COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

Inter-Departmental Correspondence

PARKS DEPARTMENT

DATE:

April 2, 2008

BOARD MEETING DATE:

April 22, 2008

SPECIAL NOTICE/HEARING:

10-Day Notice/Public Hearing

TIME CERTAIN:

9:45 a.m.

VOTE REQUIRED:

Majority

TO:

Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:

David G. Holland, Director

SUBJECT:

Certification of the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan Program Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan and Approval of the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan

RECOMMENDATION:

Conduct a public hearing on the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan Program Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan and the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan.

Adopt a resolution 1) certifying that the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan Program Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan are adequate and prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and 2) approving the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan dated May 2006.

VISION ALIGNMENT:

Commitment: Preserve and provide people access to the natural environment.

Goals: 14 and 15: Important natural resources are preserved and enhanced through environmental stewardship. Residents have nearby access to green space, such as park and recreational opportunities.

The Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan Program Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan and the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan contribute to these goals by examining best uses for these Parks and ensuring the environmental impacts of the Plan are identified, avoided or mitigated to a level of less than significant.

BACKGROUND:

Planning for the Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan began April 2004. Numerous meetings with the public occurred to address the various issues at these Parks and included three public workshops held July 10 and November 18, 2004 and June 7, 2005. The County Parks and Recreation Commission during their July 14, 2005 meeting visited sites relevant to the Master Plan and received public comment.

The Parks Commission at their August 4, 2005 meeting requested that staff explore the creation of a bike trail from Highway 84 to Skyline Boulevard prior to recommending approval of the Master Plan to the Board of Supervisors. Staff evaluated bike access options, found a potential bike alignment from Highway 84 to Skyline Boulevard (“the Valley to Skyline Trail”), and revised the Draft Master Plan to reflect those changes and other minor clarifications made as identified in Appendix H of the Draft Master Plan.

On March 22, 2006, the Parks Commission held a special public hearing on the revised Draft Master Plan that focused mostly on the proposed “Valley to Skyline Trail,” but also on the issue of equestrian crossings of West Union Creek. More than 400 people attended the meeting. The Commission heard much public comment and continued the public hearing to their April 6, 2006 meeting to allow additional public comment.

At the April 6, 2006 meeting, following comments from 79 speakers and the receipt of over 300 letters, the Commission recommended to the Board of Supervisors: 1) approval of the Draft Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan without the proposed alternative bike trail; 2) development of an updated, system-wide Trails Master Plan for San Mateo County; and 3) the formation of a Blue Ribbon Trails Committee to be selected by the Parks Director for input on the Trails Master Plan. Parks Director Holland indicated that a “Valley to Skyline Trail” would be evaluated within a regional context in an updated Regional Trail Master Plan. He also clarified that horse crossings in West Union Creek would not be closed unless the existing pedestrian bridge was determined to be unsafe, or if the Regional Water Quality Control Board or California Department of Fish and Game were to require that County Parks take mitigating action related to sedimentation and erosion.

The Board of Supervisors, on September 12, 2006, reviewed the Draft Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan and adopted a resolution authorizing the Director of Environmental Services Agency to execute an agreement with Environmental Sciences Associates for the preparation of a Program Environmental Impact Report for the Plan.

The Draft Program Environmental Impact Report was circulated for public review from July 16, 2007 until August 30, 2007. On August 2, 2007, the Parks Commission held a public hearing to receive public comments, extended the public comment period until September 12, 2007, directed staff to respond to all verbal and written comments received and recommended that the Board of Supervisors certify the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Program Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan and approve the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan.

DISCUSSION:

Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR)

The purpose of a Master Plan is to provide a long-term vision, in this instance, for a park system, and to identify potential concerns or impacts at a broad level. This Program EIR is a programmatic assessment and is designed to be a broad review of potential environmental impacts so that individual projects can be designed to avoid impacts; however, it must be stressed that further environmental review will be required when project level details are developed for individual projects. The individual projects proposed in this Master Plan have not been developed in sufficient detail to allow for complete environmental review; however, this Program EIR is intended to lay the groundwork for this subsequent review.

1. Environmental Review

A Notice of Preparation (NOP) regarding the Program EIR was released November 15, 2006, and a scoping session was held November 29, 2006. As a result of public request, the NOP review period was extended from November 29, 2006 to January 15, 2007. Comments submitted during the NOP review period raised issues on the scope and content of the Draft Program EIR, including:

• Traffic and circulation impacts to adjacent neighbors from park improvements.

• Public safety – user conflicts.

• Law enforcement in County Parks – parking and illegal uses.

• The need to include the Town of Woodside and GGNRA in the planning process, due to the Parks’ location.

Comments received during the NOP review period were addressed in the Draft Program EIR.

The Draft Program EIR was originally circulated for public review from July 16, 2007 until August 30, 2007. Copies of the Draft Program EIR were made available for public review at the County Parks Department’s Administration Office, Redwood City Main Library, Woodside Town Hall, and Woodside Library. The Town of Woodside requested that the written comment period be extended until September 12, 2007 so that their City Council could meet and comment on the Program EIR. At the August 2, 2007 Parks Commission meeting, the Commission extended the comment period to September 12, 2007.

2. Preferred Alternative Project

The Draft Program EIR was required to evaluate the potential impacts of at least two potential alternatives to the proposed project, the Master Plan. The County needs a conceptual plan that 1) continues to provide multiple recreational opportunities consistent with the regional nature of the Parks and protection of the environmental, cultural, and historic resources of the land; 2) identifies physical improvements that will decrease ongoing operation and maintenance costs; 3) makes public safety a top priority; 4) ensures the continued equestrian use of the Parks; and 5) improves vehicular and pedestrian circulation within each Park.

The two alternatives to the proposed Master Plan were the No Project Alternative and the Partial Master Plan alternative (trails, signage and Folger Stable improvements only).

Under the No Project Alternative, the Master Plan would not be implemented. The County would continue to implement existing protection, operations, and maintenance policies. The facilities and trails system at Huddart and Wunderlich Parks would remain as is. Circulation and parking would also remain the same. Public access to this area would likely increase in proportion to population growth and recreational demand. Some Master Plan improvements could occur, but on an ad-hoc basis. Park patrols and operation, erosion control, treatment of non-native species and pests, and road and facilities maintenance would continue at existing levels and intensities. The No Project Alternative would not fully address public needs expressed during the development of the Master Plan, and does not provide guidance for future needs. Therefore, this alternative was not selected.

The Partial Master Plan alternative reduces project impacts because fewer improvements are made; however, under this alternative, Park-wide utilities would not be improved, new facilities could not be constructed at Huddart Park, and the rehabilitation of existing structures at Huddart Park would be deferred. This alternative would not address, or would only address in a partial and unsystematic manner, the goal of the Master Plan to decrease ongoing operations and maintenance costs associated with aging facilities and site utilities, and lacks the environmental benefits of the Master Plan for the two Parks. Therefore, this alternative was not selected.

Staff recommends that the Master Plan, as mitigated by this Program EIR, be considered for approval as it not only meets the public needs and project objectives, but also creates the greatest potential environmental benefit.

3. Comments Received on the Draft Program EIR

Comments on the Draft Program EIR were received from numerous agencies, individuals and organizations as listed in the next paragraph. All of these comments were responded to in the Final Program EIR.

Agencies, Individuals and Organizations Commenting on the Draft EIR

Federal Agencies: Mai-Liis Bartling and Brian O’Neill, National Park Service, Golden Gate National Recreation Area

State Agencies: Timothy Sable, California Department of Transportation

Cities and Local Agencies: Susan George, Town of Woodside, Virginia Dare, Town of Woodside Open Space Committee

Individuals and Organizations: Marie Wagner Krenz, Charles Wagner, Marie Jo Wagner, Eileen Wagner, Jane Gillespie, Elizabeth Flood, Judith Bolon, Anne Fay Barry, William Murray, Friends of Huddart/Wunderlich Parks, Robert Susk, Patricia and Paul Pearson, William and Barbara Hinman, Josselyn Lane Homeowners, M. Fentress Hall, Robert and Martha Falkenberg, Matt Barger, Susan Doherty, Steven Lubin, Janet Estep, and John Kepecs

Responses made to the comments received have been incorporated into the Final Program EIR.

4. Changes to Program EIR and Master Plan

As a result of comments received, minor revisions have been made to the Final Program EIR text. These include corrections made by the EIR authors to improve writing clarity, grammar, and consistency; corrections, additions, or clarifications requested by a specific comment; or staff-initiated text changes to update information presented in the Draft Program EIR. These changes are summarized in the attached (Attachment 1) February 27, 2008 memo from ESA, the EIR consultant.

In addition to the changes made by the mitigation measures as identified in the Final Program EIR and summarized in Exhibit 1 of the proposed Resolution, the following changes have been made to the Master Plan as a result of the environmental review process.

•

The shower facility at the Toyon campground, the ranger residence, and the interpretive center have been deleted from the Master Plan and subsequently from the Program EIR. References to these project components have been removed from the project description. Any impacts related to these projects have been updated to reflect the new project description.

•

A reference to increasing the capacity of the parking lot at Wunderlich Park by expanding the parking lot toward Woodside Road was also deleted. A reference to minimizing tree removal in the parking lot improvement was added.

•

Throughout the Draft Program EIR, the County emphasizes working collaboratively with the Town of Woodside and Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA).

5. Outstanding Issues of Concern

a. Public Use Greer Road

For the past 50 years this public road, maintained by the Town of Woodside, has served as an access road for County Park service vehicles as well as for pedestrians, equestrians, and bicyclists who access the Park’s paved roads to the main entrance at King’s Mountain Road. In the Master Plan, the sentence “a secondary entrance is located on Greer Road” has been deleted and replaced with An entrance for park users (arriving by foot, bicycle, or horse) and park maintenance vehicles is located on Greer Road.

Residents along Greer Road have objected to the current use of the road, which is a public road. The residents along Greer Road could initiate a change of use through the Town of Woodside to make the road private similar to what occurred with Bear Gulch Road adjacent to Wunderlich Park. Bear Gulch Road became a private road through the action of homeowners there and County Parks is a member of the Bear Gulch Road Association; in that capacity County Parks continues to use the road as a service road.

b. Potential for Increased Use of Huddart and Wunderlich Parks

The Town of Woodside has expressed concerns that implementation of the Master Plan could result in increased use of the Parks. However all impact analyses determine that while there may be increased use, the increase is expected to be less than significant. For example under Impact 3.8-2, improvements recommended under the Master Plan are not expected to significantly increase usage of either Huddart Park or Wunderlich Park. The enhancements at the parks are not designed to increase use of the park, but to improve the facilities for existing users of the parks. Although a slight increase in available parking is proposed, an increase in traffic due to implementation of the Master Plan is expected to be minimal, if any. There are similar discussions for Impacts 3.2-1, 3.8-3, 3.8-4, 3.8-7, 3.12-5, 3.12-6 and 3.12-7.

c. Crossings of West Union Creek

There is an existing pedestrian bridge connecting Huddart Park east across West Union Creek along a trail easement on private property to Raymundo Court. In 2006, the Board of Supervisors turned over the trail easement to the Town of Woodside, which entity is now responsible for that section of trail. It has been discussed in the Master Plan that at some point the existing bridge will need to be replaced with a bridge that can accommodate pedestrians and also equestrians who currently use the Creek to cross.

During the Master Plan development, the Town of Woodside had indicated an interest in constructing a bridge from the Flood property located downstream of West Union Creek in Huddart Park. Currently equestrians cross from private trails from the Flood property across West Union Creek into Huddart Park. Attorney Robert Susk, representing Elizabeth Flood, has sent a letter (Comment Letter K in the Final EIR), which states that the existing trail on the Flood property is private property, that no public use of the trail would be allowed if a bridge was installed to facilitate access from Huddart Park, and that Woodside has no interest in the trail or in the Flood property.

Regarding crossings of West Union Creek, the Final Program EIR clarifies the issue as stated on page 2-28, comment response C-16: The text addressing the proposed bridge crossing into the Flood property from the draft Master Plan has been removed. However, if the existing bridge must be removed for safety reasons in the future, then no crossing will be replaced unless funding is available, or is required by CDFG and RWQCB.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no Net County Cost associated with the certification of the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Program Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, or approving the Final Huddart/Wunderlich Parks Master Plan.