations contained in this report, including naming the property Mills Creek Open Space Preserve. 4. Indicate your intention upon acquisition to dedicate the property as public open space. 5. Authorize the General Manager to enter into an agreement for professional services with Associated Right of Way Services, Inc. for site location services at a cost not to exceed $25,000. 6. Find by motion based upon this staff report that the property is threatened by development, subject to degradation of natural resources and more than 50% of the fee interest is held by an institutional or commercial entity. INTRODUCTION This agenda item requests the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space 330 Distel Circle • Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 Phone: 650-691-1200 FAX:650-691-0485 • E-mail: mrosd@openspace.org • Web site:www.openspace.org T" Board of Directors:Pete Siemens,Mary C.Davey,Jed Cyr,David T.Smernoff,Nonette Hanko,Betsy Crowder,Kenneth C.Nitz •Genera!Manager:L.Craig Britton R-98-36 Page 2 District to consider exercising its power of eminent domain to acquire approximately 273 acres of land to form the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve. The property is located in San Mateo County on a prominent ridge overlooking Half Moon Bay and Burleigh Murray Ranch State Park. Bordering Skyline Boulevard and situated near the intersection of State Highway 92, the property forms one of the most scenic ridges in the Santa Cruz Mountains. The establishment of the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve project will protect in perpetuity a critically important wildlife corridor. Development of the property would result in altering the natural condition of the land would severely degrade the views, wildlife habitat and public enjoyment of the area. Establishment of the preserve will preserve and protect these resources. PROTECT DESCRIPTION The project is located in San Mateo County on the ridges adjacent to Skyline Boulevard and overlooking Burleigh Murray Ranch State Park, and consists of the acquisition of approximately 273 acres of land for public park, recreation, open space and ecological preserve purposes, and creation of the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve, including the concurrent adoption of a Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Preserve, to maintain the site in a natural condition and preserve fish and wildlife habitat. The plan states the property will be managed primarily for conservation and scenic viewshed while allowing controlled public use. Preserving the site in a natural condition will involve restricting public use to existing trails and allowing steep roads to revegetate and stabilize. This will preserve the habitat for the summer steelhead trout (Federally Threatened Species). Steep roads will be closed and allowed to revegetate naturally which will reduce erosion. The spread of non- native invasive plants will be controlled by manual removal in order to prevent a reduction in biodiversity. The majority of existing roads will be open for public pedestrian trail use and patrol. Parking will not be provided on-site but visitors may park in existing facilities at the intersection of Skyline Boulevard and State Highway 92 or along roadside pull-outs. Development of the property will be prohibited, resulting in the protection of the scenic qualities of the Skyline Scenic Corridor. BACKGROUND The District has been interested in this 273-acre property since annexation occurred in this area of San Mateo County in 1978. At that time, the property was owned by Our Lady of the Pillar Church in Half Moon Bay who had received it as a gift in 1957. District staff contacted the Roman Catholic Archbishop of San Francisco in the early 1980's to express interest in preserving the property and was informed there were no plans to sell or develop it. The Archbishop was asked to contact the District if the property were to become available for purchase in the future. In May 1996, when the Russian Convent of Our Lady Of Vladimir had not completed the process of acquiring the property, District staff was asked to comment on their proposal to construct a convent, chapel and retreat center. Staff expressed concerns that the project was in I R-98-36 Page 3 a highly scenic area that was not suitable for the proposed development and stated the District's interest in preserving the property. Shortly thereafter, the property was purchased by the Convent, and in September 1996, a conceptual plan for a convent, chapel and retreat center was submitted to San Mateo County and received an approval from the Planning Commission early in 1997. The concept plan includes a one-story convent building for 20 cloistered nuns, a chapel with a gold-leaf dome, a two-story retreat center containing ten guest rooms (later reduced to eight) and residences for a priest and caretaker, and a 24-car parking area. The applicant also reserved the right to develop an auxiliary residence at a later date. The convent and chapel are to be developed on top of the prominent ridge overlooking the coast and the retreat center is to be located on the south side of the ridge and closer to Skyline Boulevard in the Skyline Scenic Corridor. San Mateo County's process for reviewing and approving the Convent's concept plan was intended to allow the applicant and the County to reach an agreement on the general design of the project and its compliance with County policies and regulations prior to the preparation of a final and more detailed plan. The property is in the Resource Management/Coastal Zone District and under a Williamson Act contract. The County determined that all proposed uses were permitted under the zoning and Williamson Act. In addition, the County determined additional density credits would be required based on proposed water use and agreed that density credits could be transferred from a property in Pescadero which is to be restricted to agricultural use. The State Office of Land Conservation notified the County that it does not support the transfer of density credits to Williamson Act lands. During the County's review process, interested groups and individuals expressed a number of concerns over a variety of issues. In May 1997, the Planning Commission's approval of the proposed development was appealed by Save Skyline Open Space, a grass- roots citizens group, on issues relating to land use and density conflicts with the Williamson Act agricultural preserve on the property, water use calculations, and enforceability of conditions limiting the number of people on the site. The appeal was denied and the project has continued with the filing of the application for plan and permit approval. Prior to the Planning Commission's review of the project, interested groups and individuals addressed the District's Board of Directors, expressing their concerns about the proposed project and requested that the District acquire the property. On October 23, 1996, the Board authorized staff to appraise and initiate negotiations to acquire the property. In March 1997, staff met with Convent representatives to discuss the District's interest in preserving the property. The Convent declined an offer by the District to purchase the property outright and hire a consultant to help locate a suitable site for building the convent and retreat center. Staff presented the owners with a preliminary access concept plan based on off-site analysis of the project site and existing surrounding park and open space lands. Staff requested entry to the property to verify the feasibility of its plan as it related to the wildlife R-98-36 Page 4 corridor, scenic qualities, and potential for regional trails, including the Bay Area Ridge Trail. Access was denied by the convent at that time. In August 1997, the Convent and District entered into a mediation agreement to engage in discussions and determine if respective goals between the Convent and District could be reconciled. Those discussions took place between September 1997 and January 1998. During the mediation process, staff and District consultants were permitted to enter on and examine the property. Staff was able to evaluate the feasibility of the preliminary access concept plan that had been presented earlier to the Convent in March 1997. The results supported some but not all the earlier off-site findings relating to the importance of scenic resources, wildlife habitat and trail use opportunities. The onsite visits revealed that regional trails were undesirable based on potential impacts to wildlife habitats and physical constraints associated with steep topography. In July 1997, staff and two members of the Bay Area Ridge Trail Council conducted a field trip and determined a preferred alignment of the Ridge Trail between State Highway 92 and Purisima. Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve (see attached July 9, 1997 Memorandum to Craig Britton). The preferred alignment would lie on the west side of Skyline Boulevard until slightly to the north of the property where it would cross to the east side of the highway, and continues on the east side to Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. The second regional trail shown on the preliminary access concept plan, connecting the Ridge Trail to Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park through the property, was determined undesirable because it would intrude on sensitive summer steelhead habitat in Mills Creek. On-site parking was determined to be impractical for public vehicle ingress and egress from Skyline Boulevard. In February 1998, the Board received a letter from the Convent's attorney stating its final offer (see attached letter from Law Offices of Colleen Doherty, dated February 27, 1998). The offer includes provisions for: 1) conveyance to the District in fee of approximately 165 acres, 2) a monastic reserve over 40% of the remaining lands to be owned by the Convent with a permanent open space easement over the majority of the reserve, 3) relocation and landscaping of the convent and chapel in an effort to reduce visual impacts, 4) restriction of future development to one auxiliary residence to take place in the RM portion of the property near Skyline Boulevard, 5) an equestrian easement for neighborhood trail access along Skyline Boulevard frontage, and 6) a willingness to consider the development of Bay Area Ridge Trail through the property if the need arises. The Convent's offer satisfies some but not all the concerns and issues regarding staff's desire to protect the natural condition of the property. First, the convent and chapel remain situated on the main east-west ridge and protrude visually into scenic open space and a major wildlife migration corridor. County staff addressed the visibility of the proposed buildings in its January 22, 1997 report to the Planning Commission in which it states, "The proposed convent and chapel would be located on the highest ridge of the property and would be visible against a backdrop of trees from Skyline Boulevard to the north of the property. The retreat center would be visible against the hillside from Skyline Boulevard to the south of the property." R-98-36 Page 5 Although the convent has been reduced in width by 30 feet and lowered five feet in the owner's recent revisions submitted to the County on February 5, 1998, the location of the convent and chapel buildings have been moved only ten feet in the southerly direction. Both buildings will still significantly alter the natural condition of the ridgetop and impacting the migration routes of many animals, including those routes used by the deer and mountain lion. Secondly, public opportunities to access the trails on the central north-south ridge will be restricted by the location of the convent and chapel buildings. Conditions stated in the offer require the primary public trail access route between Skyline Boulevard and the central ridge to be aligned downslope from the buildings on a very steep north-facing slopes. Given the close proximity of the proposed trail to the headwaters of Mills Creek and summer steelhead trout (listed as a Federally Threatened Species in November 1997), it would be difficult if not impossible to route the trail across the sideslope without seriously impacting the creek with siltation. If the trail were feasible, in order to minimize the trail's impact on the creek, the trail would need to be less than two feet in width, thereby becoming difficult for the public to negotiate and expensive for the District to manage. DESCRIPTION (see attached Exhibits A a-n_d Bl The approximate 273-acre property is located on the crest of the Santa Cruz Mountains approximately halfway between Belmont and Half Moon Bay. It is bounded by Skyline Boulevard and San Francisco Watershed lands to the east, lands of Peninsula Open Space District (POST) to the south and west, Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park to the southwest, and private properties to the north and southeast. To the east, the property borders a small private parcel on three sides. State Highway 92 lies approximately two and one-half miles to the north. The property forms the headwaters of Mills Creek, a perennial creek that flows westerly through Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park and to the coast. The property's topography is dominated by a dramatic H-shaped ridge that is highly visible from many miles away. The east leg of the ridge system is adjacent to Skyline Boulevard and connects to the west leg by way of a narrow spine-like ridge. The west half of the ridge system lies in the heart of the property and is nearly encircled by the north and south tributaries of Mills Creek. Elevations range from 1,500 feet near Skyline Boulevard to 800 feet near the southwest property corner and the confluence of the two tributaries of Mills Creek. Portions of the ridge system near Skyline Boulevard and in the center of the property are nearly level but drop off steeply to the two creeks below. The average sideslope is in excess of 45%. The vast majority of the property consists of steep, erodible slopes of mature dense coastal scrub. Though coastal scrub is not a rare community type in California, very little of this habitat type occurs on protected land in this region of the coast. Several very small grasslands are scattered within the coastal scrub. The level areas near Skyline Boulevard are disturbed and are dominated by non-native invasive species, including Acacia, Monterey Pine, Blue R-98-36 Page 6 Gum Eucalyptus and French Broom. The non-native Monterey Cypress is also present but is not invasive. The two tributaries of Mills Creek are surrounded by a dense tangle of coastal scrub vegetation and are not accessible. Red Alder, willow, sedges and ferns are present along the creeks. The property has diverse wildlife and serves as an important deer migration corridor, connecting the San Francisco Watershed lands to the east with Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park and POST lands to the west. The property is a major crossing point for deer and other wildlife because the area lying directly to the south of the property has residential development. A mountain lion was observed near the southern boundary and several mountain lion prints were found, indicating the high numbers of deer. Other animal species found include bobcats, bats, coyote, woodrats, raccoons, and shrew. The Townsends Western Big Eared Bat which is a state species of special concern was observed in flight at night but, because its flying range is quite broad, it is not known where it resides. (A state species of special concern is a species that is not considered or classified as rare, threatened or endangered. It is an administrative, informal classification which suggests that these species be given consideration during planning for projects.) Bird species, including bald eagle, Swainson's hawk, golden eagle and Cooper's hawk were also observed in flight but not located specifically on the property. Though not found on the site the San Francisco garter snake had been reported on adjacent private property by a neighboring property owner. According to a February 18, 1997 letter sent to San Mateo County from the Convent's consulting biologist, Thomas Reid and Associates, the existence of the garter snake is not likely on the property based on a evaluation process developed by a specialist familiar with the snake's habitat. (See attached Thomas Reid and Associates letter). Summer steelhead trout were found on the property in the north tributary of Mills Creek adjacent to the northern boundary and near the southern boundary in the south tributary of Mills Creek. Summer steelhead trout are a Federally Threatened Species as of November 1997. The property offers ideal spawning areas in pools with overhanging banks and dense vegetation. The California Department of Fish and Game is currently restoring steelhead habitat in the reach of Mills Creek passing through Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park, thereby increasing access to the headwaters within the property. Protection of the steep and highly erodible upper watershed by maintaining it in its natural condition will protect the steelhead population. Historically, the property and surrounding area was used for a dairy farm in the mid to late 1800's. A ranch house was built on the upper portion of the property near Skyline Boulevard and the entire area was cleared and used for grazing. Remnants of a small farm shed and cabin are located on top of the spine-like ridge and on the upper north-facing slope in the northeast portion of the property. In the late 1930's and until the late 1960's, a hunting club used the area for deer hunting and maintained a network of roads along the ridgetops; some of R-98-36 Page 7 these roads were reopened in 1997 by the current owner. The property has remained relatively undisturbed since the cessation of cattle grazing in the 1930's and grasslands have converted to mature dense coastal scrub. An unsurfaced access road enters the property through a triangular-shaped CalTrans parcel near the property's southeast corner where a gate is located. Not too far from the entry gate there is an unsurfaced side road aligned in the southerly direction leading towards adjacent private parcels. A little further to the west, there is second intersection at the site of the proposed chapel and convent buildings where an surfaced road branches off towards the northeast boundary of the property. The main road then continues across the spine-like ridge to the center of the property where it divides into two roads that follow the top of the central north-south ridge. All the roads terminate on the property with the exception of the northeast road which extends into the adjacent private parcel to the north and connects to Skyline Boulevard. There are a number of other obscure old roads and trails on the property that are extremely steep and overgrown. DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC NECESSITY SITY The public necessity for acquiring the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve is summarized as follows: 1. The scenic qualities of the property from off-site are outstanding and any development of structures and roads in the vicinity of the ridgetops will seriously degrade these views. The property's prominent ridges near Skyline Boulevard and the dramatic north-south ridge located in the heart of the property are key landscape features in this region. The chaparral and tree-covered ridges are viewed as a continuous natural silhouette against the sky and more distant ridges. The alteration of this landscape, including potential grading and associated shapes and reflections of man-made structures will detract from the natural beauty of the property. A portion of the property is within San Mateo County's Skyline Scenic Corridor, designated as such to protect the scenic qualities of the area. The property is most often viewed from Skyline Boulevard when approaching the site in the southerly direction from State Highway 92. The ridges are visible from neighboring properties to the south, portions of State Highway 1 south of Half Moon Bay, Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park and Miramonte Ridge, owned by POST. A public trail system is envisioned on nearby Miramonte Ridge which will be impacted if development were to occur on highly visible ridges of the Convent property. In the future, public trail users may also have close-up views of the property if the preferred alignment of the Bay Area Ridge Trail is developed along the west side of Skyline Boulevard to the north of the property. Project planning for the Ridge Trail is conducted by the Bay Area Ridge Trail Council, a non-profit organization that works with private and public land owners to implement the 400 mile trail envisioned to encircle the Bay Area. The R-98-36 Page 8 implementation for this section of Ridge Trail may be undertaken by other agencies or organizations. 2. On-site views are excellent from the center of property along the prominent north-south ridge opposite the site of the proposed site for the convent and chapel buildings. From here, one can capture nearly a 360 degree views of Bald Knob at Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve, ocean beaches near Half Moon Bay, mountain tops above Crystal Springs Reservoir and, on a clear day, skyscrapers in downtown San Francisco. One of the most impressive sights from this portion of the property is the unspoiled headwaters of Mills Creek which almost encircle the central ridge and then drop steeply and dramatically through the middle of Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park. This portion of the property will provide a unique opportunity for trail users to view distant points of interest and a pristine watershed. Any development of structures on the connecting ridge to the west nearer Skyline Boulevard will seriously detract from this unique opportunity. 3. Preservation of the property is needed to ensure the protection of the natural resources and wildlife habitat on the site. The property is home to many plant and animal species, including the summer steelhead trout which have recently been listed as a Federally Threatened Species. The property provides excellent habitat for the steelhead to spawn as it comprises the headwaters of Mills Creek and is undisturbed. The health and survival of the steelhead population is dependent on the preservation of the headwaters. It is especially important to preserve the natural volume and flow of the water into the creek and to minimize erosion and turbidity. Development of the property will involve grading, septic systems and increase in impervious areas that will negatively impact water flow and quality in Mill Creek. Preservation of the deer migration corridor is also vitally important. Currently deer populations move through this property when migrating between San Francisco Watershed lands to the east and Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park and POST's Miramonte Ridge. The corridor is heavily used by deer because areas to the north and south have obstacles to deer migration; residential development borders Skyline Boulevard to the south and high volumes of traffic along State Highway 92 exist to the north. Due to the deer migration and mature coastal scrub, the property provides valuable habitat for the mountain lion. Development of the property will result in a decline in a variety of wildlife species including the mountain lion which is known to avoid developed areas. As experienced on other open space preserves, daytime hiking use will not have a significant impact on the mountain lion. 4. The existing roads and trails on the property offer public trail users unique vista points and picnic spots which are not available elsewhere in this geographic area. Access to the property, prior to the Convent's ownership was from adjacent private parcels and Skyline Boulevard. Acquisition of the property would reinstate public use that has R-98-36 Page 9 occurred in the past. Parking for this use will be along Skyline Boulevard and at the intersection of Skyline Boulevard and State Highway 92. The property is within the Bay Area Ridge Trail Corridor which is a federally recognized regional trail ringing the seven Bay Area counties. The most desirable location for the Bay Area Ridge Trail is in close proximity of the property near Skyline Boulevard. If the Bay Area Ridge Trail is developed in this location, existing roads and trails on the property will be an important adjunct to the Ridge Trail by offering a spur trail to the unique vista points and picnic spots. Development of structures on the prominent ridges, as proposed by the Convent, would preclude the existing main road from being used as a public trail and require trail construction on steep sideslopes which would impact the federally protected summer steelhead habitat. Development of structures and associated uses would also impact the tranquil setting and wilderness feeling the existing roads and trails presently offer trail users. USE AND MANAGEMENT PT.AN Planning Considerations The property is in San Mateo County and subject to zoning and regulations contained in the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan. The Local Coastal Plan is currently being reviewed and updated. The amendments establish new limits on development including more stringent restrictions on ridgeline development. The majority of the property is zoned Resource Management/Coastal Zone District (RM/CZ) while a 33.46-acre area of the site near Skyline Boulevard is zoned Resource Management (RM). The property has three density credits, one of which belongs solely to the 33.46-acre parcel zoned RM. Open space use of the property is compatible with the County's General Plan and zoning ordinances. Approximately one-third of the property is within the Skyline Scenic Corridor and the entire property is under a Williamson Act contract. Both designations are intended to preserve the open space qualities of the property. San Mateo County Trails Plan and the Bay Area Ridge Trail show the Ridge Trail Corridor in the vicinity property.of the Consultation with representatives of the Bay Area Ridge Trail indicate a desirable route would be located near Skyline Boulevard between State Highway 92 and Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. Although the property does not offer a highly desirable route for the Ridge Trail, it does offer an opportunity for a spur to the Ridge Trail which would enhance the trail experience by providing unique vista points and picnic spots. A connection to the Ridge Trail would use existing trails and could be provided on the main entry road or on the road that enters the property from the northeast corner. Preliminary Use and Management Plan Recommendations The Preliminary Use and Management Plan will take effect upon the District's taking possession of the property. The Plan will maintain the preserve in its natural condition, with R-98-36 Page 10 low intensity public trail use on the existing trail system. Maintaining the property in a natural condition will have a beneficial effect on the site's vegetation and wildlife. In 1996, prior to the District's conducting an assessment of the property, the Convent contracted with Thomas Reid and Associates to conduct an environmental assessment, the results of which stated "the project site and adjoining area does not contain threatened, rare, endangered, or unique species". (See attached report.) Since this study was completed, summer steelhead trout have been found on-site and, in November 1997, were listed as a Federally Threatened Species. The Preliminary Use and Management Plan will preserve steelhead habitat by allowing steep roads to revegetate and stabilize and by limiting public trail access to existing trails. District's consultants have stated the two tributaries of Mills Creek are extremely inaccessible and no new trails are planned on-site. The District's consultants also observed the Townsends Western Big Eared Bat in flight over the property but could not confirm whether it resided on-site. The consultant stated that if the bat were to reside on-site, the farm shed and cabin could provide desirable habitat. The bat is a state species of special concern and the Preliminary Use and Management Plan proposes securing the small farm shed and cabin for the purpose of enhancing habitat for the bats if such exists. Maintaining the site in its natural condition will avoid any impact on the bat if it exists on site. The Preliminary Use and Management Plan proposes securing the property for six months before opening it to public trail use. Parking will not be provided on-site because public vehicle ingress and egress from Skyline Boulevard is not desirable and adequate existing parking facilities are available at the intersection of Skyline Boulevard and Highway 92 and along roadside pullouts on Skyline Boulevard. The District's experience with similar preserves has shown that the existing parking facilities near this property are sufficient and will not result in traffic problems given the anticipated trail use on the property. Public Access: Designate the property a Conservation Management Unit (CMU), allowing low intensity trail use on existing trails while primarily managing the property for conservation and viewshed; parking will not be provided but is available at the intersection of Skyline Boulevard and State Highway 92 and roadside pullouts along Skyline Boulevard; the property will be opened for public use in six months. Roads: Existing unsurfaced roads will be maintained in their current condition for hiking trail use and patrol purposes with the exception of steep roads that may be susceptible to erosion which will be closed and allowed to stabilize and revegetate naturally. Trail Use Designation: Existing roads that are not being restored to a natural condition will be designated for hiking use only. Signs: Install "Closed Area" signs at all entry points along perimeter boundary for six R-98-36 Page 11 months; install preserve and private property boundary signs prior to opening the property to the public. Structures: Secure farm shed and remains of cabin prior to opening property to the public; secure these structures in such a way as to enhance habitat for the Townsends Western Big Eared Bat, if such exists. Vegetation: Control the spread of non-native invasive plants in order to prevent a reduction in biodiversity as recommended in the Convent's Thomas Reid and Associates environmental assessment; only hand removal of invasive plants will be permitted. Site Safety Inspection: Site inspection has been conducted and there are no known hazards with the exception of the farm shed and cabin that are recommended to be secured. Name: Name the property Mills Creek Open Space Preserve. CEQA COMPLIANCE eject Description Refer to Project Description on Page 2 of this report. CEQA Determination i The District concludes that this project is categorically exempt from CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) under Sections 15313, 15316, 15317, 15325 of the CEQA Guidelines. Maintaining the site in its natural condition will have a beneficial effect on the site's wildlife and vegetation. There is no reasonable possibility that establishment of this open space preserve will have a significant effect on the environment. To the contrary, the very purpose of this project is to maintain the natural condition and wildlife habitat of the site. Section 15313 exempts the acquisition of lands for fish and wildlife conservation purposes. The property is being acquired to preserve and protect fish and wildlife habitats, including habitats for the Federally Threatened summer steelhead trout, mountain lion and variety of other wildlife species. Summer steelhead trout have been found in Mills Creek within the property near the north boundary and mountain lion tracks have been found in numerous locations throughout the site. No development will occur on the property and public trail use will not be allowed near Mills Creek in order to ensure the protection of the summer steel head trout. The trout habitat is extremely inaccessible to any visitors because of impenetrable terrain. Section 15316 exempts the acquisition of land in order to create parks if the site is in a natural condition and the management plan proposes to keep the area in a natural condition. The use R-98-36 Page 12 and management plan specifies the land will not be developed and will be maintained in a natural condition. New roads and trails are not proposed and existing steep roads that are eroding will be restored to their natural condition. Invasive plants will be controlled to prevent spreading further into the native habitat; only hand removal techniques will be used. Herbicides and pesticides will not be used for vegetation control on roads or in controlling invasive plants. Public access will be prohibited near creeks and summer steelhead trout habitat. Section 15317 exempts the acceptance of fee interests in order to maintain the open space character of an area. The District will accept fee interest in the property and the acquisition will be to maintain the open space character of the area and will preclude development. Section 15325 exempts transfers of ownership of interests in land in order to preserve open space. This acquisition will transfer ownership of the property to the District and ensure it will be preserved as public open space. The property will be dedicated as public open space. TERMS District's Offer to Purchase The District made a formal written offer to purchase the subject property for $982,800 on an all cash basis in January of 1998. This offer was rejected by the Convent's representatives. The District's offer is $282,800 more than the Convent's purchase price of$700,000 in June 1996. The District's purchase offer was based upon a fair market appraisal of the subject property by an MAI appraiser which was commissioned by the District. As part of the recommended action, staff is also seeking authorization to hire Associated Right of Way Services, Inc., as a site location specialist. This action is not required by law. The purpose of hiring this consultant is to help the Convent find a suitable, new location that meets their desired and specific criteria for a building location. The Contract for these site location services would be limited to $25,000. Because of the threatened development to this prominent ridgeline property, the District is left with no alternative other than to acquire the property through eminent domain action. As indicated in this report, the District has a long standing interest in acquiring this property, and was not given an opportunity to purchase the property on the open market. Since learning of the Convent's purchase and development proposal, District staff has negotiated in good faith with the Convent's representatives to reach a mutually agreeable settlement and/or acquire the property from the Convent at fair market value. Despite extensive negotiations between the Convent and District, the parties were unable to reach an agreement to the mutual satisfaction of the parties. Therefore, as a last resort, staff recommends that you adopt a resolution of public interest and necessity to acquire this property for public purposes. R-98-36 Page 13 Assuming that you approve the recommended action, the necessary documents will be filed with the court for acquisition of the property. However, staff will continue to negotiate in good faith in an effort to bring about a settlement satisfactory to both parties. Eminent Domain Policies The District's Policies Regarding Use of Eminent Domain, as adopted on April 23, 1986, are intended as advisory guidelines relating to the use of eminent domain. Section 10 of these policies reads as follows: 10. Decisions by the Board. These policies are intended solely for the guidance of the Board in the exercise of its discretion and are not intended to give rise to private rights or causes of action in individuals or other persons. The Board shall be the final arbiter as to any question of interpretation of these policies. As discussed in this report, the imminent threat of development to this property qualifies under Section 2. Unimproved propity. not subdividable and/or Section 4. Unimproved. subdividable pruW=y of the Policy: "the property is clearly threatened by development or degradation of natural resources". The fee owner of the property, the Russian Convent Lady of Vladimir, Inc., a Corporation, also meets the "institutional or commercial ownership- including ... churches ... and corporations" definition as defined in Section 9(e) of your Policies. The subject property clearly meets the definition of "susceptible to further subdivision" as defined in Sections 9(d) of your policies. Current land use regulations of the County would permit subdivision. The property consists of approximately 273 acres with a San Mateo County density analysis determination of a total of three density credits, two within the Coastal Zone (RM-CZ) and one within Resource Management (RM). The proposed development requires additional density credits within the Coastal Zone requiring a possible purchase and transfer of density credits onto the property. In addition, the possibility of future development within the RM zoning of one auxiliary residence is contemplated for future development on the property. This property is also within the Master Plan planning area. Your Policies provide for the use of eminent domain subject to the general limitations of the opening policy statement: It is the desire of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to acquire open space from willing sellers. Eminent Domain may be used only within the planning areas designated in the District's Master Plan in those instances where all reasonable attempts at voluntary negotiations fail and the property in question is necessary to the open space program of the District; and where there are no feasible current or prospective alternate acquisitions that would achieve the District's objectives. R-98-36 Page 14 It remains the intention of staff to settle this matter on an amicable basis. However, the imminent threat of development to this property makes eminent domain the only alternative left open to the District. This property is one of the more critical parcels of land within the District boundaries to be considered for open space acquisition. Alternative attempts to reach a compromise and achieve the District's objectives have been exhaustive but unsuccessful. Prepared by: Del Woods, Senior Management Specialist Michael C. Williams, Real Property Representative Contact person: Malcolm Smith, Public Affairs Manager RESOLUTION NO. MILLS CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MILLS CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, after public notice, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District held a properly noticed public hearing on March 18, 1998 in order to, among other things, determine whether the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors held such public hearing, allowed all interested persons an opportunity to appear and be heard on the matters before the Board, and considered the matters presented. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine, based on the entire record of the proceedings before the Board, that the MILLS CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE PROJECT is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act set out Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Sections 15313, 15316, 15317, and 15325. RESOLUTION NO. MILLS CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE PROJECT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE, TO WIT, FOR PUBLIC PARK, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND ECOLOGICAL PRESERVE PURPOSES, FOR THE MILLS CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE PROJECT DESCRIBING THE PROPERTY NECESSARY THEREFORE AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ITS LEGAL COUNSEL TO DO EVERYTHING NECESSARY TO ACQUIRE ALL INTERESTS THEREIN. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, after proper notice to the property owner pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District held a public hearing on March 18, 1998 in order to allow the persons whose property is to be acquired a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard on the matters set out in Section 1245.235; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has held such public hearing, considered the matters presented, and said owner had a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard upon all matters before the Board at the hearing during which the adoption of this resolution was considered; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is authorized to acquire property by eminent domain for public purposes, including acquisitions of property for park, recreation, open space, and ecological preserve purposes; pursuant to Division 5, Chapter 3, Sections 5539 to 5542 inclusive, of the Public Resources Code, State of California; and WHEREAS, the property, rights, and interests described in Exhibit "A" attached to this resolution and incorporated herein by reference (the "property") located at or near 12140 Skyline Boulevard in San Mateo County, California are necessary for public park, recreation, open space, and ecological preserve purposes, said purposes constituting a public purpose and use; and WHEREAS, in order to undertake the Project, it is necessary for the District to acquire fee title to the entirety of the property; WHEREAS, the Offer of Just Compensation required by Section 7267.2 of the Government Code has been made to the owners of record: Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir, Inc. by letter dated January 23, 1998. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the public interest and necessity require the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project and the acquisition of fee simple title to the property for public park, recreation, open space, and ecological preserve purposes for the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project is planned and located so as to be most compatible with the greatest public good and cause the least private injury; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the property described in Exhibit "A" is necessary for the proposed Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the offer required by Section 7267.2 of the Government Code has been made to the owner of the property; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the acquisition of the entirety of the property is necessary for the establishment of the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project and that the Project cannot be attained without such acquisition; that such acquisition of the entirety of the property is necessary to preserve the integrity of the park, recreational, open space, ecological and scenic values of the Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the acquisition of the entirety of the property is necessary and convenient to achieve its statutory purposes and that the exercise of the power of eminent domain is consistent with the District's policies regarding the use of eminent domain. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the General Manager be and is hereby authorized and directed to cause to be executed and/or prepared all appropriate legal documents, deposits of funds and related instruments for acquisition of title to the property by eminent domain; and 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the law firm of Turner and Mulcare or such other legal counsel as may be selected by the General Manager, be and the same is hereby retained, instructed and directed to do everything necessary to acquire all interests in the property described in Exhibit "A", and is further authorized to prepare, file, and prosecute such eminent domain proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction thereof as are necessary for such acquisition, including the obtaining of an order for immediate possession pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1255.410 et seq. to prevent the damaging, development, and/or destruction of the property. 3 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District I �/ • 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0 �� ... N 1 Mile POST Russianf - 35# n ; Convent " Bur I h Murray Ranch tat e a - / Boundary ` c ..J Pur,isima Crk 35 0 r' Redwood's .-Open Space PreserveS� , EXHIBIT A: REGIONAL MAP Mid eninsula Regional Open Space District 0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 ........... N 1/2 Mile . ............ . . ......... ........... rnAl, .. .`€ �� F� �}. ,�,.<:,,�' .�.}.::::::ter .� t j ........... ..... ..... .... 35 all .......... .......... .......... .......... vi .. ............. . ... ... (P O --------------- .......... ............ ......... ............. ........................... ...... ................ JR. ........... r ................. ................................ ................................................................. ................................ Scenic Ridges Roads and Trails Steelhead Habitat Mountain Lion Range Deer Migration EXHIBIT B: SITE MAP AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES, INC. THIS AGREEMENT, dated this - day of 199 , which shall be its effective date unless otherwise stated, is by and between ASSOCIATED RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES, INC., a California corporation ("Consultant") and the MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a public body of the State of California ("District"). Consultant and the District agree as follows: (1) Sco= and Schedule of Service. Consultant shall provide the services described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, in compliance with the Work Schedule set forth in Exhibit A. (2) Compensation. For work performed by Consultant in accordance with this Agreement, District shall compensate Consultant in accordance with the payment terms, conditions and rates set forth in Exhibit A. (3) independent Contractor Status. It is expressly understood and agreed by both parties that Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the District. (4) Assignment and Subcontracting. It is recognized by the parties hereto that a substantial inducement to District for entering into this Agreement was, and is, the reputation and competence of Consultant. Neither this Agreement nor any interest therein may be assigned or subcontracted by Consultant without the prior written approval of District. (5) Insuran . Before beginning the services called for by the Agreement, Consultant shall obtain and maintain for the duration of the Agreement the following insurance: (A) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit B. (B) Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, combined single limit applied separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names District as an Additional Insured, which is primary to any policy which the District may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the District in the same manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage"). (C) Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is excluded or is included in the Commercial General Liability policy. HAACQUISTMAROWSLAGR Agreement for Professional Services Page 2 (6) Proof of Insurance Coverage. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of required insurance coverage prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance to District, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled without at least 30 days written notice to the District. po y thirty ( ) Y In order to demonstrate the District's coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross- liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the District demonstrating same. (7) Indemnification - Consultant's Re.Sponsibility. It is understood and agreed that Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold District, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of any personal injury, bodily injury, loss of life, or damage to property, or any violation of any federal, state, or municipal law or ordinance, or other cause in connection with the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors, or agents, or on account of the performance or character of this work, except for any such claim arising out of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the District, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages. (8) Termination. This Agreement may be canceled at any time by District for its convenience upon written notification to Consultant. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall be entitled to pro-rated compensation for authorized services performed prior to the effective date of termination; provided, however, that the District may condition payment of such compensation upon Consultant's delivery to the District of any or all materials described in Section 9 herein. (9) Ownership of Materials. All documents, materials and records of a finished nature, including but not limited to final plans, specifications, video or audio tapes, photographs, computer data, software, reports, and maps, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be delivered to and become the property of District. , All documents and materials of a preliminary nature, including but not limited to survey notes, sketches, preliminary plans, computations and other data, and any other material referenced in this Section 9, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be made available, upon request, to District at no additional charge and without restriction or limitation on their use. Upon District's request, Consultant shall execute appropriate documents to assign to the District the copyright or trademark to work created pursuant to this Agreement. C:\ACQUISTN\AROWSI.AGR Agreement for Professional Services Page 3 (10) Compliance with Laws. In the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall abide by and conform to all applicable federal, state and local laws, and all ordinances, regulations and policies of the District. Consultant warrants that all work done under this Agreement will be in compliance with all applicable safety rules, laws, statutes and practices, including but not limited to Cal/OSHA regulations. If a license or registration of any kind is required of Consultant, its employees, agents, or subcontractors by law, Consultant warrants that such license has been obtained, is valid and in good standing, shall be kept in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, and that any applicable bond shall be posted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. (11) Time Extensions. Consultant agrees to diligently prosecute the services to be provided under this Agreement to completion and in accordance with any schedules specified herein. In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence. Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control, other than delays caused by the District, shall be requested in writing to the District's Contract Administrator prior to expiration of the specified completion date. (12) Whole Agreement and Amendments. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties. This Agreement integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto and supersedes all negotiations or any previous written or oral Agreements between the parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may be amended only by a written document executed by both Consultant and District's General Manager. (13) Controlling_Law. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Consultant has executed this Agreement, and the District, by its General Manager, who is authorized to do so, has executed this Agreement. MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN ASSOCIATED RIGHT OF WAY SPACE DISTRICT SERVICES, INC. By: By: L. Craig Britton, General Manager Wm. S. Tannenbaum, President Date: Date: Attachments: Exhibit A Scope of Services, Compensation and Billing Exhibit B Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Insurance Provisions H:1ACQWSTI\AR0WSI.AOR SSOCIATED RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES INC. December 18, 1997 Mr. Craig Britton General Manager Midpenninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 Re: Real Property/Site Location Services Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir Dear Craig: It was a pleasure meeting with you to discuss this assignment. Associated Right of Way Services, Inc. (AR/WS) would provide the following services at the direction of you and/or your designee: • Meet with District to establish overall parameters for site location of convent. • Meet and confer with representatives of convent to detail conditions for a new site. • Investigate the market in San Mateo and Marin Counties for possible site locations in accordance with preestablished parameters. Investigation would include but would not be limited to field reviews, research of available market listings and/or other market data information-, interviews with knowledgeable real estate professionals and analysis of other available and relevant information. • Ongoing meetings and contacts as necessary and/or requested by District to refine the site study. • Deliverable would be a summary report with spreadsheet(if applicable)detailing the site investigation methodology, sites researched, sites considered substantive issues investigated as well as any recommendations. As you know, the availability of sites acceptable to the convent may be limited. However, we understand that part of our task is to perform a certain level of due diligence in ascertaining the inventory of available properties for the convent. Our services would be invoiced on a time charged basis in accordance with our current fee schedule which is attached. I anticipate that approximately 70 to 80 percent of services would be billed at a rate of$85.00/hour with approximately 10 percent being invoiced at support staff rates of S38.00/hour and the balance at overall coordination (principal involvement) rates of$115.00/hour. While the level of effort is difficult to estimate, we would expect that a budget range of$20,000 to $25,000 would be adequate for reasonable completion of services. If this outline is acceptable,please let us know if you would like us to Punish you with one of our standard contracts or whether you would prefer us to work with a District consultant contract. Thank you again for your request for services and we look forward to working with you on this project. Smc 1 , Wm. S. annenbaum President cc: Dick Ehrhardt - AR/WS EXHIBIT—ZJ_. Denise Lucas -AR/WS Page Of uws%ritton.doc-Isb I 3496 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 105•Pleasant Hill,CA 94523-(510)947-5626• Fax 947-2095 C :. .......... Fee Schedule ,Eft dve January 1, 1998 through December 31, 1998) • Consultation / Coordination Services $ 115/Hour • Acquisition Services $ 75 -- 95/Hour * • Appraisal Services - Relocation Plans Fee Basis (Extra appraisal consulting at$130/Hour) (Lump sum) • Relocation Services $ 72 -- 92/Hour * • Right of Way Technician - Project Tracking $ 55/1-lour • Administrative Support / Secretarial Services $ 38/Hour • Other services as bid or at cost plus 15% ' Maximum rate charged Rates are adjusted each calendar year. Adjustment not less than +5% All above rates and fees include direct and indirect costs as well as profit. E'tHIBIT /q Page ;- of Exhibit B to Agreement between Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and [Name of Consultant] NMPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT INSURANCE PROVISIONS Insurance. Before beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall carry, maintain for the duration of the Agreement,, and provide proof thereof that is acceptable to the District the insurance specified in Exhibit B, "District Insurance Provisions", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. i (1) Workers' Compensation. Statutory Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance for any and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Consultant shall be provided as required by the California Labor Code. (2) Commercial General_ and Automobile Liability. Consultant, at Consultant's own cost and expense, shall maintain Commercial General and Business Automobile Liability insurance for the period covered by this Agreement in an amount not less than the amount set forth in Exhibit A, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work contemplated by this Agreement. If a Commercial General Liability Insurance or an Automobile Liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be Performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and damage to property resulting from activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of hired, owned and non-owned automobiles. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest edition of the Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form CG 0001 and Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (ed. 12/90) Code 1 (any auto). No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage. (a) A policy endorsement must be delivered to District demonstrating that District, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects each of the following: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant, including the insured's general supervision of Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to District, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. 1 (b) The insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not on a claims made basis. (c) An endorsement must state that coverage is primary insurance and that no other insurance affected by the District will be called upon to contribute to a loss under the coverage. (d) Any failure of Consultant to comply with reporting provisions of the policy shall not affect coverage provided to District and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. (e) Insurance is to be placed with California-admitted insurers. (f) Notice of cancellation or non-renewal must be received by District at least thirty days prior to such change. (3) Professional Liability. Where Consultant is a licensed professional, Consultant, at Consultant's own cost and expense, shall maintain for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount set forth in Exhibit A covering the licensed professionals' errors and omissions, as follows: (a) Notice that any cancellation, material change, or non-renewal of insurance must be received by the District at least thirty days prior to such change shall be included in the coverage or added as an endorsement to the policy. (b) The policy must contain a cross liability or severability of interest clause. (c) The following provisions shall apply if the professional liability coverages are written on a claims made form: . 1. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the date of the Agreement. 2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five years after completion of the Agreement or the work. 3. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another claims made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of this Agreement, Consultant must provide extended reporting coverage for a minimum of five years after completion of the Agreement or the work. The District shall have the right to exercise at the Consultant's cost, any extended reporting provisions of the policy should the Consultant cancel or not renew the coverage. 4. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the District prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement. 2 (4) Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Consultant shall disclose the self- insured retentions and deductibles before beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement. Any self-insured retention or deductible is subject to approval of District. During the period covered by this Agreement, upon express written authorization of District Legal Counsel, Consultant may increase such deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to District, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. The District Legal Counsel may condition approval f in r se o an cease in deductible or self-insured retention l y Y eels upon a requirement that Consultant procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses that is satisfactory in all respects to each of them. (5) XQtice of Reduction in Coverage. In the event that any coverage required under the Agreement is reduced, limited, or materially affected in any other manner, Consultant shall provide written notice to District at Consultant's earliest possible opportunity and in no case later than five days after Consultant is notified of the change in coverage. (6) In addition to any other remedies District may have if Consultant fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, District may, at its sole option: (a) Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under the Agreement; (b) Order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment which becomes due to Consultant hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment, until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof, (c) Terminate this Agreement. Exercise of any of the above remedies, however, is an alternative to other remedies District may have and is not the exclusive remedy for Consultant's failure to maintain insurance or secure appropriate endorsements. 3 MEMORANDUM Date: July 9, 1997 From: Del Woods To: Craig Re: Ridge Trail Field Trip - South of Highway 92 The following is a summary of findings from the July 3 field trip with Mary, Jean Rusmore and one other member of the Ridge Trail Council. The objective of the trip was to determine a "preferred alignment" of the Ridge Trail between Highway 92 and Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve based on geographical and traffic constraints. Property ownership was not taken into consideration. Reach I - Highway 92 to Roman Catholic Church Property The east side of the Skyline Boulevard has several steep embankments and ravines. The Cal Trans road frontage may be a possibility but it too has steep embankments. If the right of way were proposed, Cal Trans would probably be concerned over the trail's close proximity to traffic. A Cal Trans survey map would be necessary to determine if the trail could be set far enough away from traffic to make it feasible. The preferred alternative would be on the west side of Skyline Boulevard where the terrain is nearly level and there is a wide corridor in which to place the trail. Views of the bay and SF available along the trail corridor which is an important criteria for alignment. The trail could be located far away from the highway and still be on gentle slopes. Reach 2 - North Boundary of Roman Catholic Church Property to Preserve Finding a crossing point on the Skyline Boulevard is very difficult but necessary because residential development and steep slopes north of the Church property pose serious problems. The east side of Skyline Boulevard between the Church property and Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve is nearly level in most places and a desirable location for the trail. The feasible location for crossing to the east side of the highway is slightly north of the Church property where the highway is straight and grade is acceptable. A crossing on the south side of the Bell property would be extremely difficult because of unacceptable line of sight and grade. The trail alignment between the proposed crossing and preserve is densely wooded and it would be relatively easy to separate the trail from the highway. In some cases this could even be done within the right of way if Cal Trans were receptive to the trail. The second crossing would be desirable opposite the Kings Mountain Store where there is ample line of sight and the highway is level. The store will be a popular destination. -)" 5 A SA•. rVANC-ISCO" Wi J S": n.E-g� N 56crepe,E. a 5 w S" V.-t o s,.: R A* 20' '59 S60 t shill id - c F L I BM -- -,r— Gulch • i' � .. Adobe '!1c 14 z �` x � �` � I 1 \\ �✓ `'= aoc i15 �/ f S A N F R A N C I �Q o �`'',` _\ s' .•170 Water Te CD _. � U, 09 �S T A- T /-E - 1 _ . 26 JC5 vs E F At ETA i Lo I f reek �0 OFS�AT 1'� Yse x o t o .9 �ieO 7 j IVSP 1 � l..BM �148 A�'F°�, // `'%f - =ate; �,,` �f ' �`% \ _ :' ..♦ i M INK _ % l ,ys o' - .,cam_ ; ' ,: —• '� �I. Law Offices MAR n 2 19 Of _ COLLEEN DOHERTY M 16—P E ��" � 7A_T FL G 1-0 N A L OPE E. E MSTRICT 70 Ellsworth Street Teh(415)64M%5 San Francisco,CA 94110 Fax:(415)282-6654 February 27, 199E Via facsimile and mail President Betsy Crowder Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 Re: Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir Property Dear President Crowder and members of the Board: The Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir has received with great disappointment and sorrow the news that MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District has rejected the Russian Convent's offer for a conveyance of a majority of its property to MROSD. Because the Convent's proposal included an offer to put more than 90%of the property in permanent open space,with approximately 60%of the property, including all significant view areas to be conveyed to MROSD for public access and trails, and only approximately three%of the land to be affected by the monastery, it is difficult to understand the District's decision to initiate condemnation proceedings for this property. The Convent is willing,therefore,to make this final effort to be certain the Board fully understands the extent of the Convent's offer. Please consider this a letter of intent to reach an agreement on the following terms, all previously presented to the District: l. The Convent will convey to MROSD in fee approximately 165 acres(roughly 60%of the parcel), comprising the North and West portions of the property, as indicated on the plan previously presented to staff. This would include all of the viewpoints indicated by staff to be of interest to the District, including the bluffs facing the ocean and north to San Francisco;the 1539' highest ridge, located west of the building site, would be divided between the two parcels, and MROSD would own all of the northern and western portions of this area. 2. Approximately 90%of the total existing 280-acre parcel will be held in permanent open space through appropriate restrictions. The 40%of the property that is not conveyed to the District will be a monastic reserve with the majority of the reserve als o permanently dedicated to open space. The proposed monastery buildings, paths, parking areas and entry roads will affect only about three%of the entire 280-acre parcel. MROSD February 27, 1998 Page Two 3. In order to reduce potential visibility of the monastery from locations off-site, the Convent will move the monastic buildings(the Chapel and the Convent)to the south of the project application location, as close to the existing grove of trees as possible without disturbing the trees. In addition,the Convent will lower the grade of the buildings approximately five feet. The Convent has previously reduced the number of buildings for which they obtained preliminary design approval from the County from four to three. Moreover,the U-shaped footprint of the convent building has been reduced by approximately one-third from the original plan. Further, the buildings are located in the area of existing development along Skyline Boulevard, on a saddle against the backdrop of an existing large grove of pines, firs and eucalyptus trees. There is no open ridgetop exposure. The north and west sides of the convent and chapel will be heavily screened, consistent with the revised landscape plan presented to the District. As you know, we have retained a landscaping consultant,who has successfully planted screening in similar coastal conditions,to develop and maintain screening for these areas, The Convent is not willing to cut down substantial numbers of trees in the existing grove in order to move the buildings further to the south, as was suggested by the District, nor does the Convent feel it is appropriate to move all buildings into the Scenic Corridor, where the visibility from Skyline Boulevard and from neighboring properties would be greatly increased. Further,following this suggestion would result in very significant grading and disturbance of much more of the existing vegetation, The Convent is committed to building its monastery with as little disturbance to the land as possible. 4. Future development, if any,beyond the current proposed project(in whatever final form this is approved) shall be limited to one auxiliary residence,to be located in the area of existing development along Skyline Boulevard in the RM portion of the parcel, No subdivision on aM portion of the 280-acre parcel shall occur, other than the proposed conveyance to MROSD. 5. A few neighbors raised concerns about their ability to ride horses in this area, The Convent, therefore, wishes to offer neighbors access to develop and maintain a horse trail along Skyline Boulevard, on both monastic reserve property and on what will become MROSD property,to provide riders with access into existing or newly developed trails on the north and west sides of the property. 6. Should it become necessary, the Convent is willing to consider the possibility of development of the Bay Area Ridge Trail on Convent property if no other location is feasible. MROSD February 27, 1998 Page Three This offer is conditioned upon the following: 1. The cooperation of MROSD in ensuring the privacy and security of the monastics on the Convent portion of the property(the monastic reserve). This would include providing and maintaining fencing along some areas of the property adjacent to the Convent property, screening any trails which provide views of the monastic buildings or trails, and keeping all trails at least 50 feet from the borders of the monastic property, except where agreed upon by the Convent. For example,the District would own the northern and western portions of the highest ridge at 1539'. A trail would necessarily come closer than 50 feet to Convent property in this area,and the District would screen this area by planting additional vegetation in addition to providing the fences. The District would agree that there would be no condemnation of the monastic reserve portion of the property in the future. 2. Receipt of all necessary final approvals from the County and other public agencies,to the satisfaction of the Convent, and satisfactory final resolution of all litigation or expiration of relevant appeal periods. 3. Active support by MROSD for the Convent's project. 4. In at least one area near the 1539' ridge top, a locked gate would be built into the fence to provide access to MROSD trails from the Convent property. 5. In order to ensure as much quietude as possible, no motorized vehicles would be permitted on MROSD trails(except maintenance and emergency vehicles). Parking, if desired, would be restricted to the northeast comer of the property adjacent to Skyline, with a maximum of 10 cars permitted. 6. The Convent and the District would cooperate in assuring such conveyance was done in compliance with local and state ordinances, and in a manner which would permit the maximum density credit allowance for the Convent,thus lessening the necessity for transfer of density credits. Costs of subdivision of the MROSD parcel, if any, will be borne by the District. 7. The Convent and the District would cooperate in ensuring that proposed restrictions for open space use on both the Convent and MROSD parcels will be permanent restrictions. In consideration for the above terms,the District would pay the Convent the sum of $300,000,M N4ROSD February 27, 1998 Page Four The District expressed concern with this project in the areas of visibility from on-site and off-site trails,the potential for future subdivision or additional development, and protection of existing habitat areas. As you can see from the above proposal,the Convent has made an extraordinary effort to be sensitive to these concerns and to propose a plan that will truly protect this unique property. The Convent's proposal is designed to meet the needs of a contemplative order and includes a chapel, a convent for up to 20 monastics and a limited use retreat center, including a priest and caretaker residence. The monastery facilities will occupy less than three per cent of the total site. The monastic tradition in the Russian Orthodox Church has a long history, and is integral to their beliefs and practice. The Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir is a contemplative order,which means the monastics spend most of their days in prayer and contemplation, and in work with the hands—gardening, sewing,restoring icons and the like. Central to the monastic tradition is a deep respect for all of creation, and the belief,which is put into practice in a manner most of us are not able to achieve,that all of creation is equally important: man has no right to waste or disturb any resources. Russian Orthodox monastics were truly environmentalists before the word was coined. The Convent has been informed that the concern remaining for the District is that there is a potential that the chapel(primarily the dome of the chapel)and possibly a portion of the convent building may be visible from an area more than half a mile off site despite substantial screening. When this project is looked at as a whole,these fears seem irrational. In a short period of time these buildings will be screened from view;they are not to be located on an open ridgetop,but against an existing grove of trees in a saddle lower than other ridgetops, and will be less visible than some of the nearby existing residences. The District has publicly stated that it has very restrictive policies on the use of eminent domain "so that it is reserved only as a last resort or emergency procedure, in the case, for instance, of severe environmental damage or impending development and permanent loss of the open space." How can that policy be applied here in light of the Convent's generous offer? All of the highest ridges on the property are being offered to the District for public access,the building footprint has been greatly reduced, the height of the buildings has been lowered with massive screening proposed, and approximately 90%of the property is guaranteed to remain in permanent open space. All of the advantages of this property for the public are being offered . _ -AL to the District in this proposal. It seems incomprehensible that the District would be willing to spend taxpayer's money in this manner. Our own estimates of the fair market value of this property are greatly in excess of what the District is offering, yet the Convent is willing to convey to the District approximately 60%of the land, and put approximately 90%of the total parcel in permanent open space for less than one-third of what the District's own appraiser has valued the land, MROSD February 27, 1998 Page Five The District is poised to take private property from a monastic order that fled to this country to escape religious persecution, having had property confiscated on three occasions by totalitarian governments(once by the Soviet Union and twice by China). They deliberately chose to live in the United States because of our nation's long established principles of religious freedom, and have worked and lived for more than 50 years in San Francisco,with the plan to reestablish the monastery in a rural area more conducive to their lives of prayer and contemplation. It is of course the ultimate irony that once again they are faced with losing their property to a governmental action in the United States, particularly to one so arbitrary and unnecessary. In light of the above offer,the Convent requests that the Board reconsider its decision to initiate eminent domain proceedings on this property. The Convent has demonstrated its willingness to cooperate with the District,with other environmental groups and with the County planning process. This is a project fully permitted under San Mateo County's guidelines and planning codes. For the District to effectively circumvent this process in an instance where minimal harm will occur to the land and where no emergency exists is certain to raise serious questions in the public arena, and may even be unlawful. This is intended as a letter of intent, and not intended as a detailed offer. Please let us know whether you are willing to proceed on the terms outlined herein within ten days of the date of this letter. Thank you. Very truly yours, 4U-C�- Colleen Doherty Encl. cc Board of Supervisors Planning Commission Paul M. Koenig,Director of Environmental Services Terry Burnes, Planning Administrator Lee Rosenthal, Goldfarb and Lipman I _ I THOMAS REIDASSOCIATES 560 WAVERLEY ST., SUITE 201 (BOX 880), PALO ALTO, CA 94301 Tel: 415-327-0429 Fax: 415-327-4024 tra@igc.org i Ms. Diane Regonini February 18, 1997 Planning and Building Division TRA File: ELVS San Mateo County 590 Hamilton Street, 2°d Floor Redwood City, CA 94063 Re: Russian Convent Project and San Francisco Garter Snake Dear Ms. Regonini: Thomas Reid Associates conducted a biological survey of the proposed Russian Convent project site on Skyline Boulevard in San Mateo County. You sent, for our response, a comment letter from Robert Agramonte, DVM indicating that San Francisco garter snake (Thainnophis sirtalis tetrataeni.a), an endangered species, has been identified on property south of the project site. The identification of these snakes has not been confirmed by an expert biologist familiar with this species. The San Francisco garter snake normally inhabits dense wetland vegetation adjacent to bodies of water. According to information provided by the California Department of Fish and Game, the San Francisco garter snake occurs only in the vicinity of ponds and reservoirs. This type of habitat does not occur in the development area proposed on the Russian Convent site. The California red-sided or coastal garter snake can easily be misidentified as San Francisco garter snake because both have red body markings and red on the head. The San Francisco garter snake has a greenish or bluish belly. Experience, and possibly handling, is necessary to make a definite identification. Handling of a federally-listed endangered species requires a permit from the federal government. l have estimated the on-site habitat value for San Francisco garter snake using a habitat evaluation system for potential fee(lint habitats for the San Francisco garter snal_;, in S rn Mtiteo County developed by Dr. Samuel McGinnis. Dr. McGinnis is a recognized expert on this species. The habitat is evaluated for availability of impounded fresh water, vegetative cover, available food, and presence of competitive garter snake species (see attached table). A score of 12 in the habitat evaluation system denotes a prime feeding site. Habitat quality decreases as the score approaches 6. In habitats with scores below 6 the San Francisco garter snake does not normally persist on a permanent basis. Here is how I scored the project site: 1) Impounded Fresh Water(marsh, farm pond, vernal pool): "D. Only shallow winter-spring Conservation Planning and implementation ❑ Environmental Impact Analysis Geographic Information Systems ❑ Wetland Delineation ❑ Biological Surveys Ms. Diane Regonini—February 18, 1997 2 surface water (wet meadow situation)—0 pt." We found a seep area outside of the project development zone to the west of the proposed convent site. No marsh, pond or vernal pool was found. 2) Vegetative Cover: "D. Essentially no reed-shrub cover present in or around the edge of an aquatic site —0 pt." The seep area is densely vegetated in coastal scrub; a"reed-shrub" association was not found. 3) Available Food: "B. Pacific tree frogs and larva only— 2 pts." Red-legged frog and small fishes, the other prey items, require ponds, which do not occur on the site. 4) Competitive Garter Snake Species: "Coast garter snake present— 3 pts." This common garter snake, which does inhabit wet meadows as well as other aquatic habitats, is assumed to be present. The Santa Cruz garter snake occurs closer to Santa Cruz County and is not expected in this location. The total score for the habitat evaluation for San Francisco garter snake on the project site in the vicinity of the proposed development is 5 points (0+0+2+3). This score is below the minimum considered necessary for San Francisco garter snake to persist according to the McGinnis system. Please do not hesitate to telephone if there are any questions. Sincerely TaylorPeterson Senior Associate cc: Stephen Balopulos THOMAS REID ASSOCIATES Ms. Diane Regonini —February 18, 1997 3 HABITAT EVALUATION SYSTEM POTENTIAL FEEDING HABITATS SAN FRANCISCO GARTER SNAKE SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DEVELOPED BY DR. SAMUEL MCGINNIS This habitat evaluation system is based on a 12-point scale to which each of the 4 major variables contributes a maximum of 3 points. A perfect score of 12 denotes an ideal SFGS habitat. As the score diminishes towards 6, one or more prime features become less than optimal for this snake. In habitats which score a 7 or 6, the prime features are usually diminished to such an extent that if the SFGS is present, it exists in highly reduced numbers. In habitats with scores below 6 the SFGS does not normally persist on a permanent basis. 1. Impounded Fresh Water: (marsh, farm pond, vernal pool) A. Present all year; large shallow inshore zone ........ 3 points B. Present all year but shallow inshore zone dries to barren shoreline by late summer....2 points C. Shallow productive pool in winter and spring; dries completely by late summer ... I point D. Only shallow winter-spring surface water(wet meadow situation); brackish water site ...... 0 points 2. Vegetative Cover: A. Dense reed-shrub cover throughout marsh or in a wide band around entire pond edge ... 3 points B. Dense reed-shrub cover patchy in marsh or in narrow band around entire pond edge ... 2 points C. Dense reed-shrub cover in small clumps along one half or less of a pond shore ... I point D. Essentially no reed-shrub cover present ... 0 points 3. Available Food: A. Pacific tree frog and red-legged frog adults and larva; small fishes ... 3 points B. Pacific tree frogs and larva only .... 2 points C. Red-legged frogs and larva only ... I point D. Small fishes only ... 0 points 4. Competitive Garter Snake Species: A. No other garter snake species present ... 3 points B. Coast garter snake present ... 2 points C. Santa Cruz garter snake present ... I point D. Both Santa Cruz and Coast garter snake present .... 0 points THOMAS REID ASSOCIATES BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 2 The project is a new cloistered convent, chapel, caretaker_ tiouse, retreat center, garage and parking lot for the Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir. The total building area is 18,035 square feet. The project area is shown on a USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle (Figure 1) and a conceptual site plan (Figure 2), attached. The project is located adjacent to a single family residence. Surrounding land uses are private open space and residential. The lands of the San Francisco Water District Crystal Springs watershed are across Skyline Boulevard from the project. The watershed is also a wildlife preserve. The topography of the project property is hilly. The project is sited in flat areas on the main ridge of the property. The terrain on the remainder of the property is moderately steep to very steep. There are no creeks, streams, or seeps in the project area. The project would be served by a well and a septic system. The SCS Soil Survey for San Mateo characterizes the project area as containing soils of the Gazos loam series that are moderately steep and eroded. These soils occur on slopes of eleven to twenty one percent. The property also contains Gazos and Lobitos stony loams, steep, eroded on 45 percent slopes or steeper; rough broken land on slopes exceeding 41 percent; and Santa Lucia stony loam, very steep, eroded on 45 percent slopes or greater. The soils in the area of the project have good drainage, with medium runoff and moderate erosion hazard. A soils report for the project area was completed by Charles H. Hartsog (4/29/96). That investigation found the top soils at the site to include a thin horizon of Black Silty CLAY overlaying Franciscan Formation bedrock of stiff Sandy CLAYS. The climate is characterized by dry, mild summers and moist, cool winters. About 80 percent of the total annual precipitation occurs between November and March. The summit where the project is proposed frequently experiences fog. Average rainfall is between 30 and 35 inches per year. 7. Methodology (briefly describe the survey methods used in preparing the report and show on an appropriately scaled map the location of sample points, transects, and any additional areas surveyed in the vicinity of the project.) The proposed site of the buildings for this project was surveyed on foot on August 19, 1996 to determine the habitat types, plant species and animal species present. The area surrounding the project was surveyed partially on foot to determine dominant plant species of the general habitat types. The California Natural Diversity Database and the San Mateo County Local Coastal Program were consulted for plant and animal species of concern known to occur in the vicinity. Areas within one-quarter mile of the site were surveyed by eye from a suitable vantage point, and by reviewing the USGS quadrangle map. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates SAN MATEO COUNTY • 01OLOGICAL IMPACT FORM FOR COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM POLICY 7.5 RUSSIAN CONVENT OF OUR LADY OF VLADIMIR 1. Project location (include USGS Township, Range and Section) The project is located on the west side of Skyline Boulevard about 2.5 miles south of the intersection of Highway 92 and Skyline Boulevard. It is on the USGS Woodside quadrangle in section 25, Township 5 S, Range 5 W. It is adjacent to a residence at 12130 Skyline Boulevard. 2. Assessor's Parcel Number and any applicable Planning Permit numbers APN 067-310-011 3. Owner/Applicant: The applicant is the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco, represented by Steven J. Balopulos, Consultant Steven J. Balopulos 516 Sunnymount Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94087 (408) 245-3336 4. Principal Investigators (attach a qualification summary to the report). The investigation was completed by biologists Taylor Peterson and Patrick Kobemus from Thomas Reid Associates. Qualification summaries are attached. 5. Report summary (briefly state the results of the report, habitat type, rare, endangered, or unique species present, anticipated impacts, and proposed mitigation measures.) The project is located west of Skyline Boulevard on a property that contains forest, coastal scrub, grassland, and cleared areas. The project would remove a small amount of grassland and coastal scrub habitat. No heritage trees, rare, endangered, or unique species would be affected by the project. Mitigation is proposed to minimize the loss of native habitat, prevent erosion, and require the use of native plant species in landscaping. 6. Project and property description (describe the proposed project and property, including the size, topographic characteristics,water resources, soil types, and land uses on the property and in the vicinity up to a radius of one-quarter mile. Include a map of the area from the USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle series.) The project is proposed to be located on ten acres of a 200 acre site. The ten acres are on the highest portion of the site which is closest to Skyline Boulevard. The property is currently undeveloped. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 3 8. Results (at length, describe the botanical and zoological rem__.rces of the project site. To the extent possible, describe the food chain of the habitat and how the proposed project will impact those resources. Use both common and scientific names and please indicate references used.) Plant and animal species found or expected at the site are listed in Tables 1 and 2. Both common and scientific names are shown in the tables. The area proposed to be developed for the project contains forest, grassland, cleared areas, and coastal scrub (see Figure 2). The forest is dominated by Monterey cypress, acacia, and blue gum eucalyptus and contains occasional Monterey pine, redwood, and Douglas fir trees. The grassland areas are dominated by european annual grasses and forbs, including oatgrass, English plantain, black mustard, and bristly ox tongue. The coastal scrub contains a diverse assemblage of plants dominated by coyote brush, poison oak, lizard tail, cream bush, bracken fern, and sticky monkey flower. The coastal scrub is native to the site. The acacia and eucalyptus are non-native species that were planted or have invaded the site. The cypress, pine, redwood, and Douglas fir are native species. Understory vegetation in the forested areas includes a mixture of native and non-native species such as ivy,forget-me-not, bull thistle, blue witch, red elderberry, coast gooseberry, twinberry, and hairy honeysuckle. The forest provides habitat for raptors to perch and nest. Habitat within one-quarter mile of the site is dominated by coastal scrub with occasional patches of grassland and occasional stands of trees. The diversity of habitats on the project site in turn supports a diversity of wildlife. During the site visit we observed band-tailed pigeon, stellar's jay, scrub jay, dark-eyed junco, California quail, Anna's hummingbird, song sparrow, mourning dove, red-tailed hawk, and raven. We also found sign of bobcat, brush rabbit, dusky-footed woodrat, gray fox, meadow mouse, and pocket gopher. The site is expected to be used by a wide range of animal species because of its undeveloped condition and its connection with wild lands around the site. All of the existing fire trails on the site provide wildlife corridors connecting the different habitat types. Development of the project would not significantly affect the food chain on the site. The roads and buildings proposed for the site would be built in grassland, cleared areas, and coastal scrub. Existing fire trails would be used for access, and wildlife corridors would not be interrupted. The project area is on ten acres of a 200 acre site, and it is confined to the part of the site adjacent to Skyline Boulevard and existing residential development. It would remove a small patch of grassland that is used by raptors for hunting, however, there are other grassland areas in the immediate vicinity available for raptor use. 9. List all direct and indirect impacts of the proposed project on the habitat. Include within the discussion an evaluation of the perceived cumulative biological impacts associated with the project. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 4 Development of the project would impact an area of 0.4__.e including grassland, cleared areas and coastal scrub. A few small acacia trees may be removed for the project, but no native trees or trees that meet the County criteria for heritage trees would be removed or adversely impacted. Construction activities could adversely affect habitats on the site if equipment is operated or stored outside of the building envelopes. Construction equipment should be confined to the building envelopes or cleared areas on the site to prevent unnecessary impacts. Construction should also occur outside of the rainy season to prevent impacts caused by erosion of barren soils. The site is already adversely impacted by acacia and blue-gum eucalyptus which have invaded the native habitats and reduced biodiversity at the site. It would be beneficial to remove the acacia or at least control its spread into the native habitat. Areas around the building sites that are disturbed by the project should be replanted with native plant species. The spread of acacia or eucalyptus into these areas should be prevented through monitoring of the revegetation and weeding out of non-native species such as acacia and eucalyptus. New trees are proposed along the property line with the adjacent residence and near the proposed site of the convent. Only tree species native to the area should be used. Water and septic use are minimal and are not expected to result in a significant draw-down of the water table or impacts to water quality or quantity of streams down slope of the project site. The project would have a minor cumulative impact on biological resources by introducing more human activity to the wildlands on the Skyline corridor. This impact is minimized by the open layout of the project which allows for continued use of the site by wildlife, and by clustering the development with existing adjacent residential development, which leaves most of the surrounding lands .in open space. With the recommended mitigation measures, the project is not expected to result in significant biological impacts. 10. List and discuss all probable impacts to threatened, rare, endangered or unique species either listed or proposed by the Local Coastal Program, a Federal or State agency, or the California Native Plant Society, both on-site and within an area of one-quarter mile radius from the project location. The project site and adjoining area does not contain threatened, rare, endangered, or unique species. The nearest sensitive species located on the California Natural Diversity Database search is Santa Cruz manzanita (Arctostaphylos andersonii), located about 1.2 miles south on Skyline Boulevard. No species of manzanita was found in the area proposed for buildings on the project site. 11. Tabulate by significant impact all feasible mitigation measures proposed to reduce the level of impact and explain how such measures will be successful. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates l BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 5 MITIGATION MEASURES OUR LADY OF VLADIMIR RUSSIAN CONVENT 1IMPACT MITIGATION IEFFECT Construction activities Construction equipment Would prevent unnecessary could adversely affect should be confined to the impacts to habitats outside habitats on the site if building envelopes or of the building area through equipment is operated or cleared areas on the site. avoidance. stored outside of the building envelopes. Impacts to adjacent Construction shall occur Would prevent significant habitats caused by erosion outside of the rainy impacts caused by erosion of barren areas in season. Areas left barren of barren soils. construction zone. after development is completed shall be revegetated with native plant species The project could Areas around the Would prevent significant introduce or encourage building sites that are impacts caused by non- the proliferation of non- disturbed by the project native plants by not native plant species, should be replanted with introducing new plants to adversely affecting the native plant species. The the site and by controlling native habitats. spread of non-native invasion into disturbed species into these areas areas by existing non-native should be prevented vegetation. through monitoring of the revegetation and weeding out of non-native species such as acacia and eucalyptus. New trees proposed along the property line with the adjacent residence and near the proposed site of the convent should be restricted to species native to the area. All landscaping shall be composed of native plant species. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 6 12. Certification. I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this biological evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date: Signed: August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates I BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 7 TABLE 1 PLANT SPECIES FOUND DURING THE 8/19/96 SURVEY COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME California blackberry Rubus ursinus* Forget-me-not Myosotis sp. Stinging nettle Urtica dioica English ivy Hedera helix Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa Nightshade Solanum sp. Bull thistle Cirsium vulgare Poison hemlock Conium maculatum Bristly ox tongue Picris echioides California poppy Eschscholzia californica* English plantain Plantago lanceolata Yerba buena Satureja douglasit* Canyon gooseberry Ribes menziesii* Twinberry Lonicera involucrata* Coffeeberry Rhamnus californica* Hairy honeysuckle Lonicera hispidula* Spurge Euphorbia sp. Oat grass Avena sp. Sheep sorrel Rumex acetosella Black mustard Brassica nigra Harding grass Phalaris aquatics California cudweed Gnaphalium californicum* Coyote brush Baccharis pilularisk Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum* Cotoneaster Cotoneaster sp. Pink flowering currant Ribes sanguineum* Lizard tail Eriophyllum staechadifolium Creambush Holodiscus discolor* Yarrow Achillea millefolium* Mugwort Artemisia douglasiana* Snowberry Symphoricarpos rivularis' Skunkweed Navarretia squarrosa* Tarweed Hemizonia sp. Rush Juncus bufonius* Prickly lettuce Lactuca serriola Aster Aster chilensis* Goldenrod Solidago californica* Pigs foot Chenopodium sp. Lupine Lupinus formosus Wild strawberry Fragariacalifornica* German ivy Senecio mikanioides Toyon Heteromeles arbutifolia* French broom Genista monspessulana Monterey cypress Cupressus macrocarpa Silver wattle Acacia dealbata Monterey pine Pinus radiata Blue gum eucalyptus Eucalyptus globulus Dogwood Cornus sericea ssP.sericea August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 8 Table 1,continued COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii Redwood Sequoia sempervirens native plant species scientific names are based on the Jepson Manual Sources: Thomas, John Hunter. 1961. Flora of the Santa Cruz Mountains . Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. Hickman, James C.,Editor. 1993. The Jepson Manual Higher Plants of California.- University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 9 TABLE 2 WILDLIFE SPECIES FOUND OR EXPECTED COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Opossum Didelphis marsupialis Long-eared myotis Myotis evotis California myotis Myotis califomicus Red bat Lasiurus borealis Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus Racoon Procyon lotor Gray fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus Coyote Canis latrans Bobcat Felis rufus Pocket gopher 77tomomys bottae Dusky-footed woodrat Neotoma fuscipes Deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus California mouse Peromyscus califomicus Western harvest mouse Reithrodontomys megalotis Brush rabbit Sytvilagus bachmani Black-tailed hare Lepus califomicus Black-tailed deer Odocoileus hemionus Turkey vulture Cathartes aura Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis Mourning dove Zenaida macroura California quail Lophortyx californica Great horned owl Bubo virginianus Anna's hummingbird Calypte anna Northern flicker Colaptes auratus Ash-throated flycatcher Myiarchus cinerascens Scrub jay Aphelocoma coerulescens Stellar's jay Cyanocitta stelleri Common raven Corvus corax Bushtit Psaltriparus minimus Wrentit Chamaea fasciata Dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis House wren Troglodytes aedon Bewick's wren Thryomanes bewickii California thrasher Toxostoma redivivum Orange-crowned warbler Vermivora celata California towhee Pipilo crissalis Song sparrow Melospiza melodia Rufous-crowned sparrow Aimophila ruftceps White-crowned sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys Lark sparrow Chondestes grammacus Western fence lizard Sceloporus occidentalis Gopher snake Pituophis melanoleucus Rattlesnake Cmtalis viridis Source: Zeiner, David C.,William F. Laudenslayer, Jr., Kenneth E. Mayer, and Marshall White. April 1990. California's Wildlife. State of California The Resources Agency Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 10 Taylor Peterson Ms. Peterson has a background in biology and has been a long-time observer of California's natural history. She has conducted numerous biological surveys to assess the Potential impacts of landfill projects, golf course dev elopment,ment hotel resort development, quarrying, and housing development. She is experienced in identification of plant and animal species, in mapping plant communities, in mark/release/recapture work with butterflies, and in survey methods for the endangered San Joaquin kit fox. She is familiar with special habitats such as vernal pools, serpentine grassland, and riparian zones, and she is a practitioner of the US Army Corps of Engineers Method used to delineate wetlands. Ms. Peterson was a contributing author of the San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan in which she applied the Plan principles in developing specific activities for each administrative parcel on the mountain. She was also a principal author of the Kirby Canyon Landfill Bay Checkerspot Butterfly Conservation Plan and now oversees the implementation of the Conservation Plan revegetation program. In her capacity as Case Manager, Ms. Peterson directs TRA staff in the technical analysis and preparation of environmental documents, prepares her own technical sections, and maintains contact with the client, project engineers, and the lead agency. As such, she is familiar with every aspect of the preparation of environmental documents which must comply with CEQA. Several of the projects that she has managed have been controversial in nature, and she has extensive experience in responding to public concerns and comment. Educational Background A.B. Human Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates J BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 11 Patrick Kobernus A recent addition to the TRA staff, Mr. Kobernus has a background in Vertebrate Ecology and Biogeography, and is currently a Graduate Student in Wildlife Ecology at California State University, Hayward. As a staff biologist for TRA, Mr. Kobemus has helped conduct field biological impact assessments for the Canada Woods East project in Carmel, and the Bayhill VIII project in San Bruno. He is currently working to develop better evaluation methods of exotic species control efforts on the San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Project. He is also working to promote greater community and interagency involvement to better understand, protect, and restore habitat on San Bruno Mountain. Mr. Kobernus has worked on a number of ecological research projects. He is familiar with urban pollutant effects upon aquatic habitat and wildlife, having worked on two projects in this area. As an intern for Alameda County, he helped conduct a study of heavy metal accumulation within urban creeks, (Vegetated Channels Study). As a graduate research assistant under Dr. Christopher Kitting, he performed a study testing the toxicity of stormwater on aquatic animals in a stormwater treatment marsh, (Demonstration Urban Stormwater Treatment marsh in Fremont, California). More recently, he has worked as a wildlife biologist for Gualala Redwoods, (Gualala, CA), conducting Northern Spotted Owl surveys. He is familiar with the status and range of many state and federally protected wildlife species, and with biological data sources such as the California Natural Diversity Database. He has also worked as a volunteer for Coyote Creek Riparian Station, conducting vegetation mapping and bird surveys in San Francisquito Creek, Palo Alto, CA. He has experience working with aerial photography, having worked for four years as an aerial photography sales assistant and database manager for Pacific Aerial Surveys in Oakland, California. He also has experience working with computer mapping programs (AutoCAD). Educational Background B.A. English, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA M.A. Wildlife Ecology (in progreso, California State University, Hayward, CA August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates F�caL;rzc � b I 30' Cahill'Rid BM L I Z _• - , ♦ �" \~ d. •Water 663 Gulch / d bO I Adobe • z ICJ r r--= �� Ot Pt C'$BM 871 sdo _- �- \�J V` � � ` pares" — / << � � � `• `_ �- - T -�-F•- -_ »-- -- u, \ ass \�� . pm a�aaas' A N a 24 BM 4148 it - F / l A, It�*, - (� �Ssx _ A51Area of biological survey 4147 Hsu 46 :7 30 :,�` 's0o t BM l f% i � d. t . r 1935 PlseabOkouto-0 , �-�e- G� ( _•�` v� /('/' /1,. J}: _- f 40 4145 SCALE 1:24 000 1 }� 0 1 MILE .BM� 48' - J I O S 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET 1 5 0 1 KILOMETER CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET I• — DOTTED LINES REPRESENT 20-FOOT CONTOURS - - NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 ��= err_• •\ \. F IG0IZL 2 �+t611 t l`-sfe,y� .�FfC~L••`\ v:jJ , y' /J� T`ay�F..',,• a• V'�{ L,�W�'•�t,. i(f!/`, C � is���'t -(�+ ` S-• (, ;'4 w�,�.1. .�' :.te t�L.;.4 `\ :Vda• 57..•5 Yia.S.�/ .. l�`,•aLi. tv+,� .Lfj��G.� t'��:�••C��liy,[<:� w:(t�: •�;�,�,L�'y4 ,ref ai '• J�JL. fw �;W+Tt{,E,��-t{e !':'1-s: ::1. '` '' L•S'+•t' a �:..c r� r1� <' ..<.. w. G'Q . " i. Z C- 'L �.Zu" i v � G r•L0c a•� 5•c:.4y.c.� .'} 't. 'Cr• `� o�•c.4M,' w �( �•'•�c' --,% t"}l+vf,..0�i',tati�-•• F'f`i��£;s:•4 t. r�.•r.i�•• Gt.' .ii. i 1�v •'f't f t. rS O{.h .f4 h r `'45 ."a .t'frfJb ON � y � < p 4. a fi{. yce'° \ t. t t,C. .a .. •{;,•C• 4'4 t,�t. t{`�.,y'i• •,/•� �y •-�1 ' :'••�'• 'L fi• �\7l. � :L"C's�- v Ct . '-'a• �Y i t t a` � •..:.. �`Y•,:y �y�!�'.t+'l:af '.,^;,}.Y"''a•• �`r '�� .( v Xa <ry Er<. cJ'' t • r*r 1. `t} i s��.��� �• '4';{` '�%; \f ''4:L L t�t• ;,:c.ty'- ��: :s�•'[,6,. s,s"'v-�i.ta'`L�&�. �C.��f'��(.'�i (�- `' �� 4 [ t.+�b. •t'C.f(`y^ •7�<` �(/�;; �v( '�1rY •��.i�� i':m i+.�•y{pl ('(.2� (,J,'. l►'•C l`.j .i{.,t :k K4 y r►. 4:4 (j' < .i... ,(ti• yry'G•ct. r ,vY ,y'";�i:yyCi+r�✓�cZ:�^ •r..4';Ai� r. � i•' Ls 4 t' `: -rL -L* �`(. c � <: �. `�L:.s`ttrA; c C. :fin�ls1.. .�. C!;-3� '. :; ,�`. 'tt: ``S.`•'' i�Vy � :ti. ''.. �,f�•t. G�. 4 �t•. atryy.:' �:'• :'�.• .'eY i t. t�:.: .C.( � \ .C•c`.N .S;' c t: ';J1.�y `<•`� t.f''. �f.� ?Ytt.�'Gt`•�L..y.. _Ct! \+'. ;�(�'�..ti i:.�r,��.y ., c � ..`t.'r` L ,a (;.• t;_ trr s•� .•��.I. ��JC� � .x y,• "F�J ••t•.c%�.� .t . .''�..1 �.��•. a -Cy'd_ '1 �. ly.: •fE+f�;:�(.�•a+f i, .C;ir? �•• `` s., �- J•L;'.: ;�'l� `iL.• �'•••`"G., h' {W �: ;" �f:a. 1[`�C' •';,r. x. ..•tt..�•`-`. o x.�L._ . �. : L' _ \�} ., f'. ♦ 0 000rw - L �� 'ir.•.�% _E•• �y `4;€isY, a`' � .. -....•r J� L•�t 't•":. Z' (+( 'L t'� `.i•' . 1 iV,-^ x cl�• .l•itiL;,. �r� .i. rc. �}k.�. �. Ev :L �::rt• LL .eJ•:Jti' sy_. G, +�•�Ja � :jt� tl:y; 0000 �'t�+• 4J�:�f.4 ;�{�(( ,,.i �:J 6•4 :(,��-�i• �• �. i:i [''. •Vl�.r<•.0 Y •:. �• 0000 tr� ^It.t�• `;,. a{ C •v..jt.. !•/•6:• '•l'. ! 14ter� C�.a .� � �:�'�,��:• vt L � ° ooO � L�''( t-r�4 xr �'" '�a � t,'i•:c�•1-�• C•t(���� <f;� .`t' �;,. �- sv. �6� s- ``mot(�`�, •. �; Y�{.�,`�., '�.f"`�'•:Lr ,4, � (V •.� ti .L b oI o o '4v t[• � ,�_J-y �.. -��.•e. t`, ,1,, a.��'"• ) ` ,�(. 't:-\r L, '; t °OC 3 ° :iG^ �tW G.',. .., ��1.�"`:.fi': :i` -`•� y�.��a.t�.� +V ;�i,C'•E�'j�.' o 1"r t.�ire" y� fS `r CtiL••'.`,L1 ` iv t:l C��.''•b y a �,. t oo°0 1`' .n, r Y'i.. Ci.�lc V• p.�,�i�lw•4...•. :p� � �,i st,�f.•1{ l'.y,+ u� i i 4,, 11F r-k t" r r (�.. `�� f;?` `ti , �t•Y .•"�" ., .fit' a• , '{'� Y t"'J-i�a �•,i''tL'` 4. �te�Yy(,`- ��}•�4(y�.r ..•fw,y 'G' `4///.'��ti-ff ."} ,t.<.'-(! t�� y -i.tvc•. , �{.:� f�.'`�t. •"=�"�:�i{�.`• :`,f [�(y�����W+�..'r• r{E, 6�"�: s'� .�t.'•C-< �.• � •�< s��.'.;t�,i�;�SS.d� /�(E.+� vc,�� ,•- ��'.�'1'.•'.f'S(�f`itiv� LXEj ��•r. �,��5�y" ( •4 �L f,t'r�: -Gv����wCy.•i: 4;,r rE�y,y:-t ��.r',�c.�L� �.:..a��r ..�;`W �t'P tl~��.� ��fi �+.' �{...�.. "may ::y.•�c St r:a. t C-�.'`,` .4 L 1�' 4 iJ`<.. l � `t{ a ,j.C,�e•^ri,. r •f?. +}rye ta'! �• .t.l:i C�:., .t'tr _ G�:�r � n (.Y+ t. Afat fy. 4 S 4 �r J. PAR y'�,Yrs� �'CJ t• }f:<. 4 i; .. r ` ... _ 'F. '' F• {y S "� C• t:l' .r { •`r .c,`ri•.Y' � •�•�crY�f.C�k:�'^E• �1 iat► t'r� .Cy}%1 .$` it`_-- y �.Y:. t'•; L l Jr a ARCEL A .+Ly���rC~.rc GG ` R p��� �'V`'• 00000000� � /�� OF ` ..`Y. C.l .�`tMr ,t. `r •iay �.. R 000000000 1. )00000 ti� E;,F, '•:.r. {� t•t; 0000000000o w�•. : L_ 1000( t o0000000000 �`r' o / It, LL j� o0000000000 r '' • .1tiY ..(:,. 00000000°O �''ci:. t [ •�;t...,�y y.-��4 al,. t�t44i�tir tw`4i_ 00 0 � •x ,� � :�%: ` •filet ct. ``Li•G. 47f: y!- t�]'� t�{�r ,'i'• �a °Ooo � `i`G•� S�Y 1 ' v tJ4 -'}•�► �Y �0000 i Ili „�:•ff��; �Ct'•,�•t:�4 Gt�i� .��C��. - :^�•�CtL<i,�twF'i.l.���(�`^_ .�." _'4t� �t 4 ki .Kir, tr'•' i;4.K ya =:��,� i <.��'�.�; '� 'E ' •� RUSSIAN CONVENT ... L. 4. y �= Xcy`r ., { . ,,L �- VEGETATION MAP Forest ,f. Lt. •C +ti[� 001. y�7�I Gc �.5.�y t(i��� a twi•,'�+L4 000`000 Y.0[` •Y=.(� t.= .�'i.., r 1G:! {`�••1'..�.� G.,,,,((,,t.4.(<• '(. r mil/ 300000, Grassland 000000 Y� L Coyote brush scrub fr x''�� :•` .:titt,d:':`��•''f�'``�}}GCls rr �.�; �. �,c �:r, � ��� s:t <:�_,• Scale: approx. 1 in. 200 ft. cleared CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN •:":.fir .t+c�'.`r ar.'1}•w C 4.s I... _ Regional Open , , ,ace 1 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meeting 98-06 SPECIAL MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS March 18, 1998 MINUTES I. ROLL CALL President Betsy Crowder called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Mary Davey, Betsy Crowder, Ken Nitz, Jed Cyr, David Smernoff, and Pete Siemens. Members Absent: Nonette Hanko. Personnel Present: Craig Britton, Sue Schectman, Del Woods, Malcolm Smith, John Escobar, Jody Isaacs,Deirdre Dolan, Susan Dale, Mike Williams, Carleen Bruins, Gordon Baillie, and Roberta Wolfe. B. Crowder stated that because the large number of people present exceeded the capacity of the room and in order to give everyone a chance to observe the hearing and speak, arrangements had been made to adjourn the meeting and reconvene at 8:00 P.M. at the Mountain View Community Center. She asked the representatives of the Convent if they would prefer to give their presentation here or at the adjourned site. Colleen Doherty said they preferred to give the presentation at the Community Center. Maps and directions were available from staff members. Motion: J. Cyr moved that the Board adjourn and reconvene at 8:00 P.M. at the Mountain View Community Center, 201 S. Rengstorff Avenue, Mountain View. K. Nitz seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0. At 7:35 P.M., the Special Meeting was adjourned. B. Crowder apologized for the inconvenience caused by the move. At 8:04 P.M., President Betsy Crowder called the adjourned Special Meeting to order at the Mountain View Community Center. 330 Distel Circle • Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 • Phone:650 691- 1200 FAX: 650-691-0485 • E-mail:mrosd@openspace.org • Web site:www.openspace.org Board of Directors:Pete Siemens,Mary C. Davey,Jed Cyr,David T.Smernoff,Nonette Hanko,Betsy Crowder,Kenneth C.Nitz • General Manager:L.Craig Britton I Meeting 98-06 Page 2 Members Present: Mary Davey, Betsy Crowder, Ken Ntz, Jed Cyr, David Smernoff, Nonette Hanko, and Pete Siemens. Personnel Present: Craig Britton, Sue Schectman, Del Woods, Malcolm Smith, John Escobar, Jody Isaacs, Deirdre Dolan, Susan Dale, Mike Williams, Carleen Bruins, Gordon Baillie, Roberta Wolfe, and Ron Mulcare. U. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Harry Haeussler, 1094 Highlands Circle, Los Altos, asked that Board Members remember to use their microphones so they could be heard by everyone. Richard Bourke, P. O. Box 7207, San Jose, talked about surplus property sales, specifically Teague Hill. He said he did not think the District should be operating as a bank and there should be public review of all surplus property sales. III. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Motion: D. Smernoff moved that the Board adopt the agenda. P. Siemens seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. IV. BOARD BUSINESS A. Agenda Item No. I - i g Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for Acquisition of the Russian Convent Of Our Lady of Vladimir Inc. Property: Adoption of Preliminary Use and Management Plan and Naming the Propem Mills Creek Open Space Preserve: Indicate their Intention Upon Acquisition to Dedicate the PropeM as Public Own Spa cee_Authorization for the General_Manager to Enter Into an Aereement for Professional Services with Associated Nght oL)Y-AY Services. Inc. for Site Location Services at a Cost Not to Exceed $25.000d and Find by Motion That the PropeM is Threatened by Development. Su ject to Dep-radation of Natural Resources* and Owned in Fee By an Institutional o Commercial Entity. Consideration of Resolution Determining that the Recommended Actions are Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental OyalityAct. Consideration of Resolution Finding and Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity ReQuire the AcQuisition of Certain Properties for Public Use- to Wit. for Public Park, Recreation_ Open Space and Ecological al Purposes for the Mills Creek OILen Space Preserve, Describing the Propetly Necessary Therefore and Authorizing and Directing Its Retained Legal_ Counsel To Do Everything Necessary to Acquire All Interests Therein(Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir PropeM)—(Report R-98-36). B. Crowder outlined procedural rules to be followed and opened the public hearing at 8:10 P.M. Meeting 98-06 Page 3 C. Britton introduced the staff report and presented the background of the District's interest in the property. He said that due to the unsuccessful efforts to reach a satisfactory settlement and the eminent threat of development of this prominent ridgeline property, staff is recommending adoption of the resolution of public interest and necessity to acquire the property. He distributed a packet from the legal representative of the Convent and a supplemental staff report responding to that packet. D. Woods showed the property on a regional map and described the site and its surroundings. He showed a blowup of the project site and a map of the road network. He described the property, noting that it had diverse wildlife and served as an important deer migration corridor in addition to being home to many other animals and birds. Summer steelhead trout, a Federally Threatened Species, are found on the property. He showed slides of the property. He summarized the public necessity for acquiring the property including scenic qualities, on-site views, protection of natural resources and wildlife, including summer steelhead, and importance of trail use. He outlined planning considerations and the Preliminary Use and Management Plan recommendations. He concluded his review by reporting on CEQA compliance and the terms of the District's offer to purchase the property. He also talked about the District's eminent domain policies and reported stafi's recommendations. D. Wood;outlined the points contained in the Convent's recent proposal to the District dated February 27, 1998. He said the major points the District found not acceptable were the siting of the Convent and chapel building, which remained on the ridgeline and would be viewed by some trails along Skyline Blvd. In addition, a new trail would have to be built to the central ridge. D. Wood referred to a letter from the Law Offices of Colleen Doherty dated March 18, 1998. He responded to the eight points in the letter as follows: 1. Offer of public use of trails into most scenic areas—He pointed out that most of the property is very scenic. The site of the proposed Convent and chapel offers excellent views which is one of the reasons the site was chosen. Intrusion into the view area with improvements was one of the reasons for the District's interest in the property. 2. All significant environmentally sensitive areas identified by the District would be protected—He said development of the magnitude proposed could have impacts on Mills Creek at the lower elevation and the location of the buildings will also impact the movement of wildlife across the property. 3. No construction would occur on the remaining 97% of the 284 acre property -He said the Convent chapel and retreat center supposedly represent 3% of the property; however, the development footprint and human activity would occupy approximately 28 acres of the property. Meeting 98-06 Page 4 4. The Convent buildings would be visible only from areas where the homes of the Convent's neighbors are presently visible—He disagreed, stating that the buildings will be visible from areas along Skyline Blvd. to the south of the property and also from proposed trails on the central ridge. 5. More than 100 trees would be planted—He said the success of the landscaping plan is questionable. The District has not seen a successful plan of this scale in a coastal scrub area. 6. The Convent has reduced the footprint of the Convent buildings, lowered the grade, moved the buildings off the ridgeline. —He said that while it is true that the footprint has been reduced and the grade lowered, the buildings remain on the ridgeline. 7. There would never be any subdivision of the property—No subdivision is proposed but he pointed out that the auxiliary building remains part of the project and it is on the RM parcel near Skyline Blvd. 8. There would never be any development on any ridge top on the property— He said it was his understanding that the chapel and the Convent still remain on the main east/west ridge. D. Smernoff asked C. Britton if the religious affiliation or the proposed purposes of this development had ever been part of the consideration by the staff of this project area. C. Britton replied that it absolutely had not. Colleen Doherty, attorney for the Convent, introduced Mother Isihia of the Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir who said she was speaking on behalf of Mother Superior Abbess Eugenia and the Convent. She said this was a difficult time for them because by their monastic rules they should be in church at this hour. She said this is the time of Lent and described the historical observance of Lent. She said they travel the same journey as those people did 1,000 years ago and that the prayer service and principles of spiritual labor have not changed and are unshaken by the changing tides of men's philosophies in each age. She read a prayer by St. Ephraim, the Syrian, stating this was the backbone and constant striving during this time. Mother Isihia said often when there seem to be two opposing parties, the origin of the tension may come from half heard conversations, assumptions from emotional judgement, or from third hand information. In review of how they arrived at this point, they found that the premise from which they started were of two unfortunate, but amendable, beginnings. Mother Isihia said a pre-result posture is not always a sign of authority but can be perceived as an authority with a closed door and preconceived judgement, not open to receiving from the concerned party. She said the tension made the negotiations very difficult and at the end they were given three alternatives: Meeting 98-06 Page 5 1. To sell the land— She said by necessity they cannot sell the land. 2. To buy a neighbor's home and their land—By moral ethics they cannot buy out a neighbor's home. 3. To cut half of the trees in the small woods in order to move the buildings over for the beauty of the scenic view—By environmental stewardship they cannot cut the trees and change the ecological climate of that portion of the land. She said they are asking the District not take a posture of no compromise, but take into regard their data that they have found a suitable habitat and find the posture of experienced and human wisdom. She said monastics are people who depend on God and the good of the people. She drew parallels between the monastics and animals in their quest for a home. She described the history of the monastic communities, which began in the 1600s. She said the monastic life is unlike the activity of developers. Monastic communities were respected as stewards of their environment. She described a typical day in a monastery. She said it is clear that their lives do not coincide with builders of worldly society but more closely parallel those who are preservers of tradition and the work of the hands and the environment. She described the persecution the order had suffered, having lost their land in both Russia and China. She also described their experience in the United States and their search for a suitable home. She asked for the Board's consideration and wisdom in making their decision. Michael Klestoff(no card), real estate broker, said it is very difficult to build anything on the coast. He said the decision should not be made lightly because for the Convent, this property is irreplaceable. He said the offer of finding another piece of property is generous but unrealistic. Don Wolfe, planning consultant to the Convent made the following points: 1. The proposal is in conformance with the general plan, the local coastal program, and the provisions of the resource management ordinance. 2. There are no zoning variances or exceptions to any county ordinance or planning standard required. 3. The plan has received preliminary concept plan approval from the county. 4. An EIR is being prepared on the revised concept plan. 5. Subsequent to the EIR they will seek a use permit. If the conditions are not met, the use permit can be revoked. To date 42 conditions have been applied to the preliminary master plan, and he said there will be more. Meeting 98-06 Page 6 He described the project. In terms of offsite planning impacts there will be very little vehicular traffic for most of the year, and the monastic environment is noiseless and quiet. The core of the proposed 18,000 sq. ft. project is the Convent which houses 18 sisters, and contains a refectory, a library, offices, a bakery, a kitchen, a workroom and other ancillary rooms used in the nuns' day to day activities. The 2,400 sq. ft. chapel contains a maximum seating capacity of approximately 60 congregants.. Mr. Hoover, architect, pointed out the features on a graphic board. He talked about the development site, stating it was located on a saddle between two promontories, not on a ridge top. He said they believe this is the ideal site for the Convent because it is sheltered by trees. 1. He said the buildings will be painted earth tones. 2. No tree removal is required. 3. It requires very little grading and site preparation. 4. It is not located in a scenic corridor. 5. The site provides vistas which add greatly to the monastic experience. 6. It is screened from all but one neighbor. 7. The site is quite private and buffered from road noise. 8. It is not located near sensitive environmental habitat. He said they considered three alternative building locations as suggested by District staff and others. These proved unacceptable for the following reasons: 1. They resulted in greater exposure to road noise. 2. They were more visible to the neighbors. 3. They were visible within the scenic corridor. 4. Significant tree removal was required. 5. Greater exposure to prevailing winds. 6. Loss of valuable vistas. 7. Increased grading because the project would become hillside project. 8. The project would no longer be a single-level project. He said the project also consists of a 5,500 sq. ft. two story retreat center which houses a caretaker and priest, and a 24-space off road parking area. He said the auxiliary structure is not currently in the plan, but it would be part of the 3% of the property. He cited the following changes in the concept plan since the original submittal. 1. One building was eliminated. 2. Reduced perimeter footprint. 3. Reduced number of cells where the nuns would live from 20 to 18. 4. Lowered the visual high point of the Convent and chapel by 5 feet. 5. Committed the placement of at least 90% of the 284-acre site in enforceable open space or conservation easements and partial sale to the District or other qualified entity. 5. Relinquished all rights to future subdivision. 6. Provided for reasonably located public trails. 7. Reduced proposed transfer of density credit from 3 to a maximum of one. Mr. Wolfe summarized that the master plan has been carefully conceived and continually refined to be extremely environmentally sensitive, and to reflect concerns of neighbors, the District, and San Mateo County. All environmentally sensitive habitat and scenic values are protected, therefore they believe there are no planning reasons that this property cannot be symbiotically shared. Mr. Klestoff showed photographs that addressed offsite visual impacts. Meeting 98-06 Page 7 Cathy Crane(no card), owner of Yerba Buena Nursery, described trees and shrubs and showed what would be done. She said the nuns told her they wanted to know more about the trees and plants that were native to the area and wanted to incorporate those into the plans for the site. She described the trees and shrubs which had been selected and said they would provide food and shelter for the animals. Screening of the buildings will be effective quickly because the native plants selected are large and fast growing. She said Jim Lord Landscaping will install and maintain the plants and has had a lot of experience with successful landscaping plans using native plants. She said the nuns' willingness and interest in using appropriate native plants is to be commended and will be a tremendous asset to the wildlife with whom they will share this land. Mr. Klestoff showed slides of the property indicating where planting would occur, views of neighbors' property, the relationship of the building site to the neighbors, and the view from the ridge. He said the buildings will be placed against an 80 ft. grove of trees in a saddle, and would not be visible, especially when the trees are planted in front of it. He showed a slide showing a balloon at the height of the chapel dome and said they had agreed not to paint the dome gold. Other slides showed views of the property from various locations including Skyline Blvd., Highway 92, and Highway I and Mr. Mestoff said it would be very difficult to see the buildings. Colleen Doherty said the Board had a very difficult decision to make tonight and that the majority of the 400 people at the meeting were opposed to the District condemning the property. She pointed out that almost all the issues identified by staff and the concerns raised would be resolved in the District's favor under the Convent's proposal. She reviewed the District's expressed priorities and interests as follows: I. Protection of wildlife: All the environmentally sensitive areas have been offered to the District. 90% of the property will remain as permanent open space. The District has been offered to purchase 60% of the property which includes all of the areas identified by staff such as the steelhead habitat and the Mills Creek tributaries. She referred to the District's consultant's studies of wildlife and vegetation that were attached to their letter outlining their objections to the District's demand to take the property by eminent domain. In addition, the Convent is involved in a thorough environmental review process with the County. 2. Potential of trails for the public: She said the Convent has offered the District the prime area of the property, including the scenic views, areas that are pristine open space, and the highest point on the property. She said this took some sacrifice on the part of the Sisters and all they were asking in return was that their privacy and security be honored and protected. She said she found it was not credible to say it was not possible to site trails in the property without affecting the steelhead habitat when the Convent has offered them such substantial parts of the property. Meeting 98-06 Page 8 3. Scenic qualities on the site: She pointed out that the District would be getting all scenic ridges shown in the slides tonight, certainly the most significant ones with the most spectacular views. She emphasized the dome is eight feet in diameter which is quite small and had never been intended to be reflective. No pristine view will be ruined by the buildings. The existing development will be far more visible. She repeated that they dispute the description of the buildings being located on a ridge top, and said the trees will be at least twice as tall as either of the buildings. She said if the District decides to do nothing, 90% of the property will remain in open space. Ms. Doherty reviewed the history of the project, stressing the Convent's willingness to take into consideration everyone's concerns. She said the property had never been in public hands and any public use of it has been while it was privately held. She asked that the Board consider the property as a home for a small group of religious women and there would not be frequent visitors to the site. She said that there are nine nuns now and might be 20 in the future and the monastery is designed for their own use. When they are not in prayer they will be restoring icons, gardening, studying, and similar activities. She said this was in no way equivalent to 10-16 single-family homes, apartments or a hotel. She repeated that subdivision of the property is not possible. In regard to the density credit, she said the County will not let them use the density credit on this project and it might be used for a small auxiliary residence sometime in the future. She said they must be careful not to impinge on the free practice of religion. Ms. Doherty said the Board had to make findings if they take they property. She highlighted he main points as follows: Public interest and necessity requires the taking of this property- She said they cannot make that finding; all of the District's objectives can be met through the Convent's proposal. Protection of wildlife, public trails, scenic views are all protected. There is no incursion into previously undeveloped areas and 90% of the property will remain in permanent open space. She said public interest is served by having a monastery in the community. The project is located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and cause the least private injury. Public good must outweigh the private injury. She said public good includes homes for the religious in a manner that is most protective of the environment. The private injury is that if this does not go forward, this order will die out. She said the District's ordinances require that they make certain findings including that the District can only use eminent domain where all reasonable attempts and voluntary negotiations fail. The project as designed would be a significant asset to the community. She asked if they are saying there is no room in our communities for the religious. The project meets all requirements. Regarding the property being a high priority for the District, their documents showed it as ranked lowest. In addition, no overtures have been made to the owners since 1980. She said they must also make the finding that the property is threatened by development or significant degradation of natural resources. The District's code defines"threatened by development" as those instances where a Meeting 98-06 Page 9 subdivision is proposed. She said they also cannot make the finding of"significant degradation of natural resources" when less than 3% of the property will be affected by the project. She said the District states it does not want to use eminent domain unless the property concerned is an open space of critical importance, or is under some dire emergency such as immediate destruction of natural resources or clearing for development purposes, and that even under such urgent circumstances eminent domain would only be used as a last resort. Ms. Doherty referred to the factors contained in the District's Master Plan which would be considered if they decide to use eminent domain: The amount of public support for their action-Most of the letters the District received were opposed to their action. The cost of the acquisition- If they do nothing there is no cost to the District and 90% of the property would remain in open space. She said if they work with the Convent's proposal, they will purchase 60% of the property for a fraction of the fair market value and will get almost everything that has been identified as desirable on this property. If they take the property the cost will be well in excess of a million dollars. Consideration of potential actions by other governmental agencies- The Convent is in the midst of an environmental review process, they are preparing their final plan, there will be full public hearings, and there will be lots of conditions attached to any use in the property. She said she thought it would be improper for the District to prevent that process from going forward. She said she thought there were only two issues dividing the two parties: 1. That it would be easier to put trails on the only part of the property where the Convent can put its buildings. 2. The issue of whether anything will be visible from half a mile from the property. She said if they choose to take the property they would do it against their own policies, and against clear public opinion. She mentioned the past Grand Jury investigations of the District and said this is the wrong kind of publicity for the District and people who care about the environment. She said the letter to State Director of Conservation did not comply with Government. Code Section 51291(b)because it was not submitted 30 days prior to the hearing. She said the code sections cited were not applicable because of the District's proposed recreational and park use of the property. In addition, the Government Code Section 51292 findings required in the code cannot be made by the District Manager because that action would violate the Brown Act. Carrie German (no card) said she lived on Skyline 2 miles south of the property. She said trails would disturb the land, animals, and neighbors and that there was room for both public and private open space. She said she felt that clearing the trails was much more degrading to the property than the proposed use. She said the nuns must abide by the restrictions placed on them by the County and that they could not be met by anyone else. They are willing to abide by the restrictions, and she felt the project meant the end of future development in the area. She said Meeting 98-06 Page 10 transferring the density credits will limit future development on the coast and that she saw history in the making. She said building a Convent would be in the intent of the original gift of the property and that should be honored. She questioned the information given at the site meetings, saying the questions were misleading. She said the District had promised that the property would be open to the public and asked about the entrance, parking lot, kinds of trails, visitor center, and what is to stop the District from selling or trading this property. She said she was more inclined to believe the nuns. RECESS: 10:15-10:27 P.M. Mike Klestoff showed the location of the property offered to the District for fee P title. Ms. Doherty said the property had never been surveyed, and they had been told it was 284 acres, only 3% of which would be affected. P. Siemens asked what would prevent future development. Ms. Doherty said County regulations would not allow it. P. Siemens asked if there were anything in the agreement that would ensure that the use is retained as monastic. Ms. Doherty said the use permit runs with the land, not with an owner, and that in the Russian Orthodox Church, once a church is consecrated it must remain as a church. K. Nitz asked about fencing on the property. Ms. Doherty said they had asked the District to provide fencing and screening along all areas where trails would be close to the District border. Kathleen Klestoff(wife of Mike, no card) referred to the book Peninsula Trails and paraphrased a story about ecology and nature. She offered the choice of cooperation which she said was defined ecologically as the interaction between organisms that is largely beneficial to all those participating. Phyllis Annette (no card), homeowner on Kings Mountain, spoke in opposition to the action of the District and in support of the Convent's plan. She said there has been a lack of understanding and a negative attitude toward monastic life which has persisted from the beginning of the proposal. She said their community had been divided. The Convent had responded with compromise, and she did not think the land could be in more caring hands. She said this was not an occasion for the use of eminent domain and that it was an unjustified and uncalled for exercise of governmental power, and that the Convent does not pose a threat to the environment or open space. Donna Rodewald(no card), Kings Mountain, said she has tried to see the Convent site as she drove along Skyline. She said she had carefully concluded that this action is environmentally sound and that the move to take the property makes no sense and is ethically wrong. Father Stefan Pavlenko, Pastor of Russian Orthodox Church, 744 El Camino, Burlingame, said most people only know about the proposal because of the action taken against the Convent. He said the previous speakers had expressed his feelings. t � Meeting 98-06 Page l i Dr. Linda Huntimer, 22400 Skyline Blvd., #9, La Honda, said she was an environmentalist and president of the Russian Educational Program for the Disabled. She said she was impressed with the presentation about how environmentally sound they will keep the area. She said she shared Ms. Klestoff's views. She described her work in the 380 campaign, the highrise development in Pacifica, and the Sneath Lane project. She said she believed the nuns would be the best stewards of the property and that she did not believe in eminent domain unless it is an absolute last resort. Dr. Alexander Voshchenkov, 135 Campo Bello Lane, Menlo Park, expressed disappointment in the Board's position. He said the nuns are offering a win-win situation and that using eminent domain was taxpayer and tax abuse. He said those opposing the project have built homes on part of the property and they are clearly visible. He said if the District really wanted to keep the land pristine, they should use eminent domain to buy those houses and tear them down. He said the nuns would not disrupt the environment. He did not believe there had been good faith negotiations. Barry Stevens, 3265 Fair Oaks, Redwood City, representing ROMP, said ROMP supported the District's acquisition of the property to prevent development and believed it was consistent with Board policy and its founding purpose. Michael S. Danich, 1870 27'Ave., San Francisco, representing St. George Pathfinders, said he could not explain why the District would spend money to buy this land when it is being offered to them to remain in perpetual open space. He said he supported the District adding the coastside to their lands. He said he had never felt the nuns to be a threat to anyone. Elise Jauch, 112 Ware Road, Woodside, Save Skyline Open Space, said she appreciated the District's stewardship of open space. She said this area is truly special and that everyone is in agreement that this is magnificent land which is worthy of protection. She urged the District to acquire the property for the future and not to bow to development interests. She asked that the Board represent the future generations and the wildlife. Kathleen O'Connell-Sundaran, 4718 Meridian Avenue, Suite 266, San Jose, President of Santa Clara County Taxpayers Association, expressed the Association's concerns about the use of eminent domain. She asked how the Convent's provisions were incompatible with the overall goal of open space. She talked abut the District's authority to designate some assessed property as surplus property, and said this appears to be more incompatible with the overall goal of open space than the Convent's offer. She asked if they could legally bind a future board to never divest of the property. She said there had been some questions about just compensation in previous eminent domain proceedings by the District and that they had been investigated by Grand Juries in the past. She said they are requesting a comprehensive audit of at least five years to assess the District's ability to pay for safety, maintenance and upkeep of the present properties it oversees and the ability to purchase more properties. In addition, they would like VA Meeting 98-06 Page 12 to know the amount of property tax that would be lost due to the removal of the property from the tax rolls. She asked that they delay their action pending clarification of the issues. Pat Shrum, Executive Director of Santa Clara County Taxpayers Association, said they were there to offer another solution to the problem. She said if the District files an eminent domain action against the Convent, the alternative they have is to file a referendum petition campaign against this action. She offered technical support in such a campaign. John Berwald, 261 Creekside Drive, Palo Alto, said he was impressed with the grace shown by the nuns at this meeting. He thanked the Board for their contributions to enhancing open space and applauded the District's goals to acquire and preserve open space. He stated emphatic opposition to the imposition of eminent domain and cited the reasons for his position. He said he believed that the District had the opportunity to attain most of is goals by responding in good faith to the Convent's offers. Bob Ptacek, P. O. Box 1177, Montara, said he considered himself an environmentalist. He said that using public funds for the benefit of a small group or individuals is against the law. He said the nuns offer meets their objective and asked the Board not to condemn the property. He said if they do they will send a message to the coast that they do not want to send. He encouraged the Board not to condemn the property because he thought it would go against their objectives. Vit Eckersdorf, 78 Shearer Drive, Atherton, said he had served on many advisory boards including the Grand Jury. He said he was proud to be an American of Russian heritage and was worried by the power of condemnation assumed by bureaucratic agencies without consideration of taxpayers. Jonas Ion'Ionin, 3321-17'h St. #21 San Franciscoplanner in San Francisco said he applauded the District's concern for the preservation of open space. He said he didn't think the Board realized the injustice it would be committing by taking the property for the Convent. He said he felt the system often overstepped the boundaries in the name of public welfare and asked them to consider what they are gaining by taking. He stressed that the nuns want to build the Convent in an area already developed. He repeated that the nuns are preserving 90% of the land at no cost to the District or the public. He said he trusted that they would rule not to take the property. Elaine Tschorn, Redwood City, said the San Mateo County Planning Commission unanimously approved this project which she had heard was unusual. She supported the Convent and added that traditionally Americans have welcomed religious institutions into their communities. She said the greatest public good will be had by having the nuns in the community. Ray Tschorn, Redwood City, said he has seen a lot of changes in the area and that he supported the Convent's proposal. He said there would be more traffic with Meeting 98-06 Page 13 public use of the property. He talked about the Sand Caves and what had happened there since the District took it over. He said if they did take the property he thought they should consider naming it after the Convent. Tamara Piulle, 960 Glennan Drive, Redwood City, quoted from a press release regarding keeping land in private ownership but preventing development. She said they had gathered 473 signatures in two weeks asking that the District not condemn the land and presented the petition to the Board. Dave Perrone, 316 Ridge, Woodside, Save Skyline Open Space, said he was in favor of having the land protected by the District and that it was important to remember that you can't build 18,000 sq. ft. of anything and remain in harmony with the land. He said the human species is taking over the planet one piece at a time and requested that the Board consider their duty to other species. Al Bell, Committee to Save Skyline Open Space, 12130 Skyline Blvd., Woodside, commented that the 40 acre subdivision is mentioned in the nuns proposal for the project. He said a house had been added back to the plan in the area behind the other neighbors. He described what had happened to the ranch he grew up on, and said this is an 18,000 sq. ft. development. He said he supported the District acquiring the property and commended them for attempting to find a more suitable home for the nuns. Richard Bourke, P. O. Box 7207, San Jose, said he thought there was a dangerous precedent being set if the District decided to use eminent domain. He said people have a God-given right to own real estate. He talked about the environmental problems he thought existed at Mt. Umunhum. He said he was opposed to the Convent having to give up any land and said he felt the District ought to reconsider the development at Teague Hill. Dale Djerassi, 2600 Bear Gulch, Woodside, said people in the Kings Mountain area feel they might be a target for eminent domain in the future and need to be reassured why this is an extraordinary measure they are taking. He said he had found the District responsive to a situation regarding a large number of mountain bikers using property in his area. Speaking as a taxpayer interested in the preservation of open space, he said he didn't think there should be any new development on Skyline at all and that the District should explain exactly what they are doing. If they are prepared to compensate fairly and help the nuns relocate, he felt they should make it clear they are doing that. Harry Haeussler, 1094 Highlands Circle, Los Altos, said he was a strong advocate of property rights in this country. He asked which was more important-humans or animals and said he was for the human race. He asked why there were no replies to correspondence listed in the agenda. He suggested that the District save money because the Convent is giving them what they want David Blackmer, 12270 Skyline Blvd., Woodside, Save the Skyline Committee, said he and his wife didn't know the difference between open space and public I II Meeting 98-06 Page 14 open space until the Convent posted their property with no trespassing signs. He urged the Board to resist the skillful public relations efforts and accept the staffs recommendation. He said that action would be consistent with the public trust and their mission statement. Julia Bott 3921 E. Ba shore Palo Alto Loma Prieta Chapter of Sierra Club Y P urged the Board to adopt the proposed resolution of necessity. She said the chapter had adopted a position supporting the acquisition of this property through any means necessary by the District. She said one of the important things to consider was that encouraging development in the urban/rural interface was courtingdisaster. She said it was the role of Districts like this to purchase the land and justly compensate the owners. She said the chapter believes the District's proposed action is consistent with their role and mission. She said they should consider the open space value of the property, but those who are sponsoring the development should not be included in their deliberations. She said they believed that the District is committed to being good neighbors and to meeting their mission. Bill Prince, 17280 Skyline Blvd., #102, Woodside, said he was in favor of the acquisition because it doesn't directly affect anyone's home and the nuns would be generously compensated. He said the development was far too large for the area and that habitat fragmentation was far too severe. He pointed out that 3% of the property is over 8 acres. He expressed concern about what would happen when and if the Convent became non-viable, about the use of density credits and about the Williamson Act. He spoke about the aesthetics of open space and what a rare resource it is. Georgia Stigall, 17287 Skyline Blvd., #102, Woodside, resident of La Honda, said she thought this was a real tragedy that had been perpetuated by the media. She said she was an advocate for native ecosystems and was adamantly opposed to the use of condemnation in places where people have made their homes. She said she made a distinction for this land as it is a critical piece of habitat land and we need to quit breaking up the habitat. She said a significant part of her land is off-limits to any humans. She said she felt that acquiring this property by eminent domain is consistent with the mission of the District which includes protecting native ecosystems and preserving public open space. She hoped the sisters could find a home in which they could feel peaceful. Jessica Agramonte, Skyline, Save Skyline Open Space, urged the Board to preserve the property for future generations to enjoy as open space. She said she was a clinician who works with disabled persons and had testified previously about the rareness of accessible open space. She said this property is uniquely accessible for people with physical disabilities, but the 60% of the property the District has been offered is not accessible. She said the developer plans to cover the entire ridge top and block a vital wildlife corridor. She urged them to preserve the property. RECESS: 11:55 P.M. -12:05 A.M. `1K Meeting 98-06 Page 15 Olga Zavadsky, 202 El Prado Ave., San Rafael,Nashi Vesti Magazine, said she was in favor of the Convent project. Wim de Wit, 1514 Mitchell Way, Redwood City, quoted the California poet, Robinson Jeffers, John Muir, and Henry David Thoreau. He asked why the sisters in their autumn years of life were willing to threaten the beauty created by Him whom they venerate. He said the land under discussion must be part of the Bay Area greenbelt and the Bay Area Ridge Trail. He said preserving land is a difficult task and takes wise people. He asked that they do everything in their legal power and moral conviction to save this land for the best interests of all the people. Till Kilty-Newburn, 10698 Mora Drive, Los Altos, said she was heartened to see so many people come out and speak about the issue. She said she disagreed with the annexation of the property and that there must be a mutually beneficial agreement that could be reached. David Bomberger, 2021 Arbor Ave., Belmont, recalled when the District was considering its eminent domain policies in 1985. He said this was a public policy decision and it needed to be made on the basis of value of the parcel as public open space and the long term plans that the District has for fulfilling its obligation to the community. He said public policies adopted by a community often have specific impacts on properties, and many times there is no financial compensation for perceived losses in value. He pointed out that in this case the church will be fully compensated and that the District would simply be preserving all of an important piece of undeveloped property. As a citizen of this community he asked that they acquire the property. Zoe Kersteen-Tucker, 776 Buena Vista St., Moss Beach, Coastal Open Space Working Group, said she was aware that the nuns needed to find a suitable home but was opposed to allowing any single group to develop threatened open space land in the coastal zone. She said she had no doubt that this was an intensive residential visitor-serving development. She was also concerned about this action set a precedent of development on land that is under a Williamson Act contract. In addition, she said she was concerned about the visibility of the project from several places and about future development on the property. She said she believed that the most equitable use of this land was for the District to purchase it and place it in public trust in perpetuity and at the same time work to find a suitable home for the nuns. Pauline Lord, 530 Menlo Oaks, Drive, Menlo Park, expressed appreciation for the District's commitment and hard work in protection of exceptional open space. She said she strongly endorsed the goal of maintaining the site entirely as open land, even if it meant acquiring it by eminent domain. She asked questions regarding the long-term prospects of the convent and what guarantees there were that the property would not someday be sold and subdivided. She said the order already owns a church in Moss Beach and asked why they require another peaceful rural site. She asked if their objective to"interfere as little as possible with existing biotic species and to restore and maintain a harmonious relationship with the Meeting 98-06 Page 16 natural surroundings" wasn't at odds with a large, visible fenced-off development. She said the impacts were far too severe to sanction this development and she hoped the District would proceed with acquiring the land for its preservation as natural and undeveloped open space. Lennie Roberts, 339 La Cuesta, Portola Valley, Committee for Green Foothills, said she was speaking as a founder of the District and one of the key people in the campaign to annex southern San Mateo County to the District in 1976. In the 26 years since the District was formed, she said this was the first time she had personally appealed to the Board to acquire a particular piece of property. She said the Committee for Green Foothills had already sent a letter urging them to acquire this property by eminent domain if necessary and she believed it was the only fair and equitable way to resolve several issues involving this proposal. She said she was very concerned about precedent-setting accommodations being made at the County level for this project. She referred to the density bonus of 10% which was being allowed because the project sponsors have volunteered to restrict their development to less than 20% of the site. She said this was no great sacrifice since 80% of the site is not developable anyway because of the steep slopes. She said the development as approved by the county so far will have 22 permanent residences, 8 units for overnight accommodations, which is akin to a motel, and conference facilities for up to 80 people. She said this development is very similar to that of Cascade Ranch which they also opposed on similar grounds. Regarding the limits in the use permit on the number of days and the number of people that the visitors facilities can be used, she said once a large investment is made in buildings and infrastructure, if the church does decide it needs to use these more the county will find it impossible to deny the additional use of these facilities. She said she could not recall the county having revoked a use permit for violation of conditions. She asked the Board to weigh all the factors very carefully and said she hoped they decide to provide a fair and equitable value to the church and to work with them to find another site. John Kochergin, 888 Mango Ave., Sunnyvale, said when his mind had a question he could go to open space and find answers. When his soul had questions he could only go to church. He said he did not know of any other place that combined the qualities of both. The Convent would be preserving nature and helping people spiritually. Trees will be added. Mr. Kochergin read from a newspaper article comparing the development to a motel and said he disagreed with it. He said that he, as a resident of the District, knew that this project is what current and future generations want. Patricia Wurster, 47 Forest View Road, Woodside, Save Skyline Open Space Committee, said she lived on the edge of a preserve and is practically surrounded by open space. She thanked the Board for their dedication, efforts and successes in preserving open space and expressed concern about development. She said she considered this part of Skyline to be one of last outposts of the west coast and hoped they would do what they could to save the open space for all species. . Q Meeting 98-06 Page 17 Water Droste, 12475 Skyline Blvd., Woodside, said this land should be in public ownership and urged the imposition of eminent if necessary to acquire it. He said the development by the church involved overnight accommodations for a number of people, which equated to a hotel, and this property is not suitable for a hotel. He said the property is unique and should be permanent open space. Richard Geiger, 714 E. Charleston Rd., Palo Alto, said he had read in the newspaper that the District's spokesman had said they were not taking anyone's property. Mr. Geiger said he disagreed with the use of eminent domain against the Convent. Also, he was offended by the comparison of the project to a motel. He said many aspects of this point to religious persecution and that no action is being taken toward a nearby subdivision or thousands of acres in Portola Valley where property is being developed. Oleg Reozitt, Novato, said open space is wonderful but balance is also wonderful. He said the District and other open space agencies manage thousands of acres, and the District is adding to their preserves all the time. He assumed most of the additions were amicable and wondered why they have to use strong arm tactics to take over this piece of property. He said a lot of people who want the District to acquire this land are people who live nearby. He said if this parcel were his he would fight for it because private property, private enterprise, and private achievement are the backbone of this country. He asked why buy 280 acres at over a million dollars when they can have 250 acres free of charge. He said the Convent did everything by the book and the right thing to do is take their offer and let them build their modest monastery where they will do good work. Mr. Reozitt said he had easily collected over 60 signatures against the eminent domain action. Brian Cason, 9 Quail Court, Woodside, spoke in favor of acquisition of the property, stating that while it would be nice to provide a home for the nuns, this could not compare with the greater public good achieved by preserving this unique, beautiful, ecologically important property as open space. He said it is unequivocally threatened by development. He said the District has negotiated in good faith and has been unable to reach a compromise. He asked them to vote in favor of acquiring the property and added that he did not think the Board should be intimidated by vague threats concerning a Grand Jury investigation. Les McDonald, 445 Church, San Francisco, property director for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco, read a letter supporting the Convent from Monsignor Robert McElroy, Vicar for Administration, Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco. Monsignor McElroy had written that the nuns are not corporate developers and would be good stewards of this site. He asked that they agree on a plan that would accommodate the Convent's needs with the valid preservation of the land. John Messina, P. O. Box 51148, San Jose, said he had been very concerned about this construction but after investigating thoroughly was more concerned about how the project had been misrepresented to the public. He said the District had promised when it was formed that it would never use eminent domain to force Meeting 98-06 Page 18 anyone to sell them their property. He said this is the nun's home, even though they have not yet moved in. He asked if District representatives had permission to go on the property to take the photos Mr. Woods had shown this evening and was informed that they had permission from the Convent. Ed Cydzik, 343 Bluefish Ct., Foster City, said he was against the District's acquisition of property and reminded the Board that this is private property and the nuns' future home. When asked, President Crowder said all Board members have walked the property. Mr. Cydzik described his walks on the property and asked how many who were at the meeting had visited Mission Street lately. He read from the first sentence of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence and said the nuns have bent over backward for everyone. He thought the District was about to trample on their rights. John Harris, 2500 Sand Hill Road, #210, Menlo Park, said the District was proposing to deprive these people of their property which they acquired lawfully and propose to put to a lawful use. He said they call themselves environmentalists, and compared environmentalism to religion. He said environmentalists have no right to practice their religion at the expense of others. He said the nuns have a right to use the property as their home and a place of worship. He said the power of eminent domain should not exist in our country and that the founding fathers intended that it should be used only in times of great peril and for gravest necessities. He urged them not to abrogate the right of these people to enjoy property they have lawfully acquired. Serge Loukianoff, P. O. Box 1127, Burlingame, expressed opposition to the acquisition of the property by eminent domain. He asked the Board to examine what they are forfeiting because the next Board may seek to acquire property owned by some of the people who live in the area and are gun owners. Bob Bynum, 761 Towhee Court, Fremont, said he was Vice President of the singles section of the Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club, and editor of a newsletter. He said he leads 30 hikes a year in District reserves and encouraged Y P a8 the Board to preserve the property as open space. Mr. Bynum expressed concern about any development in open space because he believed it could set a precedent and that it is becoming increasingly hard to acquire open space. He expressed sympathy for the nuns' cause but asked that the District preserve the open space. Walter Stamirowski, 2560 Sherborne Dr., Belmont, said he supported convent and felt strongly about their right to build something on their property. He said he felt that eminent domain is legalized land grabbing and did not believe that should happen. He said he believed that property rights are sacred just as freedom is, and believed that this basically usurped people's freedom. He urged the Board to make the right decision and support the Convent. Kathryn Aranda, 687 Spindrift Way, Half Moon Bay, wrote on a card, "Unable to remain at public hearing late enough to testify", and, " I am opposed to exercising rights of eminent domain on the property owned by the Russian Convent." Meeting 98-06 Page 19 Helen Gordon, 9 Quail Court, Woodside, (this one was marked"Written Communication"): "I strongly support the MROSD's proposal to acquire the land of the Russian Convent for public open space. The ecological and scenic importance of this property cannot be underestimated! Although I am sympathetic to the nuns' need for a permanent residence, I believe that other sites are far more suitable. I feel in the presentation today by the nuns' lawyer that many misrepresentations and omissions were made. Firstly, most of the audience "Convent supporters" will never see or visit the area and have no knowledge of the important need to conserve this area as open space. Secondly, I am appalled by the thinly veiled threat of a grand jury inquiry should the District proceed to acquire the land for open space. But my greatest concern, perhaps, is the total omission of the repercussions that allowing the nuns(or whoever to circumvent P g ) the Williamson Act will have on development of lands all over the state. Clearly Y this is not in the spirit of the Williamson Act at all no matter the purpose of the P P rP development or its good intentions. Please preserve the natural beauty and permanent wildlife habitat for all. Thank you." C. Britton responded regarding the following points: • Visual intrusion of existing improvements and suggestion that the District buy existing improvements and tear them down-He said this is something they do not typically do and cannot afford to do. He said the difference is that there is no development on this property and the District can do something about it, whereas there is development on the other parcels and they can't do anything about it. • Use of the word threat-He said his statement was, "due to unsuccessful efforts to reach a satisfactory settlement and the eminent threat of development. . . " • Questions about whether the District might resell this property-He referred to the staff report which said the land will be dedicated as open space and as such it would take a vote of the electorate to ever dispose of it. • Review by Grand Jury-He said that typically grand juries every year select a number of public agencies to review. The last time the District was reviewed was in 1991. • There were questions about Sandstone Caves and the degradation there. He said the property was acquired from a willing seller and they had been heavily vandalized when acquired by the District. He said the District is saving what is left. • Proposal made by the Church to the District- Mr. Britton said there would be a cost to the District of$300,000 for the 60% proposed for the District to acquire. The Convent would be utilizing all development credits so the land the District would acquire would not have any"market value" Meeting 98-06 Page 20 in terms of development potential. The Convent would be retaining 27 acres that would not be restricted in any way except through the planning department. He said he felt"the Convent was using about a third of the usable land. • Reply to Harry Haeussler's letter- The letter contained questions about other matters than the one considered at this meeting and a proposed reply would be in the Board's next agenda packet for their review. • District disposing of excess land -Mr. Britton cited the reasons for disposal of the Thornewood and Teague Hill excess parcels. Colleen Doherty spoke in response to the following items: 0 Many people had spoken about the beauty of the property. She said under the Convent's proposal the District would be getting almost all of that. 0 Future development- She said the project will be built on the 10% that has not been marked as permanent open space and there will be no other development on that property other than what had been talked about. 0 Confusion about numbers- She stressed that twice a year 80 people come for a pilgrimage and won't stay on site but in private homes. 0 Moss Beach property -Ms. Doherty said the property is about the size of a single family home and is on one-half acre. 0 Suggestions that the County had done something unusual for the Convent- She said they have not, nor had the Convent asked for any exceptions. Ms. Doherty concluded that the vast majority of the property will be in open space and she did not see how the Board could make a finding of necessity to take the property. She said the Convent's proposal would satisfy the interests of the District and the Convent. D. Woods responded to the following topics: 0 Debate about ridge line- The District considered the site where the chapel and convent are proposed to be a ridge-line and the property due west of that to be a saddle. In addition, San Mateo County considered the site to be a ridge-fine when they evaluated it for consistency to the local coastal plan. 0 Scale of Convent building-Mr. Woods said there will be 10,000 sq. ft. of livable space. What will be visible will be equivalent to a 12,000 sq. ft. building because of the inner courtyard. Meeting 98-06 Page 21 • Master plan valuation-He said the master plan is intended to aid the District in evaluating overall open space values of land and is not an acquisition priority list by any means. It is only one of a number of factors that are considered when the Board is making decisions concerning open space acquisition and a low rating does not mean that an area will not be acquired. Other factors considered are the amount of public support for acquisition, cost, degree of threat of loss to development, importance for certain individual open space functions, and location relative to other public open space land. Mr. Woods said the map had been prepared without benefit of an on site analysis. After an opportunity to evaluate the land it was revealed that there were substantially higher open space values, particularly as they relate to scenic preservation and protection of wild life. B. Crowder closed the public hearing at 1:07 A.M. N. Hanko said she hadn't been able to go through the letters received at the meeting, but as of last night they had received 180 letters on this subject, 92 from within the District. She said she felt she should give more attention to those taxpayers who live within the District. Of those 92 letters, 35 said not to use eminent domain and 57 said to use it. She said she was very impressed by the presentation from the nuns, and everything she had heard from staff, who was mediating this, had indicated a great deal of assistance on the Convent's part in trying to solve the problems that the District has. She said she hated to see that cooperation end because she thought they still have much that they share in their love of natural life. She said the major issue she had seen is that the land that should be accessible to the public is where the convent and the chapel are to be built. She had been to the property and said what is being proposed with their alternative is a very steep area for a trail. The only place she could see the public having good access to for a look at the last sunsets on this continent were on the proposed building site. She said that humans as a group have ended up building so much of this continent there is very little left. She said she had come tonight hoping that maybe the District would be able to find another location for the Convent, maybe even on District land and she would like to continue to work toward that end. D. Smernoff said he appreciated the presentation by the members of the Convent and the public. He made the point that this was not a religious issue but an issue of development. He said it was a very difficult choice and he respected and admired the work the nuns do as he respected all people of religious orientation. He said his family came from Russian Jewish background and his ancestors fled Russia for many of the same reasons that the order fled, so he felt he understood religious persecution. He said this is not religious persecution but is a question of development of an ecologically significant area that has open space values that should be preserved for the wildlife habitat value and for future generations. He said it was a difficult choice because of the people who are proposing this development, but ultimately it is a development. The crucial issue is not to allow more habitat fragmentation, and the location does impact wildlife. He said it is important to maintain corridors over which wildlife migrates and allow for genetic Meeting 98-06 Page 22 intermixing of various populations. He said he personally needed to speak for constituents who can't speak for themselves: the wildlife and future generations. He said he strongly supported the District's role in acquiring a suitable location for the Convent and he believed it existed. He said he was personally committed to ensuring that a site is found and that these women find a home. He expressed concern with setting a dangerous precedent of transferring density credits onto Williamson Act property. He said he respected the goals of that legislation. P. Siemens said in conversations with staff he had learned that they consider this parcel a very key one for preservation and had since shortly after formation of the District. He said this fact was communicated to the previous owner so it has never been a secret. After seeing the property and surroundings he too saw it as potentially valuable for open space. After considering the staff report, letters and public testimony, he felt the recommendation involved three issues. 1. He said he believed the property acquisition was necessary for the public good for the reasons given in the staff report. 2. The property is clearly threatened by development which is not appropriate for the ridge line area now; even with the Convent's offer, critical building areas are proposed for present development and most importantly, subject to future intensification. 3. He believed his oath of office and his responsibility to the constituents require that he not consider religion as a factor in his decision either for or against a recommended action. He said he would support the recommended actions. I Cyr said this was incredibly difficult, and a lot of energy had been spent on both sides of the question. He said fundamentally it was not an issue of religion but a question of development and the size and impact of developing in on the land. Once development was in place it would be virtually impossible to remove it, and effectively potential open space vanishes. He said he believed that his responsibility was to attempt to determine the greatest good for the greatest number for the greatest length of time, and with those considerations in mind he felt he needed to support the staff recommendations. M. Davey thanked the public. She said she was one of the founders of the District. At that time it was their objective to preserve, protect and purchase as much open space property as they could, and they have pursued that objective. Part of that objective was to preserve the green belt around the Bay Area, and she felt this parcel of land was a precious part of the green belt. She said that because of the reasons already stated by her fellow Board Members, she intended to support the resolution because she believed the land should not be developed. She said she believed it was in the interests of everyone in the room, their children and their children's children to protect this piece of open space. She said she would appreciate their goals as the Board appreciated the Convent's objectives. K. Nitz thanked everyone for their concern. He said he was not worried about the 90% but the 10% and where it is located. He also expressed concerns about the Williamson Act problems it entails. He said in deciding this he must begin with the mission statement and principles of the District which were basically to protect and to preserve the land of the peninsula, not just for today but for generations forward Meeting 98-06 Page 23 in perpetuity. He said he believed he was elected because of his years as an environmentalist, and it was the 60,000 people who were in his ward who were not at the meetingthat h represented. e e esented H 'd h e said a also represented p p ted those who have no voice who live among us. He said for those reasons he supported the recommended actions. B. Crowder thanked those present for being patient and staying. She expressed regret that Abbess Eugenia had to leave and due to a misunderstanding su derstandin di 8t' g g d not have a chance to speak. She said Convent proponents have invested an enormous amount of time and money in the project and she found it very difficult to vote on this action at this time. She said she felt the District could further explore alternatives to eminent domain, especially as one of the recommendations in the staff report is to engage a firm to search for an alternative site for the Lady of Vladimir convent. She thought this option might be pursued further. Motion: B. Crowder moved that the Board continue this agenda item for 30 days until this alternative could be seriously studied. N. Hanko seconded the motion. N. Hanko asked staff if they needed more time to talk to the consultant as to whether there are lands out there. She said she wanted this to be an important exhaustive study, including District lands. C. Britton said he did not know how long it would take for an exhaustive search but was sure 30 days was not enough time. He said if they passed the resolution at this time, it does not mean that discussions would not continue. He said there is a lot of time between the time the Board takes this action and when they proceed to acquire the property, in some cases a year or more. He said it is staff's plan to hire the consultant and do an exhaustive search. He said one of the problems he thought they were going to find was that they will come up with a number of properties which have to be considered by the Convent and checked out for zoning. This process could take as much as six months. S. Schectman said the Board had the authority to continue this matter and if their sole purpose was continuation for the site survey, that was part of the recommended action in any case. yQk: The motion failed with Directors Hanko and Crowder voting aye and Directors Cyr, Nitz, Siemens, Davey and Smernoff voting nay. Motion: M. Davey moved that the Board adopt Resolution 97-13 a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Determining that the Recommended Actions are Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as set out in the staff report. P. Siemens seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 1 (Director Crowder voting no). Meeting 98-06 Page 24 Motion: M. Davey moved that the Board adopt Resolution 97-14 a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District'Finding and Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity require the Acquisition of Certain Properties for Public use, to Wit, for Public Park, Recreation, Open space and Ecological Purposes for the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve, Describing the Property Necessary Therefore and Authorizing and Directing its Retained Legal Counsel to do Everything Necessary to Acquire All Interests Therein (Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir, Inc. Property). K. Nitz seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to I (Director Crowder voting no). Motion: M. Davey moved that the Board adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan recommendations contained in the staff report, including naming the property Mills Creek Open Space Preserve. J. Cyr seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Motion* M. Davey moved that the Board indicate their intention upon acquisition to dedicate the property as public open space. D. Smernoff seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Motion: M. Davey moved that the Board authorize the General Manager to enter into an agreement for professional services with Associated right of Way Services, Inc. for site location services at a cost not to exceed $25,000. D. Smernoff seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Motion* M. Davey moved that the Board find by motion based upon the staff report that the property is threatened by development, subject to degradation of natural resources and more than 50% of the fee interest is held by an institutional or commercial entity. D. Smernoff seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. V. ADJOURNMENT At 1:28 A.M. the meeting was adjourned. Roberta Wolfe Recording Secretary 40 Regional Open s,,dce MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meeting 98-06 SPECIAL.MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA* 7:30 P.M. 330 Distel Circle Wednesday Los Altos, California March 18, 1998 (7:30) ROLL CALL In the event public attendance exceeds room capacity, the meeting may be adjourned and immediately reconvened at the following location: Mountain View Community Center 201 S. Rengstorff Avenue Mountain View, CA ** ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -- Public ADOPTION OF AGENDA *** ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR -- B. Crowder BOARD BUSINESS 7:45 1. Consideration f ratio o Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for ecess o Acquisition of the � ) P ty cq Russian Convent Of Our Lady of Vladimir Inc. Property; Adoption of Preliminary Use and Management Plan and Naming the Property Mills Creek Open Space Preserve; Indicate their Intention Upon Acquisition to Dedicate the Property as Public Open Space; Authorization for the General Manager to Enter Into an Agreement for Professional Services with Associated Right of Way Services, Inc. for Site Location Services at a Cost Not to Exceed $25,000; and Find by Motion That the Property is Threatened by Development, Subject to Degradation of Natural Resources; and Owned in Fee By an Institutional or Commercial Entity Consideration of Resolution Determining that the Recommended Actions are Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act 330 Distel Circle • Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 • Phone:650-691-1200 FAX:650-691-0485 • E-mail:mrosd®openspace.org • Web site:www.openspace.org . Board of Directors:Pete Siemens,Mary C.Davey,Jed Cyr,David T.Smernoff,Nonette Hanko,Betsy Crowder,Kenneth C.Nitz •General Manager:L.Craig Britton Meeting 98-06 Page 2 Consideration of Resolution Finding and Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity Require the Acquisition of Certain Properties for Public Use, to Wit, for Public Park, Recreation, Open Space and Ecological Purposes for the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve, Describing the Property Necessary Therefore and Authorizing and Directing Its Retained Legal Counsel To Do Everything Necessary to Acquire All Interests Therein (Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir Property) ADJOURNMENT *NOTE. Times are estimated and items may appear earlier or later than listed. Agenda is subject to change of order. TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: The Chair will invite public comment on agenda item at the time each item is considered by the Board of Directors. You may address the Board concerning other matters during oral communications. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to 3 minutes. Alternately, you may comment to the Board by a written communication, which the Board appreciates. All items on the consent calendar shall be approved without discussion by one motion. Board members, the General Manager, and members of the public may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar during consideration of the Consent Calendar. Regional Open 1k., -ice --i-A 110111 I'll-, R-98-36 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meeting 98-06 F March 18, 1998 AGENDA ITEM 1 AGENDA ITEM Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for Acquisition of the Russian Convent Of Our Lady of Vladimir, Inc. Property, Determination of Categorical Exemption from California Environmental Quality Act, Adoption of Preliminary Use and Management Plan and Naming the Property Mills Creek Open Space Preserve, Intention to Dedicate Property as Public Open Space, Authorization for General Manager to Enter into Contract for Site Location Services and Finding the Property is Threatened By Pgyelo ppment, Subject to Degradation of Natural Resources and Owned in Fee by an stitutional or Commercial Entity GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMM 1. Adopt the attached resolution determining that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as set out in this report. 2. Adopt the accompanying Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Finding and Determining that the Public Interest and Necessity Require the Acquisition of Certain Properties for Public Use, to Wit, for Public Park, Recreation, Open Space and Ecological Purposes for the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve, Describing the Property Necessary Therefore and Authorizing and Directing Its Retained Legal Counsel To Do Everything Necessary to Acquire All Interests Therein (Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir, Inc. Property). 3. Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan recommendations contained in this report, including naming the property Mills Creek Open Space Preserve. 4. Indicate your intention upon acquisition to dedicate the property as public open space. 5. Authorize the General Manager to enter into an agreement for professional services with Associated Right of Way Services, Inc. for site location services at a cost not to exceed $25,000. 6. Find by motion based upon this staff report that the property is threatened by development, subject to degradation of natural resources and more than 50% of the fee interest is held by an institutional or commercial entity. INTRODUCTION This agenda item requests the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space 330 Distel Circle * Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 • Phone: 650-691-1200 FAX: 650-691-0485 - E-mail: mrosd@openspace.org • Web site:www.openspace.org Board of Directors:Pete Siemens,Mary C. Davey,Jed Cyr,David T.Smernoff,Nonette Hanko, Betsy Crowder, Kenneth C.Nitz -General Manager:L.Craig Britton R-98-36 Page 2 District to consider exercising its power of eminent domain to acquire approximately 273 acres of land to form the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve. The property is located in San Mateo County on a prominent ridge overlooking Half Moon Bay and Burleigh Murray Ranch State Park. Bordering Skyline Boulevard and situated near the intersection of State Highway 92, the property forms one of the most scenic ridges in the Santa Cruz Mountains. The establishment of the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve project will protect in perpetuity a critically important wildlife corridor. Development of the property would result in altering the natural condition of the land would severely degrade the views, wildlife habitat and public enjoyment of the area. Establishment of the preserve will preserve and protect these resources. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is located in San Mateo County on the ridges adjacent to Skyline Boulevard and overlooking Burleigh Murray Ranch State Park, and consists of the acquisition of approximately 273 acres of land for public park, recreation, open space and ecological preserve purposes, and creation of the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve, including the n f Preliminary Management Plan for the Preserve to maintain concurrent ado ho o a e mm Use and ana P �Y g the site in a natural condition and preserve fish and wildlife habitat. The plan states the property will be managed primarily for conservation and scenic viewshed while allowing controlled public use. Preserving the site in a natural condition will involve restricting public use to existing trails and allowing steep roads to revegetate and stabilize. This will preserve the habitat for the summer steelhead trout (Federally Threatened Species). Steep roads will be closed and allowed to revegetate naturally which will reduce erosion. The spread of non- native invasive plants will be controlled by manual removal in order to prevent a reduction in biodiversity. The majority of existing roads will be open for public pedestrian trail use and patrol. Parking will not be provided on-site but visitors may park in existing facilities at the intersection of Skyline Boulevard and State Highway 92 or along roadside pull-outs. Development of the property will be prohibited, resulting in the protection of the scenic qualities of the Skyline Scenic Corridor. BACKGROUND The District has been interested in this 273-acre property since annexation occurred in this area of San Mateo County in 1978. At that time, the property was owned by Our Lady of the• Pillar Church in Half Moon Bay who had received it as a gift in 1957. District staff contacted the Roman Catholic Archbishop of San Francisco in the early 1980's to express interest in preserving the property and was informed there were no plans to sell or develop it. The Archbishop was asked to contact the District if the property were to become available for purchase in the future. In May 1996, when the Russian Convent of Our Lady Of Vladimir had not completed the process of acquiring the property, District staff was asked to comment on their proposal to construct a convent, chapel and retreat center. Staff expressed concerns that the project was in R-98-36 Page 3 a highly scenic area that was not suitable for the proposed development and stated the District's interest in preserving the property. Shortly thereafter, the property was purchased by the Convent, and in September 1996, a conceptual plan for a convent, chapel and retreat center was submitted to San Mateo County and received an approval from the Planning Commission early in 1997. The concept plan includes a one-story convent building for 20 cloistered nuns, a chapel with a gold-leaf dome, a two-story retreat center containing ten guest rooms (later reduced to eight) and residences for a priest and caretaker, and a 24-car parking area. The applicant also reserved the right to develop an auxiliary residence at a later date. The convent and chapel are to be developed on top of the prominent ridge overlooking the coast and the retreat center is to be located on the south side of the ridge and closer to Skyline Boulevard in the Skyline Scenic Corridor. San Mateo County's process for reviewing and approving the Convent's concept plan was intended to allow the applicant and the County to reach an agreement on the general design of the project and its compliance with County policies and regulations prior to the preparation of a final and more detailed plan. The property is in the Resource Management/Coastal Zone District and under a Williamson Act contract. The County determined that all proposed uses were permitted under the zoning and Williamson Act. In addition, the County determined additional density credits would be required based on proposed water use and agreed that density credits could be transferred from a property in Pescadero which is to be restricted to agricultural use. The State Office of Land Conservation notified the County that it does not support the transfer of density credits to Williamson Act lands. During the County's review process, interested groups and individuals expressed a number of concerns over a variety of issues. In May 1997, the Planning Commission's approval of the proposed development was appealed by Save Skyline Open Space, a grass- roots citizens group, on issues relating to land use and density conflicts with the Williamson Act agricultural preserve on the property, water use calculations, and enforceability of conditions limiting the number of people on the site. The appeal was denied and the project has continued with the filing of the application for plan and permit approval. Prior to the Planning Commission's review of the project, interested groups and individuals addressed the District's Board of Directors, expressing their concerns about the proposed project and requested that the District acquire the property. On October 23, 1996, the Board authorized staff to appraise and initiate negotiations to acquire the property. In March 1997, staff met with Convent representatives to discuss the District's interest in preserving the property. The Convent declined an offer by the District to purchase the property outright and hire a consultant to help locate a suitable site for building the convent and retreat center. Staff presented the owners with a preliminary access concept plan based on off-site analysis of the project site and existing surrounding park and open space lands. Staff requested entry to the property to verify the feasibility of its plan as it related to the wildlife R-98-36 Page 4 corridor, scenic qualities, and potential for regional trails, including the Bay Area Ridge Trail. Access was denied by the convent at that time. In August 1997, the Convent and District entered into a mediation agreement to engage in discussions and determine if respective goals between the Convent and District could be reconciled. Those discussions took place between September 1997 and January 1998. During the mediation process, staff and District consultants were permitted to enter on and examine the property. Staff was able to evaluate the feasibility of the preliminary access concept plan that had been presented earlier to the Convent in March 1997. The results supported some but not all the earlier off-site findings relating to the importance of scenic resources, wildlife habitat and trail use opportunities. The onsite visits revealed that regional trails were undesirable based on potential impacts to wildlife habitats and physical constraints associated with steep topography. In July 1997, staff and two members of the Bay Area Ridge Trail Council conducted a field trip and determined a preferred alignment of the Ridge Trail between State Highway 92 and Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve (see attached July 9, 1997 Memorandum to Craig Britton). The preferred alignment would lie on the west side of Skyline Boulevard until slightly to the north of the property where it would cross to the east side of the highway, and continues on the east side to Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. The second regional trail shown on the preliminary access concept plan, connecting the Ridge Trail to Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park through the property, was determined undesirable because it would intrude on sensitive summer steelhead habitat in Mills Creek. On-site parking was determined to be impractical for public vehicle ingress and egress from Skyline Boulevard. In February 1998, the Board received a letter from the Convent's attorney stating its final offer (see attached letter from Law Offices of Colleen Doherty, dated February 27, 1998). The offer includes provisions for: 1) conveyance to the District in fee of approximately 165 acres, 2) a monastic reserve over 40% of the remaining lands to be owned by the Convent with a permanent open space easement over the majority of the reserve, 3) relocation and landscaping of the convent and chapel in an effort to reduce visual impacts, 4) restriction of future development to one auxiliary residence to take place in the RM portion of the property near Skyline Boulevard, 5) an equestrian easement for neighborhood trail access along Skyline Boulevard frontage, and 6) a willingness to consider the development of Bay Area Ridge Trail through the property if the need arises. The Convent's offer satisfies some but not all the concerns and issues regarding staffs desire to protect the natural condition of the property. First, the convent and chapel remain situated on the main east-west ridge and protrude visually into scenic open space and a major wildlife migration corridor. County staff addressed the visibility of the proposed buildings in its January 22, 1997 report to the Planning Commission in which it states, "The proposed convent and chapel would be located on the highest ridge of the property and would be visible against a backdrop of trees from Skyline Boulevard to the north of the property. The retreat center would be visible against the hillside from Skyline Boulevard to the south of the property." R-98-36 Page 5 Although the convent has been reduced in width by 30 feet and lowered five feet in the owner's recent revisions submitted to the County on February 5, 1998, the location of the convent and chapel buildings have been moved only ten feet in the southerly direction. Both buildings will still significantly alter the natural condition of the ridgetop and impacting the migration routes of many animals, including those routes used by the deer and mountain lion. Secondly, public opportunities to access the trails on the central north-south ridge will be restricted by the location of the convent and chapel buildings. Conditions stated in the offer require the primary public trail access route between Skyline Boulevard and the central ridge to be aligned downslope from the buildings on a very steep north-facing slopes. Given the close proximity of the proposed trail to the headwaters of Mills Creek and summer steelhead trout (listed as a Federally Threatened Species in November 1997), it would be difficult if not impossible to route the trail across the sideslope without seriously impacting the creek with siltation. If the trail were feasible, in order to minimize the trail's impact on the creek, the trail would need to be less than two feet in width, thereby becoming difficult for the public to negotiate and expensive for the District to manage. DESCRIPTION (.see attached Exhibits A and B) The approximate 273-acre property is located on the crest of the Santa Cruz Mountains approximately halfway between Belmont and Half Moon Bay. It is bounded by Skyline Boulevard and San Francisco Watershed lands to the east, lands of Peninsula Open Space District (POST) to the south and west, Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park to the southwest, and private properties to the north and southeast. To the east, the property borders a small private parcel on three sides. State Highway 92 lies approximately two and one-half miles to the north. The property forms the headwaters of Mills Creek, a perennial creek that flows westerly through Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park and to the coast. The property's topography is dominated b a dramatic H-shapedridge that is highly visible from man miles away. The g Y Y g Y east leg of the ridge system is adjacent to Skyline Boulevard and connects to the west leg by way of a narrow spine-like ridge. The west half of the ridge system lies in the heart of the property and is nearly encircled by the north and south tributaries of Mills Creek. Elevations range from 1,500 feet near Skyline Boulevard to 800 feet near the southwest property corner and the confluence of the two tributaries of Mills Creek. Portions of the ridge system near Skyline Boulevard and in the center of the property are nearly level but drop off steeply to the two creeks below. The average sideslope is in excess of 45%. The vast majority of the property consists of steep, erodible slopes of mature dense coastal scrub. Though coastal scrub is not a rare community type in California, very little of this habitat type occurs on protected land in this region of the coast. Several very small grasslands are scattered within the coastal scrub. The level areas near Skyline Boulevard are disturbed and are dominated by non-native invasive species, including Acacia, Monterey Pine, Blue R-98-36 Page 6 Gum Eucalyptus and French Broom. The non-native Monterey Cypress is also present but is not invasive. The two tributaries of Mills Creek are surrounded by a dense tangle of coastal scrub vegetation and are not accessible. Red Alder, willow, sedges and ferns are present along the creeks. The property has diverse wildlife and serves as an important deer migration corridor, connecting the San Francisco Watershed lands to the east with Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park and POST lands to the west. The property is a major crossing point for deer and other wildlife because the area lying directly to the south of the property has residential development. A mountain lion was observed near the southern boundary and several mountain lion prints were found, indicating the high numbers of deer. Other animal species found include bobcats, bats, coyote, woodrats, raccoons, and shrew. The Townsends Western Big Eared Bat which is a state species of special concern was observed in flight at night but, because its flying range is quite broad, it is not known where it resides. (A state species of special concern is a species that is not considered or classified as rare, threatened or endangered. It is an administrative, informal classification which suggests that these species be given consideration during planning for projects.) Bird species, including bald eagle, Swainson's hawk, golden eagle and Cooper's hawk were also observed in flight but not located specifically on the property. Though not found on the site, the San Francisco garter snake had been reported on adjacent private property by a neighboring property owner. According to a February 18, 1997 letter sent to San Mateo County from the Convent's consulting biologist, Thomas Reid and Associates, the existence of the garter snake is not likely on the property based on a evaluation process developed by a specialist familiar with the snake's habitat. (See attached Thomas Reid and Associates letter). Summer steelhead trout were found on the property in the north tributary of Mills Creek adjacent to the northern boundary and near the southern boundary in the south tributary of Mills Creek. Summer steelhead trout are a Federally Threatened Species as of November 1997. The property offers ideal spawning areas in pools with overhanging banks and dense vegetation. The California Department of Fish and Game is currently restoring steelhead habitat in the reach of Mills Creek passing through Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park, thereby increasing access to the headwaters within the property. Protection of the steep and highly erodible upper watershed by maintaining it in its natural condition will protect the steelhead population. Historically, the property and surrounding area was used for a dairy farm in the mid to late 1800's. A ranch house was built on the upper portion of the property near Skyline Boulevard and the entire area was cleared and used for grazing. Remnants of a small farm shed and cabin are located on top of the spine-like ridge and on the upper north-facing slope in the northeast portion of the property. In the late 1930's and until the late 1960's, a hunting club used the area for deer hunting and maintained a network of roads along the ridgetops; some of R-98-36 Page 7 these roads were reopened in 1997 by the current owner. The property has remained relatively undisturbed since the cessation of cattle grazing in the 1930's and grasslands have converted to mature dense coastal scrub. An unsurfaced access road enters the property through a triangular-shaped CalTrans parcel near the property's southeast comer where a gate is located. Not too far from the entry gate there is an unsurfaced side road aligned in the southerly direction leading towards adjacent private parcels. A little further to the west, there is second intersection at the site of the proposed chapel and convent buildings where an surfaced road branches off towards the northeast boundary of the property. The main road then continues across the spine-like ridge to the center of the property where it divides into two roads that follow the top of the central north-south ridge. All the roads terminate on the property with the exception of the northeast road which extends into the adjacent private parcel to the north and connects to Skyline Boulevard. There are a number of other obscure old roads and trails on the property that are extremely steep and overgrown. DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC NECESSITY The public necessity for acquiring the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve is summarized as follows: 1. The scenic qualities of the property from off-site are outstanding and any development of structures and roads in the vicinityof the rid etoPs will seriously degrade these views. The property's prominent ridges near Skyline Boulevard and the dramatic north-south ridge located in the heart of the property are key landscape features in this region. The chaparral and tree-covered ridges are viewed as a continuous natural silhouette against the sky and more distant ridges. The alteration of this landscape, including potential grading and associated shapes and reflections of man-made structures will detract from the natural beauty of the property. A portion of the property is within San Mateo County's Skyline Scenic Corridor, designated as such to protect the scenic qualities of the area. The property is most often viewed from Skyline Boulevard when approaching the site in the southerly direction from State Highway 92. The ridges are visible from neighboring properties to the south, portions of State Highway 1 south of Half Moon Bay, Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park and Miramonte Ridge, owned by POST. A public trail system is envisioned on nearby Miramonte Ridge which will be impacted if development were to occur on highly visible ridges of the Convent property. In the future, public trail users may also have close-up views of the property if the preferred alignment of the Bay Area Ridge Trail is developed along the west side of Skyline Boulevard to the north of the property. Project planning for the Ridge Trail is conducted by the Bay Area Ridge Trail Council, a non-profit organization that works with private and public land owners to implement the 400 mile trail envisioned to encircle the Bay Area. The i R-98-36 Page 8 implementation for this section of Ridge Trail may be undertaken by other agencies or organizations. 2. On-site views are excellent from the center of property along the prominent north-south ridge opposite the site of the proposed site for the convent and chapel buildings. From here, one can capture nearly a 360 degree views of Bald Knob at Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve, ocean beaches near Half Moon Bay, mountain tops above Crystal Springs Reservoir and, on a clear day, skyscrapers in downtown San Francisco. One of the most impressive sights from this portion of the property is the unspoiled headwaters of Mills Creek which almost encircle the central ridge and then drop steeply and dramatically through the middle of Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park. This portion of the property will provide a unique opportunity for trail users to view distant points of interest and a pristine watershed. Any development of structures on the connecting ridge to the west nearer Skyline Boulevard will seriously detract from this unique opportunity. 3. Preservation of the property is needed to ensure the protection of the natural resources and wildlife habitat on the site. The property is home to many plant and animal species, including the summer steelhead trout which have recently been listed as a Federally Threatened Species. The property provides excellent habitat for the steelhead to spawn as it comprises the headwaters of Mills Creek and is undisturbed. The health and survival of the steelhead population is dependent on the preservation of the headwaters. It is especially important to preserve the natural volume and flow of the water into the creek and to minimize erosion and turbidity. Development of the property will involve grading, septic systems and increase in impervious areas that will negatively impact water flow and quality in Mill Creek. Preservation of the deer migration corridor is also vitally important. Currently deer populations move through this property when migrating between San Francisco Watershed lands to the east and Burleigh-Murray Ranch State Park and POST's Miramonte Ridge. The corridor is heavily used by deer because areas to the north and south have obstacles to deer migration; residential development borders Skyline Boulevard to the south and high volumes of traffic along State Highway 92 exist to the north. Due to the deer migration and mature coastal scrub, the property provides valuable habitat for the mountain lion. Development of the property will result in a decline in a variety of wildlife species including the mountain lion which is known to avoid developed areas. As experienced on other open space preserves, daytime hiking use will not have a significant impact on the mountain lion. 4. The existing roads and trails on the property offer public trail users unique vista points and picnic spots which are not available elsewhere in this geographic area. Access to the property, prior to the Convent's ownership was from adjacent private parcels and Skyline Boulevard. Acquisition of the property would reinstate public use that has R-98-36 Page 9 occurred in the past. Parking for this use will be along Skyline Boulevard and at the intersection of Skyline Boulevard and State Highway 92. The property is within the Bay Area Ridge Trail Corridor which is a federally recognized regional trail ringing the seven Bay Area counties. The most desirable location for the Bay Area Ridge Trail is in close proximity of the property near Skyline Boulevard. If the Bay Area Ridge Trail is developed in this location, existing roads and trails on the property will be an important adjunct to the Ridge Trail by offering a spur trail to the unique vista points and picnic spots. Development of structures on the prominent ridges, as proposed by the Convent, would preclude the existing main road from being used as a public trail and require trail construction on steep sideslopes which would impact the federally protected summer steelhead habitat. Development of structures and associated uses would also impact the tranquil setting and wilderness feeling the existing roads and trails presently offer trail users. USE AND MANAGEMENT P .AN Planning Considerations The property is in San Mateo County and subject to zoning and regulations contained in the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan. The Local Coastal Plan is currently being reviewed and updated. The amendments establish new limits on development including more stringent restrictions on ridgeline development. The majority of the property is zoned Resource Management/Coastal Zone District (RMICZ) while a 33.46-acre area of the site near Skyline Boulevard is zoned Resource Management (RM). The property has three density credits, one of which belongs solely to the 33.46-acre parcel zoned RM. Open space use of the property is compatible with the County's General Plan and zoning ordinances. Approximately one-third of the property is within the Skyline Scenic Corridor and the entire property is under a Williamson Act contract. Both designations are intended to preserve the open space qualities of the property. San Mateo County Trails Plan and the Bay Area Ridge Trail show the Ridge Trail Corridor in the vicinity of the property. Consultation with representatives of the Bay Area Ridge Trail indicate a desirable route would be located near Skyline Boulevard between State Highway 92 and Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. Although the property does not offer a highly desirable route for the Ridge Trail, it does offer an opportunity for a spur to the Ridge Trail which would enhance the trail experience by providing unique vista points and picnic spots. A connection to the Ridge Trail would use existing trails and could be provided on the main entry road or on the road that enters the property from the northeast corner. Preliminary Use and Management Plan Recommendations The Preliminary Use and Management Plan will take effect upon the District's taking possession of the property. The Plan will maintain the preserve in its natural condition, with i R-98-36 Page 10 low intensity public trail use on the existing trail system. Maintaining the property in a natural condition will have a beneficial effect on the site's vegetation and wildlife. In 1996, prior to the District's conducting an assessment of the property, the Convent contracted with Thomas Reid and Associates to conduct an environmental assessment, the results of which stated "the project site and adjoining area does not contain threatened, rare, endangered, or unique species". (See attached report.) Since this study was completed, summer steelhead trout have been found on-site and, in November 1997, were listed as a Federally Threatened Species. The Preliminary Use and Management Plan will preserve steelhead habitat by allowing steep roads to revegetate and stabilize and by limiting public trail access to existing trails. District's consultants have stated the two tributaries of Mills Creek are extremely inaccessible and no new trails are planned on-site. The District's consultants also observed the Townsends Western Big Eared Bat in flight over the property but could not confirm whether it resided on-site. The consultant stated that if the bat were to reside on-site, the farm shed and cabin could provide desirable habitat. The bat is a state species of special concern and the Preliminary Use and Management Plan proposes securing the small farm shed and cabin for the purpose of enhancing habitat for the bats if such exists. Maintaining the site in its natural condition will avoid any impact on the bat if it exists on site. The Preliminary Use and Management Plan proposes securing the property for six months before opening it to public trail use. Parking will not be provided on-site because public vehicle ingress and egress from Skyline Boulevard is not desirable and adequate existing parking facilities are available at the intersection of Skyline Boulevard and Highway 92 and along roadside pullouts on Skyline Boulevard. The District's experience with similar preserves has shown that the existing parking facilities near this property are sufficient and will not result in traffic problems given the anticipated trail use on the property. Public Access: Designate the property a Conservation Management Unit (CMU), allowing low intensity trail use on existing trails while primarily managing the property for conservation and viewshed; parking will not be provided but is available at the intersection of Skyline Boulevard and State Highway 92 and roadside pullouts along Skyline Boulevard; the property will be opened for public use in six months. Roads: Existing unsurfaced roads will be maintained in their current condition for hiking trail use and patrol purposes with the exception of steep roads that may be susceptible to erosion which will be closed and allowed to stabilize and revegetate naturally. Trail Use Designation: Existing roads that are not being restored to a natural condition will be designated for hiking use only. Signs: Install "Closed Area" signs at all entry points along perimeter boundary for six R-98-36 Page 11 months; install preserve and private property boundary signs prior to opening the property to the public. Structures: Secure farm shed and remains of cabin prior to opening property to the public; secure these structures in such a way as to enhance habitat for the Townsends Western Big Eared Bat, if such exists. Vegetation: Control the spread of non-native invasive plants in order to prevent a reduction in biodiversity as recommended in the Convent's Thomas Reid and Associates environmental assessment; only hand removal of invasive plants will be permitted. Site Safety Inspection: Site inspection has been conducted and there are no known hazards with the exception of the farm shed and cabin that are recommended to be secured. Name: Name the property Mills Creek Open Space Preserve. CEQA COMPLIANCE eject Description Refer to Project Description on Page 2 of this report. CEQA Determination The District concludes that this project is categorically exempt from CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) under Sections 15313, 15316, 15317, 15325 of the CEQA Guidelines. Maintaining the site in its natural condition will have a beneficial effect on the site's wildlife and vegetation. There is no reasonable possibility that establishment of this open space preserve will have a significant effect on the environment. To the contrary, the very purpose of this project is to maintain the natural condition and wildlife habitat of the site. Section 15313 exempts the acquisition of lands for fish and wildlife conservation purposes. The property is being acquired to preserve and protect fish and wildlife habitats, including habitats for the Federally Threatened summer steelhead trout, mountain lion and variety of other wildlife species. Summer steelhead trout have been found in Mills Creek within the property near the north boundary and mountain lion tracks have been found in numerous locations throughout the site. No development will occur on the property and public trail use will not be allowed near Mills Creek in order to ensure the protection of the summer steel head trout. The trout habitat is extremely inaccessible to any visitors because of impenetrable terrain. Section 15316 exempts the acquisition of land in order to create parks if the site is in a natural condition and the management plan proposes to keep the area in a natural condition. The use I _ R-98-36 Page 12 and management plan specifies the land will not be developed and will be maintained in a natural condition. New roads and trails are not proposed and existing steep roads that are eroding will be restored to their natural condition. Invasive plants will be controlled to prevent spreading further into the native habitat; only hand removal techniques will be used. Herbicides and pesticides will not be used for vegetation control on roads or in controlling invasive plants. Public access will be prohibited near creeks and summer steelhead trout habitat. Section 15317 exempts the acceptance of fee interests in order to maintain the open space character of an area. The District will accept fee interest in the property and the acquisition will be to maintain the open space character of the area and will preclude development. Section 15325 exempts transfers of ownership of interests in land in order to preserve open space. This acquisition will transfer ownership of the property to the District and ensure it will be preserved as public open space. The property will be dedicated as public open space. TERMS District's Offer to Purchase The District made a formal written offer to purchase the subject property for $982,800 on an all cash basis in January of 1998. This offer was rejected by the Convent's representatives. The District's offer is $282,800 more than the Convent's purchase price of$700,000 in June 1996. The District's purchase offer was based upon a fair market appraisal of the subject property by an MAI appraiser which was commissioned by the District. As part of the recommended action, staff is also seeking authorization to hire Associated Right of Way Services, Inc., as a site location specialist. This action is not required by law. The purpose of hiring this consultant is to help the Convent find a suitable, new location that meets their desired and specific criteria for a building location. The Contract for these site location services would be limited to $25,000. Because of the threatened development to this prominent ridgeline property, the District is left with no alternative other than to acquire the property through eminent domain action. As indicated in this report, the District has a long standing interest in acquiring this property, and was not given an opportunity to purchase the property on the open market. Since learning of the Convent's purchase and development proposal, District staff has negotiated in good faith with the Convent's representatives to reach a mutually agreeable settlement and/or acquire the property from the Convent at fair market value. Despite extensive negotiations between the Convent and District, the parties were unable to reach an agreement to the mutual satisfaction of the parties. Therefore, as a last resort, staff recommends that you adopt a resolution of public interest and necessity to acquire this property for public purposes. R-98-36 Page 13 Assuming that you approve the recommended action, the necessary documents will be filed with the court for acquisition of the property. However, staff will continue to negotiate in good faith in an effort to bring about a settlement satisfactory to both parties. Eminent Domain Policies The District's Policies Regarding Use of Eminent Domain, as adopted on April 23, 1986, are intended as advisory guidelines relating to the use of eminent domain. Section 10 of these policies reads as follows: 10. Decisions by the Board. These policies are intended solely for the guidance of the Board in the exercise of its discretion and are not intended to give rise to private rights or causes of action in individuals or other persons. The Board shall be the final arbiter as to any question of interpretation of these policies. As discussed in this report, the imminent threat of development to this property qualifies under Section 2. Unimproved proliy, not subdividable and/or Section 4. Unimproved. subdividable prg_ y of the Policy: "the property is clearly threatened by development or degradation of natural resources". The fee owner of the property, the Russian Convent Lady of Vladimir, Inc., a Corporation, also meets the "institutional or commercial ownership- including ... churches ... and corporations" definition as defined in Section 9(e) of your Policies. The subject property clearly meets the definition of "susceptible to further subdivision" as defined in Sections 9(d) of your policies. Current land use regulations of the County would permit subdivision. The property consists of approximately 273 acres with a San Mateo County density analysis determination of a total of three density credits, two within the Coastal Zone (RM-CZ) and one within Resource Management (RM). The proposed development requires additional density credits within the Coastal Zone requiring a possible purchase and transfer of density credits onto the property. In addition, the possibility of future development within the RM zoning of one auxiliary residence is contemplated for future development on the property. This property is also within the Master Plan planning area. Your Policies provide for the use of eminent domain subject to the general limitations of the opening policy statement: It is the desire of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to acquire open space from willing sellers. Eminent Domain may be used only within the planning areas designated in the District's Master Plan in those instances where all reasonable attempts at voluntary negotiations fail and the property in question is necessary to the open space program of the District; and where there are no feasible current or prospective alternate acquisitions that would achieve the District's objectives. R-98-36 Page 14 It remains the intention of staff to settle this matter on an amicable basis. However, the imminent threat of development to this property makes eminent domain the only alternative left open to the District. This property is one of the more critical parcels of land within the District boundaries to be considered for open space acquisition. Alternative attempts to reach a compromise and achieve the District's objectives have been exhaustive but unsuccessful. Prepared by: Del Woods, Senior Management Specialist Michael C. Williams, Real Property Representative Contact person: Malcolm Smith, Public Affairs Manager Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0 N „ 1 Mile C� POST Russian C nvenf -POST !Q J POSIT 50,0 1 r B.urleigh mrray'Ranch I` � . .. ......... State Prark� ,f 86t ndarly . =G' ` 0 0 0 , W. oR Purisima.Cre k L Redwoods ;s Open-Space Preserve EXHIBIT A: REGIONAL MAP peninsula RegMidional Open Space District .4 .5 6mmmmil .......... we 1 /2 Mile lei it / # *rf?A .... ........... ............... I r fl Y.S.% (P 01 0 ' . ............ ......o 0 ... ....... ........... ................. ------ -------- ------------------- .......... ... ... it 5 Scenic Ridges Roads and Trails Steelhead Habitat Mountain Lion Range Deer Migration EXHIBIT B: SITE MAP RESOLUTION NO. 98-13 MILLS CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE MILLS CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXFIvWr FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, after public notice, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula. Regional Open Space District held a properly noticed public hearing on March 18, 1998 in order to, among other things, determine whether the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors held such public hearing, allowed all interested persons an opportunity to appear and be heard on the matters before the Board, and considered the matters presented. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine, based on the entire record of the proceedings before the Board, that the MILLS CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE PROJECT is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act set out Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Sections 15313, 15316, 15317, and 15325. RESOLUTION NO. 98-14 MILLS CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE PROJECT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE, TO WIT, FOR PUBLIC PARK, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND ECOLOGICAL PRESERVE PURPOSES, FOR THE MILLS CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE PROJECT, DESCRIBING THE PROPERTY NECESSARY THEREFORE AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ITS LEGAL COUNSEL TO DO EVERYTHING NECESSARY TO ACQUIRE ALL INTERESTS THEREIN. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, after proper notice to the property owner pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District held a public hearing on March 18, 1998 in order to allow the persons whose property is to be acquired a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard on the matters set out in Section 1245.235; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has held such public hearing, considered the matters presented, and said owner had a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard upon all matters before the Board at the hearing during which the adoption of this resolution was considered; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is authorized to acquire property by eminent domain for public purposes, including acquisitions of property for park, recreation, open space, and ecological preserve purposes; pursuant to Division 5, Chapter 3, Sections 5539 to 5542 inclusive, of the Public Resources Code, State of California; and WHEREAS, the property, rights, and interests described in Exhibit "A" attached to this resolution and incorporated herein by reference (the "property") located at or near 12140 Skyline Boulevard in San Mateo County, California are necessary for public park, recreation, open space, and ecological preserve purposes, said purposes constituting a public purpose and use; and WHEREAS, in order to undertake the Project, it is necessary for the District to acquire fee title to the entirety of the property; WHEREAS, the Offer of Just Compensation required by Section 7267.2 of the Government Code has been made to the owners of record: Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir, Inc. by letter dated January 23, 1998. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the public interest and necessity require the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project and the acquisition of fee simple title to the property for public park, recreation, open space, and ecological preserve purposes for the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project is planned and located so as to be most compatible with the greatest public good and cause the least private injury; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the property described in Exhibit "A" is necessary for the proposed Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the offer required by Section 7267.2 of the Government Code has been made to the owner of the property; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the acquisition of the entirety of the property is necessary for the establishment of the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve Project and that the Project cannot be attained without such acquisition; that such acquisition of the entirety of the property is necessary to preserve the integrity of the park, recreational, open space, ecological and scenic values of the Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the acquisition of the entirety of the property is necessary and convenient to achieve its statutory purposes and that the exercise of the power of eminent domain is consistent with the District's policies regarding the use of eminent domain. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the General Manager be and is hereby authorized and directed to cause to be executed and/or prepared all appropriate legal documents, deposits of funds and related instruments for acquisition of title to the property by eminent domain; and 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the law firm of Turner and Mulcare or such other legal counsel as may be selected by the General Manager, be and the same is hereby retained, instructed and directed to do everything necessary to acquire all interests in the property described in Exhibit "A", and is further authorized to prepare, file, and prosecute such eminent domain proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction thereof as are necessary for such acquisition, including the obtaining of an order for immediate possession pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1255.410 et seq. to prevent the damaging, development, and/or destruction of the property. 3 EXHIBIT A A FEE INTEREST IN THE FOLLOWING REAL PROPERTY: All that real property situated in the State of California, County of San Mateo, and is described as follows: The South '/z of the Northwest '/4; the North '/2 of the Southwest '/4, Fractional South '/z of the Northeast '/4 and Fractional North '/2 of the Southeast '/4; all in Section 25, Township 5 South, Range 5 West, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian. EXCEPTING THEREFROM those portions more particularly described as follows: (a) Portion of the South half of the fractional Northeast quarter of Section 25, Township 5 South, Range 5 West, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at an existing 4" x 4" concrete monument marking an angle point in the Southwesterly right of way line of the State Highway designated as Division IV, County of San Mateo,Route 55 Section C, and commonly known as"Skyline Boulevard", as said Southwesterly line is established by Deed from Commercial Centre Realty Company, a corporation to the State of California, dated October 10, 1923 and recorded January 21, 1924 in Book 102 of Official Records at page 159 (File No. 15061-A), Records of San Mateo County, California, said monument being located South 58°26'West 157.56 feet from Engineer's Station 121 plus 30.11 of said highway; running thence from said point of beginning along said Southwesterly right of way line North 18°40'30" West 220.47 feet; thence leaving said Southwesterly line South 60°35' West 524.91 feet; thence South 23°42' 20" East 336.33 feet; thence North 60°35'East 556.05 feet to a point in said Southwesterly right of way line;thence along said right of way line,North 470 35' 30" West 124.26 feet to the point of beginning. (b) A strip of land having a width of 21 feet, more or less, and lying between the Northeasterly lines of the hereinabove described excepted Parcel (a), and the Westerly boundary of the Rancho Canada de Raymundo, and extending from the projection Northeasterly of the Southeasterly line of said Parcel (a)to the projection Northeasterly of the Northwesterly line of said Parcel (a) said strip of land being a portion of the lands described in Deed to the State of California from Commercial Centre Realty Company, a corporation, dated October 10, 1923 and recorded January 21, 1924 in Book 102 of Official Records at page 159 (File No. 15061-A), Records of San Mateo County, California. Said property is further shown as Parcel`B", although not surveyed, on that certain map entitled, "PARCEL MAP", filed May 2, 1977, in Book 36 of Parcel Maps, at Page 21. A. P. No.: 067-310-110 JPN 067 031 310 01 A 067 031 310 02 A 067 031 310 04 A 067 031 310 05 A Containing approximately 273 acres, more or less. EXHIR1T f Page/ of eFl. O H TRWRE01 —e 1-8U0-345-7334 i 2 3 4 5 SCALE IN 1110 OF AN INCH m Ol Im X b SK56 42 f0� 5 t' " 0— st+`5 t,t c W CODE AREA__ (/) ' Ln 67- 31 O U I I O BK 93 � BKS6 I 9 •. eoo' (n •✓' A• fee'°°'r `"J -- —- —— .— J. 'f9•IIM T i� t — — —__—_ _—_————_—— u YI W 0' 1 ,f ��{•t,'E I{{so' m PARCEL B L e°. �s,o•oee ,)°ra 0) CL q {••Oe'Y i I � n. wcc•n w cnc• Y 'q. ifc•ef'[ ce'n' m SS\ wcG•tYf f,U U) � fie Nfror[ •c ev � o I � L { r ~1 1 1 ) �t O ¢•r• 8 I oGo' tg�\ 'r - Nec••c'w ue e•• me L c (�� '• ;�� � (� PAR.t /z v PARCEL / F ,Yr "fit w�c e° 25 i J3 136 w G0• al,G'• a e ee `te25 30 PARCEL MAP VOL 57/66-6T 3O 36I3/ /� PARCEL MAP VOL 36/2/-22 _Dr_ L� _ - --- -- CABRILLO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT UTH SKYLINE AREA* MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT :L PAGE MILLC �` ` ROADNOTES FOR /� �� '-'L - i' �/ - ._. i I - j ✓\1 -moo+ UPPER STEVENS raF_F_K ay DUVENECK WINDMILL 1 COUNTY PARK 1 t • ��' i �a PA T RE AREA 7^ 1. BICYCLE RIDERS MUST r. WEAR HELMETS. s \ S / ` �BLACK M tw 2. UPHILL BICYCLE TRAFFIC f• J{` .` \ OUNTAIN \ ` .� a ,•© - �^ �. vim.., J _ ! 'Mq,,, h.BY PERMIT ONLY _ , •TRAIL MO BICYCLES) i ONLY ON CHARCOAL ROAD. 1 - fL• 3. NO BICYCLES ARE ALLOWED EQUESTRIAN PARKING - \. !l ON ALTERNATE TRAIL. ' .� J. SY PIE ONLY •t . C,• \C\ \,I'`- '��✓,�� •�7 STEVENS CREEK y ` NATURE TRAIL \••�1.�..,, INOIAN CREEK C BNa o ' �-,,• .r •;'/'��zb TRAIL =•S'r - --7 '` ! \. -'\ y_✓-�--eJ - � I�. � � •tnoam suso.,ur TO -` f�� $ � < 1�\ �,�� -� �• � .� J^-- 1ou9srwws-0 f-YafV� _Ca _! _ -^ Ey:-Q, • `� «• r "'— 7 MONTE BELLO \ �t�` t�OPEN SPACE PRESERVE �+� 1 jF SKYLINE RIDGE `� } OPEN SPACE PRESERVE ( � — i `1^ /r L,✓ ALONG MONTE Z h _ �•` BELLO ROAD GRIZZLY= :� FLAT. _. 2f, ! TRAIL .. ,�\`"�,.— > _) 1lf`j �• Z ra M;` fib ' \ /� / C ' - L �� ♦' DOGS _rp \r fLL -{�`� •� i-" PERMITTED HERE :.:. CJ of 75 ct> _Z_.• �� ,,-=� l f2'.- ,! ti CONSERVATION ���eti (�� \-•` �J, MANAGMENT UNIT ICMUI � X1 \\. '•/�. �/ .� �: +"� {y�� r _ �~ :.•-)7� _ 1'PARKING AREA '� `%�� `• ```~`�/ 2i1}f ;1 •�/ .� �, .� �`��'''• I.� `��? \.. :`��-� j `may,,:. 'N ~� ,� Limo,�wc rn �rfn-Z4 '• - I 'y ALTERNATE LEGEND 1 ; f�l�Jc� :e q{IKING ONLY) \ ....... HIKING ONLY ~� r UPPER STEVENS CREEK V BICYCLING,EQUESTRIAN ! µp+to o µ i< COUNTY PARK c �.R ,1/ �i�—�..1 f HIKING&RUNNING S �sE o. .n is. S, JIKOJI RETREAT' +- ^1 �1`l i t .r ) V ., y /� \ �a•`�_ ---- EQUESTRIAN& ✓ - ��t 3} \1 /�� Lq J I�I `� HIKING �•a• ]/ x NO PUBLIC ACCESS ROAD _ ©. _ � �,SCHOOL RD. � � I � UPHILL BICYCLE ' It •• !� ;�j i TRAFFIC ONL/))Y/j�� � a-- ��` i LONG RIDGE — r OPEN SPACE PRESERVE �� §ARATOGA GAP t\ �� � wARDRQAD l HICKORY OAK RIDGE f �C V •OPEN SPACE PRESERVE I J,� /. 'f --�� �f� ``.''i'��L � �v" - "! � � wtpppp� •� 1 � CONSERVATION 1i PORND ' .MANAGEMENT UNIT ICW, J!J CALTRANS ARE ALLOWED �' tiT:� !" tat 7Y y-��' PARKING LOT" 1 MI. ,:y SEMFERVIRENs �, P:A_R ?• - AUG 1993 FUND `�"� r _ HIGHWAY Duveneck Windmill Pasture Area, Monte Bello O.S.P., Long Ridge O.S.P., Saratoga Gap O.S.P., Skyline Ridge O.S.P., Portola State Park, Upper Stevens Creek County Park V. .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0 J C / , _>' \' /�.✓. f! 1 Mile \ r \/fw•�M _ 1,POST i / p 1:. Convent - i -....�, POST_ ., ; f ::�N•��� � ::<>. ...:. - �: per- r — _ Merlott (POST 50 /o)_ �. r i M1I ,B1urleigh Murray 1 ,� -� `State,.Park , �. "Boundary- ..� y _ ll r \ \ Pur•isi Creek ' 35 Redwoods. s - Ope Spac eserve / � l EXHIBIT A: REGIONAL MAP AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AND ASSOCIATED RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES, INC. THIS AGREEMENT, dated this day of , 199_, which shall be its effective date unless otherwise stated, is by and between ASSOCIATED RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES, INC., a California corporation ("Consultant") and the MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a public body of the State of California ("District"). i Consultant and the District agree as follows: (1) Scope and Schedule of Service. Consultant shall provide the services described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, in compliance with the Work Schedule set forth in Exhibit A. (2) Compensation. For work performed by Consultant in accordance with this Agreement, District shall compensate Consultant in accordance with the payment terms, conditions and rates set forth in Exhibit A. (3) Independent Contractor Status. It is expressly understood and agreed by both es that Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the District. P� � (4) Assignment and Subcontracting. It is recognized by the parties hereto that a substantial inducement to District for entering into this Agreement was, and is, the reputation and competence of Consultant. Neither this Agreement nor any interest therein may be assigned or subcontracted by Consultant without the prior written approval of District. (5) Itsuran . Before beginning the services called for by the Agreement, Consultant shall obtain and maintain for the duration of the Agreement the following insurance: (A) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit B. (B) Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, combined single limit applied separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names District as an Additional Insured, which is primary to any policy which the District may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the District in the same manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage"). i (C) Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is excluded or is included in the Commercial General Liability policy. HAACQUISTNIAROWSI.AGR Agreement for Professionai services Page 2 (6) Proof of Insurance Coverage. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of required insurance coverage prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance to District, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the District. In order to demonstrate the District's coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross- liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the District demonstrating same. (7) Indemnification - Consultant's Re. nsib' ity. It is understood and agreed that Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold District, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all liability, claims, suits, actions, damages, and causes of action arising out of any personal injury, bodily injury, loss of life, or damage to property, or any violation of any federal, state, or municipal law or ordinance, or other cause in connection with the negligent or intentional acts or omissions of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors, or agents, or on account of the performance or character of this work, except for any such claim arising out of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the District, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. It is understood that the duty of Consultant to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code. Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve Consultant from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for damages. (8) Termination. This Agreement may be canceled at any time by District for its convenience upon written notification to Consultant. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall be entitled to pro-rated compensation for authorized services performed prior to the effective date of termination; provided, however, that the District may condition payment of such compensation upon Consultant's delivery to the District of any or all materials described in Section 9 herein. (9) Ownership of Materials. All documents, materials and records of a finished nature, including but not limited to final plans, specifications, video or audio tapes, photographs, computer data, software, reports, and maps, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be delivered to and become the property of District._ All documents and materials of a preliminary nature, including but not limited to survey notes, sketches, preliminary plans, computations and other data, and any other material referenced in this Section 9, prepared or obtained in the performance of this Agreement, shall be made available, upon request, to District at no additional charge and without restriction or limitation on their use. Upon District's request, Consultant shall execute appropriate documents to assign to the District the copyright or trademark to work created pursuant to this Agreement. C:\ACQUISTN\AROWSI.AGR Agreement for Professions services Page 3 (10) Compliance with Laws. In the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall abide by and conform to all applicable federal, state and local laws, and all ordinances, regulations and policies of the District. Consultant warrants that all work done under this Agreement will be in compliance with all applicable safety rules, laws, statutes and practices, including but not limited to Cal/OSHA regulations. If a license or registration of any kind is required of Consultant, its employees, agents, or subcontractors by law, Consultant warrants that such license has been obtained, is valid and in good standing, shall be kept in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, and that any applicable bond shall be posted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. (11) Time Extensions. Consultant agrees to diligently prosecute the services to be provided under this Agreement to completion and in accordance with any schedules specified herein. In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence. Time extensions for delays beyond the Consultant's control, other than delays caused by the District, shall be requested in writing to the District's Contract Administrator prior to expiration of the specified completion date. (12) Whole Agreement and Amendments. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties. This Agreement integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto and supersedes all negotiations or any previous written or oral Agreements between the parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may be amended only by a written document executed by both Consultant and District's General Manager. (13) Controlling Taw. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Consultant has executed this Agreement, and the District, by its General Manager, who is authorized to do so, has executed this Agreement. MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN ASSOCIATED RIGHT OF WAY SPACE DISTRICT SERVICES, INC. By: By: L. Craig Britton, General Manager Wm. S. Tannenbaum, President Date: Date: Attachments: Exhibit A Scope of Services, Compensation and Billing Exhibit B Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Insurance Provisions M NACQUISTMAROW SI.AGR QcJ-"CIATED RIGHT OF WAY SERVICES, INC. December 18, 1997 Mr. Craig Britton General Manager Midpenninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 Re: Real Property/Site Location Services Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir Dear Craig: It was a pleasure meeting with you to discuss this assignment Associated Right of Way Services, Inc. (AR/WS) would provide the following services at the direction of you and/or your designee: * Meet with District to establish overall parameters for site location of convent. * Meet and confer with representatives of convent to detail conditions for a new site. 0 Investigate the market in San Mateo and Marin Counties for possible site locations in accordance with preestablished parameters. Investigation would include but would not be limited to field reviews, research of available market listings and/or other market data information; interviews with knowledgeable real estate' professionals and analysis of other available and relevant information. 0 Ongoing meetings and contacts as necessary and/or requested by District to refine the site study. * Deliverable would be a summary report with spreadsheet(if applicable)detailing the site investigation methodology, sites researched, sites considered substantive issues investigated as well as any recommendations. As you know, the availability of sites acceptable to the convent may be limited. However, we understand that part of our task is to perform a certain level of due diligence in ascertaining the inventory of available properties for the convent. Our services would be invoiced on a time charged basis in accordance with our current fee schedule which is attached. I anticipate that approximately 70 to 80 percent of services would be billed at a rate of$85.00/hour with approximately 10 percent being invoiced at support staff rates of$38.00/hour and the balance at over-all coordination (principal involvement) rates of S I 15.00/hour. While the level of effort is difficult to estimate, we would expect that a budget range of S20,000 to$25,000 would be adequate for reasonable completion of services. If this outline is acceptable,please let us know if you would like us to furnish you with one of our standard contracts or whether you would prefer us to work with a District consultant contract. Thank you again for your request for services and we look forward to working with you on this project. Sinc I mc Win. S. annenbaum President cc: Dick Ehrhardt-ARMS Denise Lucas-APJWS page of uws\brjttojLdoc-tab 3496 Buskirk Avenue,Suite 105-Pleasant Hill,CA 94523-(510)947-5626-Fax 947-2095 i .k r 't:`r.�f:Y:,}.:i:::i ;' .•.}:!':•'ii;Y'+" :v`Dt. r{?:v-. :tl.?"F.'.Y..:{• Fee Schedule lFftctive January 1, 1998 through December 31, 1998) • Consultation / Coordination Services $ 115/Hour • Acquisition Services $ 75 — 95/Hour * • Appraisal Services - Relocation Plans Fee Basis (Extra appraisal consulting at$I301Hour) Gump sum) • Relocation Services $ 72 -- 92/Hour * • Right of Way Technician - Project Tracking $ 55/Hour • Administrative Support / Secretarial Services $ 38/Hour 0 Other services as bid or at cost plus 15% * Maximum rate charged Rates are adjusted each calendar year. Adjustment not less than +5% All above rates and fees include direct and indirect costs as well as profit. Page of Exhibit B to Agreement between Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and [Name of Consultant] NMPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT INSURANCE PROVISIONS Tnsurance. Before beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall carry, maintain for the duration of the Agreement,, and provide proof thereof that is acceptable to the District the insurance specified in Exhibit B, "District Insurance Provisions", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. (1) Workers' Compensation. Statutory Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance for any and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Consultant shall be provided as required by the California Labor Code. (2) Commercial General and Automobile Liability. Consultant, at Consultant's own cost and expense, shall maintain Commercial General and Business Automobile Liability insurance for the period covered by this Agreement in an amount not less than the amount set forth in Exhibit A, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work contemplated by this Agreement. If a Commercial General Liability Insurance or an Automobile Liability form or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to-be performed under this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit. Such coverage shall include but shall not be limited to, protection against claims arising from bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and damage to property resulting from activities contemplated under this Agreement, including the use of hired, owned and non-owned automobiles. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest edition of the Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form CG 0001 and Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (ed. 12/90) Code 1 (any auto). No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage. (a) A policy endorsement must be delivered to District demonstrating that District, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects each of the following: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Consultant, including the insured's general supervision of Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to District, its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers. 1 (b) The insurance shall cover on an occurrence or an accident basis, and not on a claims made basis. (c) An endorsement must state that coverage is primary insurance and that no other insurance affected by the District will be called upon to contribute to a loss under the coverage. (d) Any failure of Consultant to comply with reporting provisions of the policy shall not affect coverage provided to District and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers, (e) Insurance is to be placed with California-admitted insurers. (f) Notice of cancellation or non-renewal must be received by District at least thirty days prior to such change. (3) Professional Liability. Where Consultant is a licensed professional, Consultant, at Consultant's own cost and expense, shall maintain for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount set forth in Exhibit A covering the licensed professionals' errors and omissions, as follows: (a) Notice that any cancellation, material change, or non-renewal of insurance must be received by the District at least thirty days prior to such change shall be included in the coverage or added as an endorsement to the policy. (b) The poli cy must cont ain a cross liability or severability of interest clause. (c) The following provisions shall apply if the professional liability coverages are written on a claims made form: . 1. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the date of the Agreement. 2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five years after completion of the Agreement or the work. 3. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another claims made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of this Agreement, Consultant must provide extended reporting coverage for a minimum of five years after completion of the Agreement or the work. The District shall have the right to exercise at the Consultant's cost, any extended reporting provisions of the policy should the Consultant cancel or not renew the coverage. 4. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the District prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement. 2 (4) Deductibles and Self- ns ured Retentions. Consultant shall disclose the self- insured retentions and deductibles before beginning any of the services or work called for by any term of this Agreement. Any self-insured retention or deductible is subject to approval of District. During the period covered by this Agreement, upon express written authorization of District Legal Counsel, Consultant may increase such deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to District, its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers. The District Legal Counsel may condition approval of an increase in deductible or self-insured retention levels upon a requirement that Consultant procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses that is satisfactory in all respects to each of them. (5) Notice of Reduction in Coverage. In the event that any coverage required under the Agreement is reduced, limited, or materially affected in any other manner, Consultant shall provide written notice to District at Consultant's earliest possible opportunity and in no case later than five days after Consultant is notified of the change in coverage. (6) In addition to any other remedies District may have if Consultant fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, District may, at its sole option: (a) Obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under the Agreement; (b) Order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment which becomes due to Consultant hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment, until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; (c) Terminate this Agreement. Exercise of any of the above remedies, however, is an alternative to other remedies District may have and is not the exclusive remedy for Consultant's failure to maintain insurance or secure appropriate endorsements. 3 MEMORANDUM Date: July 9, 1997 From: Del Woods To: Craig Re: Ridge Trail Field Trip - South of Highway 92 The following is a summary of findings from the July 3 field trip with Mary, Jean Rusmore and one other member of the Ridge Trail Council. The objective of the trip was to determine a "preferred alignment" of the Ridge Trail between Highway 92 and Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve based on geographical and traffic constraints. Property ownership was not taken into consideration. Reach 1 - Highway 92 to Roman Catholic Church Property The east side of the Skyline Boulevard has several steep embankments and ravines. The Cal Trans road frontage may be a possibility but it too has steep embankments. If the right of way were proposed, Cal Trans would probably be concerned over the trail's close proximity to traffic. A Cal Trans survey map would be necessary to determine if the trail could be set far enough away from traffic to make it feasible. The preferred alternative would be on the west side of Skyline Boulevard where the terrain is nearly level and there is a wide corridor in which to place the trail. Views of the bay and SF available along the trail corridor which is an important criteria for alignment. The trail could be located far away from the highway and still be on gentle slopes. Reach 2 - North Boundary of Roman Catholic Church Property to Preserve Finding a crossing point on the Skyline Boulevard is very difficult but necessary because residential development and steep slopes north of the Church property pose serious problems. The east side of Skyline Boulevard between the Church property and Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve is nearly level in most places and a desirable location for the trail. The feasible location for crossing to the east side of the highway is slightly north of the Church property where the highway is straight and grade is acceptable. A crossing on the south side of the Bell property would be extremely difficult because of unacceptable line of sight and grade. The trail alignment between the proposed crossing and preserve is densely wooded and it would be relatively easy to separate the trail from the highway. In some cases this could even be done within the right of way if Cal Trans were receptive to the trail. The second crossing would be desirable opposite the Kings Mountain Store where there is ample line of sight and the highway is level. The store will be a popular destination. 5560DOmE c ) s.% «.%..sco ;It W $59 ' 560 _ .hill Rid - c BM F L JI 11Z 661 ulch • z ^ Ado _ Adoe• i ..`. ¢ a>. KBM 871 �'✓ a l II Pt --v _ _ 13, ors t r s tc. 9 J o` i, f ` W 6 1 Ln i>6 ✓ N F R A N C I \1 •� l - - - ,O _ � ...f<//,�, - V- /�,y-_.. �..•, -/;'. K-n a0 a. a$� - Water L \ 12 T A' T /E I S tea,a 3 �JjL -- VS+� ALR E F VLLA / ^� � 1600 -_ -- �� - - OF \ \` P sese :opko f o r f — �- — PE E D Law Offices MAR n 2 1998 of COLLEEN DOHERTY MIDPENIRJSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 70 Ellsworth Street Teh(415)648-M5 San Francisco,CA 94110 Fax(415)282-6654 February 27, 1998 Via facsimile and mail President Betsy Crowder Board of Directors NEdpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 Re: Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir Property Dear President Crowder and members of the Board: The Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir has received with great disappointment and sorrow the news that MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District has rejected the Russian Convent's offer for a conveyance of a majority of its property to MROSD. Because the Convent's proposal included an offer to put more than 901/o of the property in permanent open space,with approximately 60%of the property, including all significant view areas to be conveyed to MROSD for public access and trails, and only approximately three%of the land to be affected by the monastery, it is difficult to understand the.District's decision to initiate condemnation proceedings for this property. The Convent is willing,therefore,to make this final effort to be certain the Board fully understands the extent of the Convent's offer. Please consider this a letter of intent to reach an agreement on the following terms, all previously presented to the District: 1. The Convent will convey to MROSD in fee approximately 165 acres(roughly 60%of the parcel), comprising the North and West portions of the property,as indicated on the plan previously presented to staff. This would include all of the viewpoints indicated by staff to be of interest to the District, including the bluffs facing the ocean and north to San Francisco;the 1539' highest ridge, located west of the building site,would be divided between the two parcels, and MROSD would own all of the northern and western portions of this area. 2. Approximately 90%of the total existing 280-acre parcel will be held in permanent open space through appropriate restrictions. The 40%of the property that is not conveyed to the District will be a monastic reserve,with the majority of the reserve also permanently dedicated to open space. The proposed monastery buildings,paths,parking areas and entry roads will affect only about three%of the entire 280-acre parcel. MROSD February 27, 1998 Page Two 3. In order to reduce potential visibility of the monastery from locations off-site,the Convent will move the monastic buildings(the Chapel and the Convent)to the south of the project application location, as close to the existing grove of trees as possible without disturbing the trees. In addition, the Convent will lower the grade of the buildings approximately five feet. The Convent has previously reduced the number of buildings for which they obtained preliminary design approval from the County from four to three. Moreover,the U-shaped footprint of the convent building has been reduced by approximately one-third from the original plan. Further, the buildings are located in the area of existing development along Skyline Boulevard, on a saddle against the backdrop of an existing large grove of pines, firs and eucalyptus trees. There is no open ridgetop exposure. The north and west sides of the convent and chapel will be heavily screened, consistent with the revised landscape plan presented to the District. As you know,we have retained a landscaping consultant,who has successfully planted screening in similar coastal conditions,to develop and maintain screening for these areas. The Convent is not willing to cut down substantial numbers of trees in the existing grove in order to move the buildings further to the south, as was suggested by the District,nor does the Convent feel it is appropriate to move all buildings into the Scenic Corridor,where the visibility from Skyline Boulevard and from neighboring properties would be greatly increased. Further,following this suggestion would result in very significant grading and disturbance of much more of the existing vegetation. The Convent is committed to building its monastery with as little disturbance to the land as possible. 4. Future development, if any,beyond the current proposed project(in whatever final form this is approved)shall be limited to one auxiliary residence,to be located in the area of existing development along Skyline Boulevard in the RM portion of the parcel. No subdivision on andportion of the 280-acre parcel shall occur,other than the proposed conveyance to MROSD. 5. A few neighbors raised concerns about their ability to ride horses in this area. The Convent, therefore, wishes to offer neighbors access to develop and maintain a horse trail along Skyline Boulevard, on both monastic reserve property and on what will become MROSD property,to provide riders with access into existing or newly developed trails on the north and west sides of the property. 6. Should it become necessary,the Convent is willing to consider the possibility of development of the Bay Area Ridge Trail on Convent property if no other location is feasible. MROSD February 27, 1998 Page Three This offer is conditioned upon the following: 1. The cooperation of MROSD in ensuring the privacy and security of the monastics on the Convent portion of the property(the monastic reserve). This would include providing and maintaining fencing along some areas of the property adjacent to the Convent property, screening any trails which provide views of the monastic buildings or trails, and keeping all trails at least 50 feet from the borders of the monastic property, except where agreed upon by the Convent. For example, the District would own the northern and western portions of the highest ridge at 1539'. A trail would necessarily come closer than 50 feet to Convent property in this area,and the District would screen this area by planting additional vegetation in addition to providing the fences. The District would agree that there would be no condemnation of the monastic reserve portion of the property in the future. 2. Receipt of all necessary final approvals from the County and other public agencies,to the satisfaction of the Convent, and satisfactory final resolution of all litigation or expiration of relevant appeal periods. 3. Active support by MROSD for the Convent's project. 4. In at least one area near the 1539' ridge top, a locked gate would be built into the fence to provide access to MROSD trails from the Convent property. 5. In order to ensure as much quietude as possible, no motorized vehicles would be permitted on MROSD trails(except maintenance and emergency vehicles). Parking, if desired, would be restricted to the northeast corner of the property adjacent to Skyline, with a maximum of 10 cars permitted. 6. The Convent and the District would cooperate in assuring such conveyance was done in compliance with local and state ordinances, and in a manner which would permit the maximum density credit allowance for the Convent,thus lessening the necessity for transfer of density credits. Costs of subdivision of the MROSD parcel, if any, will be borne by the District. 7. The Convent and the District would cooperate in ensuring that proposed restrictions for open space use on both the Convent and MROSD parcels will be permanent restrictions. In consideration for the above terms,the District would pay the Convent the sum of $300,000.00. i MROSD February 27, 1998 Page Four The District expressed concern with this project in the areas of visibility from on-site and off-site trails, the potential for future subdivision or additional development, and protection of existing habitat areas. As you can see from the above proposal,the Convent has made an extraordinary effort to be sensitive to these concerns and to propose a plan that will truly protect this unique property. The Convent's proposal is designed to meet the needs of a contemplative order and includes a chapel, a convent for up to 20 monastics and a limited use retreat center, including a priest and caretaker residence. The monastery facilities will occupy less than three per cent of the total site. The monastic tradition in the Russian Orthodox Church has a long history, and is integral to their beliefs and practice. The Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir is a contemplative order,which means the monastics spend most of their days in prayer and contemplation, and in work with the hands—gardening, sewing, restoring icons and the like. Central to the monastic tradition is a deep respect for all of creation, and the belief,which is put into practice in a manner most of us are not able to achieve,that all of creation is equally important: man has no right to waste or disturb any resources. Russian Orthodox monastics were truly environmentalists before the word was coined. The Convent has been informed th at at the concern remaining for the District is tha t there is a potential that the chapel(primarily the dome of the chapel)and possibly a portion of the convent building may be visible from an area more than half a mile off site despite substantial screening. When this project is looked at as a whole,these fears seem irrational. In a short period of time these buildings will be screened from view;they are not to be located on an open ridgetop, but against an existing grove of trees in a saddle lower than other ridgetops,and will be less visible than some of the nearby existing residences. The District has publicly stated that it has very restrictive policies on the use of eminent domain "so that it is reserved only as a last resort or emergency procedure,in the case, for instance, of severe environmental damage or impending development and permanent loss of the open space." How can that policy be applied here in light of the Convent's generous offer? All of the highest ridges on the property are being offered to the District for public access,the building footprint has been greatly reduced, the height of the buildings has been lowered with massive screening proposed, and approximately 90%of the property is guaranteed to remain in permanent open space. All of the advantages of this property for the public are being offered to the District in this proposal. It seems incomprehensible that the District would be willing to spend taxpayer's money in this manner. Our own estimates of the fair market value of this property are greatly in excess of what the District is offering,yet the Convent is willing to convey to the District approximately 60%of the land,and put approximately 90%of the total parcel in permanent open space for less than one-third of what the District's own appraiser has valued the land. MROSD February 27, 1998 Page Five The District is poised to take private property from a monastic order that fled to this country to escape religious persecution, having had property confiscated on three occasions by totalitarian governments(once by the Soviet Union and twice by China). They deliberately chose to live in the United States because of our nation's long established principles of religious freedom, and have worked and lived for more than 50 years in San Francisco,with the plan to reestablish the monastery in a rural area more conducive to their lives of prayer and contemplation. It is of course the ultimate irony that once again they are faced with losing their property to a governmental action in the United States, particularly to one so arbitrary and unnecessary. In light of the above offer, the Convent requests that the Board reconsider its decision to initiate eminent domain proceedings on this property. The Convent has demonstrated its willingness to cooperate with the District,with other environmental groups and with the County planning process. This is a project fully permitted under San Mateo County's guidelines and planning codes. For the District to effectively circumvent this process in an instance where minimal harm will occur to the land and where no emergency exists is certain to raise serious questions in the public arena, and may even be unlawful. This is intended as a letter of intent,and not intended as a detailed offer. Please let us know whether you are willing to proceed on the terms outlined herein within ten days of the date of this letter. Thank you. Very truly yours, Colleen Doherty Encl. cc Board of Supervisors Planning Commission Paul M. Koenig,Director of Environmental Services Terry Burnes,Planning Administrator Lee Rosenthal, Goldfarb and Lipman THOMAS REI D ASSOCIATES 560 WAVERLEY ST., SUITE 201 (BOX 880), PALO ALTO, CA 94301 Tel: 415-327-0429 Fax: 415-327-4024 tra@igc.org Ms. Diane Regonini February 18, 1997 Planning and Building Division TRA File: ELVS San Mateo County 590 Hamilton Street, 2" Floor Redwood City, CA 94063 Re: Russian Convent Project and San Francisco Garter Snake Dear Ms. Regonini: Thomas Reid Associates conducted a biological survey of the proposed Russian Convent project site on Skyline Boulevard in San Mateo County. You sent, for our response, a comment letter from Robert Agramonte, DVM indicating that San Francisco garter snake (Tha`nnophis sirtalis tetrataenia), an endangered species, has been identified on property south of the project site. The identification of these snakes has not been confirmed by an expert biologist familiar with this species. The San Francisco garter snake normally inhabits dense wetland vegetation adjacent to bodies of water. According to information provided by the California Department of Fish and Game, the San Francisco garter snake occurs only in the vicinity of ponds and reservoirs. This type of habitat does not occur in the development area proposed on the Russian Convent site. The California red-sided or coastal garter snake can easily be misidentified as San Francisco garter snake because both have red body markings and red on the head. The San Francisco garter snake has a greenish or bluish belly. Experience, and possibly handling, is necessary to make a definite identification. Handling of a federally-listed endangered species requires a permit from the federal government. I have estimated the on-site habitat value for San Francisco garter snake using a habitat evaluation system for potential feeding habitats for the San Francisco garter snake in San Mateo County developed by Dr. Samuel McGinnis. Dr. McGinnis is a recognized expert on this species. The habitat is evaluated for availability of impounded fresh water, vegetative cover, available food, and presence of competitive garter snake species (see attached table). A score of 12 in the habitat evaluation system denotes a prime feeding site. Habitat quality decreases as the score approaches 6. In habitats with scores below 6 the San Francisco garter snake does not normally persist on a permanent basis. Here is how I scored the project site: 1) Impounded Fresh Water(marsh, farm pond, vernal pool): "D. Only shallow winter-spring i Conservation Planning and Implementation ❑ Environmental Impact Analysis Geographic Information Systems ❑ Wetland Delineation ❑ Biological Surveys Ms. Diane Regonini—February 18, 1997 2 surface water(wet meadow situation) —0 pt." We found a seep area outside of the project development zone to the west of the proposed convent site. No marsh, pond or vernal pool was found. 2) Vegetative Cover: "D. Essentially no reed-shrub cover present in or around the edge of an aquatic site—0 pt." The seep area is densely vegetated in coastal scrub; a"reed-shrub" association was not found. 3) Available Food: "B. Pacific tree frogs and larva only—2 pts." Red-legged frog and small fishes, the other prey items, require ponds, which do not occur on the site. 4) Competitive Garter Snake Species: "Coast garter snake present—3 pts." This common garter snake, which does inhabit wet meadows as well as other aquatic habitats, is assumed to be present. The Santa Cruz garter snake occurs closer to Santa Cruz County and is not expected in this location. The total score for the habitat evaluation for San Francisco garter snake on the project site in the vicinity of the proposed development is 5 points (0+0+2+3). This score is below the minimum considered necessary for San Francisco garter snake to persist according to the McGinnis system. Please do not hesitate to telephone if there are any questions. Sincerely Taylor Peterson Seni r Associate cc: Stephen Balopulos THOMAS REID ASSOCIATES Ms. Diane Regonini —February 18, 1997 3 HABITAT EVALUATION SYSTEM POTENTIAL FEEDING HABITATS SAN FRANCISCO GARTER SNAKE SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DEVELOPED BY DR. SAMUEL MCGINNIS This habitat evaluation system is based on a 12-point scale to which each of the 4 major variables contributes a maximum of 3 points. A perfect score of 12 denotes an ideal SFGS habitat. As the score diminishes towards 6, one or more prime features become less than optimal for this snake. In habitats which score a 7 or 6, the prime features are usually diminished to such an extent that if the SFGS is present, it exists in highly reduced numbers. In habitats with scores below 6 the SFGS does not normally persist on a permanent basis. 1. Impounded Fresh Water: (marsh, farm pond, vernal pool) A. Present all year; large shallow inshore zone ........ 3 points B. Present all year but shallow inshore zone dries to barren shoreline by late summer....2 points C. Shallow productive pool in winter and spring; dries completely by late summer ... 1 point D. Only shallow winter-spring surface water(wet meadow situation); brackish water site ...... 0 points 2. Vegetative Cover: A. Dense reed-shrub cover throughout marsh or in a wide band around entire pond edge ... 3 points B. Dense reed-shrub cover patchy in marsh or in narrow band around entire pond edge ... 2 points C. Dense reed-shrub cover in small clumps along one half or less of a pond shore ... I point D. Essentially no reed-shrub cover present ... 0 points 3. Available Food: A. Pacific tree frog and red-legged frog adults and larva; small fishes ... 3 points B. Pacific tree frogs and larva only .... 2 points I L C. Red-legged frogs and larva only ... I point D. Small fishes only ... 0 points 4. Competitive Garter Snake Species: A. No other garter snake species present ... 3 points B. Coast garter snake present ... 2 points C. Santa Cruz garter snake present ... I point D. Both Santa Cruz and Coast garter snake present .... 0 points THOMAS REID ASSOCIATES SAN MATEO COUNTY 1IOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM FOR COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM POLICY 7.5 a RUSSIAN CONVENT OF OUR LADY OF VLADIMIR f= 1. Project location (include USGS Township, Range and Section) The project is located on the west side of Skyline Boulevard about 2.5 miles south of the intersection of Highway 92 and Skyline Boulevard. It is on the USGS Woodside quadrangle in section 25, Township 5 S, Range 5 W. It is adjacent to a residence at 12130 Skyline Boulevard. 2. Assessor's Parcel Number and any applicable Planning Permit numbers APN 067-310-011 3. Owner/Applicant: The applicant is the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco, represented by Steven J. Balopulos, Consultant Steven J. Balopulos 516 Sunnymount Avenue Sunnyvale, CA 94087 (408) 245-3336 4. Principal Investigators (attach a qualification summary to the report). The investigation was completed by biologists Taylor Peterson and Patrick Kobernus from Thomas Reid Associates. Qualification summaries are attached. 5. Report summary (briefly state the results of the report, habitat type, rare, endangered, or unique species present, anticipated impacts, and proposed mitigation measures.) The project is located west of Skyline Boulevard on a property that contains forest, coastal scrub, grassland, and cleared areas. The project would remove a small amount of grassland and coastal scrub habitat. No heritage trees, rare, endangered, or P unique species would be affected by the project. Mitigation is proposed to minimize the q loss of native habitat, prevent erosion, and require the use of native plant species in landscaping. 6. Project and property description (describe the proposed project and property, including the size, topographic characteristics,water resources,soil types, and land uses on the property and in the vicinity up to a radius of one-quarter mile. Include a map of the area from the USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle series.) The project is proposed to be located on ten acres of a 200 acre site. The ten acres are on the highest portion of the site which is closest to Skyline Boulevard. The property is currently undeveloped. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates I I BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 2 The project is a i.-., cloistered convent, chapel, caretak,-,, house, retreat center, garage and parking lot for the Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir. The total building area is 18,035 square feet. The project area is shown on a USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle (Figure 1) and a conceptual site plan (Figure 2), attached. The project is located adjacent to a single family residence. Surrounding land uses are private open space and residential. The lands of the San Francisco Water District Crystal Springs watershed are across Skyline Boulevard from the project. The watershed is also a wildlife preserve. The topography of the project property is hilly. The project is sited in flat areas on the main ridge of the property. The terrain on the remainder of the property is moderately steep to very steep. There are no creeks, streams, or seeps in the project area. The project would be served by a well and a septic system. The SCS Soil Survey for San Mateo characterizes the project area as containing soils of the Gazos loam series that are moderately steep and eroded. These soils occur on slopes of eleven to twenty one percent. The property also contains Gazos and Lobitos stony loams, steep, eroded on 45 percent slopes or steeper; rough broken land on slopes exceeding 41 percent; and Santa Lucia stony loam, very steep, eroded on 45 percent slopes or greater. The soils in the area of the project have good drainage, with medium runoff and moderate erosion hazard. A soils report for the project area was completed by Charles H. Hartsog (4/29/96). - That investigation found the top soils at the site to include a thin horizon of Black Silty CLAY overlaying Franciscan Formation bedrock of stiff Sandy CLAYS. The climate is characterized by dry, mild summers and moist, cool winters. About 80 percent of the total annual precipitation occurs between November and March. The summit where the project is proposed frequently experiences fog. Average rainfall is between 30 and 35 inches per year. 7. Methodology (briefly describe the survey methods used in preparing the report and show on an appropriately scaled map the location of sample points, transects, and any additional areas surveyed in the vicinity of the project.) The proposed site of the buildings for this project was surveyed on foot on August 19, 1996 to determine the habitat types, plant species and animal species present. The area surrounding the project was surveyed partially on foot to determine dominant plant species of the general habitat types. The California Natural Diversity Database and the San Mateo County Local Coastal Program were consulted for plant and animal species of concern known to occur in the vicinity. Areas within one-quarter mile of the site were surveyed by eye from a suitable vantage point, and by reviewing the USGS quadrangle map. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 3 8. Results (at length, w_scribe the botanical and zoological rt;-,,,4rces of the project site. To the extent possible, describe the food chain of the habitat and how the proposed project will impact those resources. Use both common and scientific names and please indicate references used.) Plant and animal species found or expected at the site are listed in Tables 1 and 2. Both common and scientific names are shown in the tables. The area proposed to be developed for the project contains forest, grassland, cleared areas, and coastal scrub (see Figure 2). The forest is dominated by Monterey cypress, acacia, and blue gum eucalyptus and contains occasional Monterey pine, redwood, and Douglas fir trees. The grassland areas are dominated by european annual grasses and fortis, including oatgrass, English plantain, black mustard, and bristly ox tongue. The coastal scrub contains a diverse assemblage of plants dominated by coyote brush, poison oak, lizard tail, cream bush, bracken fern, and sticky monkey flower. The coastal scrub is native to the site. The acacia and eucalyptus are non-native species that were planted or have invaded the site. The cypress, pine, redwood, and Douglas fir are native species. Understory vegetation in the forested areas includes a mixture of native and non-native species such as ivy,forget-me-not, bull thistle, blue witch, red elderberry, coast gooseberry, twinberry, and hairy honeysuckle. The forest provides habitat for raptors to perch and nest. Habitat within one-quarter mile of the site is dominated by coastal scrub with occasional patches of grassland and occasional stands of trees. The diversity of habitats on the project site in turn supports a diversity of wildlife. During the site visit we observed band-tailed pigeon, stellar's jay, scrub jay, dark-eyed junco, California quail, Anna's hummingbird, song sparrow, mourning dove, red-tailed hawk, and raven. We also found sign of bobcat, brush rabbit, dusky-footed woodrat, gray fox, meadow mouse, and pocket gopher. The site is expected to be used by a wide range of animal species because of its undeveloped condition and its connection with wild lands around the site. All of the existing fire trails on the site provide wildlife corridors connecting the different habitat types. Development of the project would not significantly affect the food chain on the site. The roads and buildings proposed for the site would be built in grassland, cleared areas, and coastal scrub. Existing fire trails would be used for access, and wildlife corridors would not be interrupted. The project area is on ten acres of a 200 acre site, and it is confined to the part of the site adjacent to Skyline Boulevard and existing residential development. It would remove a small patch of grassland that is used by raptors for hunting, however, there are other grassland areas in the immediate vicinity available for raptor use. 9. List all direct and indirect impacts of the proposed project on the habitat. Include within the discussion an evaluation of the perceived cumulative biological impacts associated with the project. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 4 Development of u.,; project would impact an area of 0.,+ .,re including grassland, cleared areas and coastal scrub. A few small acacia trees may be removed for the project, but no native trees or trees that meet the County criteria for heritage trees would be removed or adversely impacted. Construction activities could adversely affect habitats on the site if equipment is operated or stored outside of the building envelopes. Construction equipment should be confined to the building envelopes or cleared areas on the site to prevent unnecessary impacts. Construction should also occur outside of the rainy season to prevent impacts caused by erosion of barren soils. The site is already adversely impacted by acacia and blue-gum eucalyptus which have invaded the native habitats and reduced biodiversity at the site. It would be beneficial to remove the acacia or at least control its spread into the native habitat. Areas around the building sites that are disturbed by the project should be replanted with native plant species. The spread of acacia or eucalyptus into these areas should be prevented through monitoring of the revegetation and weeding out of non-native species such as acacia and eucalyptus. New trees are proposed along the property line with the adjacent residence and near the proposed site of the convent. Only tree species native to the area should be used. Water and septic use are minimal and are not expected to result in a significant draw-down of the water table or impacts to water quality or quantity of streams down slope of the project site. The project would have a minor cumulative impact on biological resources by introducing more human activity to the wildlands on the Skyline corridor. This impact is minimized by the open layout of the project which allows for continued use of the site by wildlife, and by clustering the development with existing adjacent residential development, which leaves most of the surrounding lands .in open space. With the recommended mitigation measures, the project is not expected to result in significant biological impacts. 10. . List and discuss all probable impacts to threatened, rare, endangered or unique species either listed or proposed by the Local Coastal Program, a Federal or State agency, or the California Native Plant Society, both on-site and within an area of one-quarter mile radius from the project location. The project site and adjoining area does not contain threatened, rare, endangered, or unique species. The nearest sensitive species located on the California Natural Diversity Database search is Santa Cruz manzanita (Arctostaphylos andersonii), located about 1.2 miles south on Skyline Boulevard. No species of manzanita was found in the area proposed for buildings on the project site. i 11. Tabulate by significant impact all feasible mitigation measures proposed to reduce the level of impact and explain how such measures will be successful. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 5 MITIGATION MEASURES OUR LADY OF VLADIMIR RUSSIAN CONVENT IMPACT MITIGATION 7 EFFECT Construction activities Construction equipment Would prevent unnecessary could adversely affect should be confined to the impacts to habitats outside habitats on the site if building envelopes or of the building area through equipment is operated or cleared areas on the site. avoidance. stored outside of the building envelopes. Impacts to adjacent Construction shall occur Would prevent significant habitats caused by erosion outside of the rainy impacts caused by erosion of barren areas in season. Areas left barren of barren soils. construction zone. after development is completed shall be revegetated with native plant species The project could Areas around the Would prevent significant introduce or encourage building sites that are impacts caused by non- the proliferation of non- disturbed by the project native plants by not native plant species, should be replanted with introducing new plants to adversely affecting the native plant species. The the site and by controlling native habitats. spread of non-native invasion into disturbed species into these areas areas by existing non-native should be prevented vegetation. through monitoring of the revegetation and weeding out of non-native species such as acacia and eucalyptus. New trees proposed along the property line with the adjacent residence and near the proposed site of the convent should be restricted to species native to the area. All landscaping shall be composed of native plant species. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 6 12. Certification. I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this biological evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date: Signed: August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 7 TABLE 1 PLANT SPECIES FOUND DURING THE 8/19/% SURVEY COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME California blackberry Rubus ursinus* Forget-me-not Myosotis sp. Stinging nettle Urtica dioica English ivy Hedera helix Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa* Nightshade Solanum sp. Bull thistle Cirsium vulgare Poison hemlock Conium maculatum Bristly ox tongue Picris echioides California poppy Eschscholzia califomica* English plantain Plantago lanceolata Yerba buena Satureja douglasit* Canyon gooseberry Ribes menziesii* Twinberry Lonicera involucrata* Coffeeberry Rhamnus califomica* Hairy honeysuckle Lonicera hispidula* Spurge Euphorbia sp. Oat grass Avena sp. Sheep sorrel Rumex acetosella Black mustard Brassica nigra Harding grass Phalaris aquatics California cudweed Gnaphalium californicum* Coyote brush Baccharis pilularis* Bracken fem Pteridium aquilinum* Cotoneaster Cotoneaster sp. Pink flowering currant Ribes sanguineum* Lizard tail Eriophyllum staechadifolium Creambush Holodiscus discolor* Yarrow Achillea millefolium* Mugwort Artemisia douglasiana* Snowberry Symphoricarpos rivularis* Skunkweed Navarretia squarrosa* Tarweed Hemizonia sp. Rush Juncus bufonius* Prickly lettuce Lactuca serriola Aster Aster chilensis* Goldenrod Solidago califomica* Pigs foot Chenopodium sp. Lupine Lupinus formosus* Wild strawberry Fragariacalifomica* German ivy Senecio mikanioides Toyon Heteromeles arbutifolia* French broom Genista monspessulana Monterey cypress Cupressus macrocarpa Silver wattle Acacia dealbata Monterey pine Pinus radiata Blue gum eucalyptus Eucalyptus globulus Dogwood Cornus sericea ssp.sericea August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates i BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 8 Table 1,continued COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii Redwood Sequoia sempervirens * native plant species scientific names are based on the Jepson Manual Sources: Thomas, John Hunter. 1961. Flora of the Santa Cruz Mountains . Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. Hickman, James C.,Editor. 1993. The Jepson Manual Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 9 TABLE 2 WILDLIFE SPECIES FOUND OR EXPECTED COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME Opossum Didelphis marsupialis Long-eared myotis Myotis evotis California myotis Myotis californicus Red bat Lasiurus borealis Hoary bat Lasiums cinereus Racoon Prvcyon lotor Gray fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus Coyote Canis latrans Bobcat Felis rufus Pocket gopher Thomomys bottae Dusky-footed woodrat Neotoma fuscipes Deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus California mouse Pffomyscus californicus Western harvest mouse Reithrodontomys megalotis Brush rabbit Sylvilagus bachmani Black-tailed hare Lepus californicus Black-tailed deer Odocoileus hemionus Turkey vulture Cathartes aura Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensts Mourning dove Zenaida macroura California quail Lophortyz californica Great homed owl Bubo virginianus Anna's hummingbird Calypte anna Northern flicker Colaptes auratus Ash-throated flycatcher Myiarchus cinerascens Scrub jay Aphelocoma coerulescens Stellar's jay Cyanocitta stelleri Common raven Corvus coraz Bushtit Psaltriparus minimus Wrentit Chamaea fasciata Dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis House wren Troglodytes aedon Bewick's wren Thryomanes bewickii California thrasher Tasostoma redivivum Orange-crowned warbler Vermivora celata California towhee Pipilo crissalis Song sparrow Mdospita melodia Rufous-crowned sparrow Aimophila ruficeps White-crowned sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys Lark sparrow Chondestes grammacus Western fence lizard Sceloporus occidentalis Gopher snake Pituophis melanoleucus Rattlesnake Cmtalis viridis Source: Zeiner, David C.,William F. Laudenslayer, Jr., Kenneth E. Mayer, and Marshall White. April 1990. California's Wildlife. State of California The Resources Agency Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California. August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 10 Taylor Peterson Ms. Peterson has a background in biology and has been a long-time observer of California's natural history. She has conducted numerous biological surveys to assess the potential impacts of landfill projects, golf course development, hotel resort development, quarrying, and housing development. She is experienced in identification of plant and animal species, in mapping plant communities, in mark/release/recapture work with butterflies, and in survey methods for the endangered San Joaquin kit fox. She is familiar with special habitats such as vernal pools, serpentine grassland, and riparian zones, and she is a practitioner of the US Army Corps of Engineers Method used to delineate wetlands. Ms. Peterson was a contributing author of the San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan in which she applied the Plan principles in developing specific activities for each administrative parcel on the mountain. She was also a principal author of the Kirby Canyon Landfill Bay Checkerspot Butterfly Conservation Plan and now oversees the implementation of the Conservation Plan revegetation program. In her capacity as Case Manager, Ms. Peterson directs TRA staff in the technical analysis and preparation of environmental documents, prepares her own technical sections, and maintains contact with the client, project engineers, and the lead agency. As such, she is familiar with every aspect of the preparation of environmental documents which must comply with CEQA. Several of the projects that she has managed have been controversial in nature, and she has extensive experience in responding to public concerns and comment. Educational Background A.B. Human Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA I August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates BIOLOGICAL IMPACT FORM -- RUSSIAN CONVENT P. 11 Patrick Kobernus A recent addition to the TRA staff, Mr. Kobernus has a background in Vertebrate Ecology and Biogeography, and is currently a Graduate Student in Wildlife Ecology at California State University, Hayward. As a staff biologist for TRA, Mr. Kobernus has helped conduct field biological impact assessments for the Canada Woods East project in Carmel, and the Bayhill VIII project in San Bruno. He is currently working to develop better evaluation methods of exotic species control efforts on the San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Project. He is also working to promote greater community and interagency involvement to better understand, protect, and restore habitat on San Bruno Mountain. Mr. Kobernus has worked on a number of ecological research projects. He is familiar with urban pollutant effects upon aquatic habitat and wildlife, having worked on two projects in this area. As an intern for Alameda County, he helped conduct a study of heavy metal accumulation within urban creeks, (Vegetated Channels Study). As a graduate research assistant under Dr. Christopher Kitting, he performed a study testing the toxicity of stormwater on aquatic animals in a stormwater treatment marsh, (Demonstration Urban Stormwater Treatment marsh in Fremont, California). More recently, he has worked as a wildlife biologist for Gualala Redwoods, (Gualala, CA), conducting Northern Spotted Owl surveys. He is familiar with the status and range of many state and federally protected wildlife species, and with biological data sources such as the California Natural Diversity Database. He has also worked as a volunteer for Coyote Creek Riparian Station, conducting vegetation mapping and bird surveys in San Francisquito Creek, Palo Alto, CA. He has experience working with aerial photography, having worked for four years as an aerialphotographysales assistant and database manager for Pacific Aerial Surveys ! Y in Oakland, California. He also has experience working with computer mapping programs (AutoCAD). Educational Background B.A. English, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA M.A. Wildlife Ecology (in progress), California State University, Hayward, CA August 21, 1996 Thomas Reid Associates Flc_a�rz� � o, Cahill Rid E n L I Z •Water BM 663 - - - G.d Gulch m N. N'��J i _ 3t _adobe �Lr,J -_ _ _ a•., ,Adobe \ - BM 871 4I, ca aM lilt o`�5 A N \ F R N F /I -^.,•_ '/. it -��\� l a� 24 g 11' 41 r�_'! �l, qI \. 0" C r 76�1, � `11' .I�r �' .i ••\� J^j/1//`�,:_� %s- `. 1 p��' ��� +tea I/ ^'�r \ l l i I ' ��✓�,` ` f'1`�I /ice�\`--� �^ �„"._ ��j��; �/ � �' /i.~\, "� �r _ 'i`,��.^1 l,• /(li/off I\�� ;1, i ✓/-., � L�/f' }51Area of biological survey � 1688 �''�-`tom, �=- ��s�, _, /-`�0��`, __ _,� t,ii '-�• i �\�h•` \,\;1 � I ���K M>ala_ _ .��i.�= ! \ Hrf► �,,, j600 z "' "rr,E e•s 4146 7. 1935 45 -=-r^' (`= Plslrwokoutob �`� '_-' •��w•I\41�•"/�.`--��� SCALE 1:24000 —'� c 1 7 000 0 1 MILE B M 4 8' 1000 0 1000 2 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET t •5 0 1 KILOMETER CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET '.:� 1• " l DOTTED LINES REPRESENT 20-FOOT CONTOURS NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 FIGURE 2 qy� Ai -�~ !. tl•f !N.�'� 6{L:`(i� �'4' i�' :ntr' C t,Sa1 �;ut ► ,i (;f�is'�ai�si' ` �' .wF �.tt \� �l13� i ' ak '..,��.. tt�•+�.�� '���f�U t"5�,�"�' y`- � � :f �i�1�t;,,i' . ,[.�,t!tcfk4�''�!-�'�-y`�.w `• `�,��'^ � ^f _.�► C L },�.,+f'f+a� •r c) kr �'" '�4,ytr t a Z_' !t a t tyc�}�Et- JV t`fir!• d.L ���t�.c : � G•-L,''""�'f ✓'- ;r•. i.'•�'(.'y _ :V `'1a(.•v �`�. i.,\"r. •(;X �'f�'.?• •4.4�j,c• � '<\ L{iY C. (J C, . c L{� (t:• � ^!. �`�NJ .'.v .if'• -•"` i'� '!p•�R. (,•�`(.C.�/' •2 L••'S- •.'.�.* {� v1:1 tiw ...}. i t Rw 4 c.6' tCmw, rb .�.� ' t . .G�- �'X:G• •i• a :trim. •t•.L�Cr -.',.t _\7(. (��1v ;1•'a't�,a 4.fr. 'ha{,'•'• `�'i►tY•r a •L.f+ •�+ �" .t.• 1' 91 ta tits cL�y a .t. ( •t._ f��� eJ'G .4" :.. St iG•, tr4 .{�. (5i� t �Y" f�tJ��I! � ; a..rr�.' 4 y,,. • t, �' may.. •zv. i.. {i? lv•tiIi �.J. %: :�Cr f.• C 1•,, .. �y ..,,[[ ^,F 1t W iir✓a'G,:t y,;�J-a rt, �ae. L yCK.`Z'k: :.f� Vt• .i �• ,}i�``j �Ey `e.• `, e �L ` :4 .f.• a.ti5�da '��1.'• ..(1.� .•1'... .::t;.`'C'ti• �'.%.:f.f t.•.a 1: �... s -`t•.. L4. c.`Z.�{o..: �„�".T�,,:•^L�:R..•B�:%att,G�;�. �'ti •a,� ' L�+.+.•� .Sr. r �{t��''�y; fv` c �- '�•i�,.+L�""�. G t•�+E�`tt,�.���•,,`,=` 4 L is` t'�c.:�`•c't � t .. } C `�' �y} ,�r `:ay F. .• "'�c'a � 2] '{i a f�6. �4 rk. ' S 'kr,. eat. .a ` `t. t a t�- 4e a•1.1C dC{jS:- {v n �,i��`,rw ; �j`St1 ' `� { �'/i� " ' ✓T.i ,y CG6.? '�_ 1•[,:.•thti. `lLa. :C ♦ j i�':'J�yt �ti.•.: �L`��C' t+I [ r'(,'•IL '`L. o .4 '. Y •: i� ��.• �!! , L`•Pt'F±-�rat•�-<i. LT' �(."`L4-. •� �2 �'•v( �a^.yy. .C" ,. N�, 4 i. t ��] a` -• , o ° oo {f.' �Y it(„t ''-t,th_ r•�•�r ay. it/••' _..; a oo tJt.•� t.{��. .�4r. ;:.�M'`}�� r. :G�';:�:...a.-1•a+CE'Ri.Y��Yk -jr.. ,t4.., °oo°o°o yj t S `i1i4k ( �rJ �+ a '�,`C i4�-�' <•`. {M . o •.� '� 4 ►• i""�, moo o CiC- C •. \' r�JC.:G L_: a,. y,lLr,•• t r,l2 •.i r�y �>•t ~�v,�.� ~L� f< :'� � r a "L'.<_ tp .l ��:�rs C�{�•..� .fir 1 IL t:•�,) .•' a,;' /•• 4 beo. l '•� .it, X. �1: < ..1%+,j.• +a, :,C �,t.• _� ' °. ° 1G� �W+W. :.. ' .vt•', .' l {�CAL r a fy •�•�e9' iaa',�t�C-�'�%b 'a {.. `._ 0000 ��.+y � '�^•r�i s' S' {.:1(�' 1,:�tyVyC�.�4+•�: �1(�1�OL��Y�`S '.j �i j'•� ° oo 'M�`�CY�r.,t•p��.i,,,��.y`'ti.J^-'� :. L.�ai.(��,.= r��i`4 .• \r ,L� .ti�l `� a F.iC _�i-� t;. J,�Cv.:a,Ei .�+t, u ((�� �(JY Jt , .� _�A . _. .•� ������ ,;w, try �• `V�1'1. (��,�V ♦ .. �I-aY.. r• E J. Ti/•.. `QTV:._ Y R�•\ fk 40 .'G J Ji�� .�:tv��C .+ •.fir •.t ' ••'R.Wc�.•..'Y t, c. C C .• a ; to ''� fv`� ,•�i:�:•(j+`{;V,t �IGE✓:. �;, :Y •.S, •'`. ::J•: ,4 t• 4v�' t:.•..(4•`'`L"�i. .a t" ..•a f'• t f+ s' •�� �: otnsr �. tIn . is: � l•� . {:;.•• c. �t1r,.c•(..tt-S �[ a�' [e•a' W.fv_- •ir:�•.��' :`i<•} '• fi v }vt e.�" t+ •C%:'V,'_ '�J , ,�.\u•.t�.'•i{{C`•.0��4••�.,, b' ��1�rtt. •.��;•J(:%. �. -t��ki..' � '•' t.�.•., r'�'��•t'�'t!.� �~}!'�'� Ltv'�'� :G�:.�`••��.K r 4^• . � .rt`•N.r V :i �n.C'��+:••yy((��''b 14"i� ^ • t'`1i.�;`�,�t,•ti,r z "C,�.,�S :�.4 e• �`.S•�. � -,�C` .-4�:;r�� ,�`G C'`,c�.�ac:%r c" -CC , y ;., �"c : _Zi . r l"1:. � :Lx`ti+a�. y(•'� �b�Lt. PAR `�`• c;•• `r• t . . y- t} "iYtl a :a1 J. �� fit' .!� `•` a_:�iJ`. :• ,SS?�ye.,4`•� •'y +•��yrsatij f t14. ;.f .51.. CT,� G .t F t 3• '1 Yr ��. �hf'{- x '{;r 'y .r`� ram•..` �'. J ..%(, Y trk:�"•6.{ � tX1,�.yC h;.. l` C\�r u u •7. Ctvc.J �,_3` � r„S :,i k::�` •;.F' `�,�• t 'qt,`•� `arz �,••'�«�• �) ' l ', ARCEL V• y�,h. �r•�tiw't4��'. 4 f < o0000000000 \� o000000000 • t � L,. t. t. t���G. �i o0000000000 �.E"f• ! (� +• t{vrCr ry to o00000000,o a�l�f �` „ ti'. 'tj a. _' fi.'t{• o000000000a• / • •0000000000a •� (� .- .�:X•tii Gt��y .t. �+;'•. `rash' o000 00°o°Dora S i�Y�+'• Ytt. � �ir���Lat. � Z o0 0O n.�. vt. ,ar'i• �f��er_ t�t• Lyf; �, 0000 A r"C�• `aL �.c•+:. <1}YV•r `r.� G• s�tV. C.• ., -5 _ a,0000 ��.` 4.t-c ti �td��';' �a'�` '`Z f'vi`.�` {F.1��•c• '�.z�'c-'''• £ ``+ ,4s. ' = t`��t ` �`' i'« E; c.:4t . / RUSSIAN CONVENT .t`r-Z' ,:'.�: �='� c;s c` 4 l-t•�t , l .�. VEGETATION MAP IIIII {k `� ' 4r. 4 f 4 ' sir.—�_ IIIIII Forest rQ :• {`; ra•c c Gr.t�•� oca000 Grassland y �o°°°° 1t,, a i. tw La' L • 1tr 000000 IaJrp��(7,. C Y t Y,�/.t\ � ai;Z k,� V.! Lys- Cy.+y,'•fJ )00000• rlvr�C �=w11pc r�rr`. x F ;4�+ �•��.. G, 'Y Coyote brush scrub Scale: approx. 1 in. = 200 ft. cleared CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN i Regional Open *ce 1 eetin6 M g 98-06 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meetin March 18, 1998 AGENDA ITEM _1 SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors, MIDPE7ger S A REGI NAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT FROM: Craig Britton, General Man Today District staff received the attached letter dated March 18, 1998 from the Law Offices of Goldfard and Lipman regarding the matters before you tonight. Staff has reviewed these comments and has these preliminary observations: Compliance with Government Code Section 65402 The District has complied with Section 65402 by submission of proposed open space acquisitions in San Mateo County for a finding of conformity with the General Plan(see attached letter dated January 13, 1981.) The County determined that acquisitions for open space purposes are in conformity with the County's General Plan for Lands designated in the General Plan as General Open Space. The Convent property is so designated according to San Mateo County Planning Commission report of January 22, 1997. (See relevant staff report pages attached). In any event, Government Code Section 65402 applies only to acquisitions. Adopting a Resolution of Necessity or filing an eminent domain action does not acquire property. In an eminent domain action"title to the property vests in the plaintiff(condemning agency)upon the date of recordation" of the final order of condemnation, and not before. C.C.P. Sec. 1268.030(c). Thus, property is not acquired in an eminent domain action until just compensation has been determined by judgment following trial, the judgment has been paid (C.C.P. Sec 1268.020), and there has been no abandonment of the eminent domain proceeding. (C.C.P. Sec. 1268.510). This final order"vests in the plaintiff'title to the property. (Sec. 1268.030). Compliance with Government Code Section 51290 et sea, The Convent's attorney states that the District has not provided notice to the Director of Conservation as required by Section 51291. This is incorrect. (See attached District's letter dated March 18, 1998). Further, this proposed Resolution would be exempt from Section 51292 under Section 51293(e) and 0) since the project is an improvement for the benefit of land within the preserve and includes land within a scenic highway corridor. The District focuses on purchasing undeveloped property because vacant land is much less expensive to acquire. There are ILQ costly improvements to pay for when acquiring vacant land. 330 Distel Circle • Los Altos,CA 94022-1404 • Phone:650-691-1200 FAX:650-691-0485 • E-mail: mrosd@openspace.org • Web site:www.openspace.org T- Board of Directors:Pete Siemens,Mary C. Davey,led Cyr,David T.Smernoff,Nanette Hanko,Betsy Crowder,Kenneth C.Nitz •General Manager:L.Craig Britton I R-98-36 Page 2 Supplemental Agenda Report This policy in nQ way refers to the Williamson Act, because the Act itself requires that when considering use of eminent domain, all Williamson Act restrictions m=be ignored for purposes of valuation. The District does not acquire land, either under Williamson Act or not, for the purposes of"public improvements," but acquires land in its natural state for preservation as open space. As such, n2 parcel of land is a substitute for another. The District provides"low-intensity recreation uses," rather than typical parks and recreation, with an emphasis on preservation of the natural environment. Since each parcel of property has a unique contribution to the environment, no substitute parcel is available. In the case of this property, which is located in the middle of a mosaic of undeveloped, natural lands, already owned by the State of California and Peninsula Open Space Trust, it is uniquely situated and substitute property cannot suffice. Compliance with The California Environmental Quality Act The staff report explains that the proposed project is categorically exempt from CEQA. The Convent's attorney contends these exemptions are inapplicable to the establishment of the Mills Creek Open Space Preserve. Staff has reviewed these comments and has this preliminary response: Section 15313: This section does not require a conservation plan. The project does include a use and management plan that proposes keeping in the site in a natural condition. The management plan provides specifically for preservation of fish and wildlife habitat. The site is in a natural condition, undeveloped and unimproved. There are unpaved trails and remnants of a small collapsed farm shed and a small collapsed and overgrown cabin. This does not constitute a developed or improved property. The proposed recreation uses permit only pedestrian use on existing unpaved trails which is consistent with preservation of the property. Section 15316: This section does not require an adopted management plan but allows for a proposed management plan. The District's proposed management plan provides for the site to remain in a natural condition allowing public pedestrian low intensity trail use. Low intensity trail use will in no way alter the site's natural condition. The applicant's letter is wrong when it states that the District proposes to construct a new trail to connect to the Bay Area Ridge Trail. Instead the District proposes that if the Ridge Trail is constructed, elsewhere, only existing trails would be used to connect to it. The Convent's attorney mischaracterizes the management plan. No new trails are proposed. No new construction is proposed. Securing existing improvements would be limited to minor alterations to the remnants of the cabin and farm shed, such as a wire fence or signs. Section 15317: The acquisition of the property will not involve cancellation of the existing Williamson Act contract. "Cancellation" refers to a statutory process initiated by landowner petition under Government Code Section 51280 et seq. The Williamson Act provides for preservation of open space. The property is to be dedicated to public open space which achieves a greater degree of protection. The proposed Mills Creek Open Space Preserve will create a natural preserve and is in no way inconsistent with the open space uses allowed in the property's Williamson Act contract. R-98-36 Page 3 Supplemental Agenda Report Section 15325: This exemption includes the acquisition of areas to preserve the existing natural conditions and acquisition of areas to allow restoration of natural conditions. The plan proposes to allow the property to remain in its existing natural condition and restoration to occur on steep roads. Limited pedestrian use will in no way alter the existing natural conditions of the site. The comment regarding omitting a parking lot from the project description is incorrect. The staff report states that no parking lot is proposed. The District's experience with similar preserves indicates that only low intensity pedestrian use will occur and that there is adequate parking on Skyline Boulevard. Section 15200.2: The use and management plan has been misinterpreted by the Convent's attorney. The plan specifically states that the District will not be building any trails that will impact steelhead habitat. The District proposes to allow steep trails to revegetate on their own to prevent siltation. The District is not proposing to mitigate for public safety impacts by closing trails and by securing remnants of farm shed and cabin, but merely preserving the natural conditions of the land and providing for potential habitat. In response to controlling public uses, the District's use and management plan recommends patrol to restrict public uses to pedestrian trail use only. There can be no significant impact on the steelhead habitat because the existing trails to be used by pedestrians are located far away from steelhead habitat. Policies of Eminent Domain The District's policies regarding eminent domain (ordinance 86-01) are advisory only and have no legal effect, see Section 10 of Ordinance 86-01. In any event, this Resolution would be consistent with these policies. Reasonable attempts to acquire this property have failed. District staff has been discussing this potential acquisition with the Convent for nearly two years(since they acquired the property). In August 1997 the District entered into specific mediation discussions with the Convent which extended into February 1998, but which were unsuccessful. The District has been interested in the possibility of acquiring this property since the late 1970's as mentioned in the report. The San Francisco Archdiocese was contacted and they indicated that the Our Lady of Pillar Church in Half Moon Bay controlled this particular property as it was a gift to their church. In discussing the possible acquisition with the priests at the church, staff was told that the property would always be open space and, "not to worry." Both the priest and the Archdiocese representatives indicated they would call the District if the property were ever considered for sale. Follow-up contacts were made every few years and the status did not change. The Goldfarb letter says that the District's"Acquisition Priority Map" identifies the property as being in a low priority category for acquisition. The District"Master Plan" to which he is referring has the following statement in the"About This Map" section: This map is only one of the number of factors which will be considered by the District's Board of Directors as it makes decisions concerning the acquisition of open space lands. A high rating on this map does not necessarily mean that a particular area will be acquired by the District; nor does a low rating necessarily mean that a particular area will not be acquired. some of the other considerations `!' R-98-36 Page 4 Supplemental Agenda Report include the amount of public support for the acquisition, the cost of acquisition, degree of threat of loss to development, importance for certain individual open space functions, location relative to other publicly-owned open space lands and potential actions by other governmental agencies. This property is currently threatened by development, it is currently going through the county development review process. The Convent is a California Corporation See Title Report, "Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladamir, Inc., a corporation". The Convent states they plan a"bakery"which is a commercial activity. See"Attachment A" to San Mateo County staff report, January 22, 1997. Unreasonable Precondemnation Activity Save Skyline Open Space(SSOS) copied me on some letters and memos, which I kept in my file, but repeatedly told them I was not in a position to comment or edit or otherwise work with them on the permitting process for the Convent project. I had no part in assembling their group, arranging meetings, editing letters, setting goals, contributing to fundraising, or any other way participating with this group. The memo of Mr. Bell of 2/21/98 was his correspondence, not mine. I did talk to Mr. Bell, at his initiative, as I routinely discuss District projects with many members of the public, other government agencies, foundations, etc. I expressed an estimate that I would be recommending a hearing held in"mid-March", but advised him that until the property owners were notified(the Convent), the date would not be certain. Subsequently, on February 27, 1998, the Convent was officially notified of the meeting, and on March 4, 1998 a formal notification was sent out to all adjoining owners and the list of interested individuals maintained by the District. The Convent claims that certain specified activity by the District's General Manager"is actionably as unreasonable precondemnation activity by the District". Even if true, this would not be a basis for a valid challenge to the adoption of a Resolution of Necessity. By its own statement, the Convent merely claims that the purported activity is "unreasonable precondemnation activity." Although its claims are unsubstantiated and in any event without merit, such a precondemnation claim, if any exists, is for damages and is asserted by the Convent's answer to a complaint in eminent domain, if any is ever filed. Redevelopment Agency v. Contra Costa Theater- Inc. (1982) 135 C.A.3d 73, 79, n. 2. The District staff has a right to provide information to members of the public. What those members of the public do with that information is not the responsibility of the District. In any event, here the Convent's proposal before the San Mateo County Planning Commission was approved, over the constitutionally protected apparent objection of the Save Skyline Open Space, a"grass root citizen's" group. Thus the Convent was not damaged in any way. i R-98-36 Page 5 Supplemental Agenda Report FINDINGS REQUIRED BY C.C.P. SEC 1245 230 The Convent asserts that"specific, detailed findings...how...the Convent's settlement proposal fails to comply with a specific project proposed by the District". A Resolution of Necessity does not have to contain specific findings of facts in support of a legislative decision to adopt it. Anaheim Redevelopment Agency v. Dusek(1987) 193 C.A. 3d 249, 258-261. APPRAISAL Convent's argument that 284 acres instead of 273 acres should be used in appraisal. County reports refer to a 284 acre property. Possibly that is the basis for the Districts's earlier general references to the property as a 284 acre parcel. The District retained engineers to determine the acreage. A careful analysis of available deeds , records of survey and government surveys was made to determine with more precision the acreage of the property and it was concluded that the Convent ownership consisted of 273 acres. Thus, the District did exactly what the Convent contends it should have done when it states in the March 18, 1998 letter that"it is incumbent upon the District to determine the size of the property before taking it." Convent's criticism of phrase"Best Use." in the APPRAISAL SUMMARY STATEMENT instead of the"highest and best use." An appraisal is for the purpose of determining compensation to be paid which is measured by the fair market value of the property to be acquired. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1263.310) Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.320 in pertinent part provides that the fair market value of the property is the highest price that.would be paid for property with the buyer and seller having full knowledge of"all the uses and purposes for the property is reasonably adaptable and available." The phrase the"highest and best use," is not used in Section 1263.320. As a practical matter, there is no discernable difference between"best use" and"highest and best use." - Further, and probably even more basic, there is no requirement in Government Code Section 7267.2 that the appraiser's opinion of the"highest and best use"be set forth in the written statement or summary. The only requirement in Section 7267.2 regarding a written statement and summary is as follows: "The public entity shall provide the owner of real property to be acquired with a written statement of, and summary of the basis for, the amount it established as just compensation." The case of City of Lake Elsinor v. Ranel Development Co. (1998) 60 C.A. 4th 974, at 982, holds that: R-98-36 Page 6 Supplemental Agenda Report "Government Code Sections 7267.1 through 7267.7 are merely advisory guidelines which public entities are to follow to the greatest extent practicable........(Gov. Code Section 7267.) They create no rights in property owners, and the failure of an agency to comply with them does not affect the validity of an eminent domain proceeding. (Gov. Code Section 7274) In short, compliance with them is encouraged but not mandatory." City of Lake Elsinore, supra at 982. Williamson Act Assertion Re* AWra_ is_al The Convent erroneously states that "the appraiser clearly discounted the value of the Property based upon its Williamson Act contract..." The Appraisal Summary Statement does not state that the value of the property was discounted based upon the Williamson Act contract on it. Me appraisal was approved by the District with full awareness that Government Code Section 51295 requires that the Williamson Act Contract on property to be condemned shall be disregarded in valuing the propety. Government Code Section 7267.2 contains no requirement that a comment be made in the Summary Statement to the effect that the Williamson Act contract on the subject property was deemed never to have existed. Department of Envirc rental Management BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Plaiming and I)evelopmenf Di. .,ioll EDWARD J. BACCIOCCO, JR. JAMES V. FITZGERALD I ; ARLEN GREGORIO FRED LYON JOHN M. WARD COUNTY OF SAN MATEO PDLANNIINGC. HALE DIRECTOR COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER REDWOOD CITY• CALIFORNIA 94063 (415) 364-5600, EXT. 4161 January 13, 1981 Mr. Herbert A. Grench General Manager Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1 Los Altos, CA 94022 Dear Mr. Grench: Acquisition of Lands for open space purposes by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District will be in conformity with San Mateo County's General Plan if the lands are located in areas shown in the County's Park and Open Space Plan as General Open Space. Please refer to the Parks and Open Space Plan, adopted by the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors on December 20, 1973, for determining which areas are so designated. Hopefully, this information will be helpful to you as plan and acquire your open space system. Very truly yours David C. Hale Planning Director DCH:psw Y COUNTY OF SAN MATEO PLANNING AND BUILDING DIVISION Date: January 22, 1997 To: Planning Commission From: Planning Staff Subject: Consideration of a Preliminary Concept Plan and transfer of three density credits, pursuant to Zoning Regulations Sections 6451, 6909 and 6357, to allow a convent and retreat center on approximately 6 acres of a 284-acre property. The project includes a chapel, convent building for 20 nuns, a 10-room retreat center, priest/caretaker's residence, and a 24-car parking lot. The parking lot and retreat center building would be located in the Skyline State Scenic Corridor. This application is not appealable to the Coastal Commission. Fite Number: CPR 96-0001 (Balopulos/Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir) PROPOSAr, The Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir proposes to develop a convent and retreat center-on approximately 6 acres of its 284-acre property. Three transferred density credits would be used in combination with one of the two existing credits on the property to develop: 1. A cloistered convent building for 20 nuns. This one-story facility would contain 20 individual rooms, three bathrooms, a laundry, a common lounge area, a common dining room, kitchen, bakery, offices and work rooms for religious activities. The building would surround a central courtyard and gardens. 2. A chapel for the daily use of the nuns and Sunday services for the nuns and vis itors.rs. 3. A two-story retreat center containing eight single-occupancy overnight rooms, two bathrooms, a kitchen, lounge, dining room, and conference room on the main level and two rooms and a bathroom for visiting clergy, as well as a laundry, below the main floor level. 4. A one-story priest and caretaker's residence with shared kitchen. 3� 5. A gravel parking lot for 24 cars and two covered parking spaces for the priest and caretaker. 6. Two septic drainfields (one for the convent/chapel and one for the retreat center/residence). Water would be provided by the Skyline County Water District. Access to Skyline Boulevard would be via a driveway shared with the residence at 12130 Skyline. The proposed buildings would be stucco with wood windows and composition shingle roofs. The 47-foot tall chapel would have a gold-leaf Orthodox dome. Total building area would be 18,035 4q. ft. The entire property is under a Williamson Act agricultural preserve contract which allows the property owner to pay lower property taxes subject to certain limitations on development. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1. Determine that the Preliminary Concept Plan is in compliance with the County General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and Zoning Regulations. 2. Determine that three density credits may be transferred to APN 067-310-110. 3. Direct the applicant to prepare a Final Development Plan with any necessary changes and apply for a Coastal Development Permit, use permit and architectural review. BACK RO TNn Report Prepared By: Diane Regonini, Project Planner, 415/363-1853 Applicant: Steven Balopulos Owner: Russian Convent of Our Lady of Vladimir Location: Adjacent to 12130 Skyline Boulevard, approximately 2.5 miles south of Highway 92 APN(s): 067-310-110 Size: Approximately 284 acres Existing Zoning: Resource Management (33 acres), Resource Management/Coastal Zone (251 acres) General Plan Designation: General Open p n Space i I Attachment A County of San Mateo Planning and Building Division RECOMMENDED FINDINGS AND PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Permit or Project Hearing Date: January 22, 1997 File Number: CPR 96-0001 Prepared By: Diane Regonini, Project Planner For Adoption By: Planning Commission RECOMMENDED FINDINGS Regarding the Conce t P a 1. Find that the Preliminary Concept Plan is in compliance with the County General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and Zoning Regulations. 2. The clustering of uses as proposed would promote the use or potential use of the land for agricultural/open space purposes. Regarding the Density Transfer 3. Find that the three transferred density credits would not be used in a scenic corridor or on prime agricultural lands, and that the use of the credits would be in accordance with the policies and standards of the Local Coastal Program. PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Division 1. Issuance of the use permit shall be based on the retreat housing and kitchen being fully occupied an average of 12 days/year (maximum of 96 person days) and the retreat center conference facility being used by 20 religious students 12 days/year and 80 pilgrims four days/year. The visiting clergy housing shall be fully occupied 12 days/year (24 person days). Use of the chapel shall be limited to 20 nuns and eight others daily, 30 others on Sunday services, and 40 people at 12 church feast days and 80 people at two annual pilgrimages. The applicant shall keep a retreat center and chapel attendance log to verify compliance. ,6 - 2. Use of the bakery shall be limited to bread for on-site purposes only. 3. No weddings shall be held at the chapel. Funerals shall be limited to four per year. 4. The use permit shall be subject to annual administrative reviews by the Planning Division. A use permit amendment shall be required for any changes in the operation of the facility. The use permit may be revoked if any conditions are not met. 5. All new utility lines shall be installed underground. 6. Water conserving fixtures shall be used in all buildings. Low-volume irrigation shall be used and grey water should be used for additional gardening once the facility is established. 7. Chapel bell ringing shall be limited to once weekly for one minute. 8. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan with appropriate lighting standards directing light downward. Exterior lighting shall be limited to that required for safety on the site o shielded so that no e Planning Director. Al l lighting sh all be shield and shall be approved b the g PP Y g direct light is visible from Skyline Boulevard. 9. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan providing vegetation to screen the convent and chapel buildings from Skyline Boulevard, to screen the residence and parking lot from the Bell property, and to screen the retreat building from Skyline Boulevard and all din land to the southeast for approval b the Planning Director. Proposed surrounding Y g PP vegetation shall be compatible with the surrounding vegetation and ecological characteristics of the site. All existing vegetation outside the building area shall be maintained. 10. Construction equipment should be confined to the building envelopes or cleared areas on the site. 11. Construction shall occur outside of the rainy season. Areas left barren after development is completed shall be revegetated with native plant species. 12. Tree removal shall be limited to those approved by the Planning Commission. Any additional tree removal may require a Resource Management Certificate of Compliance and/or a Coastal Development Permit. 13. The applicant shall submit carthtoned, non-reflective color and material samples for the Planning Director's approval prior to construction. 14. Carpooling or other ride-sharing measures shall take place during pilgrimages and feast days so that parking will not exceed the capacity of the lot. - 17 - 15. Pathway pavements shall blend in with the surrounding landscape as would the proposed gravel parking lot. ; 16. If any signs are proposed, a signage plan shall be submitted for the Planning Director's approval. Any future signs must be designed to harmonize with the scenic qualities of the Skyline Scenic Corridor. 17. In the event that prehistoric materials or historic traces are encountered during earthmoving, all construction within a 50-meter radius of the find shall be stopped, the Planning Division notified, and a qualified archaeologist retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations. 18. The applicant shall work with CalTrans to post intersection signs on Skyline Boulevard north and south of the proposed entrance. Building Inspection 19. All structures must be handicapped accessible. At least one van accessible parking space must be located at the convent/chapel area. 20. Kitchens and bakery will be considered a commercial use: County Geologic 21. The applicant shall provide a soils and foundation report for the area proposed for development. This should address the Pilarcitos Fault local slope op stability, the,proposed septic system and its local effects, and the nature of the subsurface materials. Department of Public Works Public Work 22. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the applicant will be required to provide payment ($1.15 per sq. ft.) of "roadway mitigation fees" based on the square footage (assessable space) of the proposed development per Ordinance #3277. 23. The applicant shall submit, for review by the Department of Public Works and the appropriate Fire District, a plan and profile of both the existing and proposed access from Skyline Boulevard to the development and parking areas. This plan shall also include provisions for handling both existing and proposed drainage and details for a "turnaround" meeting Fire District requirements. 24. The provisions of the San Mateo County Grading Ordinance shall govern all grading on and adjacent to the development site. - 18 -