HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/17/1995, 7 - OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION PRIORITY PLAN4���NI�IYIIIIIIIu��lll "1 f MEETING DATE:
Ipu�ui� UU c� o san ��is oBispo 9s
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT M9EA:
FROM: John Dunn, City Administrative Officer
By: Paul LeSage, Parks & Recreation Director
SUBJECT: Open Space Acquisition Priority Plan
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1) By motion, appropriate $15,000 from unappropriated General Fund balance for
development of an Open Space Acquisition Priority Plan.
2) Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Land Conservancy of San Luis
Obispo to perform the appropriate services.
DISCUSSION
At the August 30, 1994 City Council meeting, direction was given to staff to develop
an open space acquisition program. An important element of that program is an open
space acquisition priority plan.
If funding is approved for this item, the attached agreement with the Land
Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County will provide the plan. As a local land trust,
the Land Conservancy has experience with many different types of open space
techniques. In addition, the Land Conservancy has extensive landowner contacts
within the green belt. Knowing the intended use of parcels within the green belt is
important when making acquisition decisions.
The Land Conservancy will work cooperatively with the Cal Poly Landscape
Architecture Department in using the available green belt mapping. While this
agreement and the proposed contract with Cal Poly Landscape Architecture
Department contain funding for mapping, there is little if any duplication of effort.
The Land Conservancy will be charged with the task of developing quantitive
information that will allow the City Council to make choices in the implementation of
the Open Space Program. The information will deal with those unique natural
resources within the urban reserve line and the green belt area that can be preserved.
Attachment A to this report is a contract with the Land Conservancy. Other
background information is provided as Attachment Al & B.
111110111$1101111 city of San WIS OBISpo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
The methodology of the Land Conservancy is to begin with the entire green belt,
identify those area that for a variety of reasons are already preserved and focus on
those open spaces that are "at risk" for development. The Land Conservancy's
experience in land owner contacts becomes critical at this point. As part of preparing
the acquisition priorities the Land Conservancy has allocated a time for public
participation. This will most certainly include an opportunity for review and comment
by the appropriate advisory bodies%ouncil. It is anticipated that the report will be
ready for review by council in the spring.
CONCURRENCES
The work scope proposed in this agenda item is consistent with the aims and
objectives of the city's adopted Open Space and Land Use Elements.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funding for this item is available from the General Fund. Completion of the acquisition
plan is cost effective in that the process will identify land that can be preserved
without actual acquisition.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Contract agreement with Land Conservancy
Al & B. Other background information
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on
this 17th day January, by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and The Land Conservancy of San Luis
Obispo County, hereinafter referred to as Contractor.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to request, Contractor submitted a proposal which was
accepted by City for said services.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations, and
covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this
Agreement is made and entered, as first written above, until June 1, 1995.
2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. Contractor's proposal dated
November 28th, 1994, is hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement.
3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing services as specified in this
Agreement, City will pay and Contractor shall receive therefor: compensation in a
total sum not to exceed $15,000. Payment will be made in the following manner:
55% of the amount to be paid after the completion of Items A through H as identified
in Attachment A1, and the remainder paid at the conclusion of the contract.
4. CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the
payments and agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City,
Contractor agrees with City to provide services as described in Attachment Al
attached hereto and incorporated into this agreement.
5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification, or variation from the
terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval
by the Council of the City.
6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings
specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement
between the parties hereto. No oral agreement, understanding, or representation not
reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect,
nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or representation be binding upon
the parties hereto.
1-3
7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United
States mail, postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows:
City City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm St.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contractor Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County
Attn: Ray Belknap
P.O. Box 12206
San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do
covenant that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a
person duly authorized and empowered to execute Agreements for such party.
^ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be
executed the day and year first above written.
ATTEST:
Diane Gladwell
City Clerk
ED AS TO FORM:
A
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,
A Municipal Corporation
By:
Allen Settle
Mayor
CONTRACTOR
By:
By:
7-4
ATTACHMENT AI
Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County
November 28, 1994
Mr. Paul LeSage
City of San Luis Obispo
860 Pacific
San Luis Obispo. CA 93401
RE: OPEN SPACE IMPLEMENTATION
Dear Mr. LeSage,
The Land Conservancy is pleased to submit this proposal to help with implementation of
the City of San Luis Obispo's Open Space Element. As a local land trust, the Land
Conservancy has experience with many different types of open space protection techniques.
In addition, the Land Conservancy has developed experience with landowner contact. We
look forward to developing a partnership with the city in the implementation of your Open
Space Element. We are also pleased to learn that the city is working cooperatively with Cal
Poly to undertake a comprehensive resource mapping program We look forward to
working with Cal Poly as these maps will be very useful in setting priorities for open space
implementation program.
You have provided an outline of a first -year open space implementation program for
consideration in preparing this proposal. The following scope of work is based on this
outline. We describe those tasks where we can be of assistance and those that will be the
responsibility of the city.
The following is a summary of the tasks described in the attached scope of work. The Land
Conservancy will:
A. PREPARE A GREENBELT BASE MAP. This task is to develop a working
relationship between the Land Conservancy's computer mapping programs and that
of the city.
B. LIST AND DESCRIBE CITY HELD OPEN SPACE. The first purpose of this task
is to generate a map of land that is owned by the city in fee or in easement, within
or outside the city limits but within the greenbelt area. The long -term purpose of
this task is to illustrate how new acquisition would complement existing ownership
or easement
C. PREPARE A LAND OWNERSHIP OVERLAY. This task is to prepare a map of
private land ownership outside`�of the city and within the Greenbelt.
p P.O. Box 12206 San Luis Obispo. CA 93406 • (805) 544 -9096 • FAX (805) 544 -5122
D. INVENTORY PUBLIC OWNERSHIP AND EASEMENTS IN COUNTY
JURISDICTION. This task is to complement the city's inventory of public ownership
and easement with similar information for land in County jurisdiction.
E. PREPARE A MAP SHOWING EXISTING AND PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT.
This task is to separate land that is already committed to development or has little
potential as part of the city's open space program from that land that contains
resources that could be still be protected.
F. COMPLETE A PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF LANDOWNER INTEREST.
The purpose of including this task is to begin the process of obtaining some
indication of landowner interest. This is an optional task that is recommended for
consideration by the city. The Land Conservancy will take a direct role in landowner
contact as part of subsequent tasks.
G. PREPARE A MAP OF POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE SITES. The purpose of this task
is to develop a working base map of individual "land - based" parcels that will be
subject to. further evaluation in setting priorities for open space acquisition.
H. ASSIGN ATTRIBUTES TO EACH POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE SITE. The purpose
of this task is to establish a data base of factual information for each potential open
space site.
1. EVALUATE ACQUISITION OPPORTUNITIES. The purpose of this task is to
develop qualitative information that will allow the city to make choices in the
implementation of its open space program. This is the final task in setting priorities
for implementation of the open space program.
J. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. The purpose of this task is to provide for public
involvement and review of the work described above.
The Land Conservancy has budgeted 10 days of time for public involvement. The
location, purpose and time will be determined by the City.
Please don't hesitate to call if you have questions.
Sincerely yours,
{ Ray Belknap
Executive Director
RESUMES
Staff members of the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo
who will be worldng on the City of San Luis Obispo's
open space implementation program.
RAY BELKNAP
Executive Director
LAND CONSERVANCY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
Ray Belknap became the executive director of the Land Conservancy on January 1, 1991,
bringing to the organization expertise in environmental land use practices and policies,
along with experience in mitigation programs and wildlife habitat protection.
He has acted as an environmental consultant and educator for over 20 years. He graduated
with honors from the University of California, Berkeley, where he later taught in the
Department of Landscape Architecture. He was a Research Associate at Harvard, where
he received his Master s Degree in Landscape Architecture. He has taught courses at
several universities and state colleges on the implementation of environmental policy and
has conducted research for the National Endowment for the Arts, Design Arts Program.
This research resulted in a Handbook for designers and planners on how to read and apply
environmental and land use regulations to individual design projects. His writings on
environmental resource analysis and planning have been published by The Conservation
Foundation in Washington, DC, and the Coastal Zone Management Journal.
He has worked for California State Office of Planning and Research, where he developed
procedures for the preparation and evaluation of Environmental Impact Reports and
drafted the California State Environmental Goals and Policies Report. While working as
a design princTal at the firm of Sasaki, Walker and Associates, he specialized in large -area
development planning.
Ray has been very involved in resolving the problems of major landowners, such as WED
Enterprises, Rancho Mission Viejo, and The Irvine Company. He brought together state
and local agencies and private environmental groups to assist The Irvine Company is
arriving at a workable development and environmental protection plan for 10,000 coastal
acres in Orange County. He has prepared similar environmental rotection and
development plants for projects of several thousand acres in Arizona, New Mexico, and
Hawaii. At Rancho Mission Viejo, he was responsible for initiating a continuing research
project with the National Audubon Society on the home range of the Red Shouldered
Hawk,, native California grasslands, oak woodlands, and pained important support for the
California Department of Fish and Game's Mountain Lion research program in Orange
County.
Ray has also taught on a part -time basis at Cal Poly in the City and Regional Planning
Department. His recent study, completed with Steve French, a former Cal Poly professor,
provided a comprehensive overview of subdivision activity and environmental resources on
a county -wide basis. This study was the County's Rural Development Settlement Pattern
Study accepted by the Board of Supervisors in May, 1991 and honored by a statewide
award from the American Planning Association.
In his c a p a c i ty as the Land Conservancy's executive director, Ray is working with several
large landowners, to prepare conservation easemenu, and continues to work with state and
local agencies, as well as private organizations, to prepare and implement programs which
will enhance and preserve the natural open space quality of San Luis Obispo County.
i
ATTACHMENT B
RAYMOND K. BELKNAP
CURRICULUM VITAE
PERSONAL:
Born: February 8,1941, Los Angeles, California
Marital: Married, 5 children
Military: Honorable Discharge USAF
Physical: No handicaps
EDUCATION:
University of California at Berkeley
September 1960 - February 1964
Bachelor of Landscape Architecture
Graduated with Honors
Harvard University, Graduate School of Design
February 1965 - June 1966
Masters in Landscape Architecture
Received Charles Elliot Traveling Fellowship
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County,
Executive Director
January 1991- present
RKB Associates, Conservation and Environmental Planning
Owner
June 1973 - present
See Biographical Sketch for description of professional services
Coastal Energy Information Service
Director
January 1985 - December 1990
An information service providing information to subscribers regarding local
governmental activities effecting energy development along the central coast of
California
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Lecturer
September 1989 - June 1990
Co-teaching the Senior level Regional Planning Studio CRP 451 -2
1
nn q
California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance
Consultant
January 1983 - January 1985
Local government consultant regarding coastal planning and energy issues
University of Washington,
Departments of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning
Lecturer
January 1980 - September 1982
Courses in design, resource management and the fundamentals of environmental
and land use regulation
Harvard University, Graduate School of Design
Departments of Landscape Architecture & City and Regional Planning
Associate Professor
September 1979 - June 1981
Courses in the politics of environmental policy implementation, large scale site
planning and new town design
Governor's Office of Planning and Research, State of California
Research Consultant
1971 -1973
Prepared California's first regulations requiring the preparation of Environmental
Impact Reports and California's first Environmental Goals and Policy Report.
Sasaki, Walker Associates Inc., Sausalito, California
Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning
1967-1971
Responsible for the design of large area land
United States. See list of projects.
University of California at Berkeley
Department of Landscape Architecture
Visiting Lecturer in natural resource planning
1969
planned communities throughout the
Harvard. University, Graduate School of Design
Landscape Architecture Research Office
Research Associate
1966-1967
Conducted research for the Conservation Foundation in Washington D.C. on the
application of natural resource data to land use planning and new community
design. See Publications.
Dober Walquist and Harris Inc., Cambridge, Mass.
Landscape Architecture
Designer
1965 -67
1.0,'0
Osmundson and Staley, San Francisco, California
Landscape Architecture
Draftsman
1963-1964
PUBLICATIONS & PAPERS:
n
," with Steve French, San
Obispo
Land Use Re lgu ations ", unpublished report sponsored by the National Endowment
for the Arts, September 1983,165 p.
lines for 'Improvement' in the Rural Landscape " presented before a statewide
conference on Rural Land Use Planning, San Luis Obispo, CA, August 1, 1987. The
paper presented specific design illustrations of how new buildings can be integrated
into the rural landscape
"Protecting Scenic Values through Land Use Regulation," presented before the Columbia
River Gorge Symposium, Hood River, Oregon, June 5, 1982.
"Assets and Liabilities in Large Scale Land Use Conversion," presented to the Statewide
Conference on Land Use, Large Scale Resource Planning in Land Use Decisions,
t; University of Washington, Institute for Environmental Studies, November 7, 1981
___t �__- ♦i________.. A Q... A.. —4P tl.e T....i..n /�noetn�
ea ", Coastal Zone Management Journal, V8 no.
ew York, 1980
ivironmental Resource Analysis ", The Conservation Foundation,
1967 (remained on current publication list for over 15 years)
AWARDS AND GRANTS:
Charles Elliot Traveling Fellowship, Harvard University. Granted each year to the highest
ranking candidate for graduation in that year's class. 1967
Research Grant, The National Endowment for The Arts: Granted to prepare a Handbook
for professional Architects, Landscape Architects, and Urban Planners to be used as
a primer on finding, reading and then applying environmental and land use
regulations. 1980
Research Grant, The Conservation Foundation: Grant to study how the mapping and
classification of environmental resources could be used by urban planners in making
decisions which allocated urban land uses on a regional basis.
3
911/1
,,044�
BRIAN B. STARK
9900 Santa Lucia Rd.
Atascadero, CA 93422
(805) 466 -3140
A position utilizing knowledge and experience in planning, environmental impact analysis, and research
methods to promote environmental protection.
Master of Arts - Geography. California State University, Cluco. August ,1993.
Major classes: Environmental Impact Analysis (NEPA /CEQA), Planning Methods, Site Planning, Geographic
Information Systems, Field Techniques, and Seminars in Physical and Cultural Geography, and Water Resources.
Bachelor of Science - Social Sciences. California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. September, 1989.
Major classes: Geography, Sociology, Anthropology, and Research Methodology.
The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County. San Luis Obispo, CA. 3 -94 to Present. Began as volunteer
engaged in planning research and GIS operation. Moved to part time paid position creating thematic habitat and
land use maps using Atlas GIS and CAMRIS. Recently promoted to full time GIS and database coordinator.
The Nature Conservancy. San Luis Obispo, CA. 3 -94 to 9 -94. Volunteer. Part -time position counting, mapping, and
uwuitoring the breeding success of two threatened bird species on local beaches.
Butte Environmental Council. Chico, CA. 1 -91 to 12-91. Volunteer. Evaluated and prepared written comments for
draft EIR /EIS's concerning local projects. Specialized in air quality impact sections. Advised on the adequacy of
these documents.
Lassen Pacific Development, Inc./Chico State. Chico, CA. 2 -91 to 5-91. Class contractai by local developer to
design plans for a site in Chico, CA. Participated as a member of a team that prepared the initial statement of
environmental impact, developed impact mitigation measures, researched site characteristics, designed traffic
flow, and delivered oral presentation to the client.
City of ChicoiChlko State. Chico, CA. 8 -91 to 12 -91. Semester project for planning methods class. Developed set
of recommendations to improve the Chico General Plan sections pertaining to open space zuid conservation, and
the planning process. Delivered oral presentation of class recommendations to the Chico Planning Commission
skm
Computer Shills - Comfortable with various software packages including MS Dos. Windows, Lotus, Arc/ Info,
Atlas GIS, CAMRIS, IDRISI, Dbase III, SPSS, WordPerfect, MS Word, Pagemaker, Kwikstat, and PC Tools.
Geographic Research Techniques - Experience in planning research, mapping, orienteering, surveying,
micros imate studies, spatial analysis, and statistics. Excellent written and oral communication skills.
Survey Methods - Knowledge of sampling theory and methods, survev design and administration, and
demographic- analysis.
References
Provided upon request of prospective employers. n� /�
ATTACHMENT B
SCOPE OF WORK
City of San Luis Obispo
Open Space Implementation Program
A. PREPARE A GREENBELT BASE MAP
PURPOSE. This task is to develop a working relationship between the Land
Conservancy's computer mapping programs and that of the city. We will work with
the city to prepare a simple base map that includes all land within the city's open
space greenbelt. The scale and other information to be included on this base map
will be developed cooperatively with the city to make sure the final maps are
compattble with other city mapping programs.
This base map will serve as the foundation for all subsequent maps that will illustrate
existing public ownership and alternative acquisition priorities.
PROCEDURE. The city will provide a map of the city in Autocad for the Land
Conservancy to test importing and running the file. The Land Conservancy will then
prepare a larger map based on this city test map that shows the larger greenbelt area
for testing by the city's hardware and software.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be a base map of the city and the greenbelt area that
will be compatible with the city's Autocad mapping capabilities and plotter.
B. LIST AND DESCRIBE CITY HELD OPEN SPACE
PURPOSE. The first purpose of this task is to generate a map of land that is owned
by the city in fee or in easement, within or outside the city limits but within the
greenbelt area. The long -term purpose of this task is to illustrate how new
acquisition would complement existing ownership or easement.
PROCEDURE. City staff will provide the Land Conservancy with a map showing open
space parcels or easements owned by city. The Land Conservancy will not conduct
any new research on parcels owned by the city within or outside of the city's
incorporated boundary. This task will complete the tasks listed as task 1 ("list ..city
held open space ") and task 2 ( "list...all open space within the city") from your
implementation outline.
The Land Conservancy will incorporate the location of these parcels and easements
into the base map described above that illustrates the city's boundary and its
surrounding greenbelt area.
r-
�' THE PRODUCT of this task will be a map of the city and its surrounding greenbelt that
0
7 -/3
shows existing city ownership in fee and easement.
C. PREPARE A LAND OWNERSHIP OVERLAY
PURPOSE. This task is to prepare a map of private land ownership outside of the city
and within the Greenbelt.
PROCEDURE. The Land Conservancy will digitize the boundaries of property
boundaries using current San Luis Obispo County Assessor records.
The Land Conservancy will provide this to the city in an electronic format that is
compatible with the city's computer mapping program. The city will then be asked
to review and comment on this map before it is finalized. Following review by the
city, this information will be added to the base map described in 'A' above. The
Land Conservancy will then join this map to a data base of property ownership that
will be acquired from the County Assessor.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be a data base and map that will illustrate land
ownership within the Greenbelt area and data base containing information that is
normally available at the Assessor's office; base date, status date, home owners
exemption, improved value, etc.
D. INVENTORY PUBLIC OWNERSHIP AND EASEMENTS IN COUNTY
JURISDICTION
PURPOSE. This task is to complement the city's inventory of public ownership and
easement with similar information for land in County jurisdiction.
PROCEDURE. This task will begin with a review of the County Assessor records. The
Land Conservancy will prepare a list describing the status of parcels within the
Greenbelt that are in some form of public ownership (such as public utilities,
railroad, etc.). These parcels will be added to the overlay that shows city ownership
interest
The Land Conservancy will also try to determine if open space easements or other
types of private easements have been recorded on private land within the greenbelt
area. This information is not always readily available. We will review county permit
records and recorded documents to find those parcels that may be protected in
private or public easements. This includes land that is currently under Williamson
Act agreements with the County.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be a separate overlay map to those prepared above
that illustrates the location of open space that is in public ownership, quasi- public
ownership or protected in some form of easement or contract within the greenbelt
area.
7 -f+
E. PREPARE A MAP SHOWING EXISTING AND PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT
PURPOSE. This task is to separate land that is already committed to development or
has little potential as part of the city's open space program from that land that
contains resources that could be still be protected.
The land that surrounds the city includes homes on small parcels, vacant small lots,
homes on large parcels, open land that contains recorded (but undeveloped)
subdivisions, as well as improved and unimproved agricultural land. The city's open
space implementation program needs to be developed in such a way that it reflects
an understanding of the existing spatial. pattern of development.
PROCEDURE. The Land Conservancy will prepare a map that shows private parcels
that are occupied with a permanent dwelling or contain other improvements that
have essentially committed the land to development (where there are limited
opportunities to protect open space resources). The land that is not shown as
developed will be pursued in greater detail as having some potential to be included
as part of the city's open space program. This may include parcels that are improved
but where the size of the parcel still provides opportunities for easements or other
forms of open space resource protection. This includes areas of active agriculture.
This map will be prepared by first illustrating those lots where there is a home
owner's exemption on the Assessor's tax records, comparing this map against aerial
photographs and conducting spot checks in the field.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be a map showing parcels with homes or other
improvements that should be considered "developed," and those parcels that contain
sufficient open space that they may be important as part of the city's open space
program. The Land Conservancy will review this map with city staff before
proceeding with task 'F.'
F. COMPLETE A PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF LANDOWNER INTEREST
PURPOSE. The purpose of including this task is to begin the process of obtaining
some indication of landowner interest. This is an optional task that is recommended
for consideration by the city. The Land Conservancy will take a direct role in
landowner contact as part of subsequent tasks.
Several of the remaining tasks of this scope of work will involve mapping the land
and generating factual information. This information, and other resource information
being mapped by Cal Poly, will be of long -term value to the city in carrying out its
open space and other land use programs. We understand, however, there is also a
short-term need to begin acquisition of land or easements in the near future. This
will require that we obtain some information early in the process concerning those
landowners who are interested in participation. This will help us focus our limited
resources. There is also a need to provide all landowners with some information
7-15
-gj'?IZ9�0
about this open space program before controversy and misunderstandings develop.
The Land Conservancy is proceeding with the understanding that the city proposes
to acquire land (or easements) from willing sellers. This is important. The
implication that the city would be condemning property from an unwilling landowner
can often cause substantial controversy. Such controversy can seriously undermine
the success of an open space program. We recommend that the nature of this
program be publicized early and in as personal way as possible.
PROCESS. The Land Conservancy recommends that once the property ownership
map is complete and there is some understanding of those parcels that may contain
resources that may be important as part of the city's open space program, that the
city make direct contact with these landowners. The Land Conservancy will work
with city staff to develop a mailing list. The city will be responsible to correspond
with each landowner to determine if there is interest by the landowners in
'participating in this open space program.
The County has also indicated a desire in working with the landowners to obtain
some expression of interest in development vs. acquisition options. Some larger
landowners may, for example, have an interest in pursuing a partial or cluster
development plan for their property. These types of development plans can provide
significant open space protection. Knowing the plans of landowners for development
or conservation is essential. The earlier this information can be developed, the more
smoothly the remaining parts of this program will run. It is recommended that the
city discuss a cooperative program with the county for contacting landowners. This
may include one or more advertized community meetings.
This program may take some time to complete. It is recommended at this point in
the scope of work so that the resulting information will be available later when
individual parcels are being assessed in terms of their feasibility as part of a short-
- term implementation program.
THE PROnucr of this task could be a working list or committee of landowners who
have an interest in participating as part of this open space implementation program.
G. PREPARE A MAP OF POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE SITES
PURPOSE. The purpose of this task is to develop a working base map of individual
"land- based" parcels that will be subject to further evaluation in setting priorities for
open space acquisition. We use the phrase "land- based" parcels to draw a distinction
between "ownership" based parcels of land. We have found that while it is common
practice to refer to land by ownership as the "Smith" or "Jones" parcel, it is important
to remain focused on the underlying natural pattern of the land. One large
landownership, for example, may contain a number of smaller natural areas that
could individually be protected without acquiring the complete parcel. Or, we may
find that to protect just one ridge or hillside, it will require acquisition of multiple
z
? -r(0
parcels.
The purpose of this map is to maintain a focus on the natural features of the land.
The word "site" was chosen because it is often used to refer to a natural or land -
based parcel of land and conveys the notion that we are concerned with a specific
"place" that has unique natural or cultural features. A potential open space "site"
could contain a number of natural features. It could contain a small wetland pocket,
a fertile agricultural plain, an individual ridgeling or prominent scenic hillside, as well
as a historic structure.
PROCESS. The Land Conservancy will prepare a map of geographic areas that
contain similar natural features. Areas of similar geographic features will be
contained within "polygons" (a computer term — think of them as similar to a soil
map). These will be called "potential open space sites." There are a number of
studies and publications that could be used to fully describe the history and utility of
this approach to open space implementation. It is not our purpose here to review
this history.
Simply put, the purpose of this map is to define those areas that contribute to the
community's "sense of place." This map of potential open space sites will be used
throughout the remainder of this scope of work to evaluate and set priorities for
implementation.
We have found that it is helpful when discussing alternative acquisition priorities that
the land to be acquired has a distinct identity, that is readily identifiable, that it will
contnbute to the communities "sense of place." We will find, in subsequent analysis,
that an individual site may contain a number of overlapping natural resource values.
A hillside, for example, may contain important oak woodland, wildlife and be very
scenic. Or, we may find a small out -of -the -way place that contains only ordinary
resources but could be vital in terms of open space linkages or be a representative
example of historical landscapes. This evaluation of the resources present on each
site will be conducted as a subsequent task. The purpose of this task is simply to
create a working base map of individual sites that will be subjected to this evaluation.
This will be the map that will be used for public presentations and discussion. While
there may be a number of resource maps that will be available to discuss the overall
natural resource patterns of the greenbelt (slope, vegetation, soil, etc.), we propose
this map as the central focus of discussion. To the extent we can, each individual
potential open space site will be named to further simplify community discussion.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be a map of potential open space sites that contain
natural or cultural features that should be considered for protection as part of the
city's overall open space program. This map will be presented to the city for review
and comment. The city may wish, for example, to review the natural resource maps
being preparedoby Cal Poly and subdivide or consolidate sites before the evaluation
747
process begins.
H. ASSIGN ATTRIBUTES TO EACH POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE SITE
PURPOSE. The purpose of this task is to establish a data base of factual information
for each potential open space site.
The data base will contain a number of fields for each landscape unit. These fields
will contain information such as its size, soil type, county land use designation, or
vegetation type. They may also contain information on features that are unique to
each site. This could include information on the presence of an important historical
structure, past land use practices, presence of toxic substances, etc. The goal, over
time, is to develop a complete and factual understanding of each site.
PROCESS. The city will provide the Land Conservancy with copies of all natural
resource maps prepared by Cal Poly in a format compatible with ATLAS GIS to
assist with this task. This will be the first step. The resource maps will be compared
with the potential open space sites to provide the initial information on the natural
resources of each site. The Land Conservancy will also undertake interviews with
historians, landowners and others that could provide background information on the
potential open space sites. We will, for example, make contact with California Fish
and Game to obtain information that may only be available through experience or
on -site observation.
We will also consult County maps related to their Sensitive Resource categories or
other information that may be available through the Environmental Coordinators
office. Information on archaeological sites, for example, is confidential but is
available through the County.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be a data base that contains as much factual
information as may be reasonably collected within a short period of time through the
above sources. - The data base will be suitable for expansion over time as additional
information is available.
I. EVALUATE ACQUISITION OPPORTUNITIES
PURPOSE. The purpose of this task is to develop qualitative information that will
allow the city to make choices in the implementation of its open space program.
This is the final task in setting priorities for implementation of the open space
program. The previous task was factual This task is qualitative. This task does,
however, build on the factual information collected in the previous task. Information
will be provided on the quality of each potential open space site as well as its
potential for enhancement and feasibility of providing protection through the open
space implementation program.
. 47-4
Setting priorities can become a divisive process. Information on priorities needs to
be developed in a way that allows decision makers to make difficult choices between
competing priorities. The goal of this task is to provide a sound basis for selecting
sites between short-term alternatives while maintaining a data base that will be valid
in the future as community values change.
PROCESS. The following method has been used for many years to achieve this goal.
The traditional method uses the three interrelated concepts of Capability, Suitability
and Feasibility. These concepts are explained in greater detail below and have been
adapted for use in this particular open space implementation program.
Briefly, this method will provide information to the public and the city council in a
way that allows them to evaluate alternatives. For example, the acquisition of a high
quality wetland may cost $1 million (to use a hypothetical number). An alternative
wetland site of poorer quality may be only cost $500,000. This alternative site may,
however, require $500,000 in restoration costs to create a wetland of comparable
value to the higher quality site. The overall cost is the same. Which site should be.
acquired? This decision may, in part, be determined by the availability of funding.
There may be sources of funding for restoration but little money may be available
for acquisition. This is why it is important to have information about the quality of
the site (its capability in present condition) vs. its suitability (potential for
enhancement), as well as current economic and financial information (its feasibility).
For the purposes of this open space program, these three concepts have been
simplified to the "quality" of the site, its "potential," and the "feasibility" of obtaining
the site in permanent open space.
DESCRIPTION OF METHOD
1. Define the qualiV of each potential open space site. The factual
characteristics of each potential open .space site will have been recorded
under task "H." We now have information on which site has prime
agricultural soil or contains a visible ridge, a historic structure, etc.
The Land Conservancy proposes a simplified two -part approach to convert
this factual information into an evaluation of the relative quality of each site.
We propose to evaluate its overall quality in terms of the "multiple resources"
it contains and in terms of the "importance" of each site.
a. Identify sites with multiple resources.
First, it is important to identify those places that contain a number of
resources. The argument is; "Wouldn't it be best to protect land that
contains a number of resources; land that contains agriculture, is scenic
� //I
weds l
and provides wildlife habitat?"'
PROCESS. The Land Conservancy will prepare a series of single -
purpose maps that illustrate the location of potential open space sites
that contain individual resources, such as wildlife, and maps that
combine resources in alternative combinations; wildlife + scenic, or
scenic + historical. These maps will be reviewed with staff to develop
a final map or series of maps that illustrate the sites that contain
multiple resources. This needs to be interactive process because we
can not, at this time, predict the. pattern that will emerge nor the best
way to simplify or summarize the results.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be one or more maps that show those
areas within the greenbelt area that contain multiple open space
resources.
b. Evaluate the importance of each landscape unit.
Second, there is a need to recognize that while some individual sites
may not have a high number of resources, it is nevertheless very
important. This gets to the issue of the one tree in the desert. There
may be only one tree, but it is a very important tree. Rarity is often
an important criteria in open space protection.
PROCESS. The Land Conservancy will meet with individuals or
organizations that have information on each of the resources mapped
and for which attributes have been included in the data base for each
potential open space site. We will, for example, ask California Fish
and Game to provide some comment on whether or not any one site
stands out as having special importance; above and beyond the fact
that it contains habitat for one or a number of species. The allocation
of an "importance" ranking is intended to be a limited process so that
when the final map is completed, any site that is given an importance
ranking should be considered as having a special quality.
In developing criteria for what makes a site "important," we propose
to give a special and separate ranking to sites that would help piece
together a connected open space system. The one quality of a
particular site that can not be recorded simply as the presence or
absence of wildlife habitat, for example, is the importance of a
particular site as it relates to an overall spatial pattern or distribution
I A more comprehensive approach would also include some measure on the relative quality of each site
between sites that contain similar resources. Is one parcel of land that contains wildlife habitat better than a
similar parcel of land. We would encourage the development of this information over time. This simplified ..
approach is proposed to obtain some early consensus and priorities for implementation.
-OX
of open space.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be a separate map that illustrates those
sites that have special importance as part of the city's open space
program.
2. Define the potential of each open space site. This step can be a very
quantitative process where the costs of improving each site for each resource
are estimated and documented. For the purpose of this program, we propose
to assign a simple relative value to each site as a whole. We will assess each
site in general terms if there is potential for enhancement through landscape
restoration.
The objective of including this step is to recognize that there may be
situations where the city may want to acquire a parcel that is not the 'best"
but could be unproved. The parcel may be adjacent to an existing public
park, or it may be available at reduced cost. There could be any number of
reasons to acquire land that is less than the 'best." The information provided
by this approach will allow these situations to be considered.
PROCESS. The Land conservancy will prepare its own assessment of each
potential open space site for enhancement or restoration. This draft map will
be reviewed with city staff.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be a separate map that illustrates those sites
that have potential for restoration or enhancement.
3. Define the feasibility of protecting individual open 4ace sites. The feasibility
of incorporating a particular site into the open space program requires three
kinds of information; a willing owner, an assessment of the need for
acquisition to achieve protection of the land, and options for acquisition if this
is necessary.
a. Identify willing landowners.
PROCESS. The Land Conservancy will use the results from Task "F"
and delete from the map of potential open space sites prepared above
all ownership parcels where there is not a willing participant at this
time. This information will be presented and .reviewed by the city
before taking additional steps. This map of potential open space sites
may be amended over time as new landowners move into the area or
the interests of individual landowners change.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be a map that only shows potential open
space sites where there is known willing seller at this time.
b. Define alternatives. to acquisition.
It may not be necessary to acquire open space through the purchase of
fee or easement in order to provide protection as part of the city's
open space program. A large parcel -may be suitable for a cluster
development where substantial open space may result from the
development plan. Or, some land is severely constrained in its
development potential due to hazards.
PROCESS. The Land conservancy will review those parcels that remain
shown on the map based on the result of task I3.a. with city staff and
again eliminate from further consideration those parcels that do not
need to be acquired. We will rely on the city's determination of those
sites that should be looked at in greater detail as part of the next task.
THE PRODUCT will be a map that shows those parcels that contain
important open space resources, where there is a willing seller and
some form of purchase (fee or easement) is considered the most viable
option.
C. Determine the final feasibility of acquisition.
The final step is to determine the interest of each remaining
landowner in selling a full or partial interest in their land. This
includes beginning to obtain some indication of the dollar amounts that
may be necessary as well as funding sources.
PROCESS. The Land Conservancy will meet with each landowner who
falls into this category and develop acquisition profiles for each parcel.
We will present information on alternatives available to the owner and
their tax implications. This includes gifts, conservation easements,
bargain sales, charitable remainder trusts, etc.
THE PRODUCT of this task will be a report that indicates the potential
for acquisition, estimated costs and timeliness. The City will add to
this report information on alternative funding sources and prepare final
staff reports for public distribution.
The final product of this task will be a map and "neutral" data base
and allows each site to be reassessed over time.
J. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
PURPOSE. ' The purpose of this task is to provide for public involvement and review
of the work described above.
The Land Conservancy has budgeted 10 days of time for public involvement. The
location, purpose and time will be determined by the City.
11. EXCLUSIONS FROM THE SCOPE OF WORK
There are a number of items listed in your first -year open space implementation program
that are beyond our scope of work. These include the following:
A. Developing a maintenance plan for all city open space.
B. Reviewing development projects for their effect on open space. The information
developed from this program will assist the city in this process but we do not feel this
is an appropriate direct role for the Land Conservancy.
C. Preparing a plan for open space uses, i.e., trails on creek right -of -way.
D. Providing staff training. The Land Conservancy could help in this area, but it is not
an immediate part of this scope of work. The Land Conservancy has found, for
example, training manuals on alternative acquisition techniques, tax incentive analysis
and other similar items if you would care -to discuss these issues.
E. Developing alternatives to direct purchase for acquisition and preservation (including
grants). This is an area where the city has existing expertise. The Land conservancy
will be pleased to work with the city in soliciting grants on a case -by -case basis or
meet with staff to discuss our experience with alternative acquisition techniques.
III. COST OF SERVICES
The Land Conservancy proposes to proceed from one step to the next according to
the scope of work. This provides both of us the opportunity to evaluate the work as
it proceeds and revise or end the work as necessary.
The Land Conservancy also prefers to work on a "product" basis. The Land
Conservancy would be paid for services upon completion and approval of each
deliverable report that will emerge from each task described above.
The following is a breakdown of the cost associated with each item in the scope of
work. The following estimate of costs is based on number of days it will take to
complete the task. This will provide a basis for us to discuss and revise the proposal.
We have estimated staff time at $200.00 /day and principal time at $360.00 /day.
A. PREPARE A GREENBELT BASE MAP 400.00
B. LIST AND DESCRIBE CITY HELD OPEN SPACE 400.00
C. PREPARE A LAND OWNERSHIP OVERLAY 11000.00
7-a3
D. INVENTORY PUBLIC OWNERSHIP AND
EASEMENTS IN COUNTY JURISDICTION 400.00
E. PREPARE A MAP SHOWING
EXISTING AND PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT 1,600.00
F. COMPLETE A PRELIMINARY
ASSESSMENT LANDOWNER INTEREST 300.00
G. PREPARE A MAP OF POTENTIAL
OPEN SPACE SITES 1,900.00
H. ASSIGN ATTRIBUTES
TO EACH POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE SITE 2,200.00
L EVALUATE ACQUISITION OPPORTUNITIES
1. Define the quality of sites
a. Develop maps with multiple resources 800.00
b. Assign importance ratings 1,160.00
2. Define the potential of each site 800.00
3. Define the feasibility
a. Determine willing landowners 400.00
b. Determine need for acquisition 400.00
C. Landowner contact 1,440.00
J. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 1,800.00
total $15,000.00
IV. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES
This will be discussed at the next stage of discussion after have had a chance to review this
preliminary scope of work.
We look forward to discussing this proposal with you and making any modifications you
believe are necessary to achieve your open space goals.
wp\amr \11\23\94
7 -,A+
_41
.J
-!
In The Superior Court of The State of California
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
No. dv1- 63787 -0 -6
Citv of SLO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ss.
County of San Luis Obispo
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not
interested in the above - entitled
matter
; I am now, and at all times embraced
in the publication herein mention was, the principal clerk
of the printers and publishers of the SAN LUIS OBISPO
COUNTY TELEGRAM- TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general
circulation, printed and published daily, Sundays ex-
cepted, at the City of San Luis Obispo in the above
named county and state; that
notice
at which the annexed clipping is a true printed copy, was
published in the above -named newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof — on the following dates, to-wit:
January 7
that said newspaper was duly and regularly ascertained
and established a newspaper of general circulation by
Decree entered in the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo
County, State of California, on June 9, 1952, Case #19139
under the provisions of Chapter 1, Division 7, Title of the
Government Code of the State of California.
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
(Signature of Principal Clerk)
Date January 7 19 95
city
an to s cBsl(m
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARINGS
On Tuesday, January 17,
1995, the San Luis Obispo
City Council will hold public
hearings beginning at 7:00
P.m. in the Council Chambers
of City Hall, 990 Palm Street,
on the Items listed below.
The reports will be available
for review in the City Clerk's
Department on the Wednes.
day before the meeting. For
more information, please call
781 -7103.
The Council may also dis-
cuss other hearings or busi-
ness items before or after
those listed. If you challenge
any one of the proposed
actions described below in
court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you
or someone else raised at the
public hearing described in
this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to
the City Council trt, or prior to,
the public hearing.
TREE APPEAL - CREEK.
SIDE MOBILE HOME PARK -
to consider an appeal of a
Tree Committee decision to
deny tree removal at 3960 S.
Higuera Street (Creekside
Mobile Homes). (45 min.)
CABLE TELEVISION RATE
REDUCTION - to consider
reducing cable television
rates in accordance with Fed-
eral law. (30 min.) '
SIGN APPEAL - 2115/2121
BROAD STREET - to consider
an appeal of an Architectural
Review Commission decision
to deny an exception to the
sign regulations for a 32-
square foot sign proposed in
a Commercial- Neighborhood
zone at 2115 and 2121 Broad
Street (ARC 156.94), (30 min.)
FRENCH ANNEXATION/
PRE - ZONING - to consider
pre - zoning to Low- Density
Residential and annexation of
a 14 -acre parcel adjacent to
City limits at 4380 Broad
Street (ANNX/R 110 -93). (45
EDNA -ISLAY SPECIFIC
PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT -
to consider a text amendment
to the Edna -Islay Specific Plan
to make annexation policies
consistent with those in the
Land Use Element (SP 154.
94).115 min.)
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Diane R. Gladwell, City Clerk
Jan. 7,1995 dv81787