HomeMy Public PortalAbout20030605 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 03-12 Regional Open ice
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Meeting 03-12
SPECIAL MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
7:00 p.m.
Thursday, June 5, 2003
***MEETING LOCATION***
San Mateo County Board of Supervisors Chambers
Hall of Justice and Records
400 County Center, Redwood City, California
AGENDA*
7:00 ROLL CALL
AD pnoN OF AGENDA—N. Hanko
BOARD Busmss
7:05* 1 San Mateo County Coastal Annexation Project: Certification of the San Mateo Coastal
Annexation Final Program Environmental Impact Report and Adoption of Findings;
Approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program; Approval of the Service Plan for the San
Mateo Coastal Annexation Area; Approval of the Fiscal Impact Analysis; Adoption of the
Willing Sellers Ordinance; Adoption of the Annexation Policy; Adoption of a Resolution of
Application for Annexation and Sphere of Influence Amendment; Adoption of Resolution of
No Property Tax Exchange; and Consideration of Master Mutual Aid Agreement with the
County of San Mateo; and Consideration of Other Related Project Documents—C. Britton
10:00* ADJOLTRISINMISIT
TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: There will bean opportunity for public comment on this agenda item.
Time for each person to speak will be limited in order to accommodate all speakers. Alternately,
you may comment to the Board by a written communication, which the Board appreciates
Times are estimated
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, IF YOU NEED
ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING,PLEASE CONTACT THE DISTRICT
CLERK AT (650) 691-1200. NOTIFICATION 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING WILL
ENABLE THE DISTRICT TO MAKE REASONABLE ARRANGEMENTS TO ENSURE
ACCESSIBILITY TO THIS MEETING.
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 ' ice
1
R-03-54 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Meeting 03-12
June 5,2003
AGENDA ITEM 1
AGENDA ITEM
San Mateo County Coastal Annexation Project: Certification of the San Mateo Coastal Annexation
Final Program Environmental Impact Report and Adoption of Findings; Approval of the Mitigation
Monitoring Program; Approval of the Service Plan for the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Area;
Approval of the Fiscal Impact Analysis; Adoption of the Willing Sellers Ordinance; Adoption of the
Annexation Policy; Adoption of a Resolution of Application for Annexation and Sphere of Influence
Amendment; Adoption of Resolution of No Property Tax chang , Consideration of Master Mutual Aid
Agreement with the County of San Mateo and Consider tion of Relat Project Documents
GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS
Certify that the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Final Program Environmental Impact Report(Final
EIR)has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),was
presented to, and reviewed and considered by, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Board
of Directors, and reflects the Board's independent judgment and analysis.
1. Approve the Service Plan for the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Area (Service Plan), adopt the
CEQA Findings and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program
2. Approve the Fiscal Impact Analysis
3. Adopt the Willing Sellers Ordinance
4. Adopt the Annexation Policy
5. Adopt the Resolution of Application for Annexation and Sphere of Influence Amendment
6. Adopt the Resolution of No Property Tax Exchange
7. Consider entering into a Master Mutual Aid Agreement for Fire Services with the County of San
Mateo
DISCUSSION
Introduction
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is asked to consider whether
to apply to the San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission(LAFCo) for annexation and a
sphere of influence amendment for the Coastal Annexation Area by taking the recommended actions.
LAFCo will make the final decision on approval of the proposed annexation and sphere of influence
amendment.
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-03-54 Page 2
Upon the Board's vote to proceed, staff will submit the annexation application to the San Mateo County
LAFCo. Because of the District's multiple-county jurisdiction, LAFCo proceedings may take as much as
6 to 12 months. San Mateo County LAFCo will forward the District's application to Santa Clara County
LAFCo, which will 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 and sphere of influence amendment.
The Board's special meeting on June 5, 2003 provides additional opportunity for the Board to receive
comments on the Coastal Annexation project from agencies,organizations, and the public, all of which
have been encouraged to participate in the Board's decision on whether to move forward with the
annexation. All comments received will be presented to the Board. Notices providing information about
this special meeting on June 5 and where to review or purchase the Final EIR and other annexation
project documents were mailed to over 14,000 coastside residents on May 23, 2003, to all individuals and
organizations requesting notice, and to all responsible and trustee agencies on May 27, 2003. Copies of
the Final EIR,Service Plan and Fiscal Impact Analysis were mailed on May 24, 2003 to the agencies
that had commented on the Draft EIR. Review copies of the Final EIR and other documents are available
at the following locations: the Half Moon Bay Public Library,Woodside Public Library, Los Altos
Public Library, Southcoast Bookmobile,the District's administrative office in Los Altos,and on the
District's website. Printed copies may be purchased from Kinko's in Mountain View and Ocean Shore
Printing in Half Moon Bay at the cost of reproduction. The documents are also available on CD-ROM at
no charge.
Background
Coastal San Mateo County is rich in natural resources and ecological diversity due to its mountain-to-
ocean landscape. The dramatic visual character with forested backdrop, coastal plains and valleys,rural
agricultural lands, continental edge, and views of the Pacific Ocean is unparalleled.
Over six years ago,responding to requests from the coastside community,which included resolutions
from the Pescadero Municipal Advisory Council, the MidCoast Community Council and the City of Half
Moon Bay,the District embarked on an ambitious project to assist in the preservation of the outstanding
open space and agricultural resources of the San Mateo County coast. On February 11, 1998, after
analyzing possible methods or processes for coastal preservation,the Board authorized the General
Manager to proceed with research into the feasibility of extending the District's boundaries to establish a
system of open space preserves,parks,and beaches on the San Mateo County coast in coordination with
existing and planned District preserves and trails(see Report R-98-23). The proposed Coastal
Annexation Area is the entire 140,000 acre coastal portion of San Mateo County contiguous with the
existing western boundary of the District(see Exhibit A), and is generally defined as follows:
• On the east by the existing District boundary and San Francisco watershed lands
• On the west by the Pacific Ocean
• On the north b the southern bounds of the City of Pacifica
Y boundary tY
• On the south by the San Mateo County/Santa Cruz County boundary
The Mission for the Coastal Annexation Area
The District's mission for the Coastal Annexation Area as defined by proposed the Service Plan is:
i
R-03-54 Page 3
To acquire and preserve in perpetuity open space land and agricultural land of
regional significance,protect and restore the natural environment,preserve rural
character, encourage viable agricultural use of land resources, and provide
g tp'
opportunities for ecologically sensitive public enjoyment and education.
The Coastal Annexation project is consistent with, and encouraged by, the San Mateo County General
Plan. Many of the goals and objectives of the General Plan's Park and Recreation Resources Policies
specifically speak to efforts such as the Coastal Annexation project as shown by the following examples:
• Policy 6.47-Encourage the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to acquire,protect, and
make available for public use open space lands in rural areas and open space of regional
significance in urban areas in cooperation with San Mateo County.
• Policy 6.38.b-Particularly encourage the development of: trails that link park and recreation
facilities on San Francisco Bay to those on the Pacific Coast; multi-use trails where appropriate
and trails in County lands under management by other public agencies. Ensure that these trails
do not adversely affect adjacent land uses.
The Coastside Subregional Planning Project, September, 1998,prepared by the Cities of Half Moon Bay
and Pacifica and the County of San Mateo, and sponsored by the Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG), identifies natural resource protection and management as a key issue within the subregion,
including parkland, agricultural and grazing land, forested watersheds, coastal wetlands,beaches,creeks
and wildlife habitat. The project report discusses the decrease in land purchases by the State Department
of Parks and Recreation, local cities, and counties due to diminishing funds. It recognizes that expansion
of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District's boundaries represents one of the most promising efforts
for acquisition and preservation of open space.
The Midcoast Recreation Needs Assessment for San Mateo County, which focused specifically on the
rnidcoast communities of Montara,Moss Beach, Princeton, Miramar, and El Granada, found that the top
three priorities for people in those rnidcoast communities were: preserving natural open space,
walking/jogging trails, and multi-use trails. The findings of the assessment support the District's mission
for the Coastal Annexation Area.
The Pacifica Boundary Study, Golden Gate National Recreation Area San Mateo County, California,
prepared by Pacific West Region National Park Service May, 1997,describes the unique natural and
scenic resources of coastal San Mateo County and the need for greater preservation efforts. The report
discusses potential development in the area around Pacifica and the important riparian and wetland
habitats that could be affected if there are no preservation efforts. Some of the lands include biologically
rich wetland habitat that may support special status species such as the California red-legged frog and the
San Francisco garter snake.
Project Objectives and Alternatives
The District's Coastal Annexation project focuses on preservation and management of open space
resources in order to fulfill the following objectives identified in the proposed Service Plan.
• Protect watershed integrity and water quality
• Protect sensitive resources such as habitats for special-status species
• Provide key links to existing District and other public open space lands
R-03-54 Page 4
• Provide visitor-serving facilities (unpaved trails and small, gravel-surfaced parking lots) for low-
intensity recreation(hiking,bicycling and horseback riding)
• Support development of an integrated regional trail system coordinated with the San Mateo
County Trails Plan
• Provide opportunities for scientific research,resource conservation demonstration projects,
outdoor environmental education programs, and interpretive programs, and
• Preserve existing and potential agricultural operations in order to keep the maximum amount of
prime agricultural land and other lands suitable for agriculture in agricultural production.
The Draft Environmental Impact Report(Draft EIR)for the annexation project considered the proposed
project and identified and evaluated a number of alternatives to the proposed project. These ranged from
doing nothing(the "No Project"alternative)to annexing only a portion of the proposed Annexation Area.
Organizations and agencies whose mission is preservation of open space have expressed the need for
increased stewardship of the open space and agricultural resources of coastal San Mateo County
throughout the proposed Annexation Area. Discussions with other open space,recreation, and park
service providers within the Coastal Annexation Area(including the National Park Service, the
California Department of Parks and Recreation, and the San Mateo County Parks Department) indicate
that these agencies have a limited capacity to provide expanded open space preservation and management
services, and that,therefore, there is the need for a local agency to provide these services. Local,private
land trusts and conservation organizations owning land in the Coastal Annexation Area are not structured
to manage open space lands and provide public access on a long-term basis. If the District adopts the no
project alternative and does not complete the Coastal Annexation,the potential environmental benefits to
open space, agriculture,public recreation, and natural, scenic, and cultural resources due to the District's
stewardship programs will not be realized
An alternative to annexation of the entire coastal area would be to extend the District's sphere of
influence to include the entire Coastal Annexation Area,but annex only a portion of the larger area.
However,reducing the Annexation Area would limit the District's comprehensive watershed-based
resource planning efforts in addition to reducing preservation of open space, agriculture,public
recreation, and natural, scenic and cultural resources. The overall environmental benefits of the proposed
open space and agriculture preservation program would not be appreciative, and accomplishment of the
project objectives would be significantly diminished if an alternative geographic Annexation Area was
selected(see Chapter V of the Draft EIR).
The environmental analysis finds that the Coastal Annexation project will not cause significant
environmental impacts by implementing the Service Plan policies, guidelines and implementation
actions,together with the Mitigation Measures in the EIR. Therefore,because there are no significant
environmental impacts resulting from the project, and because it maximizes fulfillment of the basic
project objectives,the proposed project is the environmentally superior and recommended alternative.
Taxation
The Service Plan and annexation proposal are based on existing revenue sources. No new tax is
proposed.The District's primary revenue source is a share of the annual total property tax,approximately
1.7 cents per$100 of assessed property value, collected within the District The constitutional
requirements of Propositions 62 and 218 (adopted after the formation of the District)prohibit the District
from imposing any property tax within the Coastal Annexation Area without a vote of the residents of
that area. Therefore, the District could not extend the existing property tax within the District's current
boundaries to the Coastal Annexation Area without such a vote. No such tax is proposed. In the future,
I
R-03-54 Page 5
the District could consider whether to seek taxpayer approval of a funding measure,but any decision
would have to be made after approval of the annexation proposal.
Service Plan
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the proposed Service Plan for the San Mateo County Coastal
Annexation Area attached to this staff report. The purpose of the Service Plan is to outline the services
that would be provided by the District and the policies that would apply to District activities in the
Coastal Annexation Area. The District will focus its efforts on the preservation and management of open
space and agricultural resources of its own lands or lands of other public or non-profit entities that
request management assistance from the District in order to fulfill the project objectives.
District staff and Board members worked with a team of specialized consultants and a citizens' task
force, the Coastal Advisory Committee(CAC),to develop the Service Plan by identifying issues
regarding the proposed boundary extension, and developing policies for the District's operations on the
San Mateo County coast. The CAC, chaired by San Mateo County Supervisor Rich Gordon, was
composed of 13 coastside residents representing agricultural and environmental community interests.
The Service Plan was developed with the input of the CAC at 17 meetings held over the course of one
year. On November 28, 2000, the Board reviewed and approved the Draft Service Plan for the San Mateo
County Coastal Annexation Area(see Report R-00-145)and accepted updates to the Draft Service Plan
on June 12, 2002 (see Report R-02-82). The Final Service Plan for consideration by the Board
incorporates all Mitigation Measures recommended in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
Coastal Annexation Area.
The Service Plan includes an overview of the program for 15 years after annexation including land and
easement acquisition,development of trails and staging areas, and land management. At the end of the
15-year period, it is anticipated that the District will have acquired a total of 7,500 acres of land in fee
and 1,800 acres in easement. It is estimated that 2,500 acres of land will be managed under contract.
The total of all lands and easements owned or managed by the District in the Coastal Annexation Area
will be approximately 11,800 acres after 15 years. Based on this total, the District estimates that it will
provide approximately 37 miles of public trails and two staging areas.
This plan is based on funding from only existing District revenue sources, including grants and gifts, and
emphasizes managing land acquired by others. There is no new tax associated with the proposed Coastal
Annexation. The District's purchase of properties and easements within the Coastal Annexation Area
would be limited to those properties offered by willing sellers and to funding available from grants and
gifts. However, annexation would allow the District to work with the local community in the Coastal
Annexation Area and within the existing District to identify a funding measure that, at a later time,could
be submitted for taxpayer approval as described above under the heading of Taxation. Proposal of a
funding mechanism requires deliberate research and analysis to identify projected needs for funding,
target uses for funds to be derived, and evaluate the voters' willingness to pay. A tax funding measure
would currently require at least a two-thirds margin of approval by the voters.
The Service Plan will allow the San Mateo County LAFCo to determine if annexation of the Coastal
Annexation Area to the District would be consistent with the goals of the State to encourage orderly
growth and development and to preserve open space and agricultural land as set forth in the Cortese-
Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. The Service Plan also serves as the
project description for the Final EIR and as the basis for the Fiscal Impact Analysis.
R-03-54 Page 6
Agricultural Preservation Component
In preparing the Draft Service Plan,the CAC,District staff, and the Board recognized that the lands in
the Coastal Annexation Area differ from lands within the District's existing boundaries. Agricultural
uses are found throughout much of the proposed Annexation Area. In light of this fact, agricultural
preservation and protection of agricultural production on the coast are an important part of the proposed
Service Plan. The Plan seeks to promote these uses together with open space protection,passive
recreational use, and preservation of sensitive habitats.
The policies in the proposed Service Plan build on the experiences of the numerous open space preserves
and parks that accommodate both agriculture and recreation elsewhere in the greater San Francisco Bay
region. These include the following:
0 The Pt. Reyes National Seashore,managed by the National Park Service,encompasses more than 100
square miles. Within this area, approximately 19,000 acres have been retained in agricultural
production within a"pastoral zone". Within this zone, six active dairies graze a total of 7,700 acres.
An additional 11,200 acres are in beef cattle grazing. Ranchers typically sign a 25-30 year
"reservations of use"and occupancy lease. A number of trails traverse the pastoral zone, and tours
of selected Point Reyes ranches are offered periodically by the Marin Agricultural Land Trust. Also
within the Seashore is the Morgan Horse Ranch, a working horse ranch with trailside exhibits
focusing on the characteristics, breeding and history of Morgan horses. A 0.5 mile self-guided trail
provides access to this ranch.
0 The East Bay Regional Park District(EBRPD)manages 60 parks covering nearly 95,000 acres.
Many of the parks utilize grazing to promote native plant diversity and to provide fire protection for
park and surrounding areas. The Las Trampas Regional Wilderness Park Plan serves as a good
model for balancing resource protection, grazing and recreation. Based on a detailed resource
inventory, this plan includes an extensive natural resources management component as well as an
internal and regional trails plan. Multi-use trails traverse the park and offer connections to the Mt.
Diablo Regional Trail.
0 The East Bay Municipal Utility District(EBMUD), also located in the East Bay Hills,manages
approximately 28,000 acres adjacent to EBRPD. In December 2001, EBMUD completed a Range
Management Plan that utilizes cattle grazing to promote grassland biodiversity,reduce fire hazard,
and to generate revenue for the District. Grazing leases are offered on one or five-year terms. 80
miles of trails provide access through these lands for hikers and equestrians (by permit), and offer
important regional connections to trails on adjacent East Bay Regional Park District properties.
0 The Solano County Farmlands&Open Space Foundation, located in the North Bay,manages the
Lynch Canyon Open Space Preserve. Adjacent to this preserve is the Newell Open Space Preserve,
managed by the Napa County Land Trust. While long-term leases allow for grazing operations on
these preserves, they also provide for hiking and equestrian use. A key section of the Bay Area
Ridge Trail passes through these preserves and was recently dedicated.
Final Program Environmental Impact Report
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.
R-03-54 Page 7
The act of annexation is a legal and administrative change to the District's boundary and does not itself
produce an environmental effect. Implementation of that change through land management activities in
the Coastal Annexation Area,however,does create the potential for environmental effects. The District
Board and staff chose to have an EIR 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 Final EIR.
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 locations of subsequent
land acquisitions and low-intensity recreation facilities are presently unknown. Thomas Reid Associates,
environmental consultants,prepared a Final EIR that considers the environmental setting of the proposed
Annexation Area and the kinds of activities that may follow annexation. The Final 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
Service Plan that would govern site-specific planning and implementation. These policies and
guidelines, along with the Mitigation Measures in the Final 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.
Public Participation in the EIR Process
Prior to preparing the Draft EIR, the District held three public scoping meetings to receive public
comment on the environmental issues,Mitigation Measures, and alternatives to be addressed in the Draft
EIR:
• Half Moon Bay on June 20, 2000
• Pescadero on June 22, 2000, and
• The District's administrative office in Los Altos on June 27, 2000
On June 12, 2002,the Board received an informational report on the establishment of the comment
period for the Draft EIR commencing on June 13, 2002 and ending August 2, 2002 that provided a 51-
day comment period(see Report R-02-82). Although CEQA Guidelines require that the public have at
least 45 days to review and comment on the Draft EIR, the Board, in response to public requests,
I
R-03-54 Page 8
extended the comment period to August 28, 2002,providing a total of 77 days for review and comment
on the environmental document(see Report R-02-98).
The District mailed public notices of the Draft EIR's availability to all individuals and organizations
requesting notice, all responsible and trustee agencies,and to over 13,000 coastside residents. The Draft
EIR was available for review or purchase beginning on June 2, 2002. Review copies of the Draft EIR
were available at the following locations: the Half Moon Bay Public Library, Woodside Public Library,
Los Altos Public Library, Pescadero Bookmobile,the District's administrative office in Los Altos and on
the District's website. Printed copies of the Draft EIR could be purchased from Kinko's in Mountain
View and Ocean Shore Printing in Half Moon Bay at the cost of reproduction. Copies were also
available on CD-ROM at no charge.
Although a public hearing to receive public comments on the Draft EIR was not required,the District
held three public meetings to take comments during the review period:
• Pescadero on July 9, 2002;
• Half Moon Bay on July 17, 2002; and
• The District's administrative office in Los Altos on July 31, 2002. The public meeting at the
District's administrative office had all District Board members in attendance. Over 250 verbal
comments and 320 written comments were received during the public comment period in the
form of 62 verbal commenters, 5 Agency letters, 17 letters from Organizations, and 75 letters
from members of the public.
Many of the comments addressed similar issues,which are summarized below.
Key Issues
1. Relationship with Peninsula Open Space Trust(POST)and Other Open Space Providers
Within its current boundaries,the District has worked with other public recreation and open space
providers, conservation agencies, and non-profit land trusts to open manage acquire and o ace.The
q g
Coastal Annexation project anticipates that the District will pursue similar partnership opportunities
in the Coastal Annexation Area. Some commenters requested information on the relationship
between the District and other potential open space providers in the Coastal Annexation Area. The
Final EIR discusses this in some detail (see General Responses 2 and 3, Chapter II, on pages 11-4
through 11-7).
Opportunities to partner with other public agencies and with private organizations for land
acquisition or management by the District will depend on a number of factors, including the
availability of land from a willing seller,the availability of funding for the project, the evaluation of
the suitability of the Coastal Annexation project in light of the Draft Service Plan, and the
preparation of a site-specific Use and Management Plan.
Some commenters requested additional information concerning the District's potential projects with
POST. POST has been a partner with the District on acquisitions in its current boundaries and the
District anticipates that it will partner with POST on projects in the Coastal Annexation Area. POST
has a current program to acquire lands in the Coastal Annexation Area. POST has stated its intent to
continue to be active in the Coastal Annexation Area regardless of whether the annexation proposal
is approved. However, as the Final EIR notes in its discussion of Project Alternatives,nonprofit
agencies like POST are typically not equipped to offer the level of land management, including law
enforcement patrol and resource management,that the District can provide. Due to the factors that
R-03-54 Page 9
will determine the District's ability to acquire or manage land, it is not possible to identify with
certainty which properties in the Coastal Annexation Area will be acquired or managed by the
District. POST partners with a wide variety of service providers in addition to the District. For
example,POST is in discussions with the GGNRA about possible acquisition of its Rancho Corral de
Tierra property, and has partnered with State Parks and other agencies on such major acquisitions as
San Gregorio Farms, Cloverdale Ranch, Cowell Ranch and Bolsa Point, all of which were
partnerships with State Parks.
There is no agreement between the District and POST,nor with any other potential service provider
or partner(whether governmental or private nonprofit),as to which, if any, of its properties the
District may acquire or manage if the Annexation Proposal is approved. Although it is likely the
District will acquire some POST property during the Draft EIR's 15-year planning period, specific
acquisitions can only be determined after the consideration of such factors as availability of adequate
funding, a willing seller, adequate District staff and resources, suitability of the acquisition in light of
the Service Plan Policies, and environmental evaluation.
2. Representation
How the residents of the Coastal Annexation Area would be represented on the District's Board of
Directors has been raised by some area residents. Residents have asked for information concerning
the potential number of the District's elected officials and how their wards would be divided in the
event the annexation project were approved, as well as how the Coastal Annexation Area would be
represented on the District's Board.
The subject of representation is discussed in the Final Service Plan " (See "Representation"at Pages
20-21. See also Exhibit H, "Text Corrections,"which indicates current ward boundaries). By
statute,the District is limited to seven elected Directors representing seven geographical wards of
approximately equal population. While no additional wards can be created if the annexation is
approved,there will be an opportunity for Coast residents to work with the District to develop a
redistricting plan that best reflects their desired ward configurations. The Coastal Annexation Area
could be included in one or more wards,thus enabling one or more Coast residents the opportunity to
run for and serve on the District's Board of Directors.
The Service Plan proposes including the input of Coast residents and the input of local elected
officials,government agencies, and government-sponsored agencies in making these decisions.
Annexation will also enable the District to conduct public Board meetings and workshops in the
Coastal Annexation Area to provide opportunities for public participation in Board decisions.
3. Agriculture
Some of the comments on the Draft EIR related to the definition of agricultural land, compatibility of
open space and agriculture,viability of agriculture in connection with the proposed project,
conversion of agricultural land,the agricultural community's desire for specific agricultural policies
and guidelines, and the potential for bio-terrorism as a result of public access. The District consulted
with Strong Associates, agricultural economists, to analyze the potential effects of the Coastal
Annexation on agriculture(see General Response 8 in the Final EIR).
• Definition of Prime Agricultural Land-The Draft Service Plan has been revised to include a
single definition of"Prime Agricultural Land"based on the County Local Coastal Plan. This
would be consistent with Draft Service Plan policies requiring compliance with San Mateo
l�
R-03-54 Page 10
County plans and ordinances. The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg definition remains relevant for the
District's application to LAFCo.
• Prime Agricultural Lands Not in Agricultural Use -Mitigation Measure AGR-la in the Draft EIR
provides that new buildings and staging areas may not be located on prime agricultural lands that
are being used for agricultural purposes. Several commenters requested that buildings and
staging areas be precluded on prime agricultural lands that are not being used for agricultural
production. This would help further minimize the project's effects on farms and ranches. To
implement this recommendation Mitigation Measure AGR-la in the Draft EIR has been revised
accordingly.
• Non-Prime Agricultural Lands Suitable for Farming-Policy P.3 of the Draft Service Plan
requires the District to comply with all applicable County land use policies and regulations and
Policy P.2 provides that the District will not initiate any activities within the Coastal Zone that
would require a General Plan amendment or zoning change. Mitigation AGR-2 proposes
revising Policy P.2 to provide that the District will not seek General Plan amendments or zone
changes anywhere in the Annexation Area. Taken together, these policies and the Mitigation
Measure will ensure that any District activities on lands suitable for agriculture comply with the
standards listed above and other County policies and regulations in the Local Coastal Plan,
General Plan, and zoning ordinance. These requirements,together with the other Draft Service
Plan policies and recommended Mitigation Measures, are sufficient to ensure that the project
will not have an adverse impact on agricullture.
• Trail and Facility Siting Criteria- Some commenters suggested that the trail siting requirement
proposed by Mitigation Measure AGL-3a allowed too much discretion to site trails in a manner
that could adversely affect agriculture. The intent of the proposed requirement was to ensure that
trails be allowed to traverse cultivated lands only when there was no other feasible alternative.
Based on the District's past experience in trail design, there are generally numerous trail design
alternatives and there would be very few circumstances in which no feasible alternative would be
available. In the unlikely event that no alternative was available,this Mitigation Measure would
allow a trail to traverse the farmland only if buffers and other tools were implemented in a
manner sufficient to ensure that trail use did not interfere with agricultural operations. The
measure has been modified to reflect this intent.
• Compatibility with Adjacent Agricultural Uses—Some commenters expressed concern that the
proposed Service Plan policies and the Mitigation Measures in the Draft EIR would not be
sufficient to ensure compatibility between adjoining recreational and agricultural uses.
The Draft EIR recommends six Mitigation Measures to ensure compatibility of recreational use
with agriculture. Several of these measures would require the District to adequately protect
adjacent agricultural uses through the use of buffers. Several commenters requested that the
District develop more specific policies regarding buffers between recreational and agricultural
land uses. In order to enhance the buffer policies proposed in the EIR,the Mitigation Measures
have been revised to include more specific performance standards and guidelines to ensure that
recreational uses will not conflict with agricultural operations. These measures are incorporated
in the Service Plan policies. Under these policies, the District would not be permitted to develop
a trail that would either interfere with agricultural operations on lands crossed by a trail or
preclude the viability of agricultural uses adjoining a trail. This requires that all trails be
designed in a manner that avoids interference with agricultural operations.
R-03-54 Page 11
The Draft Service Plan contains several policies and guidelines to ensure that the District
receives adequate input from landowners and other members of the public in siting trails and
related buffers. The District will be required to use these procedures in developing trails plans
including the portions of those plans that address providing sufficient buffers for agriculture. In
addition, Mitigation Measure AGL-3c would specifically require the District to consult with
operators of adjoining agricultural operations. Some commenters noted that there may be
circumstances where an active operator is not available. Accordingly,this measure is revised to
require consultation with the owner or operator, as indicated at the end of General Response 8 in
the Final EIR. The policies in the proposed Service Plan are consistent with the San Mateo
County General Plan, including Rural Land Use Policies, which guide the development of
compatible uses and address the compatibility of agriculture and recreation as follows:
9.36b. -Consider agriculture to be a compatible activity in public recreation
lands, which must be protected and buffered from significant public
intrusion.
• Management of Agricultural Lands Acquired by the District- Some commenters requested
additional information regarding the manner in which the District would manage lands acquired
for agricultural use. The nature of management will depend on the resources available on
specific parcels acquired. The Service Plan establishes a number of guidelines requiring
management to support agricultural production from farms,ranches and grazing operations. In
order to ensure that agricultural production issues are considered as an integral component of site
planning,Service Plan Guideline G.6.3 (concerning preparation of resource management plans)
has been revised to include specific references to agricultural resources and to require an
agricultural management plan. This will ensure that full consideration is given to the optimal
approach to managing lands for farming, grazing, and ranching, whether lands are acquired in fee
or via an agricultural easement or lease.
• Sale and Leaseback of District Lands- Several commenters requested policies to ensure that
agricultural lands in current farming,ranching, or grazing use at the time of acquisition by the
District would not be removed from agricultural production for an extended period during the
land use planning process. Some commenters requested a policy specifying a timeline for such
leasebacks and sales following acquisition.
A new policy was added to the Service Plan to ensure that existing operators of such agricultural
lands acquired by the District are not displaced by the acquisition and can continue to operate
while the District completes a use and management plan for the property. Because there are
numerous variables that affect the time required to prepare a use and management plan it is not
feasible to specify that all sales or leasebacks will take place within a specified time as requested
by some commenters. This policy will ensure the continued agricultural use of such lands,
however,by allowing existing uses to be maintained until the property is offered for sale or lease
pursuant to the use and management plan.
• Conditions in Agricultural Leases and Easements-Several commenters requested additional
information regarding the nature of the conditions that would be imposed in agricultural
easements or leases. The Service Plan has been amended to include a policy that ensures the
District will actively pursue opportunities to enter agricultural easements and leases with
interested farmers and ranchers to promote and maintain economically viable agriculture. The
policy outlines requirements for leases and easements. All easements would be subject to the
Service Plan's willing seller policy such that the District would not be able to impose easement
conditions that are not acceptable to the landowner.
R-03-54 Page 12
• Agricultural Grant Programs-Several commenters suggested that the District partner with
agricultural operators to obtain grants to support agricultural preservation. The Legislature has
established several grant programs for the preservation of agriculture through the purchase of
agricultural easements and the provision of grant funds for other agricultural projects. To ensure
that the District takes advantage of programs of this kind, a Service Plan policy has been
amended to require the District to work actively with agricultural operators on District lands to
obtain grant funding for agricultural preservation.
• Farmworker Housing-Some commenters expressed concern that land acquisition by the District
could result in the removal of farmworker housing. The County has guidelines that allow farm
worker housing based on identifiable needs and necessary support infrastructure. Land under
District ownership leased for agriculture or under an agricultural easement would be subject to
the same guidelines. Nothing in the Draft Service Plan would require removal of farmworker
housing; the District's current operations generally retain existing housing on District lands
wherever possible. District staff, with its knowledge and experience in land use permit
processing,might offer assistance to farmers leasing District-owned land in preparing
applications and related materials to develop additional farm worker housing.
It is possible that housing that is dangerous or dilapidated could be removed. In such event the
District would work with the operator to facilitate replacement of the housing. In addition,
where expanded housing is important to support agricultural operations on District lands, the
District would work with operators to allow such expansion consistent with County regulations
and other legal requirements.
• District's Ability to Manage Lands-Several commenters requested additional information
regarding the District's expertise in managing agricultural lands. The District has general
agricultural land stewardship experience from its current operations on the bayside, which
include the following: the District leases a 70-acre Christmas tree farm at Monte Bello and
Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserves; the recently acquired 770-acre Big Dipper Ranch is leased
by the District for grazing; the District leases the 3-acre Picchetti Ranch Winery, including
vineyards; and,until recently, a 2-acre chestnut orchard at Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve
was leased to the family who originally owned the property. In addition,the District is currently
working with Ridge Vineyards to acquire conservation easements over vineyards at Monte Bello
Open Space Preserve.
The District also recognizes that agriculture in the Coastal Annexation Area differs from that in
the District's current service area. Accordingly,the Draft Service Plan states that the District
will retain additional personnel to assist in land management in the Coastal Annexation Area if
the project is approved. Because agricultural lands are among the resources that the District is
seeking to protect,Service Plan Guideline G.2 is amended to require the District to ensure that it
has the personnel available to properly manage agricultural lands.
• Terrorism Risks to Agriculture-Some commenters requested an analysis of the potential that the
proposed project would adversely affect agriculture by facilitating terrorist acts against
agricultural operations. The possibility that San Mateo Coast agricultural lands would be a target
of bio-terrorism is very small.
R-03-54 Page 13
4. Timberlands
Several commenters raised a concern that District acquisitions could remove timberland from
production, thus adversely affecting the local timber industry. Policy P.3 of the Service Plan requires
the District to comply with all applicable County land use policies and regulations, and Policy P.2
provides that the District will not initiate any activities within the Coastal Zone that would require a
General Plan amendment or zoning change. Therefore,the District is required to comply with the
standards,policies and regulations that provide for the protection of timberlands as found in the
Local Coastal Plan,the County's General Plan and zoning ordinance.
The District has acquired properties within its existing boundaries that have been logged under a
timber harvest plan. The District has also acquired properties that were the subject of an on-going
timber harvest operation, as was the case with the acquisition of the Bear Creek Redwoods Open
Space Preserve in Santa Clara County,and Purisima Creek Redwoods and El Corte de Madera Creek
Open Space Preserves in San Mateo County. In such circumstances, the District works
collaboratively with the landowner and the timber operator to successfully complete the harvest
consistent with the District's resource management goals. District staff also works very closely with
the timber operator to ensure public safety. These sites remain closed to the public until the
operation and public access planning are completed. In view of this successful experience, the Draft
Service Plan provides that the District may purchase property with approved timber harvest plans.
The intent of Guideline 6.4.2 is to enable the District to have the flexibility to consider these
acquisitions and to determine whether in the particular case to implement all or a portion of the
timber harvest plan. There are management techniques that can allow timber harvesting to proceed
in a manner that is compatible with recreational uses and with the preservation of natural qualities.
5. Public Services
• Fire -A number of comments were received regarding the potential fire risk in the Coastal
Annexation Area, and public services available for wildland fire suppression and emergency
medical services. The District consulted with Moritz Arboricultural Consulting and Landscape
FIRES to provide supplemental information on the proposed Coastal Annexation program
relative to the wildland fire hazard and the potential ignition risk resulting from recreational use.
Richard Montague of Firewise 2000,Inc., assisted the District in evaluating the environmental
issues regarding wildland fire and emergency response.
Moritz observed that public access and visitor use on lands acquired by the District in the Coastal
Annexation Area has the potential to increase ignition risk to some extent. However, studies
have shown that fire occurrence in regional parks is not significantly related to public use of
open space for low-intensity uses such as hiking. Further, staging and trailhead design features
and management programs recommended by Moritz have been included as Mitigation Measures
to further ensure that the risk of wildland fire and the potential ignition risk from the project will
not be significant. Firewise 2000 concurred with Moritz that increased recreational use within
the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Area will not create a significant increase in fire ignitions.
Firewise 2000 reviewed the District's staffing level and equipment and determined that given the
low wildland fire risk and the existing and anticipated District staff and equipment resources
after annexation, there will be no significant impact on the resources of the fire service agencies
in the Coastal Annexation Area(see General Response 9 in the Final EIR).
R-03-54 Page 14
To enhance the District's fire suppression capabilities,the Final EIR contains one new and one
revised Mitigation Measure,which require the District to undertake specified joint operations
with the County Fire Department and the California Department of Forestry(CDF). These
include consultation on fuel management practices, coordination on review of available water
resources,making a new 1500-2000 gallon maintenance-style water truck available for mutual
aid calls, and formalizing mutual aid agreements.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2c provides that the District coordinate with County Fire and CDF to
formalize mutual aid agreements. Accordingly, staff is recommending that the Board authorize
staff to develop a mutually acceptable mutual aid agreement to address these issues.
• Traffic -Comments on the Draft EIR raised questions concerning both the general methodology
used in the Draft EIR as well as the conclusions of the Draft EIR traffic study. Public comments
concerning the traffic analysis and potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed
annexation project were reviewed by traffic consultant Hexagon Transportation Consultants.
More detailed information concerning the annexation project's anticipated effects and a
discussion on the methodology used in the traffic projects has been provided(see General
Response 10 in the Final EIR and Exhibit B). Hexagon concluded that the results of this analysis
indicate that all of the study roadway segments would continue to operate within their respective
Level Of Service standard with the addition of annexation-related traffic. Therefore, the
annexation project would not cause any significant impacts to the study roadways. Additional
information regarding the methodology used in the EIR's traffic analysis is included in the
memorandum from Hexagon attached to this staff report(see Exhibit B).
• Visitor Services - Some commenters raised concerns about visitor services impacts in the Coastal
Annexation Area. The destinations for most of the current visitors to the area are the coastal
beaches and parks, such as Pescadero Creek County Park, James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve
and San Gregorio State Beach,which are owned and managed by other public agencies. The
public beaches and other publicly owned parks in the Coastal Annexation Area provide parking
and restroom facilities for their visitors. Local visitor-serving commercial establishments also
provide facilities for their guests, as required by County regulations. The District will provide
the public services needed for its own visitors including parking and restrooms on District lands
in the Coastal Annexation Area that are open for public access.
6. Housing
As part of the scoping and Notice of Preparation(NOP)process, housing was determined not to be a
potentially significant impact of the Coastal Annexation Area program. This was because the
District's main acquisition interests will be large, undeveloped, or sparsely developed parcels and in
the event structures are acquired, such structures will be maintained and either made available for
rental or will continue to be occupied by existing residents through such mechanisms as life estates.
Thus,the project will not displace substantial numbers of people or housing. Since the purpose of
the project is preservation and management of open space and agricultural land of regional
significance, open space lands typically purchased by the District have no, or very limited, services
and housing. However, when land purchases include housing, the District will employ several
methods to retain viable housing:
• Life estates for existing residents
Use of residences for staff or caretaker housing
i
R-03-54 Page 15
• Make housing not used by the District available for rental with special consideration for
public service workers
It should be noted that dilapidated or dangerous structures and other hazardous structures not of
historic or scenic value would likely be demolished.
6. Schools
Some commenters raised specific concerns about potential impacts on schools in the Coastal
Annexation Area. The Coastal Annexation project would not result in the need to construct any new
facilities in that it will not have a significant impact on schools, and the District will provide
opportunities on lands it acquires for scientific research,resource conservation demonstration
projects, and outdoor environmental education and interpretive programs that will enhance those
currently offered by schools in the Coastal Annexation Area.
A component of the District's mission for the Coastal Annexation Area is to provide opportunities
for scientific research,resource conservation demonstration projects,outdoor environmental
education programs, and interpretive programs. The District currently offers Spaces and Species, an
environmental science educational program, to students in grades 3-6. There are additional
opportunities for school groups, including teens,to participate in field projects through the District's
Preserve Partner program, or individually as a Special Project Volunteer. Spaces and Species would
continue to be available to the entire community and the field programs would be extended to lands
acquired in the Coastal Annexation Area. The District looks forward to engaging in cooperative
efforts with the coastal school districts to provide environmental education programs that benefit the
community.
The Board is asked to certify that the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Final Program Environmental
Impact Report has been completed in compliance with CEQA by adopting the CEQA Findings presented
to the Board for approval and to ensure implementation of the Mitigation Measures by adopting the
Mitigation Monitoring Program(Exhibit Q.
Fiscal Impact Anal
The Fiscal Impact Analysis, prepared by Economics Research Associates(ERA), examines the potential
I
fiscal impacts of the District's proposed Service Plan for the Coastal Annexation Area. The purpose of
the Fiscal Impact Analysis is to serve as a companion document to the Service Plan and Final 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 Impact 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
The Fiscal Impact Analysis has been updated to reflect the District's current cash flow projections and
changes to the funding for La Honda-Pescadero Unified School District.
R-03-54 Page 16
The total tax revenue loss to coastal school districts is expected to comprise a total of approximately
$4,100 over the 15-year period. This total takes into account the fact that the La Honda-Pescadero
Unified School District has become a basic aid district. Meanwhile,the Cabrillo Unified School District
is expected to remain a non-basic aid district so that any tax revenue loss is reimbursed by state funds.
As a basic aid district, La Honda-Pescadero Unified School District will no longer have property tax
losses reimbursed by state funds.
Based on a review of the projected cash reserves of the District, ERA concludes that the available cash
flow is more than adequate to cover the projected expense of implementing the Service Plan.
Consequently, the extension of the District boundaries to include the Coastal Annexation Area will have
no net impact on the level of service that the District is able to provide within its existing boundaries.
The Fiscal Impact Analysis addresses the fact that the annexation program will result in some lands being
removed from the tax rolls since government agencies do not pay property taxes on lands owned
(however,possessory interest taxes are paid on lands leased for residential or commercial purposes such
as agricultural leases). This will result in a net loss of some tax revenue in the County. As a result of low
assessed property values, and the fact that that much of the land acquired by the District may already be
tax-exempt(due to ownership by a public agency or tax-exempt organization),the potential property tax
revenue loss to San Mateo County as a result of District acquisition is not sizeable. To calculate the tax
loss, ERA assumed land would be acquired according to the Service Plan, and that assessed property
values would inflate at a rate two percent annually, under the guidelines of Proposition 13. Based on the
above assumptions, the total tax revenue loss to San Mateo County over a 15-year period under the
Service Plan is estimated to be $90,000. This represents an average annual tax loss of$6,000 to all
agencies combined over the 15-year period. According to ERA, the estimated loss in tax revenues is
unlikely to have a significant impact on the ability of County agencies and districts to maintain their
existing levels of service(the maximum annual combined loss,which occurs in year 15,represents only
about .016 percent of the Fiscal Year 2001/2002 County General Fund).
This analysis is discussed in depth in the Fiscal Impact Analysis on pages 15-19. Table 5 of the Fiscal
Impact Analysis presents a detailed account of the projected total estimated property tax revenue loss.
This estimate excludes any anticipated possessory interest taxes.
Some commenters observed that the Service Plan projects that approximately 80% of the lands acquired
by the District will be from government agencies or nonprofit organizations, which have already removed
lands they acquire from the tax rolls. Some commenters point to large properties in the Coastal
Annexation Area that have already been acquired by government agencies or nonprofits. They have
requested the Fiscal Impact Analysis include all property tax reductions due to acquisitions by other
government agencies and nonprofit organizations.However, these acquisitions are independent of the
Coastal Annexation project, and have either already occurred or are anticipated to occur in the future,
whether or not the District annexation proceeds. These acquisitions and tax reductions would occur
independent of, and regardless of, any actions of the District and are beyond the scope of the fiscal
analysis for the annexation.
Some commenters requested that future property tax revenues be estimated based on current market
values rather than average assessed valuation. However,the current assessed valuation is the accurate
reflection of projected tax loss from District acquisitions.Market value is a factor in the District's ability
to fund the services it wants to provide,but not a reflection of actual tax reduction that may occur from
the project.
R-03-54 Page 17
District staff and the Board are aware that any tax reductions are unwelcome in the current state budget
climate. Staff and the Board will look for opportunities to develop partnerships with local agencies in the
Coastal Annexation Area to work on mutual projects of interest. These opportunities can help offset even
this small loss of revenue. The Mutual Aid Agreement for fire protection services proposed in this Report
is an example of such a partnership effort.
Annexation Policy for the Coastal Annexation Area
The proposed project includes adoption of an Annexation Policy for the Coastal Annexation Area. The
Annexation Policy(Exhibit D)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 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 Coastal Annexation project includes the prohibition of 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.
Willing Sellers Ordinance for the Coastal Annexation Area
In 1999, the Coastal Advisory Committee identified the issue of District acquisition of land by eminent
domain as one of community concern. Members of the Committee felt that support for the project would
be strong if the issue of eminent domain were removed from the project. In November, 1999,many
coastside residents signed a"Cooperation Agreement"in which residents pledged full support for the
annexation project should the District Board pledge to"permanently remove eminent domain from its
policies in the proposed Annexation Area in a manner that is secure and acceptable to both the residents
and the District(possibly in the LAFCo process)." The California Farm Bureau Federation counsel
concurred that the use of the LAFCo process was an acceptable approach. Several other commenters
observed that integrating such an eminent domain policy into the LAFCo process would be an
appropriate and secure manner of prohibiting the use of eminent domain.
The District Board of Directors concurred and directed the District,as an integral part of its annexation
proceedings,to 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 a Willing Sellers Ordinance prohibiting the use of eminent domain in the Coastal
Annexation Area. °
• 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
R-03-54 Page 18
Mateo County Counsel's Office has reviewed the Board's request to include a Willing Sellers Only
Ordinance 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 Final
EIR.
The documents presented to the Board of Directors for approval include all of these measures.
Permanent Policy P.1 in the Final Service Plan prohibits the use of eminent domain in any territory
annexed pursuant to the Plan. The Implementation Policies in the Final Service Plan require the District
to take the steps described above to insure that the Policy is a permanent part of the project(see Final
Service Plan at page H-12). Mitigation Measure AGR 1-c in the Final EIR incorporates the Willing
Sellers Ordinance (see page IV-13-8). The Policy is also included in the attached Resolution of
Application for Annexation.
Lastly, a Willing Sellers Ordinance is presented to the Board for adoption. The District has prepared this
Ordinance to be adopted as part of the proposed project(see Exhibit E). This Ordinance would formally
re-adopt the policies of the Service Plan in legislation by declaring that:
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District shall not
exercise the power of eminent domain to acquire any real
property or any interest in real property within any territory
annexed to the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
pursuant to said Resolution of Application for Annexation.
The District received a comment on the Willing Sellers Ordinance, which stated that since the Draft
Ordinance did not contain the word"permanent,"it did not fulfill the objectives of the Cooperation
Agreement. However, the introductory text of the Draft Ordinance states that the Board's intent is that
the Ordinance "be a permanent rule of conduct of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District" (see
Draft EIR, Appendix E).
Another commenter observed that while even the Constitution of the United States can be changed, the
the Willing Sellers Ordinance should be strengthened to state as firmly as possible the District's
intention. Accordingly, staff has prepared a revised Ordinance,which states in the operative text that
"This Ordinance shall be a permanent rule of conduct of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District."
The adoption of the proposed Ordinance (Exhibit E), and the inclusion of policies prohibiting 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.
A comment was made about a separate issue: what would happen if a future Board tried to violate or
repeal the Ordinance? In the unlikely event this was to occur, there would be several legal remedies.
These are described in more detail in General Response 1 to the Final EIR on pages II-1 to II-4. Briefly
summarized,these remedies include:
a) Attempted condemnation in violation of the District's policies would prohibit the
condemnation from going forward and entitle the landowner to attorneys' fees upon the
suit's dismissal
R-03-54 Page 19
b) Members of the public could seek legal recourse due to the District violating its own
Ordinance
c) A judicial challenge could be brought under CEQA if the attempted repeal did not meet legal
standards
d) A challenge could be brought for violation of the Service Plan
In addition, it is important to note that virtually all grant programs prohibit acquisition of land by eminent
domain. As up to 90%of acquisitions in the first five years would be funded by grants or gifts, and
100%would be thereafter, there would be strong statutory prohibitions against the use of eminent
domain by the District. Any attempt to violate or repeal this Ordinance or Policies could not affect these
prohibitions, which would still be in full force. This will provide further assurance that the use of
eminent domain in the Annexation Area will be permanently prohibited.
I
By making the Willing Sellers Ordinance and the Eminent Domain Policy an integral part of its Service
Plan,EIR, and Resolution of Application to LAFCo, the District is making the prohibition against
eminent domain such an integral and basic part of the annexation project that legal remedies would be
available in the event some future Board were to attempt to violate or repeal the Policy or Ordinance.
Upon approval of these documents by the Board, the District will have in good faith taken the steps
requested by members of the Citizens Advisory Committee and those who signed the Cooperation
Agreement.
The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo)Process
Before the Board is a proposed Resolution of Application (Exhibit F)to the San Mateo County LAFCo
for annexation of the Coastal Annexation Area and its addition to the District's sphere of influence.
If the Board adopts the Resolution,the District will apply to the San Mateo County LAFCo to expand the
District's boundaries and sphere of influence to include the Coastal Annexation Area. The LAFCo
process to follow will involve opportunities for public participation,public hearings,and an opportunity
for full debate on the issues pertaining to annexation. In addition, the annexation will be referred to the
Santa Clara County LAFCo for a recommendation prior to San Mateo County LAFCo taking action on
the project.
If the Resolution is adopted, the next step would be for the District to file an application with San Mateo
County LAFCo. The application will include the Resolution of Application,the Service Plan, the Fiscal
Impact Analysis, and the Final EIR. The Service Plan describes the services the District would provide if
the annexation is approved and the terms and conditions under which the District would operate in the
Coastal Annexation Area. The Fiscal Impact Analysis analyses the potential affect of the annexation on
the current tax revenue of any local agencies in the Coastal Annexation Area, and assesses whether the
District has the current funding to support the services proposed in the Service Plan.
The Board is also being asked to adopt a"Resolution of No Property Tax Exchange"(Exhibit G). In an
annexation, LAFCo procedures permit an agency to request a share of the property taxes from local
agencies collecting property taxes in the area to be annexed. A typical annexation involves a
redistribution of property tax revenues among affected agencies. However, the District Board of
Directors has determined that it will not ask for any property taxes to be transferred to the District from
any local agency in the Coastal Annexation Area, including any special district. Therefore, if the
annexation is approved, no share of current property taxes will be taken from any other local agency.
The property taxes collected in San Mateo County will continue to be distributed exactly as they are
today.
R-03-54 Page 20
After submission of these materials to LAFCo, LAFCo will set public hearings and consider comments
from all interested parties and affected agencies before making any decisions. Staff anticipates that
LAFCo proceedings could begin in the fall, although the timing will depend on the processing of any
application.
Errata
During staff review of the documents several corrections to text or maps were identified. These
corrections are included in Exhibit H.
Prepared by:
Cathy Woodbury, ASLAJAICP,Planning Manager
Susan Schectman, General Counsel
Contact person:
L. Craig Britton, General Manager
List of Exhibits
A. Map of Coastal Annexation Area
B. Coastal Annexation EIR—Traffic Impact Analysis Memorandum by Hexagon Transportatin
Consultants,Inc., May 29, 2003
C. Mitigation Monitoring Program
D. Annexation Policy
E. Willing Sellers Ordinance
F. Resolution of Application for Annexation and Sphere of Influence Amendment
G. Resolution of No Property Tax Exchange
H. Errata
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-28
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
provide for mitigation options and 2. Project specifications should shall require the general contractor and any
procedures for both the building to be subcontractors to control dust and exhaust emissions of particulate
affected by the project and any adjacent through water sprinkling during demolition and excavation activities;
buildings with the potential to be covering of stockpiles of soil, sand and other such materials;covering
affected by either direct or indirect trucks hauling debris, soil, sand and other such materials; street sweeping
impacts. Mitigation Measures CUL-la of the streets surrounding excavation and construction sites; equipment
and 1 b will mitigate all impacts to maintenance to reduce emissions; and, prohibitions on idling engines
historic structures to less than when not in use.
significant levels. Cleaning of the adjacent historic buildings may be necessary after
construction activities to prevent long-term damage to the building fabric.
The need for cleaning shall be determined by a qualified Historic Architect,
shall follow the standards set by the Secretary of the Interior, and shall be
completed in consultation with the Historic Architect.
4. A structural engineer should inspect the buildings prior to construction to
determine if the noise and vibration anticipated during construction will
affect the buildings framework and fabric. The report, with any
recommendations and mitigation measures, should be reviewed by a
qualified Historic Architect.
Impact CUL-2: Removal or other Mitigation Cul-2: Application of the Standard Protocol for Unexpected Planning
substantial changes to not yet identified Discovery of Archaeological and Paleontological Cultural Materials will be (development of
archaeological or paleontological applied. See DEIR, page IV-J-12 for a complete description of this Plan. Action
resources may be significant. Plan)Operations
(construction
oversight)_
Impact CUL-3: Ground excavation or Mitigation Cul-43 Application of the Native American Burial Plan (NABP)will Prior to and Planning
other ground disturbance during be applied. See DEIR, page IV-J-13-14 for a complete description of this Plan.during (implementation
development of improvements, such as construction of Plan)
trails, could disturb human remains, Operations
including those interred outside of (construction
formal cemeteries. loversight)
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIRIResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-27
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact CUL-1: Specific lands to be Mitigation CUL-1a: The protocol for determining if structures are of historic Prior to Board Planning
acquired by the District have not been value is as follows: approval of Use
identified, but lands acquired-may and Management
contain historical resources. Due to 1. The property and building types will be identified and evaluated by a Plan
public safety concerns, historical qualified cultural consultant;
structures may need to be removed. At 2. The cultural consultant will determine if the structures in question are
a minimum, treatment of a building currently included in a local register of historic resources, on the California
and/or structure to be affected should Register of Historic Resources or on the National Register of Historic
provide for mitigation options and Places;
procedures for both the building to be 3. If it is determined that the structures in question are not currently included
affected by the project and any adjacent in a local register of historic resources, on the California Register of
buildings with the potential to be Historic Resources or on the National Register of Historic Places, a DPR
affected by either direct or indirect 523 form issued by the California Department of Parks and Recreation
impacts. Mitigation Measures CUL-1a (DPR)will be completed by the cultural consultant and the structural and
and 1 b will mitigate all impacts to building data sent to a qualified architectural historian;.
historic structures to less than 4. If it is determined that the structures in question are currently on the
significant levels. California Register of Historic Resources or if the building has been
determined to be of historic value, there are two options that would
mitigate any impact to the historic values:
a) Retain and rehabilitate the building according to the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
(U.S. Department of Interior 1990). New construction near this building
should be consistent with its historic character; or
b) Move the building to a different location on its current parcel or to a
different parcel appropriate to its historic character.
Impact CUL-1: Specific lands to be Mitigation Cul-lb: Short-Term/Construction activities may impact nearby Prior to and Planning
acquired by the District have not been historic properties. These impacts may include dust accumulation on building during (development of
identified, but lands acquired may facades, and increased noise and vibration from construction equipment. construction project
contain historical resources. Due to Construction period impacts could be mitigated to a less-than-significant level specifications),
public safety concerns, historical by implementing the following mitigation measures: Operations
structures may need to be removed. At (ongoing project
a minimum, treatment of a building 1. Project specifications should shall require the contractor(s)and any oversight)
and/or structure to be affected should subcontractors to conform to the Count 's noise control requirements.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-26
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Respotrictity—
District
Depart ent
currently closed to public use could construction stand shall be defined as the trail tread width plus 1-2 feet from
adversely affect sensitive species and each side of the edge of the trail tread. Noxious plants (e.g., yellow star-
or/natural communities. thistle)shall be controlled along trails and the edges of staging areas in a
timely manner. Potential adverse impacts on biological resources would also
be mitigated by Hyd-1 through Hyd-2.
Impact 13I0-2: The construction of new Mitigation 13I0-2: The District shall minimize fragmentation of interior habitat, Evaluation and Planning (siting
fences on lands acquired or managed reduce barriers to wildlife movement within preserves, identify and protect recommenda- and design),
by the District could restrict wildlife established wildlife crossings to allow movement across existing roads, tions prior to Operations
movement within open space areas. remove unnecessary fences and barbed wire from preserves, and seek to Board approval (ongoing project
reduce barriers to wildlife movement on a more regional basis. The of Use and oversight)
construction of new fences constructed on District owned or managed lands Management
shall not restrict wildlife movement. Fence rails shall be designed with Plan
openings large enough for native mammals to pass through.
Impact 13I0-3: Construction of District Mitigation BIO-3: See Mitigation AGR-3(h) Prior to Board Planning
improvements on open space lands approval of Final
could result in the removal or trimming Service Plan and
of heritage and/or significant trees in prior to opening
compliance with of the San Mateo trails to public
County Ordinance. access
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIWResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
I
1
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-25
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
maintenance measures, a long-term monitoring program, and contingency
measures. Native plant materials suited to the site will be utilized in all
mitigation work.
Impact 13I0-1: Constructing Mitigation BIO-1k: Periodic monitoring of known sensitive habitats adjacent Ongoing project Planning
improvements and introducing to trails or other facilities shall be conducted to determine if unacceptable soil oversight (monitoring),
recreational uses into areas that are compaction or other adverse impacts are occurring. If monitoring reveals that Operations
currently closed to public use could undesirable soil compaction or impact to a sensitive habitat is occurring, (ongoing projec
adversely affect sensitive species and barriers or other appropriate measures (such as trail rerouting)shall be oversight)
or/natural communities. employed as needed to discourage off-trail use. Brush or other aesthetically
acceptable barriers can be used to cover illegal trails, abandoned trails, or
shortcuts to discourage use until natural vegetation returns.
Impact 13I0-1: Constructing Mitigation BIO-11: Should sensitive habitat be impacted such that it Ongoing project Planning (design
improvements and introducing necessitates permanently closing a trail or staging area, a management oversight of management
recreational uses into areas that are program to rehabilitate the area will be developed. Such a program shall program),
currently closed to public use could include discing and replanting or other techniques appropriate to the habitat Operations
adversely affect sensitive species and type to return the site to a natural condition and sufficiently blocking the trail (monitoring,
or/natural communities. with barriers to effectively prohibit use. Management shall include monitoring maintenance and
the site to ensure that it returns to a natural condition without the intrusion of ongoing project
invasive exotic plants. Management shall also include design elements, oversight)
maintenance, and monitoring to ensure that erosion is minimized.
Construction and maintenance of trails will require the trimming and/or removal
of vegetation along the trail route and staging areas.
Impact 13I0-1: Constructing Mitigation 13I0-1m: Existing native vegetation shall only be removed as Ongoing project Operations
improvements and introducing necessary to accommodate the trail clearing width. The minimum horizontal oversight
recreational uses into areas that are clearing width from physical obstructions varies based on the type of trail but
currently closed to public use could should be no less than two feet from the outer limits of the trail tread and shall
adversely affect sensitive species and be determined on a case by case basis to protect special natural features.
or/natural communities. Maximum vertical distance from overhanging branches shall be 12 feet on
trails open to equestrian or bicycle use. Maximum vertical distance from
overhanging branches shall be eight feet on hiking trails. Clearing shall be
determined on a case-by-case basis to protect special natural features.
Impact 13I0-1: Constructing Evegeat
BIO-1 n: Good pruning practices should be followed when Ongoing project Operations
improvements and introducing growth must be cleared. Ground cover plants and low shrubs oversight
recreational uses into areas that are be cleared beyond the original construction stand. The
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-24
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
Impact BIO-1: Constructing Mitigation BIO-1h: Trail crossings of streams and drainages shall be Prior to Planning (siting
improvements and introducing designed to minimize disturbance through the use of bridges,fords, or construction; and design)
recreational uses into areas that are culverts,whichever is least environmentally damaging. Bridges and culverts ongoing project
currently closed to public use could shall be designed so that they visually and functionally blend with the oversight
adversely affect sensitive species and environment and do not substantially interfere with the movement of native thereafter
or/natural communities. fish. Sufficient depth and velocity of water through the culvert shall exist in
fish-bearing streams for passage of native fish and other native aquatic
species during high and low flow conditions. Trail access shall be restricted at
fish-bearing streams during critical times, such as during spawning, unless
bridges and culverts are provided for use.
Impact BIO-1: Constructing Mitigation 13I0-1i: Trails and other improvements shall avoid wetlands and Prior to Board Planning
improvements and introducing other jurisdictional waters, including seasonal wetlands, seeps, springs, and approval of Use
recreational uses into areas that are farm ponds,wherever possible. A wetlands biologist will conduct and Management
currently closed to public use could reconnaissance-level surveys of all improvements in areas with potential Plan; ongoing
adversely affect sensitive species and wetlands. Any improvements adjacent to wetland areas will be constructed so project oversight
or/natural communities. that fills avoid wetland impacts and minimum setbacks are allowed. Where thereafter
feasible, setbacks from wetlands and other jurisdictional waters shall be a
minimum of 2550 feet for trails and 50100 feet for staging areas and other
improvements.A formal wetland delineation will be required for any
improvements that may directly impact wetlands.
Impact BIO-1: Constructing Mitigation BIO-1j: Revegetation and/or enhancement shall be undertaken Prior to Planning
improvements and introducing where any sensitive habitat or special-status species habitat will be disturbed construction;
recreational uses into areas that are or destroyed by facility construction. Revegetation work shall be implemented ongoing project
currently closed to public use could prior to or concurrently with the development. The design of an appropriate oversight
adversely affect sensitive species and revegetation program shall fully compensate for the lost habitat, with no net thereafter
or/natural communities. loss of habitat functions and values. Riparian and wetland habitat impacts will
typically be mitigated at a 3:1 ratio for high quality habitat areas and at lower
ratios where lower habitat quality justifies a lower ratio. A lower ratio may also
be justified if habitat mitigation is implemented and verified'as successful prior
to the occurrence of impacts. Mitigation shall be based on in-kind replacement
of impacted habitat with habitat of equal or better biotic value. The
revegetation program shall be designed by a qualified biologist or ecologist
and submitted to the appropriate regulatory ortrustee agency for approval. At
a minimum, the revegetation program shall include a description of project
impacts, mitigation calculations, the mitigation site, revegetation techniques,
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
I
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-23
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
currently closed to public use could • Physical access controls of Use and Operations
adversely affect sensitive species and . Seasonal or intermittent closures Management (ongoing project
or/natural communities. Plan; ongoing oversight)
9 )
project oversight
thereafter
Impact 13I0-1: Constructing Mitigation 13I0-1d: Existing access routes shall be used wherever suitable to Prior to and Planning
improvements and introducing minimize impacts of new construction in special-status species habitats. during
recreational uses into areas that are Realignments will be implemented where necessary to avoid adverse impacts construction
currently closed to public use could on resources.
adversely affect sensitive species and
or/natural communities.
Impact 13I0-1: Constructing Mitigation 13I0-1e: Trail design shall include barriers to control trail use and Prior to Planning
improvements and introducing prevent environmental damage. Barriers may include fences,vegetation, construction (design),
recreational uses into areas that are stiles, and/or fallen trees or branches. Operations
currently closed to public use could
adversely affect sensitive species and (ongoing project oversight)
or/natural communities.
•
Impact 13I0-1: Constructing Mitigation 13I0-1f: A particular trail or other facility may need to be closed Ongoing project Planning
improvements and introducing during seasonal periods critical to special-status species,where overuse oversight (assessment of
recreational uses into areas that are threatens resource values, or for other reasons to protect biological resources. closure),
currently closed to public use could Where a trail or surrounding habitat warrants special notice limiting trail use, Operations
adversely affect sensitive species and the trail shall be clearly designated and should be equipped with use signs and (ongoing project
or/natural communities. appropriate barriers to discourage unauthorized use. Missing or damaged oversight)
signs, gates, fences, and barriers shall be shall be repaired or replaced as
soon as possible. Closure notices shall include the reason(s)for the closure,
an estimate of how long the facility will be closed, and a telephone number to
call for further information.
Impact 13I0-1: Constructing Mitigation 13I0-1g: When parallel to a stream or riparian zone, trails shall Prior to Board Planning (siting
improvements and introducing generally be set back from the top of bank or from the outside edge of the approval of Use and design)
recreational uses into areas that are riparian zone, whichever is greater, except where topographic, resource and Management
currently closed to public use could management, or other constraints or management objectives make such a Plan
adversely affect sensitive species and setback not feasible or undesirable. Riparian setbacks may be adjusted on a
or/natural communities. case-by-case basis based upon advice of a qualified biologist and with the
concurrence of reviewing agencies, where applicable.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-22
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
BIOLOGY'
Impact 13I0-1: Constructing Mitigation 13I0-1a: Biological resource assessments shall be conducted Prior to Board Planning
improvements and introducing during preparation of Use and Management Plans. Assessments shall be approval of Use
recreational uses into areas that are conducted by a qualified biologist and will include surveys for sensitive and Management
currently closed to public use could habitats and special-status species in the appropriate seasons. These Plan
adversely affect sensitive species and assessments will include recommendations to align potential trails to avoid
or/natural communities. impacts to sensitive habitats, special-status species, and heritage and
significant trees. If any trail alignment may affect such resources, the District
will consult with the appropriate agencies (e.g., CDFG, USFWS, NMFS)to
ensure that impacts will be avoided or mitigation is adequate.
Impact BIO-1: Constructing Mitigation BIO-1b: The District shall protect sensitive habitat areas and other Prior to Board Planning
improvements and introducing areas where special-status species may be adversely affected when planning approval of Use
recreational uses into areas that are trails and other facilities. To the maximum extent feasible, trail alignments and and Management
currently closed to public use could other improvements shall avoid impacts to sensitive habitats, including Plan
adversely affects sensitive species and habitats for special-status plants and animals. All improvements shall be
or/natural communities. evaluated on a case-by-case basis by a qualified biologist to identify impact
avoidance measures or mitigation measures for biotic impacts.
Consideration shall be given to:
• Relocating trails or other improvements
• Periodic closures
• Revegetation prescriptions
Buffer plantings
• Discrete barrier fencing that accommodates wildlife passage
Other appropriate measures
Removal of native vegetation shall be avoided as much as possible. The
appropriate resource agencies shall be contacted regarding any trail
alignments or other improvements that may impact sensitive habitats, special-
status species, or their habitat. Plant replacement shall be native to the area
and suitable for the site conditions.
Impact BIO-1: Constructing Mitigation 13I0-1c: In special-status species habitat areas,trail use levels Determine trail Planning
improvements and introducing shall be limited as appropriate to ensure protection of resources. Techniques use level prior to (design),
recreational uses into areas that are for limiting use may include, but are not limited to: Board approval
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIRIResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
I
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-21
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Depart ent
annexation project. Future toilet
facilities would be self-contained at
preserves, or connected to existing
sewer systems, as in the case of the
District developing a field office and
maintenance facilities in the Coastal
Annexation Area. Overall,the project
should be beneficial due to protection of
watersheds and associated water
quality.
Impact HYD-2: The annexation'project Mitigation HYD-2: Culverts shall be designed so that they do not limit the Prepare plans or Planning (design
would not substantially alter the existing ability of debris to pass. Structures over water courses shall be carefully details prior to and siting),
drainage pattern of the area. placed to minimize disturbance and should be located 2 feet above the 100- bid and Operations
year flood elevation or 2 feet above the Flood Hazard Flood Insurance Rate construction; (maintenance
Map flood elevation. Maintenance of culverts and drainage structures shall be Implement and ongoing
performed as needed to ensure proper functioning. installation project oversight)
practices during
construction
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-20
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
maintenance facilities in the Coastal • Sediment Traps
Annexation Area. Overall, the project . Sediment Basins
should be beneficial due to protection of 0 Erosion Control Blankets and Mats
watersheds and associated water . The District shall prevent erosion on steep slopes by using erosion
quality. control material according to manufacturer's specifications.
4. If soil is to be stockpiled for any reason at creeksides, no run-off will be
allowed to flow back to the creek.
Impact HYD-1: The Santa Cruz Mitigation HYD-1c: When acquiring new property, the District shall carefully Evaluation prior Acquisition
Mountains are known for intense rainfall evaluate existing roads and trails before adopting a Preliminary Use and to Board (preparation of
with large volume flows through creeks Management Plan and opening them to the public to ensure that their design approval of Preliminary Use
and drainage. The annexation area is is compatible with resource protection and recreational uses. In some cases, Preliminary Use and Management
windward of incoming storms and would the District may close and restore poorly designed roads and trails to restore and Management Plan),
receive intense rainfall capable of the land to its natural conditions. Where roads exist in area of geologic Plan; trail Planning (siting
eroding and destabilizing project area sensitivity(areas prone to landslides or earth movement), the District may surfaces and design)
trails. No effluent waste would be conduct a roads assessment to identify corrective actions necessary to reduce selection and
discharged due to the proposed sediment input into streams. design prior to
annexation project. Future toilet construction;
facilities would be self-contained at Trail surfaces appropriate to intended use shall be selected so as to minimize ongoing project
preserves, or connected to existing runoff and erosion problems. Trail designs shall conform to the County oversight
sewer systems, as in the case of the Surface Runoff Management Plan, County Excavating, Grading, Filling, and thereafter
District developing a field office and Clearing Regulations Ordinance, and the County Topsoil Ordinance, as
maintenance facilities in the Coastal defined in this chapter. Surface water shall be diverted from trails by out
Annexation Area. Overall, the project sloping the trail tread 3%where feasible. Where necessary, shallow ditches or
should be beneficial due to protection of water bars shall be used to divert water on running slopes greater than 5%.
watersheds and associated water Other trail drainage techniques may include rolling dips, culverts, or ditches on
quality. sides of trails. Erosion control plans shall comply with erosion control policies
in the County General Plan and Local Coastal Program.
Impact HYD-1: The Santa Cruz Mitigation HYD-1d: No large-scale grading shall be used for trail Prepare grading Planning (siting
Mountains are known for intense rainfall construction. The degree of cut allowed on a slope depends on the soil type, plans or details and design),
with large volume flows through creeks hardness, and surrounding natural resources. Ultimate cuts shall be prior to bid and Operations
and drainage. The annexation area is contoured to blend with the natural slope. Steep areas shall be handled by construction; (ongoing project
windward of incoming storms and would limited terracing to avoid large-scale grading. Surface soil disturbance shall be implement oversight)
receive intense rainfall capable of kept to a minimum to reduce erosion and maintenance problems. Only those grading practices
eroding and destabilizing project area rocks, stumps, and roots that interfere with safe passage shall be removed. during
trails. No effluent waste would be construction.
dischar ed due to the proposed
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
I
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-19
Monitoring
Impact Measure. Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
HYDROLOGY
Impact HYD-1: The Santa Cruz Mitigation HYDAa: Trails shall be sited to minimize potential water pollution Prior to Board Planning (design
Mountains are known for intense rainfall and stream bank erosion. Equestrian trails shall not be sited parallel to"blue approval of Use and siting),
with large volume flows through creeks line"streams (as mapped on USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle maps)and major and Management Operations
and drainage. The annexation area is drainages (determined during the preparation of individual trail design)within Plan; ongoing (ongoing projec'
windward of incoming storms and would 150 feet of the streambank in such watersheds. Where equestrian trails must project oversight management)
receive intense rainfall capable of cross streams or major drainages in water supply watersheds, the trail shall be thereafter
eroding and destabilizing project area sited perpendicular to the stream (to the extent allowed by topography and
trails. No effluent waste would be vegetation)through the 300-foot buffer zone (150 feet on each side).
discharged due to the proposed Equestrian trails shall not be located within 150 feet of the high water line of a
annexation project. Future toilet drinking water reservoir. These measures may be modified on a case-by-case
facilities would be self-contained at basis upon the advice of a qualified biologist or water quality specialist and the
preserves, or connected to existing concurrence of the applicable water agency.
sewer systems, as in the case of the
District developing a field office and
maintenance facilities in the Coastal
Annexation Area. Overall,the project
should be beneficial due to protection of
watersheds and associated water
quality.
Impact HYD-1: The Santa Cruz Mitigation HYD-1b: Storm water quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) Prior to and Planning (siting
Mountains are known for intense rainfall as listed in this section shall be implemented to reduce potential water quality during and design),
with large volume flows through creeks impacts. BMPs include: construction and Operations
and drainage. The annexation area is ongoing project (ongoing
windward of incoming storms and would 1. Flow of runoff from drainage structures will be directed to vegetated areas, oversight maintenance and
receive intense rainfall capable of away from creeks and drainages as is practical. thereafter project oversight)
eroding and destabilizing project area 2. Conduct any trail maintenance work during low flow periods
trails. No effluent waste would be 3. Use erosion and sediment control measures to minimize water quality
discharged due to the proposed impacts and ensure no sediment at heavily traveled trails flows into creeks.
annexation project. Future toilet These measures include:
facilities would be self-contained at • Silt Fences
preserves, or connected to existing . Straw Bale Barriers
sewer systems, as in the case of the . Brush or Rock Filters
District developing a field office and I . Storm Drain Inlet Protection
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-18
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
after the proposed annexation project is the localized area. construction
approved could include trails, parking
areas, portable sanitary facilities,
fencing, signs, and access roads. The
District may also develop a field office
and maintenance facilities. These
developments could create a significant
effect on scenic vistas.
Impact AES-1: Limited improvement of Mitigation AES-1e: Any utilities constructed within a State scenic corridor for Prior to Planning
open space areas for recreational use District facilities shall be underground. completion of
after the proposed annexation project is construction
approved could include trails, parking
areas, portable sanitary facilities,
fencing, signs, and access roads. The
District may also develop a field office
and maintenance facilities. These
developments could create a significant
effect on scenic vistas.
Impact AES-2: The field office or Mitigation AES-2: Any new lighting as part of the proposed project will have Prior to Planning
maintenance facilities may require light shields and other devices to ensure that no new light or glare will impact completion of
lighting for security or safety. Lights sensitive receptors. construction
from these facilities could affect
nighttime views in the area,
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIRIResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page V1I-17
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
AES TH15-TIOS E
Im act AES-1: Limited improvement of Mitigation AES-1a: Trail alignments and their associated facilities shall be Prior to Board Planning
P P 9
open space areas for recreational use sited and designed to be in harmony with surrounding natural and cultural approval of Use
after the proposed annexation project is settings and to retain natural appearances and values. and Management
approved could include trails, parking Plan
areas, portable sanitary facilities,
fencing, signs, and access roads. The
District may also develop a field office
and maintenance facilities. These
developments could create a significant
effect on scenic vistas.
Impact AES-1: Limited improvement of Mitigation AES-1 b: Trail alignments across the face of open hillsides and Prior to Board Planning
open space areas for recreational use near the top of ridgelines shall be sited to avoid creating new, permanent, approval of Use
after the proposed annexation project is noticeably visible lines on the existing landscape when viewed from points and Management
approved could include trails, parking looking up at or perpendicular to the trail. Conditions to be considered when Plan
areas, portable sanitary facilities, siting trails include, but are not limited to, avoiding excessive cuts in slopes
fencing, signs, and access roads. The that could not be effectively revegetated, and presence of native soil to support
District may also develop a field office revegetation.
and maintenance facilities. These
developments could create a significant
effect on scenic vistas.
Impact AES-1: Limited improvement of Mitigation AES-1c: Screening berms, perimeter planting, and parking area Prior to Planning (desi(
open space areas for recreational use trees that provide a canopy shall be used at major staging areas to visually completion of and siting)
after the proposed annexation project is buffer views into the staging area from sensitive view points. construction and
approved could include trails, parking opening staging
areas, portable sanitary facilities, area
fencing, signs, and access roads. The
District may also develop a field office
and maintenance facilities. These
developments could create a significant
effect on scenic vistas.
Impact AES-1: Limited improvement of Mitigation AES-1d: All structures proposed that are located in scenic Prior to Planning
open s ace areas for recreational use corridors shall be screened using native landscaping with plants indigenous to completion of
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIWResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page V11-16
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
AIR,QUAIITY
Impact AIR-1: Any future project within Mitigation: AIR-1: The District shall insure-that the following measures are Prior to bid and Planning
the Coastal Annexation Area could included in all future construction contracts to control fugitive dust emissions: prior to start of (inclusion in
produce significant localized air construction; construction
emissions, both during project • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often ongoing project documents),
construction and operation. These during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to existing land uses shall oversight Operations
projects could generate fugitive dust, be kept damp at all times, of shall be treated with non-toxic stabilizers thereafter (ongoing project
including PM10. or dust palliatives; oversight)
• Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials and/or
require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard;
• Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply(non-toxic)soil stabilizers
on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas for
construction sites;
• Sweep daily(preferably with water sweepers)all paved access roads,
parking areas and staging areas at construction sites;
• Sweep streets daily(preferably with water sweepers)if visible soil
material is carried onto adjacent public streets;
• Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction
areas;
• Enclose, cover,water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to any
exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.);
• Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.;
• Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt
runoff to public roadways;
• Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible;
• Suspend excavation and grading activity whenever the wind is so high
that it results in visible dust plumes despite control efforts.
Midp eninsula Regional Open Space District Final E1WResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
I
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-15
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
of a wildland fire. There is also the configuration to discourage irresponsible vehicle use. ongoing construction),
concern that allowing public recreation b. Entrance and road shoulders designed to discourage parking during thereafter
Operations
access to an area carries an increased closure and to facilitate emergency access. (ongoing project
likelihood of human caused fire and c. Gates that are at least 12 feet wide constructed of heavy materials with a oversight)
hence increases the risk of wildland fire protected locking system for District and fire access.
in the area as a whole. d. 10-foot radiuses paved with gravel around trailheads.
e. Signage that describes prohibited uses and warns against fire hazards.
f. Low ignition fuels, such as grasses,will be planted adjacent to trail heads
and staging areas, and will be mowed annually as soon as 30 per cent of
the light ground fuel is cured.
g. Close trail access points on all predicted high fire response level days
(Burn Index of 41, or higher)and post such closures on the District
website.
h. Periodic patrols by District staff.
Impact HAZ-3: District acquisition or Mitigation HAZ-3a: The District shall routinely monitor trails and provide Prior to opening Operations
management of land alone would not regular maintenance to avoid public exposure to hazardous conditions. Trails trails to public
increase public exposure to other or other facilities shall be closed for construction or repair, or when another ' access; ongoing
significant health or safety hazards. hazardous condition exists (e.g. landslide during flooding or extremely wet project oversight
However, use of future District facilities, weather)that renders trail use especially hazardous, or where adjacent land thereafter
including trails, could adversely affect uses may present unsafe conditions that could affect open space users.
trail users. Where use limitations or closures are in place, the area shall be clearly
designated and shall be equipped with use signs and appropriate barriers to
discourage unauthorized use. Missing or damaged signs, gates,fences, and
barriers shall be shall be repaired or replaced as soon as possible. Closure
notices shall include the reason(s)for the closure, an estimate of how long the
facility will be closed, and a telephone number to call for further information.
Impact HAZ-3: District acquisition or Mitigation HAZ-3b: District preserve maps for the public shall be kept up-to- Upon opening Public Affairs
management of land alone would not date to the extent feasible. Trail maps shall also provide trail use rules, lands for public (map
increase public exposure to other emergency information, trail accessibility, other pertinent safety information access; ongoing preparation),
significant health or safety hazards. and shall be available at all staging areas. thereafter Operations
However, use of future District facilities, (placement of
including trails, could adversely affect maps and
trail users.
ongoing project
oversight)
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-14
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
concern that allowing public recreation shall be provided.
access to an area carries an increased
likelihood of human caused fire and
hence increases the risk of wildland fire
in the area as a whole.
Impact HAZ-2: When open space Mitigation HAZ-2c: The District shall coordinate with appropriate agencies, Prior to opening Administration
areas are opened to the public, users such as the County and the California Department of Forestry to formalize land to public and Operations
could potentially be exposed to the risk mutual aid agreements. access
of a wildland fire. There is also the
concern that allowing public recreation
access to an area carries an increased
likelihood of human caused fire and
hence increases the risk of wildland fire
in the area as a whole.
Impact HAZ-2: When open space Mitigation HAZ-2d: In addition to continuing its current fuel management Prior to Board Planning
areas are opened to the public, users practices, as new lands are acquired, the District shall consult with the San approval of Use (development of
could potentially be exposed to the risk Mateo County Fire Department and the California Department of Forestry in and Management Use and
of a wildland fire. There is also the developing site-specific fuel.modification and management programs for Plan; ongoing Management
concern that allowing public recreation specific lands acquired, as part of its Use and Management planning process. project oversight Plan),
access to an area carries an increased thereafter. Operations
likelihood of human caused fire and (ongoing project
hence increases the risk of wildland fire oversight)
in the area as a whole.
Impact HAZ-2: When open space Mitigation HAZ-2e: The District shall limit trail use to low-intensity hiking, bird Prior to opening Operations
areas are opened to the public, users watching, bicycling, equestrian use, environmental education and other similar trails to public
could potentially be exposed to the risk low hazard uses, and prohibit smoking, camping, picnicking,fireworks and off- use; ongoing
of a wildland fire. There is also the road vehicle use. project oversight
concern that allowing public recreation thereafter.
access to an area carries an increased
likelihood of human caused fire and
hence increases the risk of wildland fire
in the area as a whole.
Impact HAZ-2: When open space Mitigation HAZ-2f: The District shall develop and maintain staging areas and Prior to opening Planning (design,
areas are opened to the public, users trail heads to incorporate: facilities for siting, and
could potentially be exposed to the risk a. Fenced parking areas paved with gravel or asphalt in a narrow public access;
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIRIResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-13
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS; TERIALS
. MA_ I
Impact HAZA: Acquired lands may Mitigation HAZ-1: The District shall also review local, state, or federal Prior to Board Acquisition (pre-
contain hazardous materials, such as government hazardous sites lists prior to acquiring a property to determine if approval of acquisition
leaking fuel storage tanks,agricultural the area is a hazardous materials site. The following resources and agencies Preliminary Use assessment),
chemicals, asbestos, or abandoned oil can be consulted: and Management planning
or gas wells. If such a site is not Plan (remediation ar,
properly remediated, the public, • Federal and state database information siting)
including students at nearby schools, . Water Quality Control Board (San Francisco Bay Region)
and the environment could be exposed . San Mateo County Health Services Agency
to hazardous materials. Under certain
circumstances, this exposure would be If a parcel is found to contain a hazardous materials site, trails, staging areas,
a significant impact. or other facilities will not be constructed on the parcel until plans can be
developed and implemented to either remediate the hazard or ensure that the
public will not have access to hazardous areas.
Impact HAZ-2: When open space Mitigation HAZ-2a: During preparation of plans for specific facilities, the Prior to Board Planning
areas are opened to the public, users District shall: approval of Use (design),
could potentially be exposed to the risk and Management Operations
of a wildland fire. There is also the a) Review, in conjunction with the local fire protection services, available Plan; ongoing
water resources. In consultation with the Count of San Mateo (equipment
concern that allowing public recreation -y project oversight purchase and
access to an area carries an increased Environmental Services Department and the California Department of thereafter
Forest the District shall determine whether the construction of dry ongoing project
likelihood of human caused fire and Forestry, oversight)
hence increases the risk of wildland fire hydrants on specific lands acquired is feasible in order to provide
in the area as a whole. additional remote area water supplies for fire suppression activities. The
District shall purchase 1,500-2,000-gallon maintenance-style water truck.
The District-owned water truck shall be available for mutual aid calls during
fire suppression activities.
b) Select indigenous plant materials and/or seed mixes utilized at staging
areas or along trails for their low maintenance and drought and fire
resistant characteristics to minimize additional fuel available to wildland
fires to the extent feasible.
Impact HAZ-2: When open space Mitigation HAZ-2b: Where compatible with other trail characteristics, Prior to Board Planning
areas are opened to the public, users planners shall locate trial alignments and access points to allow trails to also approval of Use
could potentially be exposed to the risk serve as emergency access routes for patrol or emergency medical transport. and Management
of a wildland fire. There is also the Where feasible for more remote areas, emergency helicopter landing sites Plan
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-12
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Depa ment
PUBL16SERYICES&IN,FRASTRUC-TURE
Impact PSI-1: Annexation and Mitigation PSI-1a: The District will not permit access in places where the Prior to opening Planning
subsequent acquisition of land, absent access would create a hazard due to a design feature such as a sharp curve lands for public
further land use changes,would not or dangerous intersection. access
affect traffic safety. Access to
preserves eventually acquired after
annexation could slightly increase use
of winding, steep roads that could
become hazardous depending on the
amount and type (trucks, cars,
motorcycles, etc.)of traffic.
Impact PSI-1: Significant hazards to Mitigation PSI-1 b: A maximum speed limit of 15 miles per hour shall be Prior to opening Operations
pedestrians and equestrians could placed on all trails that permit cyclists and other trail users (e.g., pedestrian, trails for public
occur as a result of excessive speed of equestrian). Signs shall be located at trail entrances that indicate that a speed access
cyclists on trails. limit is in effect.
Impact PSI-2: The lack of adequate Mitigation PSI-2: The Implementation Action G.6.E(i) shall be added to the Prior to Board Planning
emergency access would be a Draft Service Plan to ensure adequate'emergency access. approval of Final (design),
significant impact because it may Service Plan Public Affairs
preclude adequate response time by (maps),
public safety agencies.
Operations
(ongoing projeu.
oversight)
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page V11-11
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
Impact AGR-3: Notwithstanding the Mitigation Measure AGR-3j: Amend the Draft Service Plan to include the Prior to Board Planning
foregoing policies that are a part of the following policy: approval of Final
project, future public recreation at new Service Plan;
preserves within the Coastal The District shall actively work with lessees of District lands and with the ongoing project
Annexation Area may conflict with owners of land in which the District has an agricultural easement interest to: oversight
existing agricultural and timber uses on thereafter
and adjacent to District lands if trails a. Facilitate the provision of farm worker housing on District-owned lands by
and other recreation areas are not providing technical assistance in obtaining permits for such housing from
designed and managed in a manner the County of San Mateo.
that avoids such conflicts whenever b. Seek grant funding for the continuation or establishment of viable
feasible. agriculture through the California Farmland Conservancy Program and
other agriculture grant programs.
c. Provide technical assistance to secure water rights for the continuation or
establishment of viable agriculture consistent with protection of sensitive
habitats.
Impact AGR-3: Notwithstanding the Mitigation Measure AGR-3k: Amend the Draft Service Plan to include the Prior to Board Planning and
foregoing policies that are a part of the following policy: approval of Final Acquisition
project, future public recreation at new Service Plan; (development of
preserves within the Coastal The District shall actively pursue opportunities to enter agricultural easements ongoing project conforming
Annexation Area may conflict with and leases with interested farmers and ranchers. All agricultural easements oversight easements and
existing agricultural and timber uses on and agricultural leases in the Coastal Annexation Area shall: thereafter. lease terms;
and adjacent to District lands if trails a. Be tailored to meet individual farmers and ranchers needs while respecting seeking
and other recreation areas are not the unique characteristics of the property; opportunities for
designed and managed in a manner b. Specify uses that are unconditionally permitted pursuant to the easement such
that avoids such conflicts whenever or lease to provide certainty to the farmer or rancher entering the lease or transactions)
feasible. easement with the District;
c. Include terms that allow farmers and ranchers to adapt and expand their
operations and farming practices to adjust to changing economic
conditions;
d. Include terms that ensure farmers or ranchers may provide farm labor
housing as defined and approved by San Mateo County;
e. Ensure compatibility of resource protection and management, low-intensity
public recreation and viable agricultural operations; and
f. In the case of leases, be for a sufficient period of time to gain a return on
the investment in the agricultural operation.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIWResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-10
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
(e.g., growing seasons,water requirements, pesticide, manure, and waste
management)and the agricultural potential of the land. The plan shall
consider the following factors:
a) Availability of labor, including farm labor housing;
b) Availability of farm support services and goods;
c) Necessary capital improvements (e.g. water storage, fencing, land
leveling)
d) Farm operations, including erosion control, the season(s)and times of
pesticide or herbicide usage, manure and waste management;
e) Water use and availability:
f) Access to transportation and markets; and
g) Promoting agricultural production on District-owned land.
In the case of District lands adjacent to agricultural production, the
agricultural production plan shall develop site-specific measures to prevent
activities on District lands from interfering with adjacent agricultural
production.
The development of use and management plans will include consultation
with the current owner or operator of any agricultural operations on the
land, adjoining landowners, the San Mateo County Environmental
Services Agency in addition to other include opportunities for public
involvement.
Impact AGR-3: Notwithstanding the Mitigation Measure AGR-3i: Amend Draft Service Plan Guideline G.2 as Prior to Board Planning
foregoing policies that are a part of the follows: approval of Final
project, future public recreation at new Service Plan
preserves within the Coastal Prior to making any lands available to public access for low-intensity recreation
Annexation Area may conflict with in the Coastal Annexation Area, the District shall have personnel and
existing agricultural and timber r uses on equipment available to manage public access such that: there would be no
and adjacent to District lands trails significant negative impact on existing services; and adequate stewardship to
and other recreation areas are not protect natural and agricultural resources will be provided.
designed and managed in a manner
that avoids such conflicts whenever
feasible.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-9
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
that avoids such conflicts whenever can clearly support productive agricultural operations will generally be offered approval of Use
feasible. for sale while other agricultural lands will generally be offered for lease. and Management
Plan; offer for
sale or lease
accordingly.
Upon Board
approval of Use
and Management
Plan
Impact AGR-3: Notwithstanding the Mitigation Measure AGR-3h: Revise Draft Service Plan Guideline G-6.3 Prior to Board Planning
foregoing policies that are a part of the as follows: approval of Final
project,future public recreation at new GUIDELINE G.6.3 Service Plan.
preserves within the Coastal Annexation Area may conflict with Inherent in the preservation of open space resources in the Coastal
existing agricultural and timber uses on Annexation Area is the protection of: rare, threatened and endangered
and adjacent to District lands if trails plant and animal species; ecological systems; agricultural resources,
and other recreation areas are not water quality; visual resources; unique biological resources, including
designed and managed in a manner heritage and significant trees; and the unique cultural resources in the
that avoids such conflicts whenever Coastal Annexation Area, including historic, archaeological and
feasible. paleontological resources.Therefore, prior to making any lands available
to low-intensity public recreational access, the District shall prepare and
adopt a use and management plan, which, includes site-specific resource
management and public access components plan for any lands acquired
by the District or managed through contract for other public or private non-
profit property owners. All lands acquired by the District within the Coastal
Annexation Area will be inventoried to identify and prioritize resource
management issues. Where there are critical issues, such as the
presence of non-native invasive species which threaten the habitat of
endangered species or the economic viability of an adiacent agricultural
operation, resource management plans will be prepared for these areas
even if they remain closed to the public.
The use and management plan shall include an agricultural production
plan for District-owned agricultural lands or District lands adjacent to
agricultural lands. For district-owned lands, the plan shall describe the
crop and/or livestock potential for the property together with the
manaQement actions required to protect existing agricultural Rro uc ion
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIRIResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page V11-8
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
adiacent agricultural uses the recreational use shall be moved to a
different location.
All buffers shall be developed in consultation with the owners and operators of
adjoining agricultural lands.
Impact AGR-3: Notwithstanding the Mitigation AGR-3e: Where herbicides are used for vegetation control, Immediately Operations
foregoing policies that are a part of the including control of noxious weeds, they must be handled, applied, and upon acquisition;
project, future public recreation at new disposed of in such a manner that they do not adversely affect adjacent ongoing project
preserves within the Coastal agriculture. Herbicide use shall be guided by label restrictions and any oversight
Annexation Area may conflict with advisories published by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation thereafter.
existing agricultural and timber uses on (CDPR)or the County Agricultural Commission. These chemicals shall only
and adjacent to District lands if trails be applied by a person who is properly trained in their application.
and other recreation areas are not
designed and managed in a manner
that avoids such conflicts whenever
feasible.
Impact AGR-3: Notwithstanding the Mitigation AGR-3f: The District shall conduct its land management practices Upon acquisition; Planning (siting
foregoing policies that are a part of the such that they do not have an adverse significant impact on the physical and ongoing project and design)
project,future public recreation at new economic integrity of timberland preserves on or contiguous to properties oversight
preserves within the Coastal owned or managed by the District and so that the safety of visitors to District thereafter
Annexation Area may conflict with preserves is not compromised by timber harvesting (e.g., establishing Operations
existing agricultural and timber uses on appropriate buffers on District lands). (ongoing project
and adjacent to District lands if trails oversight)
and other recreation areas are not
designed and managed in a manner
that avoids such conflicts whenever
feasible.
Impact AGR-3: Notwithstanding the Mitigation AGR-3g: When acquiring lands in agricultural use, the acquisition Include Acquisition and
foregoing policies that are a part of the shall be subject to continued use by the owner or operator until such time as it continuation of Planning
project, future public recreation at new is sold or leased pursuant to the use and management plan adopted for the agricultural use in
preserves within the Coastal ' property. All agricultural land which is not needed for recreation or for the Preliminary Use
Annexation Area may conflict with protection and vital functioning of a sensitive habitat will be permanently and Management
existing agricultural and timber uses on protected for agriculture and,whenever legally feasible, the District will offer Plan; evaluate
and adjacent to District lands if trails for sale or lease the maximum amount of agricultural land to active farm agricultural and
and other recreation areas are not operators on terms compatible with the recreational and habitat use. Lands recreational use
designed and managed in a manner Ithat do not have significant recreation or sensitive habitat values and which Iprior to Board
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page V11-7
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
foregoing policies that are a part of the lands and Unigue Farmlands or Farmlands of Statewide Importance as shown approval of Use and design)
project, future public recreation at new on Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources and Management
preserves within the Coastal Aggncy_or traverse such lands in a manner that does not result in interference Plan, and prior to
Annexation Area may conflict with with agricultural activities or substantially reduce the agricultural potential of opening any trails Operations
existing agricultural and timber uses on those lands. Operators of active agricultural activities on lands owned by or to public access (construction,
and adjacent to District lands if trails under easement to the District shall be consulted to identify appropriate routes supervision, and
and other recreation areas are not on lands they cultivate. Owners and operators of ast+ve agricultural activities ongoing project
designed and managed in a manner erg lands adjacent to District lands used for non-agricultural purposes shall be oversight)
that avoids such conflicts whenever consulted to identify routes that will avoid adverse effects on agricultural
feasible. operations. The agricultural activities and the agricultural potential of traversed
lands shall be protected and buffered from trail user impacts by means of
distance, physical barriers (i.e., sturdy fences), or other non-disruptive
methods.
Mitigation AGE-3d: The District lands or easements
Impact AGR-3: Notwithstanding the Miti g Prior to Board Planning (siting
foregoing policies that are a part of the sett upon which trails are sited shall provide width sufficient for approval of Use and design)
management and/or buffer space from adjacent uses so as not to preclude the
project, future public recreation at new and Management
viability of those uses. Buffers established to separate recreation and other
preserves within the Coastal Plan, and prior to
Annexation Area may conflict with open space uses from agricultural operations shall be designed and managed opening any trails Operations
existing agricultural and timber uses on in accordance with the following standards: to public access (ongoing project
and adjacent to District lands if trails oversight)
and other recreation areas are not ) Buffers shall be designed in relation to the nature of the of the adjoining
designed and managed in a manner land use and potential land uses proposed public access;
that avoids such conflicts whenever ) Buffers shall be designed in relation to the topography and other physical
feasible. characteristics of the buffer area;
Buffers shall be designed with consideration of biological, soil, and other
site conditions in order to limit the potential spread of non-native invasive
species or pathogens onto agricultural lands:
Buffers shall be of sufficient width to allow agricultural use of adioining
agricultural lands including application of pesticides and other agricultural
chemicals on all lands needing treatment taking into account the likelihood
and extent of potential pesticide drift:.
e) All lands used for buffers should be on land or interests in land owned by
the District; adjoining landowners shall not be required to provide land for
buffers.
f) The District shall be responsible for the management and maintenance of
all lands used as buffers.
g) If a specific buffer fails to resolve conflicts between a recreational use and
Midpeninsu/a Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page V11-6
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
Williamson Act, recreational and open
space uses are allowable uses on lands
subject to contract. District acquisition
of Williamson Act lands for such uses
would thus not conflict with the contract
or related agricultural preserve
designation.
Impact AGR-3: Notwithstanding the Mitigation AGR-3a: Prior to Board Planning (sitin,
foregoing policies that are a part of the Guideline 3.2 in the Draft Service Plan should be modified to state: approval of Final and design)
project,future public recreation at new "Improvements or public uses located upon open space lands other than Service Plan; as
preserves within the Coastal agriculture...shall be located away from existing prime agricultural lands and to siting and
Annexation Area may conflict with Unique Farmlands or Farmlands of Statewide Imgortance as shown on design, prior to Operations
existing agricultural and timber uses on Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources approval of Use (ongoing project
and adjacent to District lands if trails Agency and Management oversight)
and other recreation areas are not 1, eFdedy, effiGieAt Use of aR . To Plan; ongoing
designed and managed in a manner the extent feasible, all All trails and other public facilities should be located so project oversight
that avoids such conflicts whenever as not to fragment agricultural operations unless no feasible alternative is thereafter.
feasible. available.While trails that bisect grazing lands would not be likely to fragment
grazing operations, trails that bisect cultivated crops could adversely affect the
vitality of agricultural operations and should be avoided where feasible. If trails
must traverse cultivated lands then they shall be permitted only if adequate
buffers, signs, and other measures necessary to ensure that trail use does not
interfere with the agricultural operations shall-be are implemented."
Impact AGR-3: Notwithstanding the Mitigation AGR-3b: The District shall provide private property signs where 1. Install private Operations
foregoing policies that are a part of the appropriate and provide trail users information regarding private property rights property
project,future public recreation at new to minimize public/private use conflicts and trespassing. The District shall signs
preserves within the Coastal clearly sign trails adjacent to active agriculture and provide trail users with immediately
Annexation Area may conflict with information regarding property rights to minimize trespassing and conflicts with after
existing agricultural and timber uses on agricultural users. acquisition.
and adjacent to District lands if trails
and other recreation areas are not Install other
signs prior
designed and managed in a manner
that avoids such conflicts whenever opening trails
f for public
feasible.
use.
Im act AGR-3: Notwithstanding the IMItigation AGL-3c: Trails shall either be located to avoid prime agricultural JPrior to Board JPlanning (siting
l
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final E/R/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-5
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
Acquisition of these lands by the District
would not in and itself convert the lands
to non-agriculture use.
Impact AGRA: The Coastal Mitigation AGRAd: Amend the Draft Service Plan to include the following: Prior to Board Planning
Annexation Area contains Prime approval of the
Farmland, Unique Farmland, and The term "prime agricultural land"as used in this Plan means: Final Service
Farmland of Statewide Importance. Plan
Some parcels acquired by the District a) All land which qualifies for rating as Class I or Class II in the U.S.
would likely contain lands with one or Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Land Use Capability
more of these designations. Classification, as well as all Class III lands capable of growing artichokes
or Brussels sprouts.
Acquisition of these lands by the District b) All land which qualifies for rating 80-100 in the Storie Index Rating.
would not in and itself convert the lands c) Land which supports livestock for the production of food and fiber and
to non-agriculture use. which has an annual carrying capacity equivalent to at least one animal
unit per acre as defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
d) Land planted with fruit or nut bearing trees, vines, bushes, or crops which
have a non-bearing period of less than five years and which normally
return during the commercial bearing period, on an annual basis, from the
production of unprocessed agricultural plant production not less than $200
per acre.
e) Land which has returned from the production of an unprocessed
agricultural plant product an annual value that is not less than $200 per
acre within three of the five previous years.
The$200 per acre amount in subsections d)and e)shall be adjusted regularly
for inflation, using 1965 as the base year, according to a recognized consumer
price index.
The term "prime agricultural land"as used in this Plan shall also include
Unique Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance as shown on the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency.
Impact AGR-2: Subsequent to Mitigation AGR-2: See Mitigation LU-2 Prior to Board Planning
annexation, the District would likely approval of
acquire some parcels subject to Service Plan
Williamson Act contracts. Under the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-4
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
AGRICULTURE
Impact AGR-1: The Coastal Mitigation AGR-1a: No new buildings or staging areas shall be located on As to siting of Planning
Annexation Area contains Prime prime agricultural lands or on Unique Farmlands or Farmlands of Statewide facilities, prior to
Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Importance as shown on Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the Board approval
Farmland of Statewide Importance. California Resources Agency . To of Use and
Some parcels acquired by the District implement this Mitigation Measure. IR GFdeF to avoid GGRV9FGiQn of FaFFAIaR Management
would likely contain lands with one or , the Draft Service Plan should be revised to provide that Plan and prior to
more of these designations. the ranger office/maintenance facility and the staging areas may not be preparation of
Acquisition of these lands by the District located on prime agricultural lands or on Unique Farmlands or Farmlands of any project
would not in and itself convert the lands Statewide Importance as shown on Farmland Mapping and Monitoring design.
to non-agriculture use. Program of the California Resources Agency_
As to Service
Plan revision
prior to Board
approval of Final
Service Plan
Mitigation AGR-1b: Trails and habitat preservation areas shall either be
Impact AGR-1: The Coastal As to siting and Planning (siting
i id d t locateo avoid prime agricultural lands and Unique Farmlands or Farmlands
Annexation Area contains Prime - design prior to and design)
of Statewide Importance as shown on Farmland Mapping and Monitorinq
Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Board approval
Program of the California Resources Agency_or traverse such lands in a
Farmland of Statewide Importance. of Use and
Some parcels acquired by the District manner that does not result in interference with agricultural activities or Management Operations
substantially reduce the agricultural potential of those lands. Owners and Plan and construction
would likely contain lands with one or prior to (
operators of active agricultural activities lands shall be consulted to identify supervision ano
opening an trails
P
more of these designations. — P 9 Y i
Acquisition of these lands by the District appropriate routes on those lands they Guitavate. The agricultural activities and to public access; ongoing
would not in and itself convert the lands the agricultural potential of traversed lands shall be protected and buffered project oversight oversight)
to non-agriculture use. from trail user impacts by means of distance, physical barriers (i.e., sturdy thereafter
fences), or other non-disruptive methods.
Impact AGR-1: The Coastal Mitigation AGR-1c: The District shall adopt Draft Service Plan Policy PA by Prior to Final Planning
Annexation Area contains Prime ordinance. This policy reads as follows: "Within the Coastal Annexation Area, Service Plan
Farmland, Unique Farmland, and the District shall only acquire lands or interests in lands from willing sellers. approval
Farmland of Statewide Importance. The power of eminent domain will not be exercised by the District within the
Some parcels acquired by the District Coastal Annexation Area, This policy is a Basic Policy for the Coastal
would likely contain lands with one or Annexation Area."
more of these designations.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-3
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
5. Trails shall be sited as far away from occupied dwellings as practical.
Trails not within planned road rights-of-way shall be set back a minimum
distance from occupied dwellings in accordance with Table IV-A-4 (below).
Where setbacks specified in Table IV-A-4 are not feasible, potential noise
and privacy impacts must be evaluated for any subsequent District action
and shall be reduced by use of berms,fencing, landscaping, and other
feasible and compatible means, if necessary.
Table IV-A-4 Recommended trail setbacks from occupied dwellings
Land Use Recommended Setback
Residential 50 feet
Agricultural 50 feet
Timber Production 50 feet
Impact LU-2: Permanent Policy 2 from Mitigation LU-2: Permanent Policy 2 in the Draft Service Plan shall be Prior to Board Planning
the Draft Service Plan contains modified to state: approval of Final
provisions for only the Coastal Area and Service Plan
does not include the Skyline Area. "Within the Coastal Annexation Area Geastal Zene;the District will not initiate
any activities that would require a General Plan amendment or zoning
change."
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIWResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page V11-2
Table V-1
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
• LAND U$�E
Impact LU-1: Land uses and users Mitigation LU-1a: In areas where trails would pass potentially hazardous Prior to opening Operations
adjacent to any property that the District adjacent land uses(e.g., timber operations), trail structures such as fences, trails for public
may,acquire within the Coastal barriers, and signs shall be used to deter trail users from leaving the trail and access; ongoing
Annexation Area could pose significant encountering unsafe conditions. Temporary trail closures shall be employed project oversight
health hazards to future preserve users. during intermittent operations, such as agricultural spraying, that would thereafter.
For example, timber harvesting could jeopardize the safety of an otherwise safe trail.
occur adjacent to future preserves,
thereby causing potential hazards from
falling trees, limbs and/or debris.
Impact LU-1: Land uses and users Mitigation LU-1b: The following measures will be included in every future Use Trail design and Planning (design
adjacent to any property that the District and Management Plan for parcels within the Coastal Annexation Area: siting prior to and siting)and
may acquire within the Coastal Board approval
Operations
Annexation Area could pose significant 1. In areas where trail routes are immediately adjacent to private property, of Use and Management (closures,
health hazards to future preserve users. fencing shall be employed as necessary to deter users-from leaving the construction
For example, timber harvesting could trail. Specific fence, gate, and crossing designs will be determined in Plan"and and
p g g prior to opening supervision, and
occur adjacent to future preserves, consultations with adjacent affected property owner(s)at the Use and trails for public ongoing
thereby causing potential hazards from Management Plan stage.
falling trees, limbs and/or debris. 2. All new trails/facilities will be sited away from the edges of new preserves. access; ongoing oversight)
3. All new trails/facilities will be designed to preserve existing vegetation project oversight
thereafter.
within new preserves and at the property lines so that preserve users will
not be able to view land uses in adjacent properties.
4. Trail uses will be consolidated where safe within the same trail way,
depending on the steepness, available right-of-way, safety, user
frequencies, and other conditions. A type of use on a trail may be
prohibited for safety or environmental reasons, such as erosion and water
quality. Where a trail is restricted to a particular type of user, the trail shall
be clearly designated as such and shall be equipped with use signs and
appropriate barriers to discourage unauthorized use.
r The term"Use and Management-Plan"here refers to any site Use and Management Plan,excepting the Preliminary Use and Management Plan,which is adopted at the
time of acquisition and normally preserves the status quo site conditions pending adoption of a more detailed site Use and Management Plan for the property.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIR/Responses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
EXHIBIT C
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report
Page VII-1
Vil. Mitigation Monitoring Plan
In accordance with Section 15097(a) and (c) of the CEQA Guidelines, in order to ensure that the
mitigation measures and project revisions identified in the EIR are implemented, the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District shall adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the revisions which it
has required in the project and the measures it has imposed to mitigate or avoid significant
environmental effects.
The District will monitor all mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
"Monitoring" is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project oversight. All mitigation measures
will be implemented by appropriate District personnel or Department. All mitigation measures will be
incorporated into the Final Service Plan.
The following table lists the Impacts, Mitigation Measures, Timing of,the Mitigation Measure (when the
measure will be implemented), and the Department responsibility for ensuring that the mitigation
measure will be implemented. Changes to DEIR text is shown as either underline where new or
s#+keeut where deleted.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIRJResponses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Table 1 Coastal Annexation Project - Hi hway Level of Service Analysis
Existing+ Existing+ Background+
Existing Back round Project
Max.
.. CAS �111oi�tabte Taft .
4s: Standar d Y. to;r v/C tatio :Traffic ,VEC Profaned votum Vf ,> ProfeCt; Traffic Yt
"Road," �
Passing 1! .`: votume Ratio t.OS -:Grcwtk�_, `Ict R io 1LOS," ,Trf Yotur a;°
Rte 1 Route 84-Tunitas Crk Rd D 30% 0.54 1002 0.36 C 105 1113 0.40 D 32 1145 0.41 D
Main St-Half Moon Bay Rd E 90% 0.90 1297 0.46 E 136 1440 0.51 E 41 1481 0.53 E
Rte 35 Alpine Road-Woodside Dr E 60% 0.91 191 0.07 B 20 212 0.08 B 6 218 0.08 B
Kings Mountain Rd-SR 92 B 60% 0.17 180 0.06 B 19 200 0.07 B 6 206 0.07 B
SR 92-1-280 B 50% 0.18 443 0.16 B 47 492 0.181 B 14 506 0.18 B
Rte 84 Skyline Blvd-Woodside C 100% 0.28 469 0.17 C 49 521 0.19 C 15 536 0.19 C
Woodside-Portola Road E 40% 0.92 387 0.14 B 41 430 0.15 B 12 442 0.16 B
Kings Mtn Rd-Whiskey Hill Rd E 40% 0.92 794 0.28 C 83 882 0.31 C 25 907 0.32 C
Whiskey Hill Rd-1-280 E 40% 0.92 2108 0.75 E 221 2341 10.84 E 1 66 2407 1 0.86 E
Rte 92 Rte 1-Half Moon Bay E 30% 0.93 1677 0.60 E 176 1862 0.66 E 53 1915 0.68 E
Half Moon Bay-Skyline Blvd E 20% 0.94 1995 0.71 E 209 2215 0.79 E 63 2278 0.81 E
Skyline Blvd-1-280 E 50% 0.91 1591 10.57 E 167 1766 0.63 E 50 1 1816 0.65 1 E
Notes:
a/Level of Service(LOS)standard is based on San Mateo County Congestion Management Program(CMP)level of service standards for CMP Roadway
Segments as
documented in City/County City/County Association of Govemments of San Mateo County Final Congestion Management Program for 1999.
/b/Maximum allowable Volume-to-Capacity(V/C)ratios are based on V/C threshold values for LOS A through LOS E operating conditions on two-lane highway
segments as
reported on Table B-3 of the San Mateo Count 's Final Congestion Management Program for 1999.
/c/Background traffic volumes were calculated by applying a growth factor to existing traffic volumes to account for 15 years of growth at an annual rate of 0.7% per
year.
,
A"
`Attention Bicyclists and Equestrians:
- Whittemore Gulch Trail is closed 0.5 0 5 �� •!t: >} �
f seasonally.Call the District office p 1
for current trail conditions. 0-3 y 0.3 C`1I 1
0.6 a t
�a Ssa`
No ad ge
1.2
' con
1400 0.2
(PC-,) �s•�
a
.
a¢ 0.3
Ba
.-i
23 arkin 2.1 nio
y
100
K � 1000
Higgins \ -
Purisima �.• 4Y�a� {
Road rcos e00
,� 600 spa Cr,•ek S+,y."l sea ( --•.
2.6 /
l i 800 �
1000 Purisima Creek Trail �•r'°oa
Purisima Bord
_Creek Pry
tz00ti ;ec�T u.
Road
''� �% 1.3 •sr.ate•• �a'•'
/auo
�t• il segment ,Ssait
C• I cTralosed pending Gsee`>
re-route due to Purisima
l l 1600 bridge washout.
2.5 -�k
P ew
-•�" L!lci11h1 Cr
a
1600
0.2
. ® 0.3 C�
ald Knob
2102' sa\ \ r
• 1 PPk
• j ' Swett RA)
�1
J
For complete trail information,
c refer to an El Corte de Madera Creek
��a�••�obitos Cr _ Open Space Preserve trail map.
J �p"� = ` EL COR
i• •; �; j / / /� `' �4 OPE
�•1.2
0.9
( 111 I a
1.0
Purisima Creek Redwood Open Space Preserve
San Mateo Annexation Area
PORTOLA VALLEY o�• �-
' d Stay on designated trails and observalion
4' area to help protect the fragile
environment around Sausal Pond. The
area around the pond perimeter is clna-i, I
I 1
/.Sawa -w
/ Pond0.6
` 6
1000
P`0.6
- t2a1 S r�pg Ridge Trail 0.3 1 t 0.1
P 1.6 A `y Sequoias i
1400 I ���y`�02 0*1 Trail
MH01) + A1ea�ow x0.2 1
` U
�� Trap ��
x0.2
N Hob
nniversary Trail - x/
0.7 Please use trails to bypass driveway.
5 G ICh..• v r^�-= " Use caution when crossing the driveway.
.-Hamm
- l
Hamms Gulch Trag 26
•
���'x-�•.� VX �� f
0 4;/��s 0..2 / 0.
0.4(} 1000)
QMH02)�� 1.5 roo ba4
14001-600
tio
�5� P
�} -�• lost trail ;
I � ��y�, ��• ( + ' Attention Equestrians:
Lost,Hamms Gulch,and Razorback Ridge Trails
^Lv e0111CYdt(/ 0.4 1\ ` are closed seasonally.Check trail conditions
by calling the District office. /
Windy Hill Open Space Preserve
San Mateo Annexation Area
�
35 Qi' ste,
�City fe nt 238
,J
s� Wa
nt
92 S
92 Redwood,Eity
a! 84
Purisima Creek Redwoods 82 alo Alto
Open Space Preserve t
1 Ito
35 e- Q F� taS
237
r �
Windy Hill t• r
L S AI In le
to
Open Space Preserve
J { G _a
Los Tr os Wo ds —
San. Jose
e ario 84 a ont t
edwo rra 'La Honda
p e
far
rato
Pescadero
S
17 Q
er Creek o p
0
1
Ben Lom nd t
Davenport
r
0 5 10 Miles Location of Traffic Study Open Space Preserves
Hexagon Transportation Consultants
N
• Lands acquired by the district: 9,750 acres. The lands will be subject to active use similar to that
found at the preserves studied for the traffic impact analysis.
• Easements acquired or monitored by others: 2,200 acres. These lands are not expected to be
subject to active use therefore will not generate additional traffic.
• Expansion of lands managed under contract: 2,500 acres. These lands are expected to be used to
a lesser degree than acquired lands. The Fiscal Analysis for the Draft Service Plan states that
these lands will include trail development at roughly 2/3 the rate that trails are developed on
acquired lands.
• Total lands acquired and/or managed by the District after 15 years under Optional Scenario #2:
14,450 acres. Because of the varying degrees of expected usage, this is equivalent to
approximately 11,400 acres of active use (9,750 acres of acquired lands plus two thirds of the
2,500 acres of lands managed for others (equivalent to 1,650 acres of active use).
Because the traffic impact analysis considered the traffic impacts attributable to a 12,000 acre active use
annexation proposal, it reasonably represents the projected traffic impacts for the 11,400 acres of active
use lands proposed under the Optional Scenario#2.
In conclusion, based on the guidelines set forth by the San Mateo County congestion Management
Program for rural, 2-lane highway segments, neither Coastal Annexation scenario is projected to cause
significant traffic impacts.
Attachments
Maps showing location of traffic counts
Table I
Project trips were added to the existing plus background traffic volumes to obtain project traffic volumes.
The results of highway LOS analysis under project conditions are shown on Table 1. The results of this
analysis indicate that all of the study roadway segments would continue to operate within their respective
LOS standard with the addition of project related traffic associated with public access to 12,000 acres at
year 15. Several commenters noted that the ideal vehicle capacity referenced in the DER appeared too
high in light of the conditions of the roadways analyzed. As discussed in my February 10, 2003 analysis,
the number of 2800 cars represents the capacity of ideal roadway conditions. However, the San Mateo
County CMP methodology ensures that the numbers used in this traffic analysis reflect realistic and actual
roadway conditions and terrain in the Coastal Annexation Area. The Level of Service Standard has been
thus modified for each roadway as shown in Table 1. Table 1 illustrates that neither the project nor the
cumulative project scenario causes a significant Level of Service impact as defined by the SIVIC CMP.
As noted, the analysis above errs on the side of overstating traffic impacts in that it assumes that all lands
in the coastal annexation area would be subject to the same general use levels as lands in the study
areas. This is a conservative assumption because the Service Plan contemplates a higher degree of
limited- or no-access lands than exists within the District's current boundaries. As discussed below, some
of the lands to be acquired or operated by the District in the Coastal Annexation Area will be held under
easements which do not allow public access. Other lands will be managed for owners other than the
District. These lands will have some public access but to a lesser degree than District owned lands.
Basic Service Plan Scenario
After 15 years:
• Lands Acquired: 7,500 acres. The lands will be subject to active use similar to that found at the
preserves studied for the traffic impact analysis.
0 Easements acquired or monitored by others: 1,800 acres. These lands are not expected to be
subject to active use therefore will not generate additional traffic.
• Expansion of lands managed under contract: 2,500 acres. These lands are expected to be used to
a lesser degree than acquired lands. The Fiscal Analysis for the Draft Service Plan states that
these lands will include trail development at roughly 2/3 the rate that trails are developed on
acquired lands.
• Total lands after 15 years under the basic service plan: 11,800 acres. Because of the varying
degrees of expected usage, this is equivalent to approximately 9,150 acres of active use (7500
acres of acquired lands plus two thirds of the 2,500 acres of lands managed for others (equivalent
to 1,650 acres of active use).
Because the traffic impact analysis considered the traffic impacts attributable to a 12,000 acre active use
annexation proposal, it conservatively covers the 9,150 acres of active use lands proposed under the Basic
Service Plan scenario, as well as conservatively covering the analysis of the 11,800 acres of all lands,
active and closed to the public.
Optional Scenario #2
The premise for this scenario is that additional funding for land acquisition may be available from grants
and new District-wide voter-approved funding.
After 15 years:
2
Exhibit B
f
k RAW TWSPOPTATION CONSULTANTS, INC
MEMORANDUM
To: Cathy Woodbury, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
From: Mike Waller
Subject: Coastal Annexation EIR —Traffic Impact Analysis
Date: May 29, 2003
The purpose of this memorandum is to clarify the previously conducted traffic impact analysis to cover
the projected traffic impacts of the Basic Service Plan scenario, as well as the Optional Scenario #2
Service Plan. The traffic impact analysis described in Hexagon's February 10, 2003 memorandum
evaluated the projected traffic impacts attributable to the annexation and management of
approximately 12,000 acres of open space by the Mid-Peninsula Open Space District.
The purpose of the analysis was to estimate impacts on the nearest highways if portions of the open
space were developed as recreational parks as described in the DER. Accordingly,the potential
increase in traffic associated with future preserves within the Coastal Annexation Area was projected
based on traffic counts collected at two of the District's existing preserves: Windy Hill (1,132 acres) and
Purisima Creek (2,633 acres). These two preserves were chosen because they are representative of the
predominant land types and staging areas that would be typical of the Coastal Annexation Area. The trip
generation estimates are based on traffic counts conducted at these two preserves on July 7 and 8,
August 11 and 25, and September 9, 2001. The Purisima Creek Preserve is particularly relevant to use as
a representative site because it is immediately adjacent to the proposed Coastal Annexation Area and the
staging areas are accessed from the study roadways. The traffic counts for each of these preserves were
taken at all parking areas at both of these preserves. Maps are attached to show the locations of the
parking areas included in these counts.
The 1,132 acre Windy Hill Open Space Preserve generated 34 total trips per peak hour (total trips are
equal to the sum of inbound and outbound trips), an average of roughly one trip per 33 acres. The 2,633
acre Purisima Creek Open Space Preserve generated 83 total trips per peak hour, an average of roughly
one trip per 31 acres of preserve space. It is interesting and notable that the two surveyed trip rates were
found to be so similar.
Based on these data, the current trip generation for open space preserves was calculated to be one trip
per 32 acres of open space. The analysis assumed that the project would add approximately 12,000 acres
over a 15-year period and that this land would be used at levels comparable to use levels at the studied
preserves; as discussed below, this is a conservative assumption because of the access limitations
imposed by the Draft Service Plan. Therefore, the total trip generation for the expected additional acreage
would be approximately 383 trips. This analysis assumes that the project related trips would be distributed
over the roadway system within the Coastal Annexation Area in proportion to the existing traffic volumes
on the roadway system.
40 South Market Street, Suite 600 • San Jose,
California 95113
EXHIBIT A
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
PROPOSED COASTSIDE ANNEXATION AREA
�) EXISTING MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT BOUNDARY AREA
PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA
SAN
FRANCISCO
ie► BAY
1 �
SAN
-bARLOS
SAN �
MATEO
HALF � COUNTY
MOON 1SANTA CLARA �
BAY
EXISTING COUNTY
DISTRICT C PALO
1 BOUNDARY '`? ALTO MOUNTAIN
VIEW
1 SAN
GREGORIO LA HONDA V
1 CUPERTINOr
1 PROPOSED
ANNEXATIONAWN �-
AREA
1 PESCADERO
SAN MATED LOS r
p,�SANTA '_,. GATOS
r�� CRUZ
COUNTY � '
i
Responses to Comments and Final Environmental Impact Report Page VII-29
Monitoring
Impact Measure Timing Responsibility—
District
Department
GEOLOGY
Impact GEO-1: Future District facilities Mitigation GEO-1a: Surveys shall be conducted as part of trail route site Prior to Board Planning (siting
such as a field office or maintenance planning to identify the occurrence of any potentially hazardous geologic approval of Use and design)
building could be constructed in an area conditions such as unstable slopes in landslide areas. Such areas shall be and Management Operations
subject to geologic hazards such as avoided or necessary construction design measures shall be incorporated into Plan; ongoing (ongoing project
seismic shaking or liquefaction. When the trail design to assure that: project oversight oversight)
open space areas are opened to the • Users will not be exposed to the identified hazard thereafter
public, users could potentially be . Trails would not contribute to increasing the degree or extent of instability
exposed to geologic hazards such as . Drainage from the trail would be routed away from the instability
unstable slopes in landslide areas. In no event shall a trail be routed across an instability that is actively supplying
sediment directly into a channel within a watershed known to support
anadromous fish species, unless the instability is stabilized.
Impact GEO-1: Future District facilities Mitigation GEO-1 b: The District shall routinely monitor trails and provide Ongoing project Operations
such as a field office or maintenance regular maintenance to avoid public exposure to hazardous conditions. oversight
building could be constructed in an area
subject to geologic hazards such as
seismic shaking or liquefaction. When
open space areas are opened to the
public, users could potentially be
exposed to geologic hazards such as
unstable slopes in landslide areas.
Impact GEO-1: Future District facilities Mitigation GEO-1c: Where structures are proposed, a geotechnical Prior to bid and Planning
such as a field office or maintenance evaluation shall be conducted to identify engineering methods to reduce the construction
building could be constructed in an area potential for structural failure due to geological hazards. All buildings shall be
subject to geologic hazards such as designed in a manner that reflects the geologic hazards on the site, and shall
seismic shaking or liquefaction. When be consistent with local and Uniform Building Codes.
open space areas are opened to the
public, users could potentially be
exposed to geologic hazards such as
unstable slopes in landslide areas.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Final EIWRespon.ses to Comments
San Mateo Coastal Area Annexation May 2003
Exhibit D
Amendment to
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
"Open Space Acquisition Policies as Lands Relate to
Sphere of Influence and Annexation Policies"
(Original Policy Adopted by the Board of Directors on February 1.1, 1987)
The Policy of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District entitled "Open Space Acquisition
Policies as Lands Relate to Sphere of Influence and Annexation Policies" adopted by the Board
of Directors on February 11, 1987 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sphere of Influence
Interests in land shall be acquired primarily within the Sphere of Influence boundaries of the
District. Interests in property located only partially within the Sphere of Influence may also be
considered. As to land wholly outside the Sphere of Influence, the District will consider
acquisition (choose one or more of the following): (1) by gift or competitive grant, (2) in a joint
project with another agency, (3) by significant bargain purchase, (4) when there is a direct and
important relationship to District-owned property. An future extension of sphere boundaries
P p p P Y
shall be approved according to Local Agency Formation Commission procedures and applicable
State law, with notification of affected landowners to be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Annexation
The District may initiate annexation of lands in which it owns at least 50%of the fee interest, but
shall not seek to annex lands not at Ieast 50%owned by the District without the consent of the
owners of more than 50% of the fee interest in each of the properties involved. Annexations
initiated by petition or by LAFCo shall be considered by the District.
Annexation of Territory Within the Coastal Area of San Mateo County
The foregoing Annexation Policy shall not apply to annexations within the following geographic
area: that area bounded on the north by the southern boundary of the City of Pacifica; on the
south by the San Mateo County/Santa Cruz County boundary; on the west by the Pacific Ocean;
and on the east by the boundary of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District existing on
ei owned b r the City and County of
the lands of the San Francisco Watershed own
June 12 2002 and tY
5 �5'
San Francisco.
Within such geographic area,the following Annexation Policy shall apply: The affected territory
to be annexed shall be subject to the service plan submitted by the District with its resolution of
application for annexation of such territoryto the Local Agency Formation Commission. The
i pp
g Y
service plan shall apply to the annexed territory upon the Effective Date of any such annexation
as set out in Government Code Section 57202.
Exhibit E
I
i
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
PROHIBITING THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY
BY EMINENT DOMAIN WITHIN SPECIFIED AREAS ]
ADOPTED_, 2002 2003
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District to submit a Resolution of Application to the San Mateo County Local Agency Formation
Commission for the expansion of the District's boundaries to include the San Mateo County
Coast in order to preserve open space and agricultural lands; and
WHEREAS, it was the recommendation of the District's Coastal Advisory Committee that the
District adopt a policy prohibiting the use of eminent domain to acquire property on the San
Mateo County Coast and that property be acquired from willing sellers only; and
WHEREAS, the District's Board of Directors agrees with the recommendation of the Coastal
Advisory Committee and desires to adopt such a policy prohibiting the use of eminent domain on
the San Mateo County Coast; and
WHEREAS, some Coastside residents have signed a petition asking;the Board of Directors to"pledge to
permanently remove eminent domain from its policies in the proposed annexation area in a manner that is
secure and acceptable to both the residents and the District(possibly in the LAFCo process),"and
pledging their full support for the annexation proposal should the board do so-,and
WHEREAS, the District's Board of Directors has approved a Service Plan as required by
Government Code Section 56653 in conjunction with its Resolution of Application to the Local
Agency Formation Commission for annexation of the Coastal Annexation Area as defined
therein,which contains Permanent Policy P.1 prohibiting the use of eminent domain in the area
to be annexed; and
WHEREAS,the District has approved the environmental document for this annexation required j
by the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA Document")which contains Mitigation
Measure No. AGR-lc prohibiting th p g e use of eminent domain in the area to be annexed; and i
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Board of Directors to further demonstrate its commitment to a
prohibition of the use of eminent domain to acquire property in the area to be annexed pursuant
to the Resolution of Application, Service Plan,and CEQA Document by adoption and
Publication of an ordinance of the Midpeninsula
eninsula Regional
t onal Open Space
ace District setting out its
intent that this be a permanent rule of conduct of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District.
i
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED AS FOLLOWS:
Be it ordained by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District as
follows:
i
SECTION 1. On , 2002-2003,the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District approved a Resolution of Application for Annexation("Resolution of Application for
Annexation"), Service Plan, and CEQA Document for submission to the San Mateo County Local
Agency Formation Commission to annex the following territory: That area bounded on the north by the
southern boundary of the City of Pacifica; on the south by the San Mateo County/Santa Cruz County
boundary; on the west by the Pacific Ocean;and on the east by the boundary of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District existing on June 12, 2002 and the lands of the San Francisco Watershed
owned by the City and County of San Francisco.
SECTION 2. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District shall not exercise the power of
eminent domain to acquire any real property or any interest in real property within any territory
annexed to the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District pursuant to said Resolution of
Application for Annexation.
SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall be a permanent rule of conduct of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District.
SECTION 34. The Board of Directors shall publish this Ordinance once within thirty (30)days
after adoption in a newspaper of general circulation printed,published and circulated in the
District.
SECTION 45. This Ordinance shall take effect from and after the Effective Date of the
annexation pursuant to the Resolution of Application for Annexation,as set out in Government
Code Section 57202,and shall be effective within all territory annexed pursuant to such
Resolution of Application for Annexation.
SECTION 6: This ordinance shall be broadly construed in order to achieve the purposes stated in this
Ordinance. Each section, paragraph, sentence,clause and phrase of this Ordinance is intended to be so
broadly construed, and, in addition, is severable and independent of every other section,paragraph,
sentence. clause and phrase of this Ordinance. If any section,paragraph.sentence,clause or phrase of this
Ordinance is held invalid the Board of Directors declares that it would have adopted the remaining
provisions of this Ordinance irrespective of the portion held invalid, and further declares its express intent
that the remaining portions of this Ordinance should remain in effect after the invalid portion has been
eliminated.
The foregoing ordinance was adopted at the Regular or Special Meeting of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District held on the day of ,2-OO-22003,by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Deane LA-4.eNonette Hanko President Board of Directors
Attest: Attest:
District Clerk Kenneth C. Nitz, Secretary
i
EXHIBIT F
RESOLUTION NO. 03-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REQUESTING THE SAN MATEO COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY
FORMATION COMMISSION TO UNDERTAKE PROCEEDINGS
FOR THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AND
REQUESTING THE AMENDMENT OF THE SPHERE OF
INFUENCE OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT
RESOLVED,by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
("District')that.
WHEREAS,the District desires to initiate proceedings pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg
Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, commencing with Section 56000 of the California
Government Code for the proposed annexation of territory to the District and for the amendment of the
sphere of influence of the District;and
WHEREAS,the territory proposed to be annexed by the District and to be included within the
sphere of influence of the District is inhabited;and
WHEREAS, a description of the boundaries of the territory proposed to be annexed and allocated
to the District's sphere of influence and a map of such territory is attached hereto, marked"Exhibit A"
and incorporated herein by this reference;and
WHEREAS,said territory proposed to be annexed and to be incorporated within the District's
sphere of influence as described in Exhibit A is hereafter referred to as "the Coastal Annexation Area";
and
WHEREAS,the nature of and the reasons for the proposed annexation and sphere amendment for
the Coastal Annexation Area are to acquire and preserve in perpetuity open space and agricultural lands
of regional significance on the San Mateo County Coast,protect and restore the natural environment,
preserve rural character,encourage viable use agricultural use of land resources, and provide
opportunities for ecologically sensitive public enjoyment and education as more specifically set out in the
District's Service Plan for the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Area("Service Plan'), a copy of which is
attached hereto,marked"Exhibit B"and incorporated herein by this reference;and
WHEREAS, it is desired that the proposed annexation and sphere amendment be subject to the
terms and conditions set out in the Service Plan, including but not limited to Service Plan Permanent
Policy P.1;and
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the District that the District shall not exercise the power of eminent
domain to acquire any real property or any interest in real property within any territory annexed to the
District pursuant to this Resolution of Application; and
EXHIBIT F
WHEREAS,the proposed annexation and sphere amendment are consistent with the spheres of
influence of any affected city or affected district;and
WHEREAS,the Board of Directors has certified the Final Environmental Impact Report for the
San Mateo County Coastal Annexation and Sphere Amendment Project in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act.
NOW,THEREFORE,this Resolution of Application and Request for Sphere Amendment is
hereby adopted and approved by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula,Regional Open Space
District and the Local Agency Formation Commission of San Mateo County is hereby requested to take
proceedings for the annexation of the Coastal Annexation Area to the District and for the incorporation of
the Coastal Annexation Area into the sphere of influence of the District pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-
Hertzberg Local Government Act of 2000;and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the officers designated to receive copies of the report by the
executive officer of the San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission and to be given mailed
notice of the hearing are:
Nonette Hanko, President,Board of Directors
L. Craig Britton, General Manager
Cathy Woodbury,Planning Manager
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the General Manager of the District is authorized to execute
all documents,to provide any information or data requested by the executive director necessary to the
proceedings,and take such steps as may be necessary to enable the proceedings requested in this
Resolution to be completed.
EXHIBIT Q
RESOLUTION NO. 03-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MAKING A DETERMINATION OF NO PROPERTY TAX
EXCHANGE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
DIVISION 1,PART 0.5, SECTION 95 ET SEQ. OF THE
CALIFORNIA REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE
WHEREAS,the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
has adopted a Resolution of Application and Request for Sphere Amendment("Resolution of
Application')to be filed with the San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission for
annexation of territory described therein as the Coastal Annexation Area and more specifically
described in Exhibit A thereto,and for incorporation of the Coastal Annexation Area into the
District's sphere of influence;and
WHEREAS, state law requires that local agencies, including the City of Half Moon Bay,
which receive property tax revenues from the proposed annexation area negotiate any exchange
in property tax revenue that may occur as a result of the annexation;and
WHEREAS,the District Board of Directors has determined that it shall not seek any
property tax transfer or exchange to the District from any local agency,whether city,county,or
special district in connection with the proposed annexation of the Coastal Annexation Area and
that,therefore,no negotiated property tax exchange is requested; and
WHEREAS,this determination has been made prior to and as a condition precedent to
the Executive Officer of the San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission issuing a
Certificate of Filing for the Resolution of Application.
NOW,THEREFORE,this Resolution of Determination of No Property Tax Exchange is
hereby adopted and approved by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District;and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that there shall be no transfer or exchange of property tax
revenue to the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District from any affected local agency,
including but not limited to the City of Half Moon Bay and any special district located within the
proposed Coastal Annexation Area,and no such exchange or transfer shall be sought by the
District,in connection with the proposed annexation of any territory to the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District pursuant to the Resolution of Application for Annexation.
— — — — — — — — — — —
♦♦ MROSD Ward
♦ Boundaries
L ♦
(sz l
7
7 t
54 ..
5
i 2
r 84
San Mateo 9
' County Santa Santa Clara
Cruz aunty
County 35
t
♦
1 '
1 r
L, County Boundary
�] Coastal Annexation Area
� i Miles
MROSD Ward boundaries 0 2.5 5 10
based on 2000 Census 1:350,000
i
Exhibit H
Text Corrections
San Mateo Coastal Annexation Area—Draft Final Service Plan
June 5, 2003
Paragraph 2 at page 20 is corrected to read as follows:
By law, special districts are limited to a maximum of seven wards, which represent
roughly the same number of people. The District is composed of seven wards with
approximately 100,000 people in each. Figure 2 illustrates the physical relationship
between the existing District Wards and the Coastal Annexation Area. Based on the 2000
Census, the District will be reappei4ietg-re4pportioned the Ward boundaries in 2002
Representation for the Coastal Annexation Area would
also require the District to reapportion its boundaries. Since the population within the
Coastal Annexation Area is below 100,000 a separate ward for the San Mateo Coast is
not anticipated. The District could include the Coastal Annexation Area within one or
more wards.
Corrected Figure 2 is attached.
Paragraph 4 at page 42 is corrected to read as follows:
Should the District acquire lands that contain existing structures, these structures may be
maintained and improved for uses such as staff or caretaker housing or for rental to
others. Rental reference would be provided to other r recreation providers,p popen space or rec ea p iders,
such as the San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Department, and other public service
workers, including teachers, where use of such facilities would benefit public recreation
or open space programs and the community. Structures may or may not be retained
depending on their condition and potential for compatible use. If retained, structures
would likely not be expanded. Dilapidated or dangerous structures and other hazardous
structures not of historic or scenic value may be demolished.
Text Corrections
San Mateo Coastal Annexation
Final Environmental Impact Report/Responses to Comments
June 5, 2003
Mitigation BIO-1i at page VII-24 ofth e Mitigation Monitoring Program is corrected as
shown on the page attached.
i
i
I
FROM : KHAWO PHONE NO. 650 494 07% Ma 16 2003 05:36PM Pi
ns� 11; 03 04: 1'7p M U U U bsu b' 1J*V�ta P-
May 16,2003
Craig Britton
General Manager
Midpeaninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos,CA 94044
Re: CALL FOR SPECIAL NMETNi G OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPEN, NSULA RIEGIOTVAL OPEN SPACB DISTRICT FOR JXM4 STH,
2003
Den Craig,
Staff has requested that I C311 a Special Meeting of the Board of Directors for June 50',
2003 to consider certifying the Final EIR,approval of the Final Service Plan,approval of
filing an application to 1.4ko for the Coastal Annexation Project,and related documents.
I
Accordingly,as Board President,I an calling;a Special Meeting of the Board of
Directors of he Midpeniesudat Regional Open Space District to be held at 7:W p_tn. on
June P,2003 for the purpose of considering certification of the Final EM. approval of
the Final Service Plan,approval of filing an application to San Mateo County Laivo,anci
approval of related project documents for the Coastal Annexation Project.
The meeting is to be held at the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors' Chambers,
located at 400 County Center,Redwood City,CA.
I'd appreciate your also putting this on the Board's Agenda for May 28'h,2003 so the
other Board Met:bers can concur.
Thank:you for your assistance.
Very truly yours, P_
.Nonotte Hanko,President
Board of Directors of the Midgeninsula Regional Open Space District
cc: Members of the Board of Directors of the Msdpew—sula Regional Open Space
District
Susan Schectman,General Counsel
I
i
i
I
PUBLIC NOTICE
Special Meeting of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Thursday, June 5, 2003
7:00 P.M.
San Mateo Board of Supervisors Chambers, Hall of Justice and Records
400 County Center, Redwood City, California
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District will be considering
whether to apply to San Mateo County LAFCo for Annexation of the Coastal Annexation Area.
This will include:
• Certification of Final Program Environmental Impact Report(FEIR)
• Approval of Service Plan
• Adoption of the Willing Sellers Ordinance
• Adoption of Associated Policies and Resolutions
TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: There will be an opportunity for public comment on this matter. Time
for each person to speak may be limited in order to accommodate all speakers. Alternately, comments
may be submitted to the Board in writing, which the Board appreciates, at the following address:
Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, anyone needing assistance to participate in this
meeting,please contact the District Clerk at(650) 691-1200.Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting
will enable the District to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
Review the FEIR& related documents at the following locations:
MROSD Administrative Office, 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA
Half Moon Bay Library, 620 Correas Street,Half Moon Bay, CA
Woodside Library, 3140 Woodside Road,Woodside,CA
Los Altos Library, 13 South San Antonio Road, Los Altos, CA
Bookmobile, Pescadero, CA
Purchase the FEIR and related documents from:
Compact Disk: MROSD Offices—(650) 691-1200
Paper Copy: Ocean Shore Printing, 345 Main Street,Half Moon Bay—(650) 726-5168
Paper Copy: Kinko's, 1935 El Camino Real W.,Mountain View—(650) 964-4701
Download the FEIR and related documents from the internet:
Online and free of charge at wwrw.openspace.org