HomeMy Public PortalAbout20020612 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 02-12 Regional Open ice
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Meeting 02-12
REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
7:30 p.m.
Wednesday,June 12, 2002
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos,California
AGENDA*
7:30* REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS—Public
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR—D. Little
BOARD BUSINESS
7:40* 1 San Mateo County Coastal Annexation Project: Acceptance of Update to the Draft
Service Plan for the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Area; Informational Report on the
Proposed San Mateo Coastal Annexation Project,Including the Draft Program
Environmental Impact Report, and Other Documents Related to the Coastal Annexation
Project,the Public Participation Process, and the Establishment of the Public Comment
Period Commencing June 13,2002 and Ending August 2, 2002; Accept the Update to the
Draft Service Plan for the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Area; Receive the
Informational Report on the Draft Environmental Impact Report,Fiscal Impact Analysis,
Draft Annexation Policy,and Draft Willing Sellers Only Ordinance; Receive the
Informational Report on the Public Participation Process and Establishment of the Public
Comment Period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report commencing June 13,2002
and Ending August 2, 2002.—C. Woodbury
REVISED CLAIMS
9:00* INFORMATIONAL REPORTS—Brief reports or announcements concerning pertinent activities of
District Directors and Staff.
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 three minutes.
Alternately,you may comment to the Board by a written communication, which the Board
appreciates.
All items on the consent calendar may 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.
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,Deane Little,Nonette Hanko,Larry Hassett,Kenneth C.Nitz • General Manager:L.Craig Britton
Regional Open c; ice
R-02-82 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Meeting 02-12
June 12, 2002
AGENDA ITEM I
AGENDA ITEM
San Mateo County Coastal Annexation Project: Acceptance of Update to the Draft Service Plan for the
San Mateo Coastal Annexation Area; Informational Report on the Proposed San Mateo Coastal
Annexation Project, Including the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, Fiscal Impact
Analysis, and Other Documents Related to the Coastal Annexation Project, the Public Participation
Process, and the Establishment of the Public Comment Period Co encing June 13, 2002 and Ending
August 2, 2002
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Accept the update to the Draft Service Plan for the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Area.
2. Receive the informational report on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, Fiscal Impact
Analysis, Draft Annexation Policy, and Draft Willing Sellers Only Ordinance.
3. Receive the informational report on the public participation process and establishment of the public
comment period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report commencing June 13, 2002 and ending
August 2, 2002.
DISCUSSION
Background
Over four years ago, responding to requests from the coastside community, the District embarked on
an ambitious project to assist in the preservation of the open space and agricultural resources of the San
Mateo County coast. On February 11, 1998, the Board authorized the General Manager to proceed
with research into the feasibility of expanding the District's boundaries to establish a system of open
space lands and easements on the San Mateo County coast in coordination with existing and planned
District preserves and trails (see Report R-98-23).
On January 13, 1999, the Board authorized the General Manager to execute an agreement with 2M
Associates to assist staff and provide the specialized services and products necessary for the District to
pursue the annexation of the San Mateo County coast (see Report R-99-08). Patrick Miller, Partner of
2M Associates, leads the coastal annexation team of the following sub consultants: Terrell Watt,
AICP, Planning Consultant; Thomas Reid Associates, Environmental Consultants; Economic Research
Associates, Fiscal Consultants; and Shute, Mihaly, and Weinberger, Environmental Attorneys.
The entire consultant team worked with staff and Board members to conduct an extensive series of
meetings with the Coastal Advisory Committee established by the Board. This process continued for
nearly a year and enabled the District to identify coastside community issues regarding the proposed
annexation and to develop initial policies for the District's potential operations on the coast. The
consultant team prepared a Preliminary Draft Service Plan that included guiding principles to provide,
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, Deane Little,Nonette Hanko,Larry Hassett,Kenneth C.Nitz # General Manager:L.Craig Britton
R-02-82 Page 2
upon final approval of the annexation, a foundation for the District's development of more specific
policies for the Coastal Annexation Area.
On November 28, 2000, the Board reviewed and approved the Draft Service Plan for the San Mateo
County Coastal Annexation Area. The Service Plan also serves as the project description for the
Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and as the basis for the Fiscal Impact Analysis (see
Report R-00-145). The Service Plan, EIR, and Fiscal Impact Analysis will be integral components of
the District's application to the San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission(LAFCo) to
extend the District's sphere of influence and boundary to the coast. The Service Plan will also form
the basis for District operations on the San Mateo County coast upon final approval of the annexation.
1. Update to the 2000 Draft Service Plan
la. Increased Opportunities to Acquire Land and Easements
During the time that the initial research and analysis took place to prepare the fiscal study and
EIR, three significant events occurred which will influence the potential service levels for the
District's proposed acquisition, and management programs on the San Mateo County coast:
• The recent announcement by Peninsula Open Space Trust of its campaign to raise $200
million to acquire lands within the proposed annexation area, some of which may come
under the District's management or ownership in the future,
• The passage of Proposition 12 (Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and
Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000), which provides $2.1 billion for protection of
natural, cultural and historical resources, and
• The passage of Proposition 40 (California Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood
Parks, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2002), which provides $2.6 billion for
protection of natural, cultural and historical resources
Both bond measures provide grant funding for acquisition, development and restoration of
parks, open space recreation areas and historical resources and for land, air and water
conservation and stewardship programs.
These three events provide increased opportunities for the District to acquire land and
easements by gift or grants. Thus, staff and the consultant team prepared an update to the
Draft Service Plan to reflect the potential enhanced land acquisition program in the Coastal
Annexation Area given these unexpected likely sources of income. Accordingly, the updated
Basic Service Plan table reflects a decrease in the lands managed under contract and an
increase in land acquisition and services that the District anticipates it would provide over a 15-
year period. With these increased opportunities for the District to acquire land or easements
by gift or grants, the 15-year projections of service levels in the 2000 Draft Service Plan were
revised as follows:
• Lands acquired would increase from 850-1,080 acres to 5,750-7,500 acres.
• Easements acquired or monitored for others would increase from 208-270 acres to 990-
1,800 acres.
• Expansion of lands managed under contract would decrease from 3,800-5,700 acres to
1,500-2,500 acres due to the increased opportunities for acquisition by grants or gifts.
• Existing roads and trails that would be acquired would increase from 13 miles up to 27
miles.
R-02-82 Page 3
• New trails would increase slightly from 9 miles up to 9.7 miles (no new trails would be
constructed for the first 3 years due to the time required for planning, permitting and
construction).
• The number of staging areas would increase from one minor staging area to two staging
areas: one minor (12-20 parking spaces) and one major (40-60 parking spaces).
(For all the above, see Draft Service Plan, pp. 22-25)
lb. Clarification of Voter Approved Funding a Measure
The District's annexation of the San Mateo coast based on the proposed Service Plan would not
result in a tax of coastal area residents. However, annexation would allow the District in the
future to work with local interests within the Coastal Annexation Area and within the existing
District to identify a funding measure that may be submitted in the future for voter approval.
The potential for an enhanced land acquisition program described in the Basic Service Plan
above is also reflected in the two Optional Service Plan Scenarios that characterize District
activities should a voter-approved funding measure sponsored either within the Coastal
Annexation Area alone or District-wide be proposed in the future and be approved.
Proposal of a funding measure requires deliberate research and analysis to identify projected
needs for funding, target uses for funds derived, and evaluate willingness to pay on the part of
the voting constituency. The language in the Draft Service Plan that references such a
potential funding measure has been updated to clarify that a tax funding measure currently
requires at least a two-thirds margin of approval by the voters. Additional language clarifies
that the term "voter-approved funding measure" throughout the Draft Service Plan refers to a
funding measure that may be selected after extensive research and analysis (see Draft Service
Plan, p. 7).
Staff recommends that the Board accept the update to the Draft Service Plan to serve as the project
description for the EIR and as the basis for the Fiscal Impact Analysis. Proposed deletions to the
Draft Service Plan are shown as strike-through text (stfike thr-eugh) and for proposed additions and/or
text substitutions presented as underline text(underline text).
2. Receive the informational report on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, Fiscal Impact Analysis,
Draft Annexation Policy. and Draft Willing Sellers Only Ordinance.
The California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) requires analysis of proposed projects to
inform decision-makers and the public about potentially significant environmental impacts, and to
identify ways environmental damage can be avoided or mitigated to an insignificant level.
The act of annexation is a legal and administrative change to the District's boundary and does not
itself produce an environmental effect. The District Board and staff chose to have an
Environmental Impact Report prepared to ensure a very thorough analysis of potential
environmental issues and public concerns raised during the scoping process. The annexation of the
San Mateo County coast, adoption of the Service Plan, adoption of an annexation policy for the
Coastal Annexation Area, and an adoption of a willing sellers only ordinance is the proposed
project that is the subject of the Program EIR.
2a. Draft Program Environmental Impact Report
The District's purpose in pursuing annexation is to be able to acquire and manage open space
lands on the San Mateo County coast to preserve open space and agricultural lands. The
R-02-82 Page 4
locations of subsequent land acquisitions and low-intensity recreation facilities are presently
unknown. Thomas Reid Associates, environmental consultants, prepared a Program EIR that
considers the environmental setting of the proposed annexation area and the kinds of activities
that may follow annexation. The Program EIR for the Coastal Annexation Area analyzes the
following environmental factors:
• Land Use
• Agricultural Resources
• Public Services and Infrastructure
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Noise
• Air Quality
• Aesthetics
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Geology
Analysis of the potential for environmental impact takes into account the guiding principles of the
Draft Service Plan that would govern site-specific planning and implementation. These policies
and guidelines, along with the mitigation measures in the Program EIR, would avoid or minimize
the environmental effects associated with future implementation of projects that could potentially
result from the annexation. Under CEQA, the District will still be required to undertake an
environmental evaluation of subsequent site-specific projects as they are proposed, and determine
what additional environmental documentation and review are necessary.
2b. Fiscal Impact Analysis
The Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by the fiscal consultants, Economics Research Associates,
examines the potential fiscal impacts of the District's proposed Service Plan for the Coastal
Annexation Area. The purpose of the fiscal analysis is to serve as a companion document to
the Service Plan and Program EIR and focuses only on the fiscal issues related to the
annexation. The document addresses the economic factors outlined in the Cortese-Knox-
Hertzberg Act that LAFCo will consider in review of the District's annexation proposal. The
fiscal analysis considers the following factors:
• The ability of the District to provide services within the Coastal Annexation Area and
within its existing boundaries, including the sufficiency of revenues for those services
following the proposed boundary change,
• The effect of the proposed annexation on adjacent areas' economic interests,
• The probable effect of the proposed annexation on the cost and adequacy of services and
controls in the area and adjacent areas, and
• The effect of the proposal on maintaining the economic integrity of agricultural lands.
2c. Annexation Policy for the Coastal Annexation Area
The proposed project includes adoption of an Annexation Policy for the Coastal Annexation
Area. The Draft Annexation Policy provides that within the Coastal Annexation Area, any
lands which may be approved for annexation will be subject to the Service Plan submitted by
the District to LAFCo with its resolution of application for annexation. The Draft Annexation
Policy can be found as an appendix to the Program EIR.
R-02-82 Page 5
The District's current Annexation Policy was adopted by resolution in 1987. It was an
outgrowth of a public process conducted by the Board's Land Acquisition Committee to
develop an approach to annexations and to acquisitions of land within and without the Sphere
of Influence of the District. The 1987 Policy generally provides that the District may annex
lands in which it owns at least a 50% interest. The 1987 Policy was adopted in part to address
concerns of residents that annexation of territory would facilitate the use of eminent domain to
acquire lands. The 1987 Policy was also designed to address single parcel annexations.
The nature of the proposed annexation project necessitates an amendment to the 1987 Policy.
First, the project involves a large geographic area comprised of many parcels, both publicly
and privately owned. A single parcel annexation policy based on prior District ownership
would not be feasible under these circumstances. Second, the current annexation project
includes a prohibition on the use of eminent domain (acquisition would be from willing sellers
only). Therefore, the objectives of the 1987 Policy are still attained. Under the proposed
Annexation Policy, the proposed annexation could not result in the use of the power of eminent
domain to acquire land.
2d. Willing Sellers Policy for the Coastal Annexation Area
The Coastal Advisory Committee identified the issue of District acquisition of land by eminent
domain as one of community concern. The Committee recommended, and the District Board
of Directors concurred, that as an integral part of the District's annexation proceedings, the
District adopt a policy prohibiting the acquisition of land by eminent domain in the Coastal
Annexation Area. The consensus of the Board was to accomplish this by a variety of means to
insure that the policy become institutionalized as part of the annexation process as follows:
• Adoption of an Ordinance Prohibiting the Use of Eminent Domain in the Coastal
Annexation Area (a copy of the Draft Ordinance Prohibiting the Acquisition of Property by
Eminent Domain is attached as an appendix to the Program EIR).
• Inclusion of a prohibition of the use of the power of eminent domain in the Service Plan,
resolution of application for annexation and proposal to be submitted to LAFCo for this
annexation. The San Mateo County Counsel's Office has reviewed the Board's request to
include a willing sellers only policy as part of its annexation proposal and Service Plan and
resolution of application for annexation and has concurred that such an approach is
acceptable to LAFCo.
• Inclusion of a prohibition of the use of eminent domain as a formal Mitigation Measure in
the Program EIR.
The adoption of the proposed Ordinance and the inclusion of the prohibition of the use of
eminent domain throughout the administrative documents required to complete the annexation
project will result in a secure commitment to this prohibition and provide legal recourse to any
affected person in the unlikely event any future Board would even contemplate violating the
prohibition
3. Informational report on the public participation process and establishment of the public comment
period for the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report commencing June 13. 2002 and ending
Aup-ust 2, 2002
R-02-82 Page 6
On November 28, 2001, the Board adopted District Guidelines for Implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (see Report R-01-130). Pursuant to these guidelines, the
Board assigned the General Manager, or his or her designee (the Planning Manager in the case of
the Coastal Annexation project), authority to establish time periods for the circulation for public
review of environmental documents in a manner that assures adequate opportunity and time for
such review as required by CEQA.
Pending the Board's acceptance of the update to the Draft Service Plan, the Planning Manager will
commence circulation of the Draft Program EIR on Thursday, June 13, 2002, provide all required
notices, file all appropriate documents, and begin the public review period as required by CEQA.
Although a public hearing to receive public comments on the Draft Program EIR is not required
and written comments are strongly encouraged, District staff and consultants will hold three public
hearings during the review period to receive public comments on the environmental document(see
Public Participation Process At A Glance, below).
THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS AT A GLANCE
DRAFT PROGRAM EIR REVIEW PERIOD
JUNE 13 UNTIL 5:00 P.M. AUGUST 2, 2002
Public Comment Meetings
0 July 9 at 7:00 P.M.
Board Room, Pescadero Unified School District
620 North Street, Pescadero
0 July 17 at 7:00 P.M.
Ted Adcock Community Senior Center
535 Kelly Avenue, Half Moon Bay
0 July 31 at 7:30 P.M.
Board Room, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle, Los Altos
FINAL PROGRAM EIR PREPARATION & REVIEW (60-90 days)
0 Responses to public comments prepared
MROSD BOARD PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS (30 days)
• Certify Final Program EIR, adopt Service Plan, annexation policy and willing
sellers ordinance, and approve annexation application
LAFCo PROCEEDINGS (6-12 months)
• Submit annexation application to San Mateo County LAFCo
• Application forwarded to Santa Clara County LAFCo
• Santa Clara County LAFCo Public Hearing to receive comment and make a
recommendation to San Mateo County LAFCo
• San Mateo County LAFCo Public Hearing to consider annexation
R-02-82 Page 7
The public review period for the Draft Program EIR will end at 5:00 P.M. on August 2, 2002. At
the conclusion of the review period, the environmental consultant will work with staff to prepare
responses to the public comments for inclusion in the Final Program EIR, which will be available
for public review in advance of certification consideration by the District Board. This process will
take approximately 60-90 days.
The District Board will then hold a public meeting to consider certifying the Final Program EIR,
adopting the Service Plan, the Annexation Policy, and Willing Sellers Ordinance, and approving
the annexation application. Due to public notice requirements, this process will take approximately
30 days.
Upon Board approval, staff will submit the annexation application to San Mateo County LAFCo.
Because of the District's multiple-county jurisdiction, LAFCo proceedings may take as much as 6-
12 months. San Mateo County LAFCo will forward the District's application to Santa Clara
County LAFCo, which will subsequently hold a hearing for the public to comment upon the
annexation proposal. San Mateo County LAFCo will subsequently hold a public hearing to receive
comment and to determine whether to approve the annexation.
Prepared by:
Cathy Woodbury, ASLA/AlCP, Planning Manager
Susan Schectman, General Counsel
Contact person:
L. Craig Britton, General Manager
Claims No. 02-10
Meeting 02-12
June 12, 2002
Revised
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
# Amount Name Description
3867 850.00 Aaron's Septic Tank Service Sanitation Services
3868 271.63 Accent&Artech Lamination Supplies
3869 820.91 Acme&Sons Sanitation Sanitation Services
3870 145.78 ADT Security Services Burglar Alarm Service
3871 2,443.70 Allied Auto Works Vehicle Service and Repairs
3872 187.80 Americas Propane
3873 6,076.38 Andy's Roofing Company, Inc. Red Barn Roof Replacement
3874 56.23 AT&T Telephone Service
3875 1,177.39 AT&T Wireless Cellular Phones&Service
3876 195.00 Bankosh Michael Reimbursement-Tuition
3877 13,935.98 Barg Coffin Lewis&Trapp Legal Services-Guadalupe Watershed
3878 138.80 Barron Park Supply Co., Inc. Plumbing Supplies
3879 824.53 Big Creek Lumber Fencing Materials
3880 75.78 Brim Tractor Company, Inc. Tractor Accessories
3881 244.98 Browning-Ferries Industries Refuse Services
3882 18,000.00 California JPIA General Liability Insurance-Primary Deposit
3883 111.58 California Water Service Company Water Service
3884 300.00 CARPOSA Agency Membership Dues
3885 151.86 Champion Chemical Field Supplies
3886 87.50 *1 City of Half Moon Bay Room Reservation-Annexation Meeting
3887 50.00 City of Palo Alto Revenue Collections 2 Parking Citation Hearings
3888 346.40 Cole Supply Co., Inc. Sanitation Services
3889 461.72 Costco Supplies
3890 103.00 Cougar Couriers Document Courier Service
3891 317.50 County of Santa Clara--Dep. Of Env. Health Permits-Hazardous Material
3892 88.00 County of Santa Clara--Fiscal Services Finger Print Services
3893 133.96 Cuzick, Elaina Reimbursement- Photo Prints-Red Barn
3894 3,619.01 *2 Dell Account Computer Equipment
3895 40.88 Dickey, John Reimbursement-Mileage
3896 150.00 Done Right, Inc. Roof Inspection
3897 798.89 Emergency Vehicle Systems Equipment Repairs
3898 25.00 Environmental Volunteers Membership Dues
3899 49.09 Federal Express Express Mailing
3900 3,933.84 *3 First Bankcard i256.78-bocat Business Meeting Expet.,
669.62-Local Business Meeting Expense
1807.98-Computer Supplies/Accessories
487.65-Field Equipment
745.99-Conference Expense
222.60-Printing&Copying
3901 169.09 Foster Brothers Keys&Locks
3902 597.96 Gardenland Power Equipment Field Supplies&Equipment
3903 50.00 Gehrer, Dick Docent Training
3904 291.60 Goodco Press, Inc. Printing Services
3905 159.93 Grainger, Inc. Uniform Expense
3906 1,422.18 Green Waste Recovery, Inc. Garbage Service
3907 58.38 Greenlnfo Network GIS Resource Data- San Mateo Coast
3908 29.93 Harari-Kremer, Ruthie Reimbursement- Mileage
3909 19.46 Howard, Kelly Reimbursement- Uniform
Page 1
Claims No. 02-10
Meeting 02-12
June 12, 2002
Revised
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
# Amount Name Description
3910 35.77 Kowaleski, John Reimbursement- Uniform
3911 40.00 *4 La Honda-Pescadero Unified School Dist. Room Reservation-Annexation Meeting
3912 135.87 Lab Safety Supply Field Supplies
3913 23,928.82 Lasher Auto Center Vehicle Purchase- Dodge Durango
3914 300.00 Law Enforcement Psychological Services Psychological Assessment-Recruitment
3915 1,521.00 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Legal Services
3916 960.00 LM Construction Structural Repair-Red Barn
3917 42,037.64 Locus Technologies Legal Services-Guadalupe River Watershed
3918 114.64 Los Altos Garbage Co. Refuse Services
3919 1,000.00 Maaco Vehicle Repairs
3920 150.00 *5 McCutchen Environmental Forum Registration
3921 280.61 MCI Long Distance Telephone Service
3922 1,189.23 MetroMobile Communications Radio Repairs&Maintenance
3923 147.23 Millbrae Lumber Co. Supplies-Tafoni Project
3924 33.34 Northern Energy Propane Service
3925 358.72 Ocean Shores Company Equipment-Right Angle Drill
3926 39.22 Office Helper Office Supplies
3927 1,031.53 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Equipment&Supplies
3928 505.77 Pacific Bell Telephone Service
3929 30.00 *6 Peninsula Celebration Assoc. Event Booth Registration Fee
3930 265.44 Peninsula Digital Imaging Maps&Color Test Print
3931 2,576.39 Peninsula Transmission Service, Inc. Vehicle Repairs
3932 63.87 Phillips, Warren Reimbursement-Uniform
3933 763.27 PIP Printing Newsletter&Map Printing
3934 3,000.00 Reserve Account Postage- Postage Meter
3935 243.57 Roberts&Brune Co. Bollards-La Honda Residence Propane
3936 102.55 Roessler, Cindy Reimbursement-Books for Field Offices
3937 2,595.54 Roy's Repair Service Vehicle Repairs&Service
3938 70.62 RV Cloud Plumbing Supplies
3939 168.87 Safety Kleen Oil Recycling
3940 3,356.00 Safway Steel Products Inc. Red Barn Exterior Scaffold
3941 51.93 San Mateo County Times Subscription
3942 3,009.00 Seever, Richard Pig Control Services
3943 239.00 Sherwin Williams Paint&Supplies for Red Barn
3944 209.60 Skyline County Water District Water Service
3945 496.87 Soma Ergonomics, Inc. Office Furniture
3946 87.60 Sommer, Sandy Reimbursement- Mileage
3947 58.97 Specialty Truck Parts, Inc. Vehicle Parts
3948 97.43 Summit Uniforms Uniform Expense
3949 64.00 Terminix Pest Control
3950 53.64 Tex Shoemaker&Son, Inc. Cellular Phone Accessories
3951 2,071.50 Timothy C. Best, CEG Consulting Services-Road Assessment/ECDM
3952 127.46 Tony&Albas Pizza Local Business Meeting Expense
3953 383.77 Tooland, Inc. Field Equipment&Supplies
3954 42.06 Union 76 Fuel Expense
3955 1,402.03 United Rentals, Inc. Equipment Rental
3956 51.28 Verizon Pager Service
3957 99.64 Vu, Douglas Reimbursement- Conference Expense
3958 113.88 Welaratna, Sumudu Reimbursement- Mileage
Page 2
Claims No. 02-10
Meeting 02-12
June 12, 2002
Revised
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
# Amount Name Description
3959 34.30 West Coast Aggregates, Inc. Base Rock for La Honda Creek Preserve
3960 100.19 Williams, Mike Reimbursement-Mileage
3961 600.00 Wolfe, Roberta Recording Services
3962 91.50 Woods, Del Reimbursement-Conference Expense
3963 200.00 Woodside&Patrol Private Patrol Patrol Services-Windy Hill
3964R 1,319.36 Los Altos Garbage Co. Refuse Services
3%5R 259.77 Home Depot, Inc. Field Supplies&Equipment
3966R 322.08 Petty Cash Local Business Meeting, Office Supplies, Field
Supplies, Vehicle Mileage
3%7R 33,259.82 Folsom Lake Ford Vehicle Purchase-Ford F550
Total 190,903.84
*1 Urgent Check Issued 5/28/02.
*2 Urgent Check Issued 5/29/02.
*3 Urgent Check Issued 6/03/02.
*4 Urgent Check Issued 5/28/02.
*5 Urgent Check Issued 6/6/02.
*6 Urgent Check Issued 5/22/02.
Page 3
P
Regional Open Space
� P
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
To: Board of Directors
From: John Escobar, Assistant General Manager
Date: June 7, 2002
Re: FYI's
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
Regional Open ce
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
May 30, 2002
The Honorabale Donald Gage, Chairperson
The Honorable Blanca Alvarado
The Honorabale Peter McHugh
The Honorable James Bealle, Jr.
The Honorable Liz Kniss
Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
70 West Hedding Street
San Jose, CA 95110
Dear Supervisors:
On behalf of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, I would like to submit the following
comments on the proposed trail alignments across Stanford lands. After reviewing alternatives
for the C-I and S-I trails, the District endorses the C I-B (Optimal San Francisquito Corridor),
and S I-E (Cherry Stem/Stanford Periphery) alignments as the two trails that provide the best
routes for a pleasant trail experience while minimizing intrusion into private property and
reducing impacts to the environment.
C I-B Trail Alignment
County staff rated the recreational value of this alignment as "medium to high," and determined
that it has a very low environmental impact. To this, the District would like to add that it
believes the C I-B trail alignment provides the safest and most valuable recreational opportunity
of all the alternatives selected for the C-I trail. By utilizing a service tunnel under 1-280, it
avoids conflicts with vehicles entering and exiting 1-280 and also avoids unsafe road and
driveway crossings. The Cl-B route also provides recreational opportunities to the future
residents of the proposed faculty housing development adjacent to the Stanford Golf Course and
does not adversely affect the owners of private property in Stanford Weekend Acres/Happy
Hollow.
S I-E Trail Aliartment
The majority of the proposed trail route is highly desirable from a trail user's viewpoint because
it follows an attractive route and provides a reasonably direct connection to the Arastadero
Preserve. It generally parallels Old Page Mill Road and Matadero Creek in the southerly
direction, turning west and gradually climbing through a grassland area, then departing from the
Cherry Stem to traverse along a ravine between a dense woodland and open grassland
community. At the upper end of the ravine, the trail alignment turns sharply to the east and
returns to the Cherry Stem,where it becomes less desirable due to the close proximity of
residences and backyards. A highly desirable alternative to the portion of the trail next to the
residences would be to connect the trail at the upper end of the ravine directly to the southern
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,Deane Little,Nonette Hanko,Larry Hassett,Kenneth C.Nitz - General Manager:L.Craig Britton
Donald Gage& Supervisors
May 30, 2002
Page 2
Encroachment of the trail alignment into the Stanford property is limited to roadside frontage
along Page Mill Road, Old Page Mill Road, the portion of the Cherry Stem extending west of
Matadero Creek, and a small area of pasture near the cattle tunnel. From the upper end of the
ravine to the S I-B road and tunnel, a roadside trail could be developed and fenced,thus
separating the trail and a small, 12-acre portion of pasture from the vast majority of the rest of
the property. The segment of trail along the edge of the ravine would not encroach into the
pasture area and both the trail and cattle could be easily fenced to protect the riparian habitat and
prevent trail users from trespassing into the pasture. The proposed trail alignment directly west
of Matadero Creek could also serve as a year-round firebreak in the area where Charles Carter
indicated red-legged frogs may be present. The trail would reduce the need to annually till a
firebreak that is currently being done and,most likely, impacting the red-legged frog habitat.
The District supports the County's effort to work with the community, other agencies, and
Stanford to ensure that the C-I and S-I trail alignments are consistent with the Countywide
Trails Master Plan and the requirements for safe, recreational trails. The District believes the C-
I-B and S-I-E alignments best meet the requirements of the Trails Master Plan and are the
optimal routes for a pleasant trail experience that also reduces environmental impacts and
intrusions into private property.
These trail alignments are required under the terms of the Stanford General Use Permit(GUP) as
mitigation for Stanford's 5 million square-foot development proposed over the next ten years,
and implementation must not be delayed. The District believes that it is appropriate and
necessary for the County to advise Stanford that acceptable trail agreements must be brought to
the Board of Supervisors within 2 months after the conclusion of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) review process.
Sincerely,
Deane Little,President
Board of Directors
DL:cw:ak
Regional Open ace
..................................................................� A
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
May 31, 2002
Scott McQueen
Communications & Control
2633 S. Bascom Ave.
Campbell, CA 95008
Subject: Option to Extend Radio Site Rental Agreement No. 1800
Dear Mr. McQueen:
Pursuant to Section I of the First Addendum to the Radio Site Rental Agreement No.
1800 dated July 7, 1992, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District hereby
respectfully exercises its option to extend said Agreement for the first of its perpetual
successive ten (10) year periods. In accordance with Section 7 of the First Addendum,
the annual charge shall continue at one dollar ($1.00) annually.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at (650)
691-1200.
Sincerely,
Michael C. Williams, SR/WA
Real Property Representative
cc: Board of Directors
J. Maciel
D. Topley
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,Deane Little,Nonette Hanko,Larry Hasseft,Kenneth C.Nitz - General Manager:L.Craig Britton
Regional Open , ace
A
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
May 31, 2002
Mr. Lawrence Lansdale, BRAC Environmental Coordinator
Southwest Division
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
1220 Pacific Highway, Code 06CH.LL
San Diego, CA 92132-5190
RE: Comments on the Final Revised Proposed Plan for Site 25, Eastern
Diked Marsh and"Storm Water Retention Pond", and the Sampling
Work Plan for Stevens Creek Nature Shoreline Study Area
Dear Mr. Lansdale:
On behalf of the District, I would like to submit the following comments on the Final
Revised Proposed Plan (FRPP) for Site 25 and the proposed Sampling Work Plan (SWP)for
District land. Although the District is fully supportive of the Navy's commitment to clean up
contamination on the lands known as Site 25, we remain strongly concerned over the Navy's
desired approach for the cleanup. It is our understanding that the Navy proposes to divide Site
25 into two separate cleanup plans,based exclusively on land ownership, to expedite remediation
of NASA-owned lands. As an initial point, it is not clear what legal basis the Navy is relying on
for the proposal to divide the Site 25 cleanup at this stage of the process. The two-phase
remediation proposes two different cleanup levels for an area that is essentially one large,
interconnected seasonal pond. Given the existing physical and functional connectivity between
the two ownerships that comprise Site 25, and the ever increasing local and governmental
interest in bayland restoration,the District finds the proposed piecemeal remediation approach
for Site 25 to be totally inadequate. This concern is heightened in light of the just announced
agreement to acquire baylands from Cargill Salt,notably lands that are immediately adjacent to
Site 25. It is now unmistakably clear that a reasonably foreseeable future use for all or major
portions of Site 25 is restoration as a tidal marsh. We urge the Navy to withdraw this plan and
prepare one that examines a cleanup to standards appropriate for such use. In the alternative, use
of an interim Record of Decision to allow the Navy to cleanup the most toxic areas, and to
perform the proposed additional sampling, offers a marginally reasonable and rational approach
to Site 25 contamination at this point in time,provided that there is a commitment on the part of
the Navy to complete the entire cleanup in a timely manner.
Turning to specific issues of District concern about the proposed plan, we offer the
following more detailed comments:
Connectivity
The majority of Site 25 is essentially a large, seasonal pond that is divided in ownership between
NASA and the District. Currently, no physical barrier exists to prevent storm water or sediments
from flowing freely between the two properties, which explains the contamination present on
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,Deane Little,Nonette Hanko,Larry Hassett,Kenneth C.Nitz - General Manager:L.Craig Britton
Aft.Lansdale
May 31,2002
Page 2
District land. As we understand the Navy proposal, this connectivity issue is to be fully
addressed during the Remedial Design Stage of the process. The representation of the Navy is
that the connectivity issue is merely a question of design feasibility; essentially that if cleanup to
the standard proposed for the Navy portion of Site 25 is infeasible without a physical barrier, one
will be proposed in the design phase. Although feasibility studies of various remedial designs
will offer the opportunity to analyze possible physical division of Site 25, it will only occur after
the Navy has arbitrarily limited the options that are now available.
Part of the FRPP is a new sampling plan composed of two distinct segments—one for District
land to further assess the presence of contamination and one to further delimit the previously
identified contamination "hot spots" on the Navy portion of Site 25. The further sampling on
District lands will lead to a separate Proposed Plan for cleanup of the District's lands. Without a
simultaneous process for the analysis and cleanup of both portions of the Site, given the present
connectivity, it is just not possible to adequately address the feasibility of any remedial design.
For example, the Navy removes contaminated soil from its lands and determines that no physical
barrier is fiscally feasible. If sampling on District lands discloses the presence of previously
unanticipated contamination,either in volume or identity, the parameters for available remedial
options could be adversely influenced by an earlier determination of remedial design feasibility
for the Navy (NASA)portion of the site.
This connectivity of the two portions underlies our strong concern over the appropriateness of
proceeding with the current plan. The net result of the FRPP is the creation of an inconsistent
pond environment. It is this inherent inconsistency that the District believes will lead to
significant problems in the future restoration of the property. Without a physical barrier to
prevent the dispersal of fish and fish-eating birds, how is its possible for the District to pursue
tidal flow restoration as the reasonable and anticipated use of the land? Without a consistent
remediation plan that supports fish and fish-eating birds for Site 25, it appears that the Navy
would be establishing indirect controls over the future use of District property. Institutional
controls placed on the Navy portion of Site 25 may be feasible; however, such controls are
absolutely unacceptable to the District for its land.
Failure to Consider the Reasonable Future Restoration of Site 25
The Navy is aware of an increasing interest among local groups and the federal government over
the future restoration of Moffett Field baylands,including NASA's stormwater retention pond.
In 1988,Congress passed Public Law 100-566, which identified Site 25 Moffett Field baylands
as part of the acquisition area of the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge
(Wildlife Refuge). In support of this designation, the Navy recently received a letter from
Margaret Kolar with the Wildlife Refuge expressing an interest and willingness from the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to acquire and manage the site as a tidal wetland.
Congresswoman Anna Eshoo has also expressed her support for a remediation alternative that
allows for the future tidal restoration of the land and encourages the Navy to collaborate with the
District and USFWS in investigating such an alternative. Given that the federal government and
local interests groups identify the property as a suitable candidate for future tidal restoration,the
current remediation proposal, which fails to consider tidal restoration as a reasonable future use
of the property, is inappropriate.
Mr.Lansdale
May 31, 2002
Page 3
Stormwater Retention Basin
In the Draft Pre-Construction Sampling Plan, it is asserted that the Navy acquired the
Stormwater Retention Basin in 1951. This is incorrect. The Navy acquired a portion of the
Stormwater Retention Pond; a portion continued to be owned by Leslie Salt Company until the
District's grantor, the Peninsula Open Space Trust, acquired that parcel in 1980. As we have
previously informed the Navy and NASA,the District has never given permission for use of its
lands for stormwater retention nor has it ever authorized pumps or pumping at this site.
Lastly, this letter also serves to provide comments on the proposed Sampling Plan that
has been prepared by the Navy to further evaluate and characterize the contamination present on
District land. These comments were first presented to you verbally in May and are reiterated
here for the record.
Sampling Plan for District Lands
The Proposed Plan that the Navy expects to prepare for the rernediation of District land will be
based in part on findings from a second soils sampling survey. The District has several requests
for the proposed sampling plan to ensure that the range of sampling points will offer a clear
understanding of the extent and nature of any contamination. The current sampling plan lays out
4.5-acre grids across District property with proposed sampling points taken at each gird comer,
resulting in a total of 12 soil samples. The District is concerned about the adequacy and
reliability of this random sampling approach since it does not take into account the difference in
water elevation, water flow, surface topography,or the fact that only a portion of the property
remains submerged through the majority of the year. To ensure that there are no irregularities in
the data, and to property account for differences in soil characteristics, the District requests
doubling the number of sampling points from 12 to 24 by reducing the grid pattern to 2.2-acre
squares.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of our comments.
Si ere ,l
L. Craig Britton
General Manager
LCB:ar:dms
cc: MROSD Board of Directors
Margaret T. Kolar,Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge
Honorable Anna G. Eshoo
__,
�i