1994 AMENDMENT TO THE BRIONES REGIONAL PARK LAND USE-DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Approved: December 6, 1994 Resolution No: 1994-12-305
East Bay Regional Park District Planning/Stewardship Department 2950 Peralta Oaks Court P.O. Box 5381 Oakland, CA 94605 (510) 635-0135
1994 AMENDMENT OF THE BRIONES REGIONAL PARK LAND USE-DEVELOPMENT PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page #
Introduction/Purpose ...... 1
Land-Use Zoning for New Properties ...... 1 Background ...... 1 Proposed Zoning ...... 2 Master Plan Zoning Unit Percentages ...... 8
III. Specific Recreation Amendments ...... , .. 10 a. Designation of the Lafayette Ridge Recreation Unit with an Equestrian Day Camp ...... 10 b. Connection of the Lafayette Ridge Trail in Lafayette .... . 17 c. Replacement of Special Event Camp Site at Corral Valley With a New Special Event Camp Site at Coyote Valley .. 18 .
FIGURES
1. Land Use Zoning and Project Area Map ...... 3 2. Special Management and Resource Units of the Western Parcel ...... 5 3. Proposed Lafayette Ridge Recreation Unit with Equestrian Day Camp ...... 11 4. Connection of the Lafayette Ridge Fire Trail ...... 19 5. Proposed Special Event Camp Site at Coyote Valley on Bear Creek Road ...... :'...... ·22
TABLES
1. EBRPD Resource Inventory Key - Special Units 9
APPENDIX
A. Contra Costa County Public Works letter concerning Bear Creek Road (Coyote Valley Special Event Camp) 23
I. INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE
The purpose of this amendment is to update the 1981 Briones Land use Development Plan (LUDP\EIR or "plan"). There are two major objectives to this effort. The first objective is to designate land use zones for the new acreage acquired since the LUDP. The amendment also establishes protective zoning for major creeks throughout the parkland. (add to page 79 of the 1981 EIA.)
The second major objective is to increase recreational opportunities at Briones Regional Park. The::S-pecific recreational amendments included in Chapter III are: " "0, • Designation of the 19 acre Lafayette Ridge Recreation Unit for an equestrian day camp facility and staging area (add to page 22 of the 1981 LUDP)
Connection of the Lafayette Ridge (fire) Trail in the vicinity of Vista Bella Road in Lafayette to provide emergency/fire response (add to page 25 of the 1981 LUDP)
• Designation of a new Special Event Camp Site at Coyote Valley on Bear Creek Road (add to page 25 of the 1981 LUDP)
The Amendment is intended to stand alone as a separate document that serves as an addendum to the adopted documents.
Briones Regional Park, within Contra Costa County is 5756 acres in size. It is encircled by Alhambra Valley Road on the north in Martinez, Reliez Valley Road and Pleasant Hill Road on the east in Lafayette, Highway 24 and Happy Valley Road on the south in Lafayette, and Bear Creek Road on the west in an unincorporated area. (Refer to Figure 1, the Land Use Zoning and Project Area Map.)
II. LAND USE ZONING FOR NEW PROPERTIES
BACKGROUND
Since the LUDP was adopted in 1981, acquisitions of approximately 680 acres have been made in seven different areas. This brings the total park acreage to 5756 acres. New properties are described below and land use zoning is designated for each area. The land use zoning procedure is established by the Master Plan to protect natural resources and guide recreational development. The zoning of the -new areas -complements-existing zoning for the -remainder of the parkland. Standard zoning for a regional park is divided into two basic units.
Natural Units comprise the majority of the parkland including the significant natural features in a cohesive area. Recreational development will be limited here, consistent with the preservation of natural resources.
1 Recreation Units are designated for areas suitable for recreational and staging facilities. These will be accessed by roads, located on flat areas, and located at the edge of the parkland, whenever possible. (See Figure 1 for locations of new units.)
Appropriate activities and facilities for a Regional Park and its zones are established by the Master Plan. New or upgraded recreational facilities, including trails, which are allowable uses, must have inter-departmental review to determine: if the type or scaLe_of project complies with existing plans; if an amendment and public review are -required as well as whether the project complies with CEQA.
Within the two basic land use zones are special overlay units, which are designated for resources which require a higher level, or specialized form of management beyond the District's basic operations and management. See Table 1 for the listing of these units.
No known archaeological, historic, cultural, geologic, paleontologic, wildlife or plant resources requiring Special Protection Unit status have been identified on the new parcels. Potential supporting habitat exists for several native wildflowers: fragrant fritillary, Diablo helianthella, and Mt. Diablo fairy lantern. However, no populations of these species are known to occur in these areas. The District nevertheless recognizes that additional surveys are needed to determine the extent of these sensitive resources throughout the entire park. Special Management Units and Special Resource Units are estabiished within new properties to bring these areas into compliance with District standards.
PROPOSED ZONING
Western parcel
This 603 acre area composed of several adjacent acquisitions (Duarte, Pereira, Rosa Trust/Union Bank and Santos properties) is located adjacent to Bear Creek Road. The topography con'sists primarily of ridge top and side slopes of a large ridge stretching westward from the center of Briones. It contains several draws with relatively flat land that is easily accessible from Bear Creek road. The ridge line is the largest area of relatively flat land. Elevations range from about 720 feet to elevation 1235 feet at Costa Peak. Several small, manmade stock ponds serve grazing cattle on this property which is primarily non-native grassland with oak savanna. Yellow star thistle is widespread and feral pigs are currently being controlled. Oaks are widely scattered on the ridges and slopes. Riparian vegetation is located in the many swales. Wildlife inhabiting this area includes perching and raptorial birds, a diverse selection of reptiles and mammals including raccoon, gopher snake, red fox and deer.
2 WESTERN:-_--_ PARCEL (see Figure 2)
EXISTING NAIVRALARE4 BriD~"es R-e"g,",i,0' ; 2'11 P;ark
SPRINGVTEW PARCEL
~ NOTE: Existing major creeks are NORTH designated as Special Resource Units (SRU). Refer to page 7.
~ MIl.. ES
Figure 1 - LAND USE ZONING & PROJECT AREA MAP Briones Regional Park Legend Specific Recreation & Fire Protection Access ~ Proposed Natural Area Proposed Recreation Unit * Proposals CJ Existing Nature Area Existing Recreation Unit
1994 Draft Amendment [0 the Briones Land Use-Development Plan Sept. 1994 prepared by PlanninglSleward.hip Deparn",m, - Ea., Bay Regional Park Diroict 3 There are several multi-purpose roads along the ridge tops and in some draws which provide park vehicular and emergency access as well as access for hikers, equestrians and bicyclists. The ridge top has excellent views of the area, with the west end of the Pereira trail providing a good view-point of the adjacent Briones Reservoir. There are no public utilities.
The Western Parcel is designated as a part of the Natural Unit (see Figure 2). Several stock ponds in this property are designated as Special Management Units because of their existing or potential value as wetland habitat for wildlife. A small spring fed wetlana: is designated as a Special Resource Unit. The following measures will be taken to manage the ponds and wetland.
PRESCRIPTIONS:
• Fence selected ponds and wetland areas to prevent cattle and wild pig damage and to enhance vegetation and wildlife habitat. Enclosures will include the entire wetland plant association and adequate buffer. The District will provide an alternative water source for cattle which will -also be designed to accommodate wildlife use.
• Remove Bullfrogs when feasible, to reduce the threat of predation to native amphibians.
• Deepen ponds as needed to maintain and improve water quality.
• Increase water flow into ponds, as needed by enhancing existing potential spring sources or through maximizing the interception of runoff.
An approximately 12 acre area, cal/ed Coyote Valley, is designated as a Special Event camp site within the Natural Unit (see Figure 1 and Figure 5). This area is discussed in more detail in Chapter lII.c.
Echo Springs parcel
This 11 acre property is primarily a steep, south facing slope with a riparian drainage at the western edge and with a relatively level area fronting Echo Springs Road. Elevations range from 680 feet to 1000 feet. The primary vegetation cover is chaparral with oak/bay woodland species in the drainage and flatter areas. This area is potential Alameda whipsnake habitat. The California Natural Diversity Data Base does not identify it as whipsnake habitat and there have been no verified sightings in this area of the park in the recent past. It contains no park facilities or utilities other than an EBMUD water meter available for District use. It is near the Spengler Trail. The ridge top above the property provides fine views of the surroundings. A good view of the property itself, is available from Spengler Trail. The Echo Springs property is not suitable or appropriate for additional recreational facilities. It is deSignated as part of the Natural Unit. There are no special units established.
4 • "::::1--- -- .:~ SPECIAL MANAGE"MENT AND RESOURCE UNITS "OF: ", ~= Park - Fence (visible) Fence (hidden in thick brush) Trail o Junction of differem fences II Gate .. ~ a\ Developed spring -, .... ' ' .. smg (Special Management Unit - Undeveloped spring N Developed Pond .::.:...... SM(g) Special Management U~it w -\rE Wetland SRU(a) Special Resource Unit s " . : .. " .. -.... " .. ,'.' " I • ~' .. - .• "'eiYoTB . ~~'-:;~:~ VlftLEYj' "<' " ~".' \. I I:' .'. "'':''f ; , 'l.i,'. :~~ '. -,<''P' ,.. .' . !', ':~.:.!: f~ j ,I" ::i" .'- .. \ : ,:7'~' ~ ... LNld Use-Development Plan Amendment. 5 East Bay Regional Park District Planning/Stewardship Department Neighbors along the road have requested that the District provide local access into the park. They have suggested two routes. One is to improve a partially existing trail. It dead-ends where terrain becomes steep. Switch backs and retaining walls would be required there. The other idea is to allow the public on an EBMUD paved road between Echo Springs Road and Spengler Trail which s~rves as an access to a water tank. The District has maintenance access on this road and will investigate the feasibility of extending its access rights to include public use for hikers, equestrians and bicyclists (but not private automobiles). No staging would be provided. Springhill parcel This rectangular shaped, 40 acre parcel spans part of a ridge that stretches into Briones. Most of the property is steeply sloping with relatively flat areas at the ridge top and at the bottom of the slope which includes a creek and touches Springhill Road. Elevations range from approximately 500 feet to just under the 1,000 foot elevation. This ridge forms part of the northern backdrop. to the Springhill Road Canyon. The land is primarily vegetated with oak/by woodland with an area of annual grassland at the ridge top. The lower slopes have a grassy understory. This mixture of vegetation supports a diverse wildlife assemblage including raptorial birds, songbirds, ground dwelling rodents and deer. There are no facilities or utilities on this property other than an existing mUltipurpose trail that connects Briones Crest Trail and Springhill Road. The trail crosses private property and cannot be opened as a public trail at this time. This area is designated as part of the Natural Unit. There are no special units established. Alhambra Creek Valley parcel Two properties in the Alhambra Creek Valley, Zunino (4 acres) and RobrechtjGriffitts (7.9 acres), were purchased in 1982 soon after the adoption of the Land Use-Development plan. The former Zunino prQperty now contains part of the entrance road to the staging area. The former RobrechtjGriffitts parcel contains primarily an old orchard. Human use has been extensive, and no special status species are expected or are known to inhabit the property. These parcels are designated as part of the Natural Unit, in accordance with zoning in the 1981 LUDP. Springhill School parcel Approximately 1 acre of the former Brown parcel at the eastern end of Lafayette Ridge, near the San Reliez Ct. service entrance was traded to the Springhill School (a school building was later erected on it.) In exchange, the District received a 10 foot wide trail along Pleasant Hill road, stretching from the existing Lafayette Ridge Staging Area to Springhill Road. The Lafayette School District reserves a 15 foot wide easement across the trail at about its mid point between the staging area and Springhill Road. This property is regularly used as a pedestrian/bike path. The trail is zoned Recreation Unit along with the adjacent staging area (see Chapter liLa). 6 Springview parcel A 14 acre parcel adjacent to parkland on Lafayette Ridge was acquired as a part of a subdivision dedication in 1986. This very steep and rugged land is on the north facing slope of the ridge and is covered with grassland and scattered oaks, bay trees and brush. It contains a trail constructed and maintained by the City of Lafayette. The trail connects Leslyn Road and the Lafayette Ridge Trail. This area is deSignated as p.9~ of the Natural Unit. No special units are established. Briones Road parcel The District received a .033 acre parcel near Briones Road in 1988 as an eXChange. The property is designated as part of the Natural Unit. Creeks Creeks are an extremely important natural resource within the park. They form a life-support system for wildlife by providing important habitat, food, water and by functioning as a corridor for the movement of wildlife. The riparian vegetation along creek banks helps regulate water temperature and prevents erosion. Creek zones are also important to park uses serving as a scenic and interpretive resource. Particularly because of the shade they provide, they are often preferred as the site for recreational facilities. Public use, especially in the more intensively used recreation units, has the potential to damage or threaten creeks and their valuable habitat. Thus, the major creeks of Briones are designated as Special Resource Units to bring them into compliance with District standards. The following measures will be followed in park operations and management in order to protect them. PRESCRIPTIONS • The District will establish a 50 foot minimum creek protection zone for major creeks within the parkland. Any new building and parking lots will be located a minimum of 50 feet from the top of the creek bank. Picnic tables will be allowed within the 50' setback zone but no closer than 10' from top of bank. Staff will monitor these areas and where public use is creating damage will install appropriate signage and/or barriers to keep users out of the creeks, or move tables further from the top of bank. • Trail or road crossings will be minimized and each will be reviewed on a case by case basis for CEQA compliance and CDFG requirements. In general, bridges are preferred to culvert crossings. Stream-side disturbance will be minimized. The District will comply with California Department of Fish and Game regulations for any construction work. 7 • Uvestock will be excluded from creeks where necessary, to protect riparian habitat. MASTER PLAN ZONING UNIT PERCENTAGES With the addition of these new properties to Briones Regional Park, the Natural Unit is increased by about ~% bringing the Natural Unit to 97~% of the parkland and the Recreation Unit to 2~% of the total park acreage. An additional Recreation Unit is established -af the eastern end of Lafayette Ridge. This is discussed in Chapter III. This change does not alter the percentages because of the small size of the Recreation Unit. 8 TABLE 1 EBRPD RESOURCE INVENTORY KEY - SPECIAL UNITS NATURAL RESOURCES 1. Special Protection Units (sp ) (a) Species on-afederallist for endangered or threatened status (b) Species on-a-state list for rare, endangered or threatened status . ~ (c) Species on a federal or state list of special concern (d) Species on a watch list designated by EBRPD (e) Archaeological sites (f) Historic or cultural features (g) Geologic or paleontologic features 2. Special Resource Units (sp ) (a) Wetlands, seasonal wetlands, marshes (b) Lakes, ponds and shorelines (c) Streams, creeks, and riparian zones (d) Forests and woodland savannas (e) Brushlands, scrub and chaparral (f) Grassland (g) Serpentinite habitats (h) Dunes 3. Notable Resources Any feature that does not quality for special protection status or require an individual management prescription - these features are listed for informational purposes. DEVELOPED RESOURCES 4. Special Management Units (sm ) (a) Fuel breaks (b) Dedicated nature areas, botanic gardens, or park feature requiring special attention (c) Eucalyptus and pine forests (d) Re-created shoreline, lake edges, stream channels or habitat areas used for nature study or park uses (e) Animal or plant populations that require special management (f) Farms, fields or orchards (g) Developed freshwater springs and ponds (h) Flood control basins, sediment ponds (i) Other outstanding or unique developed resource 9 III. SPECIFIC RECREATION AMENDMENTS a. Designation of the Lafayette Ridge Recreation Unit with an Equestrian Day Camp Facility Background An equestrian day camp (including horse confinement areas) is proposed for the 116 acre parcel aftfle eastern end of Lafayette Ridge. Site opportunities, as described below, make this site suitable for various recreational uses. An amendment redesignating use areas from the Natural Unit to a Recreation Unit is required by the EBRPD planning process. The EBRPD Board approved the "concept" of a seasonal, equestrian day camping and horse confinement facility on January 18, 1994 for this site in accordance with the Concession and Special Use Policy subsequent to the Park Advisory Committee (PAC) review and recommendation for Board approval on January 10. Figure 3 shows the location of the Recreation Unit. The day camp would provide equestrian lessons and trail riding to Bay Area youth. It would be a special-interest recreation facility operated by a concessionaire through a lease agreement with the District which will be approved by the Board of Directors pending approval of the Amendment. Conditions of operation will be strictly enforced through the lease agreement. The site proposed as a Recreation Unit is in the center of the parcel, formerly used as a boarding stable, located along Pleasant Hill Blvd. near Highway 24 in Lafayette. This 116 acre area consists predominantly of grass-covered slopes, rising about 600 feet in elevation from east to west. About 40 acres of oak woodland vegetation occurs on north-facing slopes. There are no significant drainages or riparian vegetation on the site. This area has been extensively grazed and is rated as having low agricultural productivity due to steep terrain and shallow soils resulting in minimal forage production. A site survey was conducted in the spring of 1994 and no sensitive species were observed. The one fresh water spring on the site has been developed for livestock watering. This area is connected to the rest of Briones Regional Park by the Lafayette Ridge Trail, a multi-purpose trail, which offers excellent views of Lafayette, Walnut Creek and Pleasant Hill and which passes through the proposed day camp facility center. The trail is designated as part of the Briones to Mt Diablo Regional Trail. Other trails on the property create a number of loops for hiking, riding and bicycling. Bicycles are allowed only on wider, multi-purpose dual4rack trails used by service and emergency vehicles. The District has service-access-only rights from San Reliez Court into the property. San Reliez Court is a private road in Lafayette, maintained by the City of Lafayette. The trail from San Reliez Court to the flat terraces on the slope, is graveled for all weather use but the trail to the staging area is not graveled. 10 NATURAL UNIT No horse grazing Maintain public trail access Trail use (no cross country) Keep One-Track Trails RE,CREATION UNIT facility Center Lease Area (3 ac.) - 50 horses or corrals Former resident site # 2 Paddock Lease Area (15 ac.) Existing bam __~~~'_ No. Public Use Former resident site # 1 Access pointfor EBRPD I NATURAL UNITII~-- maintenance, police & fire only. (no concession or public access) RECREATION UNIT Pleasant Hill Road Lafayette Ridge Staging Unit Access point for facility (existing parking) (7 '50' '70<>' 7'7'" \000' center concessionairre :§) +1 ___1---'1----+1 ---+1 & public use Figure 3 - PROPOSED LAFAYE1TE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT WITH EQUESTRIAN DAY CAMP Briones Regional Park Legend Facilty Center Unpaved Multi-Purpose Trail Hiking.Riding Trail Paddock •••••••• • Alita Route for Concessionnaire x X Fence 1994 DrafiAmen The 116 acre site is almost entirely surrounded by suburban development. It is adjacent to Springh1i1 Elementary school and across Pleasant Hill Road from Acalanes High school. Residential lots abut the parcel on the northern and south western sides This area was intensively used for many years as a year-round horse boarding facility with 3 barns, two security trailers and corrals located on the 3 acre graded, flat terraces at about elevation 640' MSL. Septic lines may still exist although their condition is unknown. The trailers have been removed, but the old barn and some associated corral fencing remain. Telephone and electricity service is available at the proposed day camp site. The former water system has been abandoned and must be replaced to provide water to the terrace location. Since the stable was closed, several years ago, the site has been grazed as a part of the District's grazing program. Most remnants of the former stable have been removed, although some cleanup is still being completed. Policy The District will designate a portion of the eastern end of Lafayette Ridge as a Recreation Unit. This will allow the construction and operation of a seasonal equestrian day camp facility within the unit. Equestrian use will be controlled and limited to a level of use below the levels of the former stables on this site (SO horses maximum). This area will be removed from the grazing unit. Should the equestrian day camp be abandoned, the District wou/,d consider other suitable recreational uses for this 'area through the LUDP /CEQA process. Implementation Measures The District will designate approximately 19 acres of the eastern edge of Lafayette Ridge as a Recreation Unit. This will include: the existing Lafayette Ridge Staging Area and trail along Pleasant Hill Road (less than 1 acre) and approximately 18 acres suitable for recreational activities (3 for the facility center and 15 for the exercise paddock). This change will not alter the percentages of Recreation Unit and Natural Areas for Briones Regional Park. The remainder of the 116 acre property, at the end of Lafayette Ridge, remains within the Natural Unit. The developed spring located along the Lafayette Ridge Trail is designated as a Special Management Unit within the Natural Unit. 12 Prescriptions for Spring • Fence the spring to exclude cattle Extend the lateral well and relocate the water trough to a better, nearby location on a larger grassland grazing area that is less steep. Design and Opelllting Criteria for the Proposed Day Camp/Horse Confinement Facility at Briones Regional Park The following Development Criteria describe the facility and set limits on development and operation to protect parkland resources. The Criteria will be incorporated into the lease agreement. The criteria were established primarily to deal with the potential impacts of grazing, soil stability and erosion, visual impacts, manure disposal, public access, concessionaire access and appropriate space allocation. Seasonal Recreation Use Concessionaire will conduct a day camp and horse confinement facility for riding instruction and trail riding. It will operate during the dry season only, initially from June 1 to Sept. 15. The period of operation may be extended from April 15 to October 15 pending review by the District. During the extended period, the number of horses will be reduced. During the off season (October 16 to April 14), all horses will be off site. A year-round security residence (a non-permanent trailer) may be established to protect the existing barn. Capacity and Type of Equestrian Use • A maximum of 50 horses will be allowed on the lease area at one time during June 1 to Sept. 15. A maximum of 25 horses will be allowed on the lease area at one time during April 15 to June 1 and Sept. 16 to October 15. The facility will serve day camp/riding instruction and trail riding. No private boarding of horses will be permitted. Location of Lease Area and Facilities • Facility development will be limited to the 3 acre flat terraced area (facility center) at the site of the existing barn. (See Plan Figure 3). This area will contain: arenas, pipe pens, security trailer, corrals, and storage areas. 13 • A large paddock (approximately 15 acres) will be permitted to provide exercise space for horses, but not a primary forage area. This will be used in a rotational manner so that vegetation cover can be maintained. (See the "Compliance" section below.) Uses in Non-Facility Areas • Concession~~ staff and campers may use all designated trails. No off-trail use will be permitted. No grazing of horses will be permitted in non-lease areas. Facilities • Concessionaire will provide and maintain all structures and facilities and utilities for its operation including fencing of pastures and corrals. Development will include some demolition and minor grading to smooth rough areas. . • Concessionaire will either use the existing barn or the District will remove it. All safety hazards will be removed. If the existing barn is retained, Concessionaire will have the option (but not be required) to provide a security resident in a temporary trailer to be located at a site approved by the District. • Concessionaire will remove its facilities when it vacates the site at the end of the lease unless otherwise established by the District. Access • Public access on the Lafayette Ridge Trail for. hikers, equestrians and bicyclists, as well as for service and emergency vehicles, will be maintained through the site at all times. All Concessionaire vehicles will enter the property through the Lafayette Ridge Staging Area. The 1300 foot unpaved portion of this route (between the Staging Area and existing gravel road) may be graveled if necessary. Concessionaire will not use the District's easement at San Reliez Court. • Campers will be bussed to the site in vans provided by the concessionaire. • Members of the public will not be permitted to drive to the Concessionaire lease area. 14 • The District will maintain Lafayette Ridge Trail ,for maintenance/emergency use but will not be responsible for maintaining the all weather surface (gravel) for the concessionaires use. • In the event the barn is retained and Concession security residence is added, Concessionaire will be responsible for maintaining the all weather road surface (gravel) for access to the security residence. The District will maintain the one-track hiking/riding trail between the parking lot and barn area to provide an off-road trail alternative. Trail users will be able to continue to use the two track Lafayette Ridge Trail through the Recreation Unit. Parking • Concessionaire will be encouraged to minimize traffic and on-site parking within the site and use the existing parking lot whenever possible. A maximum of 6 parked cars will be allowed at the Facility Center near the barn area where turn-around fire access will be maintained at all times along the regional trail. A maximum of 9 additional cars will be allowed to park at the former residence site #2 within the Paddock area, out of sight of the Regional Trail and adjacent residents. (See Figure 3) • Concessionaire will be permitted to use the Lafayette Ridge Staging Area for schools and special events although a minimum of two truck and horse trailer parking spaces must remain available to the public at all times. Concessionaire will provide for any additional parking needs off site. These events must be noticed on the site. Utilities , ' • Concessionaire will be responsible for any improvements in service needed for the facility. Municipal and well water is available on District property near San Reliez Court. There is no operating sanitary system although an abandoned leach line is near the old barn. Its condition is unknown. (see Soils & Geology) Telephone and electric lines run through the site. Concessionaire will provide and service a public restroom facility, during the summer season, along the Lafayette Ridge Trail, in addition to restrooms for its staff and patrons. Soils and Geology • Concessionaire will maintain asphalt' paving along the fill slope to protect it. No heavy structures or equipment will be permitted in this area. 15 • Water and any septic or leach line use will be managed to avoid impacting the existing fill area near the old barn. Manure Disposal All manure in the facility center will be hauled off site and disposed of in a lawful manner unless composted in a system in accordance with all local, state and federal laws and approved by the park supervisor. Manure will not be disposea of on-site. • No manure, cleaned from stalls and corrals, will be stockpiled longer than 14 days unless composted. Compost will be removed by the end of each operating season. The lease area will be cleaned of manure and compost by October 15. Visual Impacts • Buildings will be sited away from the edge of hillsides and below ridge lines to minimize any potential visual impacts. • Hay and other supplemental feeds used in the operation will be stored in the barn or in other approved locations. Compliance with District and Other Regulations • The facility will comply with Ordinance 38, the District Master Plan, adopted policies and the Briones Land Use-Development Plan/EIR as amended. • The operators will be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits and complying with all necessary regulations. • The site will be kept in a neat. and clean condition. Equipment and construction materials, etc. will be screened or located out of site (in barn, behind barn or pipe pens, or former residence site #2) so they are not visually intrusive, particularly to the Lafayette Ridge Trail, parking lot and neighbors. A thorough site survey was conducted in Spring 1994 for plants and animals. No special status species were found and no corresponding special units are established. If special status features are found in the future, the District will comply with State and federal laws for their protection. 16 • Horse use within the paddock area will be regulated to maintain adequate vegetation cover and minimize erosion. Horses will not be fed in or kept overnight in the paddock. The District and Concessionaire will meet annually to evaluate the condition of the paddock and develop a grazing plan for the coming year. If horses pose a significant problem to adjacent residents the District will address them with options such as a buffer between the paddock and backyard fences. The concessionaire will be responsible Jor reduction of grass fuel loads unless cattle grazing can be employed. -if necessary, corrective steps will be taken. These could include: cross fencing, reduction of the size of the paddock or reduction in the number of horses. The District will have the authority to suspend use of the paddock should overgrazing begin to occur or other problems develop. • Specific design plans for new facilities or for the modification of existing facilities must be approved by the District prior to construction. Good Neighbor Policy • Concessionaire will assist the District in upholding its Good Neighbor Policy. • No recreational activities will take place near adjacent neighbors homes other than normal trail use. Concessionaire will comply with gate closure and key privilege rules to manage vehicles, cattle, etc. b. Connection of the lafayette Ridge Trail in the Vicinity of Vista Bella in lafayette Background The Lafayette Ridge Trail was severed with the construction of a housing development on the southern side of Lafayette Ridge at Sessions and Northridge Roads several years ago. The eastern end of the trail currently ends at a 10 foot high bluff above Vista Bella, a public road within the City of Lafayette. Alternate alignments to reconnect the mUlti-purpose trail to serve emergency use are limited because of a steep-Sided drainage in very steep terrain. A narrow single-track hiking/riding trail was rerouted through the parkland in this area to provide continuous recreational use. This amendment deals with the Connection of the multi-purpose fire/bicycle portion of the trail. Connection is important primarily for quick fire response along Lafayette Ridge (between fire trails #15-11 and #15-9.) This would benefit adjacent residential areas in addition to the parkland. The reconnected trail is also needed for reestablishment of efficient patrolling and park 17 maintenance and for reestablishment of an important bicycle route through the park. (See Figure 4) Policy The District will connect the fire trail (two-track) portion of the Lafayette Ridge Trail on a route in the vicinity of the existing single -track, riding and hiking trail on park property or througl'tYista Bella Road to provide fire prevention, emergency, and maintenance use only. The District prefers providing fire/emergency/maintenance . :,; access on the Lafayette Ridge Trail within park boundaries if this is the most acceptable route according to District criteria. The District will continue, in conjunction with Contra Costa Fire, to obtain multiple access routes for fire safety purposes in this area. Implementation Measures The following steps will be undertaken to accomplish the project: prior to implementation of a capital project to provide fire prevention/emergency /maintenance access on Lafayette Ridge Trail in the vicinity of Vista Bella Road, the District will evaluate the relative benefits and costs of two identified options. This evaluation will include the following criteria: fire safety, environmental impacts, construction costs, risk assessment, liability and neighborhood concerns. The evaluation and final staff recommendation will be taken back to the Board of Directors for approval of the selected option at a public hearing. • establish a review procedure with adjacent neighbors at the end of the street regarding any concerns such as landscaping, gates. If Vista Bella is chosen as the preferred option the fire access/service gate will be constructed and signed to prohibit public access. • refer allowing bicycle use along a 500 foot single-track section of the Lafayette Ridge Regional Trail as part of the District's annual Ordinance 38 review. • install gates, bollards and signage per District standards 18 TO SPRINGlllLL ROAD OPTION 2: GRADE DRIVEWAY LINKING LAFAYEITE RIDGE TRAIL &< VISTA BELLA FOR FIRE EMERGENCYIMAINTENANCE ACCESS ONLY. REFER BICYCLE USE OF SINGLE TRACK TRAIL TO THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF ORDINANCE 38. OPTION 1: CONSTRUCT FIRFlEMERGENCYIMAlNTENANCE TRAIL IN VICINITY OF EXISTING SINGLE TRACK TRAIL ON PARK PROPERTY TO DEERHILL ROAD __ __ EXISTING MULTI-PURPOSE (TWO-TRACK) TRAIL e-. -.... EXISTING HIKINGIRIDING (SINGLE-TRACK) TRAIL 0 0 000 0 0 PROPOSED HIKINGIRIDING (SINGLE-TRACK) TRAIL o 50 I approx. scale I }AJs. " ABANDON TIllS TRAIL Figure 4 - CONNECTION OF THE LAFAYETTE RIDGE FIRE TRAIL in LAFAYETTE Briones Regional Park 1994 Daft Amond.mcQt to thD Brioae;. Lud U.o-Deve1opmeat PlaaNov.• 1994 p"'pued by P!~&lddlip Dopartme .. - Eut Bay RcgioulPark DUtrid 19 c. Replacement of Special Event Camp Site at Corral Valley With a New Special Event Camp Site at Coyote Valley Background Special Event Group Camps are large scale events that are usually held in April or May for weekend long outdoor camping experiences. The events are held on a reservation basis. Both Homestead Valley and Corral Valley have been regularly used, accommodatfn~ up to as many as 1000 individuals. Participants carpool to the site and as many as 200 autos have parked at the edge of the campsite. Both existing locations' are large scenic valleys which offer spacious area for activities, privacy and a natural setting. There are no utilities at these sites. Chemical toilets are provided. Water is brought in for each event. The biggest disadvantage of these sites is their locations which are more than one mile 'into the parkland, beyond the staging area. Private cars loaded with camping gear drive on park trails which are also used by hikers, joggers, bicycles and equestrians. There have been no recent traffic incidents, but the potential is present. The road to Homestead Valley crosses Bear Creek and has been closed at times because of flooding or wet weather conditions. Coyote Valley, a small grassland valley, one mile north of the Bear Creek entrance on property acquired since the 1981 LUDP, has two large useable, flat fields that are separated by a willow covered drainage. The site is surrounded by grass covered hills with tree canopied drainages and a Bear Creek Road embankment. A thorough site survey was conducted in the spring of 1994 for plant species and animal species. No known sensitive species were found on this site which is currently being grazed by cattle to reduce fire hazard. The road is well screened with riparian vegetation and road traffic is relatively infrequent. Bear Creek Road is a 50 mile/hour two-lane arterial road. The existing driveway into the site is located at the inside of a curve of Bear Creek Road. A preliminary investigation by Contra Costa County Public Works on November 18, 1993, indicated that sight distances are sufficient for limited public use of the driveway with minor modifications (such as signs and vegetation clearing) to increase visibility and eliminate stacking on the road. Higher levels of use would require a left turn lane in compliance with Contra Costa County requirements. A Contra Costa County encroachment permit will be necessary for the driveway. Policy Coyote Valley is designated as an alternate Special Event Camp site for dry season use only (April 15 - October 15) which may also be used as a staging area for running and bicycling events, etc. It will be used on a limited basis through the reservation system, not on a regular weekend use basis. 20 Implementation Measures Homestead Valley will be maintained as the primary Special Event Camp site for Briones with Coyote Valley serving as the primary alternate site. Corral Valley will no longer be used for this purpose. Facilities in Coyote Valley will not be permanent. A maximum of 400 campers will be permitted at Coyote Valley. A total of 200 cars will be accommodate.d for staging events. Parking will be restricted to the eastern field to avoid impacts on the riparian zone. The District will take the following steps to provide the campsite: Work with Contra Costa County Public Works to obtain an encroachment permit. Work with Fish and Game to obtain a permit for a ford crossing of the riparian drainage and/or maximum of two small, pedestrian, wood bridges to be located in field. . • Prepare site with minimal grading and smoothing to accommodate mowing Provide chemical toilets (if necessary) Provide fencing to manage cattle grazing and to protect the stock pond and potential wetland at the north edge of the site. • Provide a loop trail system connecting Pereira Trail for campers. The west branch will be a gated multi-purpose access to connect with existing fire trail. The east branch will be a hiking/riding trail. • Eliminate potential stacking in and out of driveway by accommodating two way traffic. Through the reservations process, ensure that there are no impediments or activities at the entry, such as ticket taking, and require staged arrivals, if necessary. Require large equipment delivery vehicles to enter the site before the event period. Prune vegetation at road curves, where necessary. Restrict parking and developed structures within 50 feet of the edge of the drainage • May install maximum 5000 gallon water tank 21 Briones Regional Park 1994 Draft Amendment to me Briooal Land Use-Development Plan Nov. 1994 prepared by ?ianninglS!ewardgtup Deparonent - East Bay Regional P3dc Dtstnct APPENDIX A Contra Costa County Public Works letter concerning Bear Creek Road (Coyote Valley Camporee Site) J_ Michael Walford Contra Public Works Department Public Works Directc Costa 255 Glacier Drive Martinez, California 94553-4897 Milton F. Kubicek County Deputy· Engineering FAJ<: (510) 313-2333 Telephone: (51O) 313-2000 Patricia R. McNamee Deputy· Operations December 1, 1993 Maurice M. Shiu Deputy· Transportatio· S. Clifford Hansen Deputy· Adminisrratio: Karen Parsons Landscape Architect East Bay Regional Park District 2950 Peralta Oaks Court P.O. Box 5381 Oakland, CA 94605-0381 TRAF:Rd. No.2351 Dear Ms. Parsons: This letter is a follow up to your meeting with Lee Council regarding your proposed group reservation camp site on Bear Creek Road. Mr. Council's measurements indicate there is a sight distance of 800 feet to the north and 845 feet to the south along Bear Creek Road. Both of these distances provide adequate stopping sight for a design speed of 70 miles per hour. Therefore, the proposed driveway location is acceptable. The park district will be required to obtain an encroachment permit for the proposed driveway. Should you have any questions, please contact Steve Kersevan at (510) 313-2254. Very truly yours, \~~~Robert V. Faraone Senior Civil Engineer Transportation Engineering RVF:SK:mg c:pars23SU12 cc: J. Bueren, Transponation Engineering Permit Engineer , Maintenance Division: 2475 Waterbird Way. Martinez. California 94553-4897 • Telephone: (SID) 313-7000 • FAX: (510) 313-70 1994 AMENDMENT TO THE BRIONES REGIONAL PARK LAND USE-DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS & RESPONSES COMMENTS RESPONSES 6t,te of California Memorandum Le-rrsf2. I om. I September 29, 1994 LEDER 1 (Resources Agency) ~ I 1. Projects Coordinator Resources Agency Attention: Nadell Gayou A, COYOTE VALLEY, No significant earth disturbing activities are proposed, The Coyote 2. East Bay Regional Park District Valley site is proposed for seasonal use only, using existing grasslands for tent camping Post Office Box 5381 and parking, The creek ford area is to have added layers of graded gravels and filter Oakland, CA 94605-0381 fabric. Site development activities may include digging of fenceposts, construction of the From I Department of Park. and Recreation stream ford~ a footbridge and a half-mile trail loop up to the ridge. While it seemed unlikely Office of Historic Preservation that these activities would impact any cultural resources, the initial study reiterates the EBRPD's eXisting policy of stopping work should cultural resources be located, given the possibility of their existence in the original Bear Creek watershed. Subleo!l: Negative Declaration for Amendment of the 1981 Briones Regional Park Land Use-Development Plan, SCHI 94093039 The EBRPD finds that with the minimal nature of site changes in Coyote Valley, that the A negative declaration includes a demonstration that ",n potential for significant environmental impacts to cultural resources is not significant, and attempt was made to identify the potential significant effects of that a survey for such resources is not called for at this time, However, in the event of any the proposed project and the reasons the proposed project will not location of cultural resources, the EBRPD will utilize existing adopted procedures to stop have a significant effect on the environment (Public Resources work and to have the resource evaluated by a qualified professional in the cultural Code 21064 and California Code of Regulations 15063). resources field. The initial study indicates that the project area is undeveloped and contains riparian habitat. It further states that "the creek and valley bottom area of Coyote Valley has a moderately high probability of containing pre-historic hunting and food gathering sites." The initial study also declares that "the district nevertheless recognizes that additional surveys are A needed to determine the extent of these sensitive resources throughout the park." However, the initial study makes no provisions for such surve~~ to take place prior to the proposed earth-disturbing activities discussed in the Use-Development Plan. I f~el it would be prudent to survey areas where earth-distrubing activities are proposed for archaeological resources prior to those activities taking place. If you have any questions, please contact me at 916-653-6624. ~~~ ~:EWell sta~e Historic Preservation Officer 1 COMMENTS RESPONSES 10-17-1994 B4:09PN FR(J1 CITY of u:FRYEITE TO 6353478 P.02 L£.rref<,. z.. *Memorandum* LETTER 2 (Lafayette Planning Dept.) ~ To: &-III P--. Eat Bay Rer;IoaaI ~ Dlstrict A. VISTA BELLA. The EBRPD will comply with the appropriate City of Lafayette permit processes. • FrSa: Beat V ... I'operluc. "-ocIIIIe IA1lI;rette PlaanlDl Dtpartmeal 8. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. The CONCESSIONAIRE will comply with the • ~ 0ct0IM!r 17, m4 appropriate City 9f Lafayette permit processes. • ~ Park'. General PIu AmeDllmeDl, VIsta IIelJa Irall clumge tmd ~ ___ eamp _ of the Brown'.ltaDcb I .•~ For your irecord IIDd ~rral, here lin -:y DOItI aboot oar c:01IftI"I8tIon reprdln& the ~ the City wlJI UJII!d for Ihoee ItIJIDII relenaaed aboYe. I) A clIIipp III the repnw tnDlocatlon aIolIa Latiayette JUdae (a protected rldae III La&ydIe), wl1l reqnIn a La.acJ Use Permit from the LaCa;rette Planning Commlulon A I wtdc:b will toftr hoCh the JIl"OPOIIed pwIInc IlIJd _ changes propoled. The Land Use Penn1l will ueed to be obtained before the District could receive a gradIDc permit -Vor aD ~ permit for wade along the rldge aDd oalo Visla Bela. %) The. or !be Pln'k land (or a COIII1DUClaJ uummtr camp, ~na1 riding scbool or similar use would require a Land Use Pennlt from the Lafayette Planning CommIaIon. Coustrudion o( new &dJlUes, cban;es of the IICUSI road to the Park, cbangts of the use e, or Iaod flIom IiftSlo4:k p1IZina to a comtfljtn:lal recreation socb as a use tbst Rougblna n .wahl have would require hoCb Ibe ~ Vile PftInIt and bolIdInglp-adiDg permIb from the :CllJ. Tbe ....,a Use Penult process requln. Ibe ."pI.Icaut to apply ror !be me, whstever that might be, submit !be appropriate tee!, Plans. and app\lcal10D forms.. 'Ibe request ror !be Lsnd Use Pennlt Is considered III • pnblk t-riDIIU) bribe l'bnDina Comm.iAiOD and any olhet city ~ that 'WOuld be iDt...... At roo aIId llurn dlseu~. II would _ ID05t appropriate ror 8111 future appJlaUon (not your current Generul Piau Amendmtl1t) to atllizle thou portion! or your Em whleb , would apply to, uy, 8 chan,e in the trail III Vista Bella, or, a change 01 use of Jand from Iiftstock to cornmen:b1 recreation at the n.-.. IlaIXh. .1 hope tJrIs clarilles my dismsdon rib you about the.. Issues. I \oot: fonward to -"erin, the hills at 8:30 a.m.., FrIday, October :21, 19'}4 . .rtf 2 ee: NKS PDC COMMENTS RESPONSES :0-11-91 08:18PII FROIi CRD 257 I CA WALNUTC TO 6353178 P002 LETTER 3 (Lafayette Parks and Recreation Commission) L.eTi6fi!. 3 A. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. Handling of equestrian rigs at Pleasant Hill Road and Springhill Road for access to the previo.us Brown's stables and the Lafayette Ridge staging area are pre-existing uses. In addition, the equestrian concessionaire has October 17. 1994 a policy of planning road routes to maximize safety, consistent with EBRPD policy. The movement of horses on and off the site is twice yearly, when the facility opens in the Ma. Maxine Tern&r spring and when it closes in the fall. The occasional movement of individual horses may Chief. Planninq/Stewardship Department occur during the season, but will be the exception, not the rule. The movement of E.B.R.P.D. P.O. Box 5381 daycamp students Is I;>y a shuttlevan several times a day, with the potential of a single van oakland, CA 94605-0381 run coinciding with peak commute traffic once In the morning and once in the evening. RBI 1994 Draft Ammendment to the Briones Regional Park Land u.e-DeveloPM8nt Plan (Historical note: The Lafayette Ridge staging area on Pleasant Hill Road provides 30 Environmental Cheoklist/lnitial StUdy parking spaces, including provision for equestrian rigs and has been used in this capacity since 1981. (LUDP/EIR, 1981) The equestrian facility, previously known as Brown's Dear He. Torner. Ranch, utilized rsgular entry and egress onto these roads with equestrian rigs. prior to Ihave'had an opportunity to read the above referenoed documents and EBRPD ownership.) have been a8ked to otter comment. Thank you for this opportunity. I will aimply refernee paqe. and item or seotion; to link my eom B. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. Grading proposed is minor levelling of corral manta to the documents. areas that are already approximately flat. This qualifies as maintenance of an existing tand Uae-Development Play area. &y Camp FacIlity C. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. Several trail terms are clarified in this P.12, para. 1- no left turn lane for n. bound traffic, but U turns at Springh~ll Rd. Question how negoti~ble the U turne aro response. A single-track (hiking-riding) trail is the EBRPD term for a trail that allows only A for an eql.estrian rig and pick-up truok at Springhill Rd. hikers and riders. A dual-track (multi· purpose trail) is the EBRPD term for a trail that not Aleo vay heavy traffio on Pleasant HIll road at peak bours. only permits hikers and riders, but also .bicyclists, maintenance vehicles and fire vehicles. p.14 Pacilities, para. 1- How much grading? What will it do to The Lafayette Ridge Trail has an alignment of each type between the Lafayette Ridge s suil stabIlity, erosion? Staging Area and the Lafayette Ridge Recreation Unit. Trail rutting is handled on a site ra ~-What are the eafety hazards? • 14 Acoess, para 1. discusses a0081S to the Ridge Trail for specific basis as an operations-maintenance issue. Trail closure after storm events is an all. Tnilmip on unnumber~~ p.ll shows Z types of trails. dashed operational decision made by the Park Supervisor when conditions warrant. (unpaved multi-purpOse), ~Qtted(hiking-rlding), and the map has aD G arrow to 8 ~hed trail indicating one traok which would not be D. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. The visibility being described on p. 16 of the multi-purpose. I find this .oonfusing. p&ra 4.-discuGses maintaining the Ridge Trail for maintenance use. Draft LUDP Amendment is that of avoiding an accumulation of materials relating to the voes any uf lhis include conoorns about bicycle rutting on steeper operation of the equestrian daycamp, and that the site be maintained in a "neat and slope.? p. 16 visual Impacts, ·para. l-Visibility fram what areas or points clean" manner for viewers on the adjacent trail, at the parking lot below, and neighbors t' is being considered? . that might see the facility. No existing facilities conflict with Lafayette Ridge protection Com liance with District an Other Re lattons, para.2-Are othar regulations. Furthermore, no new buildings are proposed in this plan. ~ Lafayetto reQulations 1nvo va s as t e General Plan? p. 17. Good Neighbor Policy, para 1- What is it? f . E. See the response to comment 2A,B. F. The EBRPD adopted a Good Neighbor policy in 1993, clarifying operational procedures regarding issues that may arise between the EBRPD and its adjacent neighboring property owners. 3 COMMENTS RESPONSES : 0-17-91 DB: 1BPJ/ FROII CRO 257 I CA WALNUTC TO 635317B POOJ i,;ert&f2. "3 LETTER 3 (Lafayette Parks and Recreation Commission) paoe 2 G. VISTA BELLA. The Lafayette Ridge Trail Is a Regional Trail and is shown as such in Vbta Bella the District's Master Plan "Regional Parkland and Trail Map", 1989. Regional Trails are defined in the 1989 Master Plan as "primarily for pedestrian, equestrian and bicycling Some significant points are made in a letter written on 10-11-~4 uses" and to "provide links between parks, local trails and urban communities". (p.55) The to the Oistrict by one of the neiohbors, Mr. Scott Anderson. Master Plan also states that the "District will add bicycling sections when topography and There are several assumptions and .sertiona in the first ~araqraph financing will allow". (p;56) . which are not shared by Lafayette residents living on the ridge. P. 19, para. l-" ••. ty.at1 is also needed for reeetablisment of effi The Draft LUDP Amendment (9/1994) addressed the issue of the segment of the cient patrollino and park maintenance and ••• an important bicycle :r:oute ...... The :r:idge is somewhat desolate and bow is patrolling Lafayette Ridge Regional Trail that is topographically limited and only provides for hiking done now? Does Maintenance involve checking for and repairin~ riding use. The adjacent sections of the' Regional Trail are multi· purpose trails, providing ruttin\J on s.teep slopes created by bicycles? The ridge is not a IIood for both bicycle~se and vehicle access for fire and maintenance vehicles. The September t:.1 bicycle route in the park due to limited accellS, severe slopee '1 in areas, and sinole tracks. Calling it an important bicycle route 1994 draft ameridment proposed that cutting a vehicle access point between the south is overatatin\J . the case, I believe. section of the multipurpose Regional Trail and Vista Bella Road would allow continuity of para. 2-diucu.ged alternat!v.£. What aro they? IIradinq-How much access along the publicly owned Vista Bella road to the north section of the multipurpose is "minor"? Regional Trail. The determination of the geotechnical engineer hired by the EBRPD in p01i;y-aow was tbis decision made? Vista Bella residents do not perce ve the use es particularly sate due to the dip of thc street 1991 was that the grading at the Vista Bella site and on the ridgetop trail were not and the blind driveway exits. environmental effl1cts with potential for significant,impacts to the environment, as defined in the CEQA guidelines. A permit process for grading/encroachment is required by the coyote Valley No comments. Lafayette Planning Department. ENVIRONMENTAL In response to comments during the public review period, the draft LUDP I Amendment was revised to show alternative routes for drive through fire, / emergency and maintenance vehicles that would . be investigated for their accaptability (ie., safetvand cost benefit) in the vicinity of Vista Bella Road. The ( Project Impact Evaluation District preference is to provide access within its boundaries in the vicinity of the 1. In conluotion with abo". trail rut. p~vide oreater oppnr existing single track hiking and riding trail if this is acceptable froma safety and tunlty for falling. or dumpino the bike. cost benefit basis. The other alternative is to connect the Lafayette Ridge Trail ~ttachment: Does not talk abbut the impact of year round bicycle uee. Limited aocess I believe !» referrin9 to the eques through Vista Bella Road with the construction of a driveway through a bluff at the trian day camp users. east end of Vista Bella road for fire/emergency/maintenance vehicles only. The '" 2. ouestion the impact level of neoligible. Draft LUDP Amendment is revised to indicate these changes in the text of page 18 Attachment: What did the oeotechnical report (1991) state? Won't and its figure on page 19. permit be needed? •. Attaohment. p. 7, para. 3-encloDura to protect watlands etc. How will this affect wildlife access to water? Any mitiqation Prior to implementation, the District will continue to evaluate more feasible :t propOsad? 7, Concern of Villta Bella neighborhood of inorea .. ed "intru.. ivo" alternatives. Should another alternative be feasible, the District will comply with the noise from people, cars, bicycles. Despite the posted "no appropriate sections of the California Environmental Quality Act. parkincr" there is no ability to enforce. j 13. wildfire conditions (frequency, hazardl-aqain Vista Bella neighbors have questioned this based on past experiences. The District will, during its annual review of its Ordinance 38, evaluate the bicycle 16. IIttaohment. p. 7-parkland u •• /adjacl!nt land lI"e and Lafayette use status on Regional Trails. Gen. Plan-The oen. plan doeg not address bl~e usage. H. VISTA BELLA. See responses 3C and 3G above. I. VISTA BELLA. The reference to enclosure fencing to protect wetlands refers to springs where vegetation has been altered by cattle use. This fencing is generally recommended by California Department of Fish and Game at such sites to benefit riparian vegetation and 4 COMMENTS RESPONSES : 0-1 H4 DB: 48PI/ FROM CRO 257 I CA lVALNUTC TO 6353478 P004 L..6TTE~~ LETTER 3 (Lafayette Parks and Recreation Commission) smaller wildlife. Downstream from such fenced springs a water trough will be provided for Page caUle use. Larger wildlife such as deer are known to both jump such fences and to drink from troughs. 18. Vista Bella neighbors peroeive ~he proposed land use aDd street eonneo~ion aa a reduction 1n the quality of their neighbor hood. J. VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. Also see responses 3G above. j 20. Attaohment, first sentence is unclear. Concerning the Vista s.11a proposal. the .00••• concerns a'olty a~ree~ not the Ridge Trail. K. VISTA BELLA. S~e responses for 3A above. para. J, reI use on a limited basis. What are the limits? ~1. Attachment! See commont 1n '7. above about Vista Sella parking. 22. Attachment. RE: phased .huttlebus/staff/service tripe io not L. VISTA BELLA. Comment noted. clear. Congestion on Pleasant Bill Road at peak hours weekdays, year round 111 BAD. 2). Attachment! Doea not include non-patrolled fast cyc11sts on M. VISTA BELLA. Water storage tanks used by the previous equestrian operation at the "" steep slopes. Lafayette Ridge Recreation Unit may be replaced at their present wooded. below-ridge ,:a. 1.ttaohment. 2 ....t.r 12troage tanks "may he replaced at the Lafayette locations or immediate vicinity. Ridge location. Where? P. 5 I unn\l!llbered . items (unnumbered), N. VISTA BELLA. See comments in Letter 2. Input from the neighborhood meeting and Other agencies consultad? city of Lafayette- when. results? Identified public controversy? Not correct to assert "No" field trip has been incorporated into the revisions to the Draft LUDP Amendment (11/94). Neighborhoo~ meeting on B-22-94 with Vista Bella Neighbors and ? E.S.R.P.D. employees, opposition registered. O. TRAIL USE. Comments noted and forwarded to the EBRPD Trail Specialist. Steve Fiala. Q!!!!!!. ~ddition to Project ImpAct Evaluation' '11 Coyote Valley staging area parking ror 200 And planning tor bicycling events on surrounding hill trails. What is the long term impaot of this many cyelists on the trails in large qroups? Verbalized concern about cycle crashell."leavinq-trail"accidents o~ Laf. Ridge trail. Bow aro thoso dealt ~ith7 Another eitizen coneern; Cyclists leaving the ~af. Ridge trail and "croas countrying" on private lots. Cyclists leav1ng the Lat. Ridge tra1l and taking water breaks at private household outdoor ~.ter spigots. o C.. n 'Park Dist'rict sponaore4-i volunteer cycle patrol be "reqUisitioned" for aell1stance? These always seem like crank lotters, howaver, tho above were generated from discussions with Lafayette citiBene and a review pf the referenced documents. Thanks again for the opportunity. Regards, Fran Stieha, Chair Trails Suboommitt •• Lafayette Parke and Recrsations Commission 1538 PleAsant Hill Road Lafayette, CA 94549 OQ' J'ennifor Ru~gel1., La!. p.R.Direc. Betsy Van Popering. Laf. PLanning -'!'""!' flf 5 COMMENTS RESPONSES L.Er-tE~-4' "f::D EAST BAY JOUN B.LAMPE LEITER 4. (EBMUD) <"/J MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT OII!£CTO'I' ()I WAmr !'tA.NNING October 18, 1994 A. COYOTE VALLEY. The comments raise a number ot questions regarding protection ot water quality in the Briones Reservoir watershed. The relocation of an existing special event campsite to the Coyote Valley was found by the EBRPD to be a project with no Ms. Maxine Terner potential tor significant effects for water quality in the watershed. Chief of Planning/Stewardship East Bay Regional Park District The following respqnse to EBMUD comments will first clarity the project context and then P.O. Box 5381 respond to the issues raised by EBMUD in its letter. Oakland, CA 94605-0381 The EBRPD recognizes the concern of the EBMUD regarding watershed flows, from all SUBJECT: Notice of Preparation ofa Negative Declaration to Amend the Land Use parts of the watershed, that move into its 30 year old Briones Reservoir and that may affect water quality or build up of bottom sediments. The EBRPD recognizes a long Development Plan (LUDP) for Briones Regional Park relationship with the EBMUD in the ownership of lands by both agencies in this watershed; and notes that the EBMUD participated in the 1981 Resource Analysis, Dear Ms. Terner: Resource Management Plan and LUDP for Briones Regional Park in 1981. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft Negative Declaration to EBMUD owns over 9000 acres in the Briones and San Pablo watersheds, including lands amend the Briones LUDP. . recently acquired in the Lawson Hill area, just west of Coyote Valley. The EBRPD owns, in 1994, approximately 2400 acres of the upper watershed of the Briones Reservoir As a responsible agency under the ealifornia Environrnenlal Quality Act (CEQA), the District drainage basin. The upstream portion of It)e San Pablo Reservoir drainage basin includes welcomes this opportunity to comment on the proposed changes to the Briones LUDP, the greater Orinda urbanized area on both sides of Highway 24. specifically as it relates to activities in the Coyote Valley. These changes would allow a new camporee site in Coyote Valley, which is in the Briones Reservoir watershed and is located The Coyote Valley parcel was added to Briones Regional Park as part of the Rosa and adjacent to Bear Creek Road. The camporee would require permanent facilitie~ such as a parking Pereira parcels acquired by EBMUD and EBRPD using State of California Park Bond lot for 200 motor vehicles, and the installation of storage vaults for rest rooms. It is not clear in (Proposition 70) funds; The EBRPD took title to the portions of the Rosa - Pereira parcels the project description whether any other permanent or temporary facilities which may be needed, to the north of Bear Creek Valley Road and EBMUD took title to the portions to the south stich as picnic tables and barbecue pits. of the road. EBMUD confirmed at that time that public recreation would be an allowable use on those properties acquired with Park Bond monies. Because of the location of this facili~~" and the nature of the proposed development, the District has a serious concern that the proposed project may substantially impact and potentially degrade The upper watershed of the Briones Reservoir had several component creeks, tributaries the water quality within the District's Briones Reservoir. of Bear Creek prior to the 1964 flooding. The 1981 Resource Analysis/Management Plan for Briones Regional Park describes the total acreage of the Bear Creek drainage in the Because it supplies water to treatment plants which have direct filtration, Briones Reservoir is parkland as 2,000 acres. Within this drainage the 1981 LUDP for Briones Regional Park critical to the successful operation of the District's distribution system. Any activities proprJsed in describes the Bear Creek Recreation Unit which supports several intensive recreation p.. the Briones watershed, especially a camporee site in Coyote Valley, if undertaken without uses, including parking, pump-out toilets, picnicking, camping, trails and a regional effective mitigation, would likely require the construction of additional, expensive water treatment archery center. This is a managed and sustained level of recreational use in the Briones facilities to maintain existing water quality and comply with the Department of Health Services Reservoir watershed since 1981 with no documented downstream effects. (DOHS) regulations. The proximity of the site to a main tributary of Briones Reservoir will significantly impact water quality and management of the District's watershed lands. Because The Coyote Valley drainage (to the immediate west of the Bear Creek Drainage) has a there are numerous issues and concerns with the location and use of the camporee site in Coyote drainage area that is approximately 2000' x 2000', or close to 90 acres. The Draft LUDP Valley, EBMUD strongly urges the EBRPD to re-evaluate this proposed use in a full Amendment describes the special event campsite as 12 acres, of which less than half environmental impact report including development of alternative site locations outside of the would be used for Siting tents, portable pump-out toilets (EBRPD standard, no storage Briones watershed area. vaults proposed), cooking area, etc. (east side) and parking (west side). The central riparian zone (with a minimum creek bank setback of 50') will be flagged for special fir RECEIVED r-- 2 .. 1994 events as a low use area and will not have siting of special event campsite facilities in it. 115 EtE\lfNTH STREfT • DAIt'LANO. CA '4801-'240. 15rol IJ5.JOOO 6 "0. BOX '.f055 • OAKlAND. CA f1U1, ,o55 BOARD OF01RECTDRS KAmERINE McKENNEY. STUARr FLA$UMAN. ANDREWCOHfN Pi. '''NING/STEWARDSHIP JOI-fN A COlE~N • JOUN M. GIOIA. NANCY J. NADEl. KENNETH H. SIMMON$ COMMENTS RESPONSES [,eTT€i(Z. ~ LEDER 4. (EBMUD) Ms. Maxine Terner October 18, 1994 The Draft LUDP Amendment (9/1994) describes relocating the special event campsite Page 2 function from the vicinity of the Bear Creek Recreation Unit to the Coyote Valley area. The EBRPD finds that moving a seasonal special event campsite from one portion of the The District recommends that the environmental document analyze and mitigate water quality upper watershed to another is not a Significant impact as described by EBMUD in its impacts associated with the camporee operation. Concerns focus around coliforms, Giardia, letter. No significant change in the level of use is proposed, and the reservation Ceyptosporidjum. suspended solids, total organic carbon and nutrients. Furthermore, it is agreements will continue to set out the conditions that organized groups must adhere to imperative that this impact be recognized as significant to the water quality of Briones and that in their site use and cleanup. appropriate mitigation measures be developed to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The District recommends the use of Best Management Practices (BMP's), as prepared for the No additional storm runoff is anticipated in the Coyote Valley area given the zero increase State of California Storm Water Task Force in March 1993, to develop adequate measures to in paved and developed surfaces, the maintenance of grassland areas, and the fencing effectively prevent oil, grease, herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers, and metals from entering Briones off of the riparian zone from cattle use that should enhance riparian vegetative cover. The Reservoir. BMP's shall also be used to control the short and long-term impacts of erosion on the EBRPD finds the Coyote Valley culvert adequately sized for the 90 acre drainage area and watershed, including the mitigation of continual generation of nuspcnded solids and silt resulting its vegetated surfaces. from concentrated vehicular and human impacts within the Briones watershed. These need to be thoroughly analyzed in the environmental docurnent. Because of the risk of adverse impacts to its EBMUD concerns regarding "dry season use only" are addressed in the Draft LUDP Briones watershed, selection of appropriate BMP's and design criteria of resulting mitigation Amendment (9/1994). Only dry season special event campsite use is described in the measures should be subject to participation and review by this District. Coyote Valley area. The dry season is defined in the Draft LUDP Amendment as April to October. Peak storm events during the defined dry season may occur. In the unusual Page two of the environmental checklist indicates that the Coyote Valley camporee site will use circumstance of such storm events, events scheduled for Homestead Valley may be more restroom facilities during operation, and the construction of storage vaults for the restrooms and easily accommodated at Coyote Valley, as nonpaved access roads within the park may access for pumping of storage. In addition,the LUDP stated that "chemical toilets (l11ay be be unsuitable for camp vehicle use. provided by the group)", indicating that private individuals may be responsible for providing, maintaining, and removing restroom facilities. The document does not clearly indicate which Use as described in the "amendment will be low and is not expected to exceed 6 - 10 per method is to be used for the Coyote Valley camporee site. Therefore, we recommend that year, using temporary facilities as described in the amendment and these responses. methods for containment and transporta,i"n of sewage from the site be analyzed and addressed in the environmental document. Lastly, we IIIso recommend that methods of trash generation and B. COYOTE VALLEY. The integrated trail system within Briones Regional Park is storage be addressed. connected to the Coyote Valley area, with numerous hiking opportunities available to organized camps using the Coyote Valley special event campsite during the dry season. This same trail system is currently being used by the existing special campsite uses It was observed during a site visit that the existing culvert under Bear Creek Road which drains event that are proposed to be relocated to Coyote Valley in this plan. This use of existing Coyote Valley may be undersized to accommodate additional storm water runoff which may EBRPD trails, maintained on an ongoing basis by park staff, is found not to have a result from changes in the watershed surface resulting from the proposed project. Please verilY potential for significant environmental impact by the EBRPD. that the capacity of the storm drain is adequate; and if not, include appropriate improvements and upgrades needed to handle additional flows following development of the site. It should also be further understood that while it would be unusual for an organized camping event to send all its members and support staff on a single hiking event To minimize erosion and transport of sediment into Briones Reservoir, activity on the Coyote altogether, should they do so, the trail design and maintenance at Briones is adequate Valley camporee site would have to be limited to the dry season. However, using the site as an to handle these seasonal uses. The purpose of EBRPD trails is the channelling of users alternative to Homestead Valley as stated, which is sometimes inaccessible due to wet conditions, on preferred routes, and to discourage a variety of volunteer trails that would have greater implies that EBRPD intends to use Coyote Valley during the wet season. Please c1arilY when the impacts on natural habitats. Coyote Valley site would be used. Public ~ccess by people and their vehicles in the area of Briones Regional Park (adjacent The introduction of large numbers of people and vehicles)lIto the Coyote Valley area will increase to EBMUD lands) has been sustained by the EBRPD since 1981 (or earlier) with no ~ the possibility of wildland fire and trespass on10 District property. Any fires which occur in the correlated increase in trespass problems or wildland fire on record. The Coyote Valley District's watershed, especially one in the Briones watershed, will have a significant negative special event campsite will be connected to the existing Briones Regional Park trail impact to Briones water quality. Item 13 within the Initial Study indicates this as being negligible. COMMENTS RESPONSES LEiTT&fZ..l' LETTER 4. (EBMUD) Ms. Maxine Temer system; easily accessed without having to cross a major roadway designed to October 18, 1994 accommodate high speed traffic. The EBRPD notes that EBMUD maintains its own Page 3 staging area for public use elsewhere in the watershed, on the reservoir side of the road. The District believes that this impact is potentially significant and needs further analysis. What Trespass issues are also addressed by fencing programs, signage programs and actions will EBRPD take to prevent a wildfire from occurring during a camporee? It is not clear information brochures, etc. prepared by both agencies. Where EBRPD brochures show e as to what this will be. Furthermore, it is not clear as to the capabilities which exist to quickly any trails on adjacent ESMUD property, they are always accompanied by a statement on suppress a fire. Lastly, the issue of trespass on adjacent District watershed property resulting , the necessity for an EBMUD permit, and a EBMUD phone number is provided. The from this development was not addressed. EBMUD does allow hiking on its land in portions of the Briones Reservoir watershed. This information (ie., brochures) Is also provided to organizations using the EBRPD reservation As part of the environmental review process, the lead agency is required to evaluate all of the system. impacts associated with a particular use. With the camporee project, the Negative Declaration 'J t,. does not specifically evaluate light and glare impacts. The potential environmental impacts of District-wide, the EBRPD has Master Plan policies and programs in place related to fire artificial lighting may be significant to motor vehicles 0:1 Bear Creek Rond, in an area which is risk issues. These Include comprehensive fuel and wildland management programs currently unlighted. The District recommends this impact be addressed. (including grazing); a Remote Automated Weather Station system (RAWS, one located at Briones), monitoring climate data related to fire risk; a no open fires policy during high The intended operation of the site, either by EBRPD or a concessionaire, was also not discussed risk conditions; a park closure policy during Red Flag conditions; its own fire department; t? and should be clarified. This relationship is important to EBMUD because ofresponsibility, helicopter staff and. its park staff trained as firefighters; agreements with other fire public safety, and control issues. agencies including California Department of Forestry (CDF), and accessibility from public roads and fire trails. The EBRPD and EBMUD participate in the Mutual Aid System (MAS) The District would welcome the opportunity to discuss these comments with you at your coordinated between agencies in California and have often co-operated together in the convenience. If you have any questions, please contact Steve Abbors at (510) 287-0431. past on local fire response needs. Very truly yours, The EBRPD finds that, with the above described existing programs, public use of trails, picnic and camping areas within its, parklands. including Briones Regional Park, does not have the potential for significant wildfire impacts to the environment. l' kvJ~.~i~ II C. COYOTE VALLEY. No lighting installation is proposed as part of the Coyote Valley 'I' :t.tc~or of Water Planning special event campsite. JBL:MAJ:dd D. COYOTE VALLEY. The EBRPD will maintain the Coyote Valley special event campsite 9419.wp6 as part of its camping reservation system; all groups renting the facility will be subject to the usual EBRPD agreements, conditions and fees. As stated on p. 20 of the Draft LUDP Amendment, "it will be used on a limited basis through the reservation system". 8 COMMENTS RESPONSES KELLE." !'i10:52824S.3 P.01 LBT~~S Michael Kelley Bicycle Trails Council of the East Bay 523 Santa Barbara Rd. LEITER 5 (Bicycle Trails Council) Berkeley, CA 94707 A. VISTA BELLA In response to comments dwing the public review period, staff Maxine Temer recomrnends that the LUDP Amendment be revised to show only fire, emergency and Chief of Planning/Stewardship maintenance vehicles to have access from Vista Bella Road. See response to comment 2950 Peralta Oaks Court 3G. Box 5381 I Oakland, CA 94605 The District will, during its annual review of its Ordinance 38, evaluate the bicycle use status on Regional Trails. October 17, 1994 .1 Re: Briones Regional Park LUOP Dear Ms. Temer, I am writing to comment on one aspect of the above referenced LUDP. We understand that you are considering connecting the Lafayette Ridge trail at Vista Bella, and that you are doing this for reasons of fire protectioh and completion of a bicycle route. We have been long concerned with having appropriate access to Lafayette Ridge. After the improvements to the link that traverses the old Brown property, the Vista Bella problem is the last remaining break In the trail. We strongly support efforts to correct that. This could be done in one of two ways. The first would be to A make the changes you propose, and thus provide fireroad access. I . understand some neighbors have suggested as an alternative that the existing single track trail be ... ~de legal. Although I have never seen the area myself, I understand ;that the single track in question has been used by cyclists without problems. It may be a good idea to consider th:lt option. Naturally, we would be delighted to participate in a trail project aimed at making necessary improvements to that trail. Unfortunately, the idea of using the single track for bikes does not seem to deal with the other large concern, that of providing access for fire protection. I am persuaded after reading the material, that the alternatives are too costly, and that it may be necessary to improve the fire road In the manner you suggest .. In any C8se, we encourage you to take whatever steps are necessary to reestablish this critlC81 bicycle route. In fact, we would urge the District to consider other areas where single track trails may be A opened to complete long distance bike routes, even if some Improvements are necessary. This will help .,f.¥c1lsts, who travel longer distances, and help the District in general by dispersing users. (7) .j),ha7 considering my remarks. 9 lIe~ COMMENTS RESPONSES ~.,~~~~ ~:\:. ,ffift.f··~ L6T1Erf2.~ ~~~~m' EAST BAY CHAPTER ;fft- ,~~ Alameda & Contra Costa Counties _' -6~- California Native Plant Society LETTER 6 (CNPS) P.O. Box 5597. Elmwood Station Berkeley, Ca 94705 A. COYOTE VALLEY. Comments noted. See the response to comment 4A. October 16,1994 B. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. The EBRPD is acutely aware of the exotic species problem.in California; it is a member of the California Exotic Plant Council, and Maxine Temer Chief, Planning/Stewardship Department has had an Integrated Pest Management Program in place for several years. This East Bay Regional Park District program would address monitoring and exotic species control strategies for specific sites 2950 Peralta Oaks Court as needed. This site has received extensive equestrian facility use during previous Oakland, CA 94605-0381 ownership. Existing stable facilities include levelled areas, paddocks, stable barn, water PAX: 510 569-4319 tanks and road access. The Draft LUDP Amendment of allowing for up to 50 horses during the dry season (in a controlled operation) is not a significant shift in site use. RE: Negative Declaration to amend Briones Regional Park Land Use Development Plan Various IPM and erosion control strategies (ie., fall seeding). consistent with existing EBRPD adopted policy, may be implemented. Dear Ms, Temer; The California Native Plant Society East Bay Chapter has reviewed the above referenced docwnent and we conclude !hat the initial study does not warrant an adoption of a negative declaration because It provides to little information on certain critical aspects of the proposed new land uses and because the information !hat is provided indicates great potential for significant impact To little information on the camporee is provided to adequately determine the potential of Significant impact For example, how many camporees will be held each year and what will be the number of participants and vehicles per event? During which months will camporees be permitted? What activities will take place at camporees? Where will campers sleep. cook and wa.~h-up? How will refuse and sanitation be handled? What will be the A extent of the grading for the parking area 1, How much siltation from the parldng area will occur and how much impact will the silranon have on the adjacent riparian area? There needs 10 be a map with a narrative which ~escribes the resources !hat are present and the detailed precautions that will be taken 10 protect each resource. Unless the camporee Is limited to three or less events per year. 400 campers and 200 cars in a small area for intensive non-dispersed activities has the potential of signifICant impact, especially since it is located in a riparian habitat We feel that keeping up to SO horses on site in the Lafayette Ridge area will have a significant impact on the vegetation and soils. Dicotyledon weeds such as mustard and star thistle will increase significantly since a horse's digestive system does not destrOy dicot ~ seeds. Contrary to the negative declaration, there is a strong likelihood of a significant increa!le of these weedy dicotyledon species. The 3 acre site where the horses will be kepI ~ill ~~m~ denude~ of .a11 vege~0!l.: What site restoration actions will be undertaken and The East Bay chapter of the California Native Plant Society feels that the initial stud.y needs to be im roved as described above. In any case. it Is our feeling that an Em is requued for this prolosed amendment Please keep us informed of further actions, changes, and plans for these sites. .'.'{":;..- rJf Sincerely; 10 -r~~ Ted Robertson Conservation Committee Member COMMENTS RESPONSES lBTrE:.f2- 7 Golden Gate Audubon Society LEITER 7 (Golpen Gate Audubon Society) 2530 San Poblo Avenue. Suite G • Berkeley. CA 94702 • Phone: (5 10) 843·2222 • Fax: (510) 843·535 I A. COYOTE VALLEY. Comments noted. The special event campsite does not incfude siting of any permanent recreation facilities and therefore does not meet the EBRPD Americans Committed to Con LE-T"f1;~ S MT. DIABLO AUDUBON SOCIETY LETTER 8 (Mount Diablo Audubon Society) .rC P,O.110X 53 A. COYOTE VALLEY. See responses to comment4A. The special event campsite will not 4iJ}~"( WAI.NUT CREEK. CIIJ..IrOnNIA g~~m; be sited in an environmentally sensitive area; use is setback from riparian areas and surveys do not suggest the presence of any rare, threatened or endangered species. 14 Octoer 1994 B. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. The Draft LUDP Amendment locates an equestrian use in an are,i'previously used as a private horse stables (until the completion J of the EBRPD acquisition, a few years ago). This area does not support wetlands; does not support rare, threatened and endangered species (verified by field survey reports); and does not otherwise meet the criteria for an environmentally sensitive site or need for special protection;ranagement units. . C. Comments noted. Existing procedures for detailed parkland planning are described in TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:RE:BRIONES PARK ET AL the existing EBRPD Master Plan as Land Use Development Plans (LUDP's), The language in the Briones LUDP (1981) provides for its amendment. (p.31, LUDP) The purpose of this Greetings: Amendment and related CEOA compliance is 'to ensure that proper environmental planning occurs; adequately addressing tile EBRPD's 'dualrole in providing resource Some of our members have advised us, in just the past few days a proposed Negative Declaration protection and appropriate recreational opportunities for its diverse constituency; and has been advertized to permit creation of a campground and horse stable area in Briones Park. adequately providing for public review of the project. A· We have also been advised the two areas which are propOsed for such use are environmentally sensitive. Since we have not been provided with the full facts and since the Park District proposes to rewrite its General Plan we urge the proposed changed NOT be implemented through the use of a negative declaration. ' (;;. We further suggest that in view of the suhsta./.ial questions raised before the Board of Directors concerning the revision of the General Plan th:at piecemeal change, without adequate biodiversity review is not in the interests of the parks, the public or the plant and wildlife which the park district has an Olb~.ga'on to protect. -'" Y0r\W. rl~' ?~ A.~4 ___ ' Vice President-ConservafuH\ cc:Board of Directors."" East Day Regional Park District, Conservation Committee f;;fCE/VED ( - 1 ti 1994 l'Jl p. \. 'IIING/STEWARDSHIP 12 COMMENTS RESPONSES REGIONAL PARKS ASSOCIATION tert6-tz..1 LElTER 9. (Regional Parks Association) A. Comments noted. The appropriate use of park lands is established in the 1989 Master october 16, Plan, with which this LUDP Amendment complies. The Master Plan includes a policy on Special Interest Recreation llaxine Terner, Chief of Planning East Bay Regional Park District B. COYOTE VALLEY. See responses. for comment 5A. This type of use is typically users P.O. Box 538" from within the regiqn; the level of use Is temporary (a weekend is typical for a Oakland, California, 94605-0381 camporee), lacks permanent Infrastructure, and is Infrequent, and therefore does not Dear :1axine, relate to the permanent grow1h Inducing criteria that are contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, this use Is a ralocation of an existing use already being The Executive Board of the Regional Parks Association wishes accommodated at Briones Regional Park. to comment on the determination under CEQA to prepare a Negative Declaration on the projects included in the amendment to the C. COYOTE VALLEY.'. In 1981 the EBRPD Board adopted a LUDP/EIR for Briones Briones LUDP. Regional Park that stated that It would balance environmental concerns and regional The initial study needs amplification. We believe these recreation opportunities; the plan allowed for less than 10% of Briones to be deSignated projects, under CEQA, require an EIR because of inadequate study as recreation and staging units. The. plan also allowed for public use of trails, camping ~ and inadequate proj~ct description. The evaluation needs to and backpacking camps in the natural unit. address the impact of both these projects on the par~ as a whole, on other users, on neighboring property, and for consistency The natural unit guidelines on p. 24 of the 1981 Briones Regional Park LUDP state that with the Master plan. "Development should be limited primarily to making the natural area available for public enjoyment in a manner consistent with the preservation of natural resource values. The Camporee project does not ask the question as to whether Development may include such things as basic, not elaborate. improvements necessary this is a pro~er use of parkland. What do the Scouts wish to" gain from the camporee experience that dictates that it occur for camping and related outdoor activities." in a park. Could this activity be accommodated somewhere else such as Golden Gate Fields, or a facility such as Sears Point The references to the 1981 LUDP above make it clear that the EBRPD Board adopting qaceway with a large area. the plan intended Briones to be a regional destination for a large and growing regional population, and that there would be use of trails and camping in the natural unit, balanced 80th the Camporee and the H~fsecamp project involve large numbers with management of natural resources. The EBRPD finds that use of the special event of visitors, mostly young people under 20. In the initial campsite by campers of any age, affiliation, etc., as described in the Draft LUDP study there is no description of the current visitor population , in Briones, either in terms of numbers or age. Will these Amendment (9/1994) and the Draft LUDP Amendment revision (11/1994), does not have projects increase the visitor population by 10%, 100%, or 1000% the potential for a significant Impact to the environment. when there are Camporee and/or the horsecamp is attended? According to California Environmental Quality Act Appendix item K, "induce SUbstantial growth or concentration of population", this is an impact normally deemed Significant. In the initial study report there is the implication that the camporee use will be shifted from another place to Coyote Valley, and therefore this is not an increase in population. Will the camporee campers be restricted to the site, and not allowed (., out in the rest of the park? Common sense tells us that 400 youngsters confined to one spot for a weekend or more will certainly have a physical impact on the soil, plant life and wildlif~ that exists there. On the other hand, if they will be hiking on trails, or exploring the creeks etc., in the rest of the park, there will be impaf~ts all ·o.ver that will be more than negligible. Ar~ Campor~e campgounds included in the definition of camping in the present Master Plan? If not, then this project 13 COMMENTS RESPONSES LeT"r&fZ. 4 potentially conflicts with adopted environmental plans, and LETTER 9. (Regional Parks Association) G is significant and needs an EIR. D. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. The equestrian daycamp function is As to the Horsecamp, the issue of the impact on the rest of contained in the Lafayette Ridge Recreation Unit, with occasional use of the Lafayette the par!. is not addressed. Also there is no description of D how the restrictions on the operators of the horsecamp are to Ridge Regional Trail as equestrian skills are acquired. The operation of the concession be enforced. ' Nho will monitor, how often, what extra ground is controlled by legal agreements and attached conditions, agreed upon by both the crew might be needed, etc. EBRPD and the concessionaire, and renegotiated and/or opened to bid on a regulal basis. The concessionaire will maintain the recreation unit with its own staff, according to Check off items: criteria established by the EBRPD in the Draft LUDP Amendment and regularly reviewed by the Park Supervisor, 1. Landslides at the Horsecamp access road s'ite. Not discussed, but it is a frequent occurrence in that area. There is no plan to change the road to the Lafayette Recreation Unit with the shift from 5. Air quality. Arg the horses paddocked, in which case there needs to be more thorough discussion of manure removal. llhere private use to concessionaire use. Regular road maintainance will be carried out by the is it going to go? 1\ common practice is to sprinkle it around EBRPD. The EBRPD finds that there is no potential for a significant change in local earth the acerage. Since these folks are leasing over a hundred acres slumping patterns as a result of road use and regular maintenance activities described will it be ppread there? If pastured, what is the allowable in the Draft LUDP Amendment. Also see the response to comment 10b. ~ A.U.M? I'Ihere will the water be placed? Hopefully it will be disbursed so that one spot is not trampled to death in the 15 E. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. Comments noted. Manure disposal is acre paddock area. described on p. 16 of the Draft LUDP Amendment (9/1994) as lawful disposal oftsite. 18. Reduction of recreational opportunity etc. This issue has not begn addressed. Both of these projects remove from the public's use recreation opportunities. Of special concern F.LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. No significant loss of recreational opportunity f is the restriction of opportunity to enjoy the western wooded~ will 'occur, and there is an increase in recreational opportunity for a wider range of area on the Brown property, and to go cross country on the individuals. The b.afayette Ridge Regional Trail through the Lafayette Ridge Recreation Unit ~creage leased by the Horsecamp. There would be no other use will continue to be open during park open hours, similar to other regional trails. of Coyote Valley while a Camporee is in progress. 19 Alte~ation of views. At the Horsecamp site vehicles used FF. COYOTE VALLEY. No significant loss of recreational opportunity will occur, and there by the concessionaire will be visible from, Highway 24, that , is horse trailers, cars and vans. Lafayette supported the is an increase in recreational opportunity for a wider range of individuals. The Coyote Valley area will be connected to the existing trail system with a short trail loop, connected acquisition of this propertYp~artly to preserve the view £rom i!ighway 24. ii to an existing trail link. Further, the latter area will be in use on an infrequent basis. 22. Increased traffic. \'lhat will be the impact on Pleasant gill Road, which is already up to capacity during certain hours. G. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. The majority of parking related to equestrian ~ The initial study talks about increased traffic on roads, but daycamp use is handled in the Lafayette Ridge Staging Area, oftsite at another private not on trails within the park. With the increase in numbers camp facility, or is reduced by the use of student shuttlevans. The Recreation Unit itself potentially using trails, there could be an impact that is more accommodates a limited amount of parking as described on p.15 of the Draft LUDP than negligible. 26 Neighbors of the Vista Bella project could be subject to Amendment; these sites on the northerly side of Lafayette Ridge have no visibility from trespass and vandalism. '.' Highway 24 and limited visibility from neighboring areas in the vicinity of Pleasant Hill 1 Road. The Regional Parks Association supports appropriate recreation activities within the Regional Park system, but these must be H. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. See response to comment 3A. developed within a context that preserves the land and biota for future generations. Meeting momentary desires at the I. VISTA BELLA. Comment noted. expense of the enjoyment of those to come is not the goal. Sincerely Yours, lit/- .11"1, Mi4 Helen Clebanoff, President Regional Parks Association COMMENTS RESPONSES 0(1-17-1994 IS: Ie FR01 S}ERRR CLUB SF BRY CHRPT TO 5694319 P.01 LenrG~ 10 SIERRA CLUB SAN FRANCISCO BAY CHAPTER LE17E ..l 10 (Sierra Club) Serving the r.ounlies of Abmed2, (.ontr.l COSta. Marin 2nd Sm Prandsco Offic:e: S2~7 College Avenue, Oakland, CA 94618 • (510) 653-6127 A. u\f'~YElTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. See response to comment 9A above. Books1ore: 6014 College AVenue, Oakland, CA 94618 • (510) 658-7470 . October 17.1994 B. LAF/·.YElTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. This topic was eddrassed In the Initial Study, 9/1994, expanded comment on question one, on page six. To recap, no new road 1... 1: Ct.1 V 1:0 .1' construr\'lon Is proposed, and mlt;1imum wet season vehicle access will occur on the road. No new lioite change Is proposed'which may exacerbate slope movement and have the Maxine Temer, ChJef ( . - 1 7 1994 PlanninglStewardship .. potentia! for slgnlfictiht effect. Also see the respcnse to comment 90 above. East Bay Regional Park District r ~. "liNG/STEWARDSHIP 29~U l'eralta Oaks Court PO Box 3381 -' C. LAFA'/trrE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. !: :,~ response to comment 9G above. Oakland CA 94605-0381 Initial Study & 1994 Draft AmendmenL BrIones LOOP ~'l Dear Ms. Temer: Than.kJou for the opponunity to comment on the above documents. Unfortunately, I only lelU1le of the documents on Wednesday, and Wl!SI1't able lo acquire them untll Friday, jUlit three days before your comment deadli.rie. I also want to thank Karen Parsons for the generous amouul of tIme she ~t with me 8t the DIstrict discussing the proposal concernlng connecting the Lafayette Ridge Fire Trail. I indlcated to her the possibility that the Dub could support grading of a driveway for fire vehicles and bicycles at Vista Bella and the Part bouIlulU)'. . . However meritorious this proposal. adoption of the proposed 1994 Draft Amendment to the Briones WUP may very well not be possible willi tlie existing Iullial Study under a Negative Declaration. As I read CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064 (Determl:ititul SignIficant Effect) and 15070 (Decision to ~epare a Negative Declaration), botli in conjunction with Appendlx 0 (Significant Effectll), $tsveralllSpccts of all three p'ro~al8 appear to m to have potentially sIgnificant impacts which are not Identified in tbe Initial Sludy. If the District were to respond with m6difieatJons of the proposals to miliaate what we believe are 51gnU\cWllltnpllel~ to less than significant levels, perhaps the District could approve a MltJgated Negative Declaration, thus avoiding the expense and delay of a full· blown Environmental Iriipact Report. . . ~ueslrlan Youth Day eft'"j RepresentatJves of the Oub and other environmentai groups tlcized this proposal at a oard meeting earlier In 1994. The principal objection was tliat the Day Camp would constitute 8 restrictive privnte use of what sboula be open spRce preserved for all park mers, regardless of discretionary income (OT, In most cues, the lack of money) to pay tbe daily fees required for me of the area·· even simply hllcing cross· Irr counby across the eo.stcrn port of the 116-tlcre Jlroperty on an existing footpath. lbat objectfon stillstands. Hence, the amwer to the Inftlal Study's Question 20 (Access) Isn't complete without some d~cussion of this point. It ~ clearly a significant Impact. and mmt bo miti&ated to Q less than signific=nt level. Additionally, we believe there are landslides in this area, an.d that the proposed Day Camp ~ would increase their occurrence (Question 11 Geologic, hY9r9logiC or soli condition hazards). Also the horse trailers will be visioleirom HighWay 24 which (I believe) is a ~ designated Qliliomia Scenic Highway (Questiont9, Alteration of Views). It Is therefore unlikely that approval of this proposal will be possible with a Negative Declaration. 15 !TIpo;ed Ccnnectlon Qetlte Larayett~Flre Trail at Ylata..B.ellllB.oJ. The Sierra . j • • , I 1 •• ~ .•• ~ .. t,._ r. .. ;.. ··,.t.,:,.1 ... ~ ..... ~" h;t""'Il("I"t::; frnm fhfl' r(\~ 0(1-17-1994 I::: 19 FROM SIERRA CLUB SF BAY' CHAFT TO 5594313 P.0? l£Ti€~ 10 di5cu.ssed in :J~ial way on pages 17·18 of the Initial Study. For the Oub, the principal 1? benet'll Is co flre vehicles and bicycles to the fire ttall; even thou~ the proposal would have the e ect of use of the City of Lafayette's Road for some distance. LElTER 10 (Sierra Club) CEOA Ouillellnes Appendix 0 lncludes namc as a slgnftlcant impact. in a way that I do D. VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. The revision to the Draft LUDP Amendment revision not believe the Initial Study fully addresses. addresses some of these issues. I. Caw.1S IW 11lc..~ In tr.tffic which Is subStantlalln relation to the existing tramc load and capacity of the street system. E. COYOTE VALLEY. Comments noted. The EBRPD regrets the implication made by the Sierra Club that only one user group would use the special event campsite, The Briones There Is no dlseuuion in the Initial Study, uudel' Question 22 (Inc..Tl:wsell Traffic) of the special event camping history includes not only Boy Scouts, but also Girl Scouts. their Impact of increased bicycle traffic on exIs~ traffic patterns on Vista Bella Road. Fire adult leaders and helping family members; and groups from other organizations that may verucle traffic would very likely not be significant, although the Study should quantify It include a variety of age levels and affili'!,tions. relative to existing traffic level! on VlnB Della. We acknowledge that hlcy\:le trullk ili nut [iktly to be significant. but here, too, the Initial Study must pvc the gener81 public an idea of quantity and impacts of bicycle trips in relation to tha capacity of 1M street system. ,~ With respect to the Inftlal Study di5cusslon of this proposal under Question 20 (Changes to vehicular, equestrian, bi~c1e. or pedestrian Circulation or Access), we concur that fire vehicle access Is beneficial. and would add that increased recreational use or ll1e UrI: trllil. particularl)' by bicycles, Is a direct benefit, and also an indirect benefit by provision to bikeu of a better route than what they may now be using, the footpaths within the park, to get from one branch of the fire trail to the other. , .c.anw.om Slte.t Coyote Valley; o~ ~ Creek Road /urv inference drawn from the Initial Study that the site would exclusivey ea backul' [or existing use by eh:lDllnUi of the BO}' Scouts of America (BSA) of the Homestead Valley primary camporee site is problematic, e, since not all Fotential users of the site are members or adult supporters of the BSA. Hence, the IiUtlai Study should give the publlc a better bamJle un the potential use by other campin~ groups. Study Question 20 (Changes to vehicp.lar, equestrian, bicycle or pedestrian Circulation or Access) discloses the only foreseen non-Stouting use of the two meadows Is ror 'ocCA5iOIUJl staging oCbicycle/Iwuullg '\lvenUl: AgaIn. the public needs a better handle on what Is being proposed, and once the District Is more specific, specific mltlgatlons could be proposed and discussed by the public and the Board. "II Respectfully, Y~~3(- DAVID I. TAM (SlO/655-6nS) Secretary, East Bay Publlc Lauds Sul.x:lImmlttce 16 , I COMMENTS RESPONSES LSTi5f2. 1/ LEDER 11 October 11, 1994 O , ... 't C't.\'vf. A. VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. The Draft LUDP Amendment revision addresses \ it, \Illlt. some of these issues. See the response to comment 3G above. Maxine Terner ( Chief of Planning/Stewardship , .. ~I'QS"'W East Bay Regional Park Dist. ~ .,.. ,,\~\GI::'i£'· 2950 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland, CA 94605 Dear Ms. Terner: The 1994 Draft Amendment to the Briones Regional Park Land Use-Development Plan and Environmental Checklist/Initial Study as they pertain to connection of the Lafayette Ridge Fire Trail at Vista Bella are partly inaccurate, a bit misleading, and also contradictory. As a 20 year resident of Vista Bella, I would like to set the record straight, offer an alternative, and state my concerns. INACCURACY: The Ridge trail was never severed as stated on page 17 of the draft amendment. The hiking/riding trail is now as it was when it first became park land, an old cattle trail carved into the contours of the hillside. It is very natural, scenic, and appealing. The fire access road on the other hand was never really usable even before the Nort~~idge Development. It was steep and never graveled as the other roads were. It was annually graded, I suspect, as a fire break. MISLEADING: The reasons given to connect the multi-purpose trail all center around fire protection and fire vehicle access yet bicycle use is included as if it were part of the fire safety issue. The grading required to route the trail on Vista Bella is neither minor nor without visual consequences as implied on page 18 of the draft amendment. By comparison to an unspecified route which has ·serious visual consequences· we are led to believe the Vista Bella route is OK. In fact the visual impact may be the greatest as this route is at the very top of the ridge and will require removing ridge line trees. CONTRADICTORY: The draft amendment states that grading is minor. The Environmental Checklist/Initial Study Attachment states that 17 grading will not exceed 700 cubic yards. Cut and fill in the COMMENTS RESPONSES L8"T/6f2.. I( magnitude of 700 cubic yards at the top of the ridge and involving tree removal cannot be considered to be minor. The resultant visual scar cannot be considered to be negligible as stated on page 2 of the Environmental Checklist/Initial Study. ALTERNATIVE: Connect the southern end of fire trail 15-10 to the western fork of fire trail 15-4 by grading the minimum required trail along the park boundary. This trail may involve more grading than the Vista Bella route, but it would impact fewer residences, would be further from any residence, would not involve any utilities, would not require tree cutting, and would not be seen from as many locations. From a fire fighting standpoint, this route offers some advantages to traversing Vista Bella. It provides access to the prevailing windward and lower side of a wooded area. It provides access to the boundary of the park. It provides unencumbered movement along the trail system--no gates to open and no civilian vehicles to circumvent. This trail would also be more desirable for park users because it offers more open space and wooded surroundings. Please refer to the sketch enclosed. CONCERNS: " \1 My immediate concern is the impact this proposal has on two of my neighbors. Grading as much and as close to their residences will certainly affect their quality of life. Not only will their landscaping be changed forever but they will have to live in fear that trespassers and even park users might accidentally start a fire. Their homes would be destroyed before fire fighting equipment could ascend our hill with or without the fire trail connection. My second concern is Park access from Vista Bella. The views and open space near Vista Bella have over the years been a magnet for late night. parking and gatherings. Mostly, the individuals are relatively quiet, leave little trash, and generally behave. But often enough there are others who are raucous, litter indiscriminately, and are very disruptive. I fear that someday ( especially if their frequency increases) they will discard a lit cigarette and start a fire or perhaps lose control of their car descending Mar}ino Rd. and injure themselves. The top of a brushyrhil1 isno place to drink or smoke. Unfortunately, it often occurs on vista Bella. ~~third concern is that someday after everyone has gotten used to trail access from Vista Bella, park planners will be enticed to make it a staging area. I prefer this not happen COMMENTS RESPONSES LeTT&~ I) for the reasons above and the increased traffic up and down Martino Rd. whose incline is actually steeper than County standards. It would be a matter of time before there was a serious accident. In conclusion, I prefer an alternate route be chosen for the multi-purpose trail. This would satisfy all of my concerns. If, however, the QDly viable route for improved fire vehicle access is through Vista Bella and Planning/Stewardship feel it is imperative, then I urge that all other uses be denied, the access be gated, and the access be posted so as to discourage public use. I further urge that an extensive landscaping plan be developed to mitigate the damage to my neighbor's yards. The plan should include restoring privacy and wind controls. Finally, a covenant should be included in the LUDP Amendment that specifically prevents a staging area from being developed at either end 6f vista Bella at a later date. Thank you for providing timely notification and affording me the opportunity to respond to the 1994 Draft Amendment. Sincerely, S ..... tt 0-. L \--f.r-- Scott Anderson 1075 Vista Bella Lafayette, CA 94549 i; Enclosure " ce: Susan Smartt Board of Directors East Bay Regional Park District 2950 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland, CA 94605 ec: City Council City of Lafayette 3675 Mount Diablo Blvd. Lafayette, CA 94549 ce: Niroop Srivatsa, Director Lafayette Planning 3675 Mount Diablo Blvd. Lafayette, CA 94549 ce: Jennifer Russell, Director ,p Lafayette Parks & Recreation 3675 Mount Diablo Blvd. Lafayette, CA 94549 19 -. --- / 7 tv o I ~~,~ / / N I -s' :: .. ~------4-- - _ I -- COMMENTS RESPONSES (J:;-rmf::. 12- ;,F C ~ IVEi::.. LETTER 12 I\·fembers of the Board of Directors 1 () 1994 A. VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. The Draft LUDP Amendment revision addresses E"~t Bay Regional Park District some of these issues. See the response to comment 3G above. 2950 Peralta Oaks Court f. ''';'.i';G::·TEWARDSHIP Oakland. Calif. 94605 Dear Members of the Board. Your current plan to carve out a fire trail al the end of Vi st. Bella will not only adversely effect the vallie of my property. bllt will also increase greatly our exposure to fire and then. In addition, the altering of the geological hill formation al the end of our driveway, will expose the entire street and especially my front yard, to winds that are at times up to 100 miles an hour. When we purchased our property in 1977, the land around us was privately owned. There was no public access to the land surrounding us. Aner the park purchased the hill adjacent to our bad,yard, we began to see an increase in pedestrian traffic and visitors on this property. Over these past twelve years. I have had to frequently go out to the hill and ask people to put out their cigarettes. I have also encountered young people with fireworks, who I have managed to remove from the area. During all these years. I have never seen any employee of the Park District supervising this potentially lethal situation. Now you wish to open this same panoramic hill to pedestrian traffic from Vista Bella. A fire trail. even with a large locked gate. will be a "magnet" for every teenager etc. in the area. My family will be vulnerable to nol only continual lire danger, but also the threat of vandalism and then. Since my husband, Dr. Bruce Baldwin. died of a heart attack last year. I have become the sole supporter and protector of my four children. The Lafayette police, though of good intentions, do not have the manpower to respond instantly to every criminal situation. The security of our home and our physical well being within our home will be threatened. The Chronicle recently ran an article highlighting the problem of increased burglaries in homes adjoining park lands. Add to this the possibility of alcohol and drug use on park grounds at night, and the consequences are frightening. In addition. our streel will be dealing with 811 increase in bicycle and automobile traffic. 'The situation on Martino Road is already very dangerous. "No Parking" signs have done little to discourage large groups of "party -goerH. For years, our street has dealt with continual parties and noise at the other end of the streel.l INow you wish to open up this end! I will be living twenty feet from "Party Central" . On this hill. there are also winds up to 100 miles an hour. One cigarette thrown by an inebriated youngster and our home will be gone in ten minutes and the entire neighborhood in twenty munutes. So you see, this" lire trail" is only a negative. Another major concern is the environmental impact of removing the 13 foot hill that shelters my front yard and the entire street of Vista Bella from winds that gust up to 100 miles an hour at times. Your plan to remove 700 cubic yards of hillside at the end of my driveway will not only devalue my property. but will also expose the entire fronl yard to the full force of the ridgeline winds. TIle destructive effect on my landscaping and the wood structure of the house will be severe. We inslalled a massive rctaining wall at great expense many years ago. in order to protect this area. By removing 700 cubic yards of hill { 70 dump trucks of soil}. you will create a wind lunnel thai will blast not only my front door. but also the entire length of Vista Bella.! It is a major change to the natural geological layout of the landscape. It is certainly something that the City of Lafayette would not allow us. as private cilizens. to do. I believe that there are ordinances in place that prohibit the removal of such a steep grade. especially when they impact the environment of the neighborhood so severly. To sum the situation up. your plans for opening a lire trail access at the end of Vista Bella is my worst nighhnare. I will do every~~ing possibl!!"fo prevent East Bay Regional Park 21 COMMENTS RESPONSES LzT161Z.. I~ from turning a secure. protected community into an area threatened by the fl. vandalism, fire and continual noise from parties and buffeted by 100 mile winds. We have recently paid off our house mortgage with the proceeds from my husband's life insurance, so that my children and I could remain in our home. Therefore. hopefully,you will understand my anxiety and distress over this proposed plan. It endangers all that my children and I own--our one source of stability in a troubled time. Please reconsider. .... With Concern, Barbara Baldwin and family ;~/~ 1054 Vista Bella Lafayette. California 283-5279 l' " JI(' 22 COMMENTS RESPONSES L&~ 'f<. 13 ------ i 8 ~ /' :£: .. '. idB1EJJIE?ffi~~c1c1t-;~~---:-~- LETTER 13 , 4?J. ,I. J'h I 'al :Ll~ I : '-"'• ....: ,:/ iii : J - , i---- :£i~-j ~ r---1 -(T-T·---T-- /.-rr-r+- j j-"-- A. VISTA BELLA, Comments noted. The Draft LUDP Amendment revision addresses , ~-::-, -.~~--,-- --,-- - +--"':-If?~-k-l-l---I--.~--I-L .--!- some of these issues. See the response to comment 3G above, I .' ~ ii', I iA! _i~) I ~I A-'~':~ p J i : r . I J -: I ,-, I r- ~'-i -r-:---'I'i 7l"l- T -I~-~-~---:-~ :-~--~·~l--L.L I' , J -jpl----~_t_-I- ; , ; _~:--*-~~--:---~-J--~-- - ii----~C-.Q~;--tfj---4--'lli·-i~~-~-~j--FTY-l---j-~-+- ,) ll-- -t- -~L{~J"-a-1· -J~-4--+-=-~-l_L-L:~--~-l-- ~;!'T J-- +- _I ' :-. -.L---;·!·-0~L-, ,~.--~-~ C:u!'iuq.,I--~-- 1 ; I AA~__ --JL_.~~__ .;._ .. ~.LJ',I... ,'_j~;U~.J.--!.--.L. i ~.·h ..../1 ,-··,t),,--;--·T I I: :'7'"i ,-:-:'":--1- r·'·_I_I ~ I ~' , ~~J"---d~r---;~~~'---M-~-~j~--¥~f.--LA ' /~ r- .-L};_ '.: I: i ,.a.L:.A; ... : f i ; ; =L'-~ __ ~--i'm' --'--T·- -" ----'. - ---r-~1~~~--'-"-'--,- , ' .. ,-) - -1- :-,! . -~--·i---! ... -. -;.1. J. -j---l- ..l---l--L--+I. --·1·-· :- ... f- -1- .. 1---1-· -1- -;-, . ! : ; I I' 1 I ., , j '[ I. I I 'L -.. ----.-. ----.-" ... ----. I--- .... ,"--l- -1-,.------'---"--,- .. -. -.- L.__ .-+-- -- 1-··- -.-.- ·-·t--~-· .. ,.. ··- : ; i \ : t I I : ; : ! I : Ii,! I I ~" __ ~ ____-~~_:~~'j_.':- 1 -~~;- ·I-·:~=h-~~~-:.~=L.-~~...... ------..-.- -...... - ._,_..1_. __: -l---~-+-r-+~3.E12-0:~£&()~s11-4_i-+ -~--~--.: -t~-L~~~j--Y--~~}I~- 1. .l .~~/~~:-~~~~T~ _:_~-:·_~-.:T-~-·- \ :, I . : I : I I I I ! : I I i I . i ! ~.:.------!---:- ---:---1--:-~--·---t---~~--:---~t-~~1 ; : I ~--;---: -.l.---~-·-!---1-- . ,I I I I I I ,1 f :, I -:==~=:~~1~~-~:~~~}=~.~~f]~j=t~~Ij~J:- -; -f-·~t~;~-~=j~~~r~:~! rI ! !; I I.! t! ~!! I: Il! :~~ ----' -·-~------r------·-""""·--"1----+------"'-~-··~~ -,.-- .... I' ~ I , ~ :! 'I: I ,! ! : ---!--t , ! r'--r-l ____ .i. ___ .~ .:....._1-_1~+-I ~ I I I i_....L...J , , I • , i !,' I F '·'''I/'GI'TEWAR· I I iii . ... .__ ---....,. .. -.-!--~.--.L_~-~--~--i---i--..L+rj-Jt ...:..---=-r-:....;-·-,,:. ; Q~le ~ --;---j"-'--;-- I : 1 ! I ~ I I : ! , ! :' I': 1 i ; : -: -- -.---"-. ~---.~-- 'i---r'--~ --T ·-~,~~-r-·--~~:?l-r-··i--1--T-l--r--T-·-···-·-- ~--T'I-' '---1'- --. -.~ ---, ... -- .-, '-;-'---';--, T-1-f---+-+-+--:---+---'-rl-t I I FPH +-'-y-+ +, 1_: ___ ~ __ :._.__ ~I ! : i ~ __:__ Ii, ! : i-L--i---l--+-L : .•__ ...I ___ .1 ____ -l _____I ~ i ___.:..._l_---j__1___1 I I , ' I __ -+__I i I ! _.++ __ -L'____ I .+ ' ____" -l_-I-1 ~ 23 '1,": I'liil' I I .:1. : ;.1 1 !L: -1- i -- '.-"" -c -~·----t--+----LI -+-r-r-·--i--L-t- : ./---+-+- f--, '1- t'----r-; - , I :, _ _ _ __: L ___ ~ 1 J _L L ! __ 1.. .J__ L_J.. t-- 4 ., , 1 l... l COMMENTS RESPONSES 10/17/94 10:48 ~'l1na!!18gg82 1I0RLDVIBlI SYSTBII 1ai002 '510 • b'l><; . ~-n LW0t\ "'" y A~~\ ~I~'~l:> L8T~f2-/~ lIDRPD Planning Department LETTER 14 2950 Peralill Oaks Ct. Oakland. CA 9(605 A. COYOTE VALLEY. Comments noted. See letter from Contra Costa Public Works Department, p. 23 of the Draft LUDP Amendment. Weekend use of this site a maximum October 15.199. of 6 • 10 times a year is not expected to conflict with peak use periods, To Whom It May Concern: li' B. COYOTE,YALLEY, Comments noted. See reponse to comment 3B above . .~; 1 am completely opposed to the l!BRPD:~ propoul to establish a Camporee Bite and build a second entrance to Briones llegional PlI1k on Bear Creek Road.. Aa a taxpayer, home owner and resident of Bear CJ1!ek Road, I feel It Is an outmgeous expenditure of funds to build a second entrance less than a mile lind a half from an existing developed entrance. AdditionaUy. there are two mllJor publi~"~afety~. ~'90dated with this proposed 'j Camporee lib! that the Draft Negative Declaration of Environmental Signl.flc&nce doea not adequately addness, 'I1Ie first public Rfety hazard is that of traflic conb:ol. The place- I lnent of the proposed entrano~ lIS shown on the BBRPD map Is situated between two bOnd curves on Bear Creeklb:lad. Placing en al!a!S8 point at,thIs jund:ure would create an incredible traHtc hB281'd. go aranteed to end In tragedy. The I:xlsting traffic situation "-I on Bear Creek Road Is a1read" enough to make your hair stand on end. There are f" countless speeding motorists 'IYith no regud for traffic codes and the lives of themselves or others. that continua)ly paa 5 three to four CIIJ:B at a tInte on double yeDow line marked stretches of the road. ThiI out of control speeding problein and the high volume of recreational bike traffic a1read,y make fur a volatile situation. Couple this with Increased traHic trying to negotiate II diJ8cult,and inappropriate aoceB/I mand out of the site and you create a deadly situation. 'I1Ie second public safety hazar.d Is that of fire. ThIs proposed entrance and Camporee site wiD bring hundreds of pelple and the possibility of fire from cigarettes and other t7 devices less than a ml1e from howes and livestock m the area. ThIs is an area of high fire danger with little resourol! ttf !:'antral .. raging blaze.. 11Ie proposed site is scheduled for speciaL reserved events ortly; but what do you plan to do to prevent the use of this area by teenagers late at night and other people lookmg £or a quick and easy campfue site off the road? nus problenl already exists to a small extent and will be exacerbated by the building of an "attractive 'nuisance" Campmee site. The lIDRPD proposed CampoJ:ee site Is a rldlculous expenditure of park funds, and poorly planned with little thought to the mherent ha2ards asBOdated with the project. Therefore I recommend this proposed site be abandoned. and the Camporee site be relocated and developed at the existing recreation unit enl:rann! on Bear Creek Road. Sincerely. ~~ kcCEIVED 1290 Bear Creek Road Martinez. CA 94553 51().37U..9498 [- 1 7 1994 \' ')'''IG/ST EWAR08HIP 24 COMMENTS RESPONSES SUMMARY OF THE 1994 AMENDMENT l£1i6f2- IS OF THE BRIONES REGIONAL PARK LAND USE-DEVELOPMENT PLAN (LUDP) LEITER 15 DESIGNATIONS OF PARKLAND USE: The Amendment designates land use zones Cor new parcels added to the park since the 1981 LUDP. A. LAFAYETTE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. Comment noted. RECREATION AND FIRE PROTECTION ACCESS PROPOSALS: I -Establish a new recreation unit at the end oC Lafayette RJdge to allow an equestrian youth camp (with a max. oC 50 horses) at the site oC a fonner equestrian stable. Criteria are established to I protect park resources and maintain existlDg public use and trail access. -Establish a Camporee site (maximum 400 people) at the western edge of the park with an entrance Crom Bear Creek Road. Two hundred cars maximum can park on the site. Camporees and special events will be held on a limited, reservation basis. An aggregate ford and pedestrian bridge across a seasonal drainage will be constructed. j -Connect the Lafayette RJdge (ftre) Trail at VISta Bella Road in Lafayette to reestablish thru access for emergency/ftre vehicles and bicycles. 7~:p;, 20,,994';;';;;;" r-= "'lst Bay Reg. Park Dlat. ~9pO geralta Oaks Court )~kland, Calif. 94605 1e: Lat. Ridge Rec. Unit (figure 3) . am opposed to your plan to "Establish l new recreation unIt at the end ot ,~fayette Ridge to allow an equestrian 'outh camp (with a max. of 50 horses'''_ Anthony G. Lagiss II P. O. BOx 222 " ~I k ~ttel Ca. 94549 -')\..U\fftti P j ~. . Figure J - LAND USE ZONING & PROJECT AREA MAP Brlone6 RegiolUJl Parle EIVED ~ _ ...... _ .. .0'~ ( - __...... u •• '117199( til _.Ar.~""- ~-~ .... p_ nUN IS1EWARDSHIP CJ B1btltI.,.....Ar-. l~l~~~~i:Jj...... , ~.u.r ~ UaIl II ______'-- ___ 1*.1_ 25 .. - .. ------_.- .... _... - EaSt Bay Regional Park District, 2950 Peralta Oaks Court., Oakland, CA 94605 'j COMMENTS RESPONSES L,GT1Erzl y; 1/ Ce-f·~ OO~ ~ ~~ ~ /V~ ~~ iJ-yI.. VI sf?\. /?PIAI JWS I( C'"£i1h~0) LETTER 16 PAUL D. MENZIES 7fr.Lv(~ A. VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. The Draft LUDP Amendment revision addresses 1062 Vista Bella Road some of these issues. See the response to comment 30 above. Lafayette, California 94549 : 1:;,.t:CEIVED :j (-,1}\994 I October 13, 1994 r _\' 'NINGlG1EWAI10SHIP Members of the Board of Directors East Bay Regional Park District 2950 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland, CA 94605 Re: Park District's plan to do major grading to the ridge line at the north end of Vista Bella Road in Lafayette, and to thereby allow vehicular access and other access from Briones Park to Vista Bella Road Dear Board Members: r' This letter is in response to the Park District's proposed use of Vista Bella Road as a "multi-purpose" trail for hikers, bicycles and emergency/fire vehicles. My family lives on Vista Bella Road and will be directly affected by the proposal. We are against your proposed usage of our streets as a recreational area. Martino Road is very steep and narrow with many blind curves and switchbacks. It is actually an "illegal grade" with No Parking signs posted on one side of the street. Vista Bella Road is a narrow road with No Parking signs on both sides of the street. If Vista Bella Road becomes part of a hiking/bicycle trail, this will mean a substantial increase in traffic on both Martino Road and Vista Bella Road. Until quite recently, the views and open space at the top of Martino Road and off Vista Bella Road have been· a magnet for late night parking and social gatherings. The individuals who come are often raucous, li\1er indiscnlilinately, are very disruptive to the residents' quiet enjoyment of their neighborhood and, after consumption of alcohol, often 26 COMMENTS RESPONSES ££TTF12: I fa drive down Martino Road in a fast and unsafe manner. Your proposed grading to the lO-ft. high bank at the north end of Vista Bella Road will allow such people easy access to the knoll which overlooks the valley in which dowptown Lafayette lies. The top of a brushy hill is no place to drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes. Those activities have been very frequent in the past and will be encouraged by your proposal. A cigarette carelessly discarded could easily start a major fire in the area. In addition, I believe that the Park Service's intention to grade 700 cubic yards of earth (,; . ... on the ridgeline, and to remove trees on the ridgeline, violates the City of Lafayette's ;' ,.'f ~.::~~ '.;I.;.~~~: ~.:~ Once again, any plan that incorporates Vista Bella Road as part of a recreational area is an intrusion on the privacy of the homes on both Vista Bella Road and Martino Road. I am stro~ly opposed to your proposal and urge you to work with all local residents to develop Iplan satisfactory to the residents. i;'I J'j1 27 I, ~.:, , :' '. .\':'. -.1,'\ (t ',/ .:: • 'f,~• .r', .! '. . 'l~ :.:':;..:,:" ..... "1\ . .. I ~/: ~. '?'::':);'" '~<: \:::;~'.: , .~.~;::: "/:: ~ ,::', ':'':-..~: " \ ';" COMMENTS RESPONSES The District received additional copies of the form letter signed by Paul Menzies from the following neighbors of Briones: Mr. and Mrs. A. Sherman 108 Greenbank Drive Lafayette, CA 94549 Beryl Sihr 1 South Hampton Place .... :':;.::·;;~'·/.\J·:-:'~':';·:.!'i.~.':>' ·.i .. :.... '.·;:;·,.·:':,:'.. /· .:. :.;;/,:;:,,';'; ~:. ","' .:.:.~,.,.,::) ',.': oe'.'::' :"1'" ,', ":. ,. '.' '. ,.: :,'" ., :,\ ~"" ::,;.::.,. .:~: Lafayette, CA 94549 Marilyn Gambs 1108 Martino Road Lafayette, CA 94549 Armando Ortiz 120 Greenbank Drive Lafayette, CA 94549 Thomas F. Dall 1092 Martino Road Lafayette, CA 94549 illegible illegible 1255 N. Scenic Drive Lafayette, CA 94549 "ii Leah Bulla 1255 No. Scenic Drive Lafayette, CA 94549 Mark illegible 1309 Martino Road Lafayette, CA 94549 George Eichelberger 1320 Martino Road Lafayette, CA 94549 Kenneth and Marjorie Cusick 1332 Martino Road Lafayette, CA 94549 Q" b{?j e. f Th 9-7VLA c,. f? f '7 ho P fIj?JC? ~~ ,,~'. ;') :r',:' :;-\ : ',' ~I~ " "',1 ~ .', \, . .';,(;: ~f~:.: f·,:'~·~·· .~:l.\. ,::~".',::., ;'. \)e.~ :,,J;... ~ . •~ .... I ~:::: ::'. :,', ,': i, t';:[;.;::, .<~ I COMMENTS RESPONSES L6TI6f!. 17 LEITER 17 A VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. The Draft LUDP Amendment revision addresses October 13, 1994 some of these issues. See the response to comment 3G above. ';/ '.; 'VED Members of the Board of Directors I _, 1994 East Bay Regional Park District 2950 Peralta Oaks Court F. 1 /1/tv(;t~'tIVAHI)SHIP Oakland, CA 94605 , ~ Re: Park District's plan to do major grading to the ridge line at the north end of Vista Bella Rd. in Lafayette, thus allowing vehicular access and other access from Briones Park to Vista Bella Rd. Dear Board Members: We are against the proposed use of Vista Bella Rd. as a "multi-purpose" trail for hikers, bikers and emergencylfire vehicles. Our family lives on Martino Road, which dead ends into Vista Bella Rd. Here are the reasons we feel threatened: 1. Martino Rd. is very steep and narrow, with many blind curves and switchbacks. (It is actually an "illegal grade" with No Parking signs posted on one side of the street. Vista Bella is so narrow it has No Parking on both sides of the road.) II 2. The top of Martino Rd. and Vista" Bella Rd. draw many moonstruck parkers at night. Individuals have often been raucous, and litter thoughtlessly. Not a very pleasant addition for our "qUiet & peaceful" neighborhood. This has improved and we do not want to undo and add more new folks at the top of the hill. 3. There is a real DANGER of: Fire from a careless smoker and/or injury due to a reckless driver (often alcohol is consumed). Many bends in the road need to be taken at very reduced speeds. 4. There is already access to the trails from Pleasant Hill Rd., Springhill Rd. and (without a car) at the West end of Vista Bella. Better access for a fire vehicle may be needed, but moving 700 cubic yards of earth from the 10-ft. high bank at the north end of Vista Bella Rd. is too muchll PI1 29 COMMENTS RESPONSES UTT8FR.17 -2- We are not opposed to open space and proper fire/emergency precautions; however, we believe that the top of Martino Rd. 15 not the best spot for opening access to the public. It is an intrusion on the privacy of the homes on both Vista Bella Road, Martino Road and all of the small side streets off of Martino Rd. We urge you to work with local residents to develop a plan acceptable to all sides. Sincerely, DI Ck f- ~t~U- 111I21Ao~ Dick and Laurie Morrison 1321 Martino Rd. Lafayette, CA. 94549 ~l~ froM & Ceri&0t;o+a,W\ily l"tC; f .t7 £4M.tc" ~ , ~*) CPr, t1~9 If II 30 COMMENTS RESPONSES L-GTTG fZ.. 'B Alice and Zafer Nashashibi !·.Zc..~ :Vt:u LETTER 18 1065 vista Bella (·-121994 Lafayette, CA 94549 A. VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. The Draft LUDP Amendment revision addresses F_". ·'?:2:STEWARD5Hir· some of these issues. See the response to comment 3G above. October 10,1994 Ms. Maxine Terner Chief, Planning/stewardship Dept. East Bay Regional Park District P. o. Box 5381 Oakland, CA 94605-0381 Dear Ms. Terner: We are residents of vista Bella Road in Lafayette and would like to thank you and your staff for keeping us informed on the proposed amendment to the Briones Regional Park Land Use Development Plan. Herein we are addressing our concerns regarding your letter dated September 16, 1994 and the Draft Amendment. Per your request we are submitting our written comments to meet your october 17, 1994 date. 1. In your letter of September 16, 1994 you mentioned the District's proposal, "to construct a drive way at the end· of Vista Bella Road to reestablish through access for emergency /fire vehicles on the Lafayette Ridge Trail. This proposal is a part·of the Briones Land Use-Development Plan now being circulated for public review." " ;; Meanwhile, on page 1 of the 1994 Draft Amendment it is stated,"connection of the Lafayette Ridge (fire) Trail at vista Bella Road in Lafayette to increase recreational access as well as emergency/fire response", the wording of which concerns us. 2. In your Environmental Checklist/Initial Study under Project Description, it is stated, "to connect the Lafayette Ridge multi purpose trail at vista Bella Road in Lafayette". On pages 17 and 18 of the 1994 Draft Amendment under Background and Policy, again the wording of "multi-purpose fire/bicycle" and "through Vista Bella Road for fire prevention/emergency and bicycle use" is mentioned. The wording "to increase recreational access" and "multi purpose trail at vista Bella Road" and "bicycle use" are of major concern to us beca~se inc~eased usage will create rather than prevent fire hazards. 31 COMMENTS RESPONSES L£i1E~ I~ - :2 - . 3. On page 17 under Background it is stated, "The Lafayette Ridge Trail was severed with the construction of a housing development on the southern side of Lafayette Ridge at Sessions and Northridge Roads several years ago." Why was this allowed to happen? Why should vista Bella residents be victimized for this error? 4. We are also concerned about the grading needed to connect : : vista Bella to the Ridge trail which was estimated' in your Environmental Checklist "to be less than 700 cubic yards for the driveway access". This is rated "negligible" in your report. In our opinion this is a major excavation, not a negligible one. 5. We would be willing to have Vista Bella Road connected to the Lafayette Ridge Trail for one use only, that of fire protection. This would be allowed only after reviewing drawings to our satisfaction, and proving to us that it is a necessity rather than just a good idea. An environmental report would also be required to prove to us that the wind factor would not be increased as a result of the excavation. Again, we would like to thank you for keeping us informed on your project and for your willingness to work with us regarding any concerns we may have. Since we cannot be present at the November 15 meeting due to being out of state at that time, please enter our letter on the record. Other representatives from our neighborhod will be at the meeting on November 15 to speak on our behalf. ~ " sincerely yours, #U-"'-«-~J~J(~ Alice and :fa'fer Nashashibi CC: Susan Smart 32 COMMENTS RESPONSES LG1T£f2 Ji Richard P. Uslnger. D.D.S. LEITER 19 A. VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. The Draft LUDP Amendment revision addresses October 14, 1994 some of these issues. See the response to comment 3G.above. Board of Directors East Bay Regional Park District 2950 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland, California 94605 Dear sir/madam: i wisn to proLetit ~i,~ ~10pue~~ C011b~LUl.LiuJl vI 6 fiL~ luctd iD Briones Park at Vista Bella Road in Lafayette. Construction of a fire road in that area will create dangerous fire conditions, denegrate property values, and be environmentally disruptive to a highly sensitive portion of Lafayette Ridge. Mature trees will be cut and seven hundred cubic yards of earth removed. This area is a visually sensitive portion of Lafayette. I believe it violates the Lafayette Ridge Ordinance. The road will increase the fire hazare and endanger the surrounding neighborhood. Increased automobile and pedestrian access, with the attendant increase in litter and discarded cigaret.tes, pose a signif icant danger during the summer r.lo~ths. Construction of the road will degra~e property valueR, pose significant security risk4'from increased public access, Bnd denegrate the quality of life in Lafayette. The road can easily be constructed by connecting existing fire roads already in place West and downhill from the proposed site at Vista Bella Road. Construction of the road on Vista Bella in nOL necessary. I urge the Board of Directors of the East Bay Regional Park District not to aprove this project. ,~ RECE.IVED [ ,- 1 iJ 1994 P. Usinger, D.D.S. p _\. 'NING/GTEWAADSHIP RPU/ms cc: Board of Sl.:pervisors, ConFJ'a Cost·<'i'~ COUT!ty Planning commission, City. 'of Lafayette 33 2991 lreat Boulevard, Suite G. Concord. Canfornla 94518 TelephOne 510.689.7110 RlcslmKe 510.689.0506 COMMENTS RESPONSES ~u !'.':CE:IVE- r . - 1 2 1" LEITER 20 -J:k, MaP ~ =f;. -~<--. A. LAFAYEITE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. Comments noted. f i e07J~~ ~F'-i!2STf"""I"l"'1 ______._,~kd_ __g ~J1~d_- _ _~_T.1LJ-~ 7V'J". ! ~~.t,!_;;tI, /?u,EJS.-L (p-L -d.:~~ q ;L.~-~f!~-'V"'h;,:;'!; 1~~os(!...cI to J~ /77uru.- ('a.~ .;;. , ; ~ --LZ2l..fi"(J d;'Q7 (PC I We.~ I J2£oeC,'4. i-;Jl " ~ . ~*' c\ &.c,-, WQc.JJ.~ ~.e -f're evaCVJ;ilL-V'h 0J__ .-±/';'&' -:tf- ~ f c~ c-h, jh ~~7!-7Zi: ~~id.&'lfl bf 02t~, I ~ow ~ lfj'.,x fi~?~-r- y>.-ec£ ;~ wrc.--lcup~. ~4 ~ -:r--+ (D 0 , ~. z ts /lU? Ch- '-flu- {r...z .. e ~~ £Vea'7 ~ Yi....c. Cup O.f £ K CcgC~ -r --P!' (~ dl&... fYIO--n Q ~rvT- ~L &- t' S-- C<.. ;;Dc9-ih.; d~ ~~I -'rz;t';/a.-n:<.l:;;:--:;"'F~ 1L& ~. ~:~ oj ~{e.G.~«'12 ~~~(~f..== ~t I b z--u0q; /1?LM~C~~_ 34 COMMENTS RESPONSES ~~\ SPRINGHILL LEDER 21 V A.LL.E Y A. VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. The Draft LUDP Amendment revision addresses some of these issues. See the response to comment 3G above. B. LAFAYETIE RIDGE RECREATION UNIT. Comments noted. Please see the responses to comments 3A-D and gO-G. rd:CE1VED ( : - :3 1 1994 October 20. 1994 p _\. 'NING'STEWARDSHIP' Ms. Maxine Temer Chief. Planning/Stewardship Departm~nt East Bay Regional Park District 2950 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland. CA 911605 Rc: Draft Amendment to the Briones Regional Park Land Use-Developl'{Icnt Plan Dear Ms. Temer: The Springhill Valley Association (SVA) Board of Directors represents over 200 homd; and families in the Springhill Valley. Our streets and neighborhoods will be the most impacted by the proposed changes to Briones Regional Park. Therefore. we would like to direct our comments and concerns abOut the proposals to both you and to the Board of Directors of the EBRPD. We have comments and concerns about the Environmental Checklistflnitial Study and . Evaluation. the Designation of the Lafayette Ridge Recreation Unit with an Equestrian Camp. the C"I;Inection of the Lafayette Ridge Recreation Unit at Vista· Bella in Lafayette. the Sr.jingview Parcel, the Springhill Parcel, Buckeye Ranch and the surrounding proPerty, most namely the Dickey property. First, we are aware you have met with homeowners on San Reliez Court and on Vista Bella which are both in our homeowner's lIssociation. However, the proposals impact on virtually nil of the homeowners in our area. At some point YOIl may want to meet wit!l ~ur Bourd as well, which we would welcome. Second, we have previously requested EBRPD to take what ever action they deem necessary to acquire Buckeye Ranch. Buckeye Ranch, together with the Springhill Parcel weuld fonn the cornerstone of this area and be a major addition to Briones Regional Park. Buckeye is ideally suited for horses and is contiguous to the Girl Scout camp and the Springhill Parcel. In fact, it would be better suited for the "Roughing it" camp than the Brown Parcel. Incidentally, there is a "for s.,le H sign by a major Realtor currently on tile Buckeye Property. If EBRPD does not acquire Buckeye, ii will most cCErtainly be developed. Third, Springhill is facing 8 number of proposed developments: the Dickey Parcel (nine homes on 39 acres), which is contigu~us to the Springhill Parcel; the Hoskins Property (eleven hom;cs on abou(6 acres), which is near the Dickey Parcel; and possibly the Buckeye property. If developed, the Buckeye Property 36 will acid nltothcr 25 to 42 homes. If Buckeye is acquired by the EBRPD, it will r 0 Do\ 622 1',-,\1111. CA Q~HQ COMMENTS RESPONSES SPRINGHILL hhve a stAging area for the public, similar to the one at the Brown RmlCil near Springhill School, which will generate additional traffic. 11lere are a number of other vacant parcels in the area that will eventually be developed. Also, the Girl ~Ii Scout camp would like to expand. All of this potential traffic will use Springhill Road. If we are to factor in all of the proposed changes in the Draft Briones Land Use N Development Plan, together WIth the changes listed above (and there may be more), the cumulative impacts on Springhill Volley are substantial. TIlerefore, we ask that you include these cumulative impacts in your Draft Amendment, the Environmental Study and in your decision making for all Parcels. We also request, you include the possibility that all or portions of the Buckeye Ranch, the Dickey Parcel, and the Jennings Property may become part of Briones. The District will certainly want access to these parcels which are contiguous to Briones. Before cotnmenting specifically on the Draft Amendment, it is important to note that any changes must be consistent with the General Plan for the City of Lafayelle, Lafayette's Hillside and Low Density Residential Ordinances and any use changes nlust be approved by the appropriate City commissions. Next let us move to the Vista Bella proposed fire trail and it appears a proposed bike trail as well. First, one major error in your report needs to be corrected having to do with "severing of the Lafayette Ridge Trail" by the Sessions Development several years ago. TIle Sessions Development did not sever the ridge trail, in fact the opposite is tme. The Sessions Development added a conne~tioll that did not exist prior to the Development. The Sessions Development also provided fire and trail access to the ridgeline as one of the conditions of approval. The Lafayette Ridgeline was acquired in pieces as each individual development was approved by the City of Lafayette including the Brown Ranch, which would not otherwise be part of Briones. TI,e SVA. is sympathetici" \0 the idea of a fire trail given the high fire danger on our ridgelines. However, we do not feel all of the options have been fully explored. TIle Vista Bella homeowners have suggested an alternative route that will involve some retaining walls but will avoid the movement of substantial soil and retain the privacy and security of their area. There are two other possible r(iutes as well; Brown Avenue and Sessions/Northgate. TI,ese two routes connect to each other and could result in the E:.st/West route you are trying to achieve. Visia Bella, on the other hand, is outside of the EBRPD, will encourage undesirable uses, must transverse a major water line, requires removal of up to 700 cubic yards of dirt, is strongly opposed by the neighbors and lIlay cost more than the other alternatives. Also, Vista Bella is a narrow street and if Contra Costa Consolidated Fire is present or if neighbors are being evacuated, EBRPD Fire will not be able to get through to the other side. Therefore, we recommend you further study the alternative routes before making a final conclusion about using Vista Bella. TIle SVA supports the use of bikes (presumably mountain bikes) in the appropriate areas of the Par~. However, we feel the use of the Lafayeue Ridge is an inappropriate area and therefore are opposed to a bike trail in this vicinity. First, there is no staging area at the same elevation as the Ridgeline causing bikes to have to climb hundreds of (eet to reach their destination. The soils in this area are soft and subject to erosion' with overuse. Given the steep terrain, the bikes cause damage to the slopes geUing to and from the Ridgeline. TIle rainfall causes 37 r.o no, fil2 'I " ... "TII:CA Q.JHQ COMMENTS RESPONSES ~2..\ the damaged soil to further erode and drain downhill. nus erosion leads to scarring of the hillsides Rnd ultimately destroys the environment and beauty of this area. Given the lack of security in this area, the bikes cannot be policed and, if injured, the bikers cannot be treated (there was a serious biking accident recently neAr Vista· Bella). Also, the trail is currently used by hikers, runners, livestcx;k (both horses and cattle) and is not compatible with bikers. Therefore, we encourage the EBRPD to reevaluate their policy or ordinance concerning the automatic use of bikes on all fire trails, particularly in the Lafayette ridge area. We fully support the use ofbik.es in the appropriate areas of the Park and at lower, less steep elevations of the hillside!. Regarding the Springhill Parcel (formerly the Selby property) and the Dickey property which is contiguous: we encourage you to take into consigeration the need for public access as these parcels are virtually landlocked (unless Buckeye is acquired). However, we do not support access to the Springhill Parcel through the Dickey property over Prado Wnyoff Springhill. The Dil!key property, if developed, would have scenic easements over 70 % of their property and should be accessed through the Springhill Parcel by the general public. You may want to include the Dickey property in your Report as the EBR~D may want to utilize the open space portion or acquire it. 11le Dickey property may be required to seek access for its developmcnt (9 homes are being. requested) over the Springhill Parcel. Also, we have been infonned there were Indian tribes in tlus vicinity and there may be some archeological resources remaining. Finally, if the Dickey property is not developed, we would encourage EBRPD to acquire it. Our main concerns about the Equestrian Day Camp Facility on the old Brown Ranch are: the time of use during the year, the traffic and parking generated, offsite visibility, drainage problems, overuse and potential damage to the environment, bikirig(except on lower elevations), and trail conflicts with hiKers, the Acalanes running team, bikers, horses, cottle and other uses. TIle SVA strongly supportJLse of the property from only June 1 to September 15th. Any extension of this1time should only be allowed after we have been able to observe the impacts of the shorter period use and after a public hearing to obtain the neighborhood input. We are primarily concerned about overuse of the property. Contrary to your report there are significant drainage issues on this parcel. Soil drains almost every year onto Pleasant Hill Road and often closes part of the road and has to be cleaned up by the City of Lafayette. There is a large amount of soil slippage and fill at the bottom of the hill. Also, because people do not always stay 011 the prescribed trails, there is significant evidence of scarring on the hillsIdes. Your report talks about 50 horses on the property and how this is a lesser use than the prior owner (Mr. Ken Brown). However, Mr. Brown utilized his whole ranch and not just a portion as you are proposing and he did not conduct horse hikes every 45 minutes throughout the day! Nor were there hikers, bikers, runners and other using the property. The Brown property is quite sensitive and very steep and overuse will quickly destroy its character. . YOll discuss the need for six parked cars at the Facility Center and nine cars at the fonner residence. It was our uncjrrrstanding tlYe general public including the users or riders were going to use the staging area at Pleasant Hill Road. If so, why would you need parking for fifteen cars? We recommend limiting the parking to 38 ' six vehicles or less, which will reduce the traffic on Springlull Road and San r.o nil' ~21 1\1 \\1111. (:\ Q4'}4Q COMMENTS RESPONSES SPRINGHILL I; VA.LLEY Relicz CO,urt. If you bring riders up in vehicles together with fifteen parking stalls and riding trips every 45 minutes, you will be creating a traffic nightmare. Hopefully, this knot the plan. We would certainly oppose this concept. A residence is propose~ on the property together with barns, pipe pens, fences, e We would aplireciate your Environmental Checklist incorpomting the above comments and concerns as well. Certainly, to answer that soils conditions, grading, changed site nmorf, noise levels, damage to archeological resources, consistency with City zoning, altered views, changes in circulation, changes in parking, increased tmffic and levels of police protection are negligible, is incorrect. To state there nre no cumulative effects, no immediate 6r long-tenn environmental impacts, and no identified public controversy is also incorrect. Our Association objects to many of the conclusions and recommendations. This does not mean we are against an equestrian facility, nor a fire trail, but we do not believe our concerns have been completely addressed. Thank you for listening tp,our concerns and if you have further questions, please feel free to contact us. r. . \I r-'~ !~UI Schweii:lillz President Springhill Valley Association cc: lafayette City. Council East Bay Regional Park District Board of Directors Scott Anderson 39 P.O All,622 i'AI Or!ll. (1\ Q.f'Hl) COMMENTS RESPONSES Lem£u~ Bcar Hill Ranch LETTER 22 Linda Darsow Sutton 230 Bear Oaks Cl. A. COYOTE VALLEY, Comments noted. See response to comment 39 above, Martinez, CA.94553 10/15/94 EBRP Dist. 2950 Peralta Oaks Ct. Oakland, CA. L:: ,r;.'··.~.l Fir' '7 r :;I 7, To whom it may concern, In regards to the proposed amendment to the Brionies Regional Park LUDP. I am personally opposed for reasons of fire safety to the Bear Oaks neighborhood on the west boarder and the environmental impact , Fire safety is a primary concern to this area, particularly when there's talk of retiring the Garcia Ranch Rd. station along with the current fire chief in the near future. There is not a maintainable fire break between the top of the hill where the Karen Weiser memorial bench is and Bear Creek Rd. because of the extreme terrain. This is right where our property boarders the park. The first available break for protecting the neighborhood would be our driveway after our house would be destroyed. Firemen don't work uphill from a fire, we could easily be at the top of a chimney in a fire situation. lam not comfortable with the development of a facility as has been described with the encouragement of camping and picnicking of such large groups that the current sophistication of roads and parking are insufficient. Anything closer than the existing location at a main park entrance between us and the Happy Valley Rd. intersection at Bear Creek Rd increases the threat to our safety. To the statement that there would be "no environmental impact" that's ridiculous! How can paving, diverting water, fencing off existin~ ~ or just creating more tIaffic in generalllQ! have any impact. I will take this up in more detai. at your meeting. I don't wish to deny anyone outdoor recreaUon in the park, I just don't see the value m spreading industrial improvements all over the OPEN SPACE. The LUDP was developed to ~ the pristine environment for public appreciation not provide drive through camping. Consolidation of facilities for siSSified out door experience woulq minimize environmental impact. Successful Boy Scout Jamborees have been held at the existing site near the Happy Valley Rd.intersection ( a beautiful valley) make some improvements there if it is no longer sufficient and save some money, time and environment. MOST SINCERELY, Linda Darsow Sutton ..,. 11' 40 COMMENTS RESPONSES lhireR ~3 Octoher I~, 1!)!J4 LEDER 23 l,tCEIVED Membors of the Bonrd of Directors A. VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. The Draft LUDP Amendment revision addresses Eo~t Boy Iwgionnl Park District c- 2 i 1m some of these issues. See the response to comment 3G above. 2!l50 Peralta Oaks CAJurt Oakland, GA !l4605 P_ "'NINGISTEWARDSHIr Dear Boord Members: We wish to voice our significant concerns regarding the Park District's proposed grading of the eou.th end of Vista Bella Road, Lafayette, which would allow vehicular access and other access to Briones Park. For the past sixteen years we have resided on Martino Road, which dead ends into Vista Bella Rond. Our home is located at a sharp, blind curve. Unfortunately, we are all too aware of the problems caused by the narrowness, the grade, the sharp curves, and the switch liacks. Drivero unfamiliar with this road pose a threat to themllE'lves and to the local residents. Additionally, because of the nature of the terrain, the city of Lafoyette has found it difficult to maintain the rood even at the present level of traffic. Any increase in vehicular troffic con only compound this problem. Historically, the magnificent views and open space in this area have attracted mony people. Unfortunately, eome have chosen to ·party" with the aid of alcoholic beveroges, cigarettes, and the like. With an increase in "No Porking" signs and an increase in police patrolling, there has been a recent and significant decrease in the previously mentioned behaviors. Should the Park District decide to open the end of Vista Bella, an attractive nuisance will be creatod, again. WiIl"d conditions in this area should aleo be considered. The existing knoll deflects a strong prevailing wind. Removing" the knoll would increase both the wind and concomitant fire danger. Obviously, a significant increase in people using the area could also result in an increase in fire danger. The canyons around this area have V!1ry limited access and are extremely steep. The fuel supply for a wild fire or even a fim storm ill abundant in this area. We tlo support modification of the Ilxisting trail net.work to Allow for improved IICCCSS for fire nofoty. We are not oppoood to troil improvements for hikers and bicyclists. "ow/wer, Wt, tlo 1)(1lievo thot. thi" can be occompliAhed in 0 monner thot does not promotn allllso of thl' l!nvironmont. We join the other rellident.~ of Vista Bello and Martino Hood who desire to work cooperatively with the Park District to develop a mutually satisfactory usage /lIon for this area. 77;;An~;1~J~~L " p- ~ .Joon ond Don BCerlino ---- 41 COMMENTS RESPONSES ~z.4 Frederic R Beddall 236 Frisbie St #8 Oakland, CA 94611 LETTER 24 November 1, 1994 Comments noted. Maxine Terner, Chief Planning\5tewardship East Bay Regional Park District 2950 Peralta Oaks court, P.O. Box 5381 Oakland, CA 94605-0381 re: Briones LUDP Dear Ms. Terner, I read yesterday's Contra Costa Times article with disbe lief. I am appalled that the EBRPD would even consider the proposed changes at Briones, including the 200-car parking lot and 40o-sice campground, and the rich kid equestrian stables ... I am totally, irrevocably opposed to the idea that EBRPD should promote developed recreation in our parks. The construc tion of all these facilities will severely degrade the natural ness of our parks. Tilden Park, to me, is a disaster, not a role mode11 a relic of a less sensitive era when amusements were necessary because people were less interested in nature, soli tude, scenery, wildlife, etc. I do not want to see Briones or any other EBRPD Park turned into another Tilden! with tiny little corners zoned "natural area"!!! What a joke! I understand your unde~lying concern that youth, and par ticularly minority youth, are not well served by the EBRPD ... Well, get a cluel Until pu~lic transit is available to the parks, our youth will never be able to go there unless the family takes a drive. These are not urban playgrounds, and very unfor tunately, they are a long, long way away from where most people live. If you yourself tried to ride your bike from the flats of Oakland to any of these parks, you'd know what I meant Meanwhile, what the parks DO provide are islands of wildness and naturalness in a sea of suburbia. Any child (or adult with a sense of wonder) can appreciate the freedom and space of our parks -- these are places for hide and seek, cowboys and indians, and any game the imagination can corne up with. The parking lots and campgrounds only detract from that possibility. 50 please, please, cut it out. Your mission is not to be all things to all people, but to preserve these undeveloped areas UNDEVELOPED even by you!!! ~JncerelY": RECEIVfH,) ~/&~ I' , O~, 1994 42 Fred Beddall p_ \' '~IING/STEWAAD8HI~ COMMENTS RESPONSES " LcG~ '2.5 Octuber 10. 1994 LETTER 25 r,ECEIVED A. VISTA BELLA. Comments noted. The Draft LUDP Amendment revision addresses some of these issues, See the response to comment 3G above. Ms. Maxin~ Te~ner ('·121994 ~ast 8ay Regional Park District 7950 Ppralta Oaks Court 00')1,1 aneJ, CA 9"605 P_ \' "liNG/STEWARDSHIP Dear Ms. Terner: Tilis letter is in response to your proposed use of Vista Bella as a "multi-purpose" trail for hikers. bicycles and emerqency/fire vehicles'. My family lives at 1070 Martino Road, whIch is tt~ last house on Martino before Vista Bella. Wp ~rp vpllemently aqaJ'1sl your proposed usaqe of aur strepts as ~ recreational ~rea. VistR Bella is a narrow road. wltll no parkinq siqns on both sides of tl,e street. Martl"o Road is VRry steep and rlarrow, with many blind l curves. It is actually an "il1eqal qrade ., with No Parking slqns nosted on one side of the street. Any increase in ofl-street p~rkinq will leave one narrow lane for 2-way trafflc. If Vista Bella becomes part of a hiking/bicycle trail. this will mean a substantial increase of both cars and traffic on both Vista Bella and Martino Roads. We don't understand flOW you can even think about usinq Vista Bella as a blcycle trail. There are homps on both sldes uf the street. lhlS is NOT a case of a recreational trail cros~inq a residen~ial street. this is a case of lJSlnq a res1dentlal stre~t as a recreational area. We can. how(?ver. lInderstc1nd the use of Vis"ta Bella in an ~merqpncy for fIre u.e. Hut it should be STRICTLY for fire control. ThlS LJOES NOT mean a (ire trall that IS lei" l open for recreatIonal use. fhc trail 5hould be clearly marked tn ornll1hl t htke:>rs ancl bIcycles. C\ qate should bp. nrovlded tt, .."lt WIll dlSCOtlraqp .HlY rp.crealioflal USf':>. Of cr:nH·"Se. It sl)ould bp landsc ..1lJed tn aesthetlcally enhance the SLJl'rOIJl1dlnq neiqhbo,.-hood. "Tn my knnwler:lqe. Vlsta Bella was not built as a hikinq tr~jl. bLJt was tluilt as a residentlal neiqhborhood for famillPS. There is a perfectly usable biking/hlking trail dnproXlmatelv 100 yards below Vlsta Bella. which connects U,e tr'lll to the staqing area on Pleasanl Hill Road. Any plan that incorcorates Vista Bella 15 an intrusion on the prlvdc-y of thesp homes and aJI ttl,e homes on Martlno Road. Martino Road has so ~lny cur~~s and switchbacks. and IS so steep and narrow. 'that. even now, any truck that 8nters has to qo all the waY up to the top Just to turn around. 43 COMMENTS RESPONSES 2 fhe City of Lafayette does not have the police manpower to enforce parkIng violations or safety precautlons an Vista Bella and Martino Roads. Therefore. you will be turning a peaceful, family neighborhood into "party central". Aoa.n, my family is strongly opposed to this proposal, whictl would turn Vista Bella and Martino Road into a reC-rE"f3tlonaJ trall and publ ic parkinq lot. Pleas. contacl m. with any comments at (510) 284-2371. Sincerely, ~~ Alan Pepper 1070 Martino Road cc: Ms. Susarl ~;martt ~ •.y':I' .!J1 44