US Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management Central Coast Field Office,

COTONI-COAST DAIRIES PLANNING PUBLIC WORKSHOPS SUMMARY REPORT

December 2018

Report prepared by the Consensus Building Institute

BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1 | Background and Overview ...... 1 Background ...... 1 Pre-Scoping Public Workshops Overview ...... 1 Workshop Materials and Supporting Documents ...... 1 Section 2 | Outreach and Notification ...... 3 Notification ...... 3 Workshop Attendees...... 3 Section 3 | Presentations and Activities ...... 4 Welcome and Introduction ...... 4 BLM and Project Planning ...... 4 Current Management ...... 5 Potential Access Points ...... 6 Small-Group Discussions ...... 6 Next Steps to Formal Planning Process...... 7 Submitted Feedback ...... 7 Section 4 | General Feedback ...... 8 Recurrent Themes ...... 8 BLM Planning Process ...... 8 Access and Activities ...... 9 Public Health and Safety ...... 12 Natural and Cultural Resources ...... 13 Plan Implementation and Property Management ...... 14 Section 5 | Feedback on Specific Access Points ...... 16 Northern Area...... 16 Central Area ...... 18 Southern Area ...... 19

Appendices Appendix A – Workshop Notification Materials Appendix B – Workshop Handouts Appendix C – Public Written Feedback

i December 2018 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

SECTION 1 | BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW

BACKGROUND Cotoni-Coast Dairies extends from the steep slopes of the Santa Cruz Mountains to the marine coastal terraces overlooking the Pacific Ocean near Davenport in Santa Cruz County, California. The Cotoni-Coast Dairies property is marked by six forested perennial streams that flow from the Santa Cruz Mountains into the Pacific Ocean: Molino Creek, Agua Puerca Creek, San Vicente Creek, Liddell Creek, Yellow Bank Creek, and Laguna Creek. Between these riparian drainages are broad marine terraces used for livestock grazing. The property supports a wide variety of habitats and wildlife, including Coho salmon, steelhead trout, California red-legged frogs, mule deer, and mountain lions.

In 2017, Presidential Proclamation No. 9563 expanded the California Coastal National Monument to include five onshore units along the California coast containing significant scientific or historic resources. The largest of these newly designated units was the 5,843- acre Cotoni-Coast Dairies property. The United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Central Coast Field Office will prepare a resource management plan amendment (RMPA) for the Cotoni-Coast Dairies unit of the national monument. BLM will develop this plan through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, which involves the community and stakeholders with open comment periods and possibly public meetings that will be announced through local news and BLM social media channels media.

Public access to Cotoni-Coast Dairies is currently limited to guided hikes while BLM develops a management plan that will ensure public safety and protection of resources. The Cotoni-Coast Dairies unit shall become available for public access upon completion of the RMPA. Before the RMPA development process begins, BLM has been gathering data and input from stakeholders as part of its pre-scoping phase.

PRE-SCOPING PUBLIC W ORKSHOPS OVERVIEW In December 2018, BLM held public workshops on December 4 and 13, 2018, in Santa Cruz and Bonny Doon, respectively, about the Cotoni-Coast Dairies unit of the California Coastal National Monument. The goals of the workshops were to introduce BLM staff to the public, outline the planning process, and explore potential access points for Cotoni-Coast Dairies. The BLM will use the feedback received at the public workshops to inform next steps to develop the RMPA for the Cotoni-Coast Dairies property. Attendees learned how they can stay informed and provide input during the formal NEPA planning process.

This document summarizes the content and key themes from those public workshops. This document also incorporates written feedback that the public submitted by January 11, 2019.

WORKSHOP MATERIALS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Workshop participants received handouts and presentation materials to facilitate discussion on public access. Workshop-related documents are included in the following appendices:

December 2018 1 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

Appendix A – Workshop Notification Materials ▪ BLM News Release

Appendix B – Workshop Handouts ▪ Agenda ▪ Presentation Slides

Appendix C – Public Written Feedback (Submitted by January 11, 2019) ▪ Workshop Participants ▪ Davenport North Coast Association ▪ Renee Shepherd ▪ Jim Bierman ▪ Marcia Lipsenthal

December 2018 2 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

SECTION 2 | OUTREACH AND NOTIFICATION

NOTIFICATION In November 2018, BLM e-mailed an invitation to a list of individuals and/or agencies that had expressed interest in BLM activities at Cotoni-Coast Dairies. This invitation provided the following dates and locations information:

Tuesday, Dec. 4, from 5 to 7 pm Thursday, Dec. 13, from 5 to 7 pm Louden Nelson Community Center Bonny Doon Elementary School 301 Center Street, Santa Cruz, CA 1492 Pine Flat Road, Santa Cruz, CA

On November 8, 2018, BLM posted a news release to its website (www.blm.gov/press- release/blm-host-cotoni-coast-dairies-public-access-workshops) and sent the news release to a list of local media contacts. The news release announced the scheduled workshops, provided participant information, and explained the purpose and intent of the workshops. Appendix A also provides copy of the news release.

WORKSHOP ATTENDEES In addition to the BLM staff and consultants, approximately 80 attendees participated in the Santa Cruz workshop and about 70 attendees participated in the Bonny Doon workshop.

Workshop participants used polling clickers to provide general background about themselves (e.g., where they live and familiarity with the property). Attendees indicated they were primarily from the City of Santa Cruz, Bonny Doon, Davenport, or elsewhere in Santa Cruz County. Few individuals came from outside the county. At the Santa Cruz workshop, the majority of attendees were City of Santa Cruz residents, and a large proportion had not previously participated in meetings related to the Cotoni-Coast Dairies property. At the Bonny Doon workshop, almost all attendees resided somewhere within the county (with a higher proportion residing in Bonny Doon and Davenport than at the Santa Cruz workshop), and a large proportion had participated in meetings related to the property before. A substantial proportion of the attendees at both workshops indicated they were either somewhat familiar or very familiar with the Cotoni-Coast Dairies property. Attendees identified themselves by the many forms of recreation they enjoy, with most interested in biking, hiking, horseback riding, or landscape and wildlife viewing. (Recreation preferences varied by workshop location. Many mountain bikers attended the Santa Cruz workshop, whereas a larger proportion of Bonny Doon attendees identified walking/hiking as their favorite activity.)

December 2018 3 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

SECTION 3 | PRESENTATIONS AND ACTIVITIES

[Appendix B provides the workshop agenda and the BLM presentation slides.]

WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION Field Manager Ben Blom from the BLM Central Coast Field Office welcomed workshop participants and thanked them for taking the time to provide their valuable insight on how to manage the property. At the Santa Cruz workshop, Ben Blom also introduced BLM Acting State Director Joe Stout and Central California District Manager Este Stifel. The meeting facilitator, Gina Bartlett with the Consensus Building Institute, reviewed the agenda and oriented participants to the workshop activities. The goals of the workshop were to introduce BLM staff to the public, outline the planning process, and explore potential access points for Cotoni-Coast Dairies.

Ben Blom provided an overview of the Cotoni-Coast Dairies property and BLM’s role and responsibilities for the property. The BLM mission is to sustain the health and productivity of public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The California Coastal National Monument stretches from the Oregon border to the Mexico border. The Monument encompasses thousands of rocks and islands, and six mainland units, including Cotoni-Coast Dairies. Prior to European settlement in the mid-1700s, the area was inhabited by the Ohlone which are part of the Coastanoan language group. From the mid-1700s to mid-1800s, it was owned under Spanish and Mexican land grants. In the early 1900s, the Coast Dairies and Land Company and Portland Cement Company purchased the property. The Trust for Public Land acquired the property in 1998 and then donated it to BLM in 2014.

In 2017, Presidential Proclamation 9563 expanded the California Coastal Monument to include Cotoni-Coast Dairies, highlighting the natural and cultural resources of the property. The proclamation also states the property “shall become available for public access upon completion of a management plan.” BLM emphasized that public access is a fundamental component of this RMPA planning process.

The property also came into public ownership with deed restrictions: ▪ Property will be managed for open space and public recreation consistent with protection and preservation of natural resources. ▪ Public recreational access, open space, and grazing are priority uses. ▪ No commercial timber operations or motorized off-road vehicles.

BLM AND PROJECT PLANNING Sky Murphy, BLM planning team lead, provided a brief history on management plans related to the property and then outlined the steps of the RMPA planning process. The BLM Central Coast Field Office has been working with the local and regional stakeholders and communities related to the property for decades. In 2005, the BLM developed the California Coastal National Monument Resource Management Plan. In 2014, BLM developed an Interim Management Plan when it received the Cotoni-Coast Dairies property. The next step is to amend the broader California Coastal National Monument Resource Management Plan

December 2018 4 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

to focus solely on management decisions for Cotoni-Coast Dairies. The RMPA will consider a range of alternatives for public use and enjoyment that are compatible with the preservation of the objects and values of the Monument.

Resource Management Plan Amendment (RMPA) Process Discussions with cooperators, interested parties, and other groups will continue before formal scoping begins. The BLM held the December 4 and 13, 2018, public workshops in anticipation of the RMPA process officially starting in 2019.

Publication of a Federal Register notice formally initiates the plan amendment process. The BLM also issues official agency news releases to local media outlets in association with these notices.

Process Overview 1. Pre-Planning 2. Publish Federal Register Notice of Intent for RMP Amendment (Includes a 30-day public scoping period) 3. Develop alternatives and analyze impacts 4. Publish Federal Register Notice of Availability for the Draft RMPA (Triggers a 30-day public comment period) 5. Publish Federal Register Notice of Availability for the Final RMPA (Triggers a 30-day public protest period. Important Note: Entities can only participate in the protest period if they have established “standing,” by participating in the previous planning process steps.) 6. Respond to protests 7. Publish Record of Decision and approved RMPA

Coordination and consultation with local, state, and federal agencies and Native American tribes occur throughout the RMPA process. Under the Department of the Interior’s current streamlining policies for NEPA planning, the planning process is scheduled to take six to twelve months.

CURRENT MANAGEMENT BLM Natural Resource Specialist Mike Powers, who also serves as the BLM’s public liaison for Cotoni-Coast Dairies, reviewed current management activities related to public access potential and what the BLM has learned to date. Since accepting the property in 2014, the BLM has engaged a wide range of stakeholders regarding management. For example, the BLM has hosted guided tours; pursued partnerships to advance collaborative research, education, restoration, and other programs; authorized continued livestock grazing; and worked with existing rights holders. BLM staff have also engaged with a large network of land managers and resource agencies within the broader region.

Mike Powers described how the BLM was transferred a portion of the overall Coast Dairies Lands Company property, which resulted from the split of this overall property into lands allocated to California State Parks, BLM, and the Trust for Public Lands. The resulting layout presents challenges for identifying potential public access points, which include concerns related to lack of supporting infrastructure, biological and cultural resource impacts, public

December 2018 5 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

safety, and impacts to neighboring landowners. Therefore, the BLM has begun engaging with partners and the public to find at least one suitable access point for the property.

POTENTIAL ACCESS POINTS Mike Powers explained that the BLM’s recognition of the challenges regarding access point areas led to a feasibility study, which analyzed 10 potential access points. The Feasibility Study is a technical study that will inform the BLM’s upcoming formal planning effort. The Land Trust of Santa Cruz County funded the study, and convened a group of key stakeholders that contributed to its development.

Mike said that the BLM selected the sites for the feasibility study, using its knowledge of public safety concerns (particularly those related to ingress and egress off Highway 1), information regarding sensitive biological and cultural resource, and the presence of public roadways and potential regional trail connections. Since every area has its own challenges, the BLM thought broadly about all options near Highway 1 and connecting public roads. The BLM avoided assuming that it would be able to utilize lands owned or managed by private property owners. In identifying the list of potential access points, the BLM also considered opportunities for connectivity to other regional trail projects, such as the North Coast Rail Trail and property.

Mike Powers introduced Brian Hannegan, consultant for the RRM Design Group, which completed the feasibility study in partnership with the BLM and the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County. Brian presented a brief overview of the 10 potential access points with draft design concepts for each site:

Northern Area 1. Swanton Road 2. Warrenella Road 3. Warrenella Road – Oaks 4. Warrenella Road – Top Central Area 5. San Vicente Creek 6. Liddell Creek at Bonny Doon Road Southern Area 7. Yellow Bank Creek Gate 8. Marina Ranch Gate (Lower) 9. Marina Ranch Gate (Upper) 10. Laguna Road Gate

SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS Workshop participants divided into small groups to discuss and provide input on public access. Staff from the BLM, the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County, and the Consensus Building Institute provided facilitation. The discussion focused on the following two questions:

WHAT CRITERIA WOULD YOU LIKE BLM TO CONSIDER WHEN PLANNING FOR ACCESS?

December 2018 6 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THE POTENTIAL ACCESS POINTS? WHY?

Facilitators encouraged participants to share their ideas and suggestions without striving to reach agreement. Section 4 and Section 5 summarize the range of ideas and identify recurrent themes from public discussion.

NEXT STEPS TO FORMAL PLANNING PROCESS The BLM will use the feedback received at the public workshops to inform the development of the RMPA for the Cotoni-Coast Dairies property. Attendees learned how they can stay informed and provide input during the formal NEPA planning process, which is expected to begin in spring of 2019.

SUBMITTED FEEDBACK Individuals could submit written feedback at the workshops or email comments to the BLM Central Coast Field Office. Emailed comments received by January 11, 2019, were incorporated into this summary report. BLM staff encouraged participants to submit written comments during the formal planning process, which will be made publicly available.

Appendix C provides copies of the submitted feedback received before January 11, 2019.

December 2018 7 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

SECTION 4 | GENERAL FEEDBACK

The following summarizes the range of ideas and feedback from workshop participants and written comments, not consensus recommendations. Participants discussed ideas in small groups and facilitators prepared high level notes that report authors have summarized in this report.

RECURRENT THEMES (Listed in no particular order)

❖ Include additional public access as part of a comprehensive, long-term management plan for the property that addresses public access, recreation, and public health and safety while ensuring protection of natural and cultural resources. ❖ Cultivate a “community feel” for the property’s stewardship – help people to be good stewards and neighbors as they enjoy and appreciate what the Cotoni-Coast Dairies property has to offer. ❖ Develop a trail and staging / parking network that supports both multiple-use trails (potentially open to horses, bikes, hikers) and single-use trails to minimize user conflicts. ❖ Promote regional trail interconnectivity. ❖ Provide equitable access opportunity so visitors from all income levels or physical abilities are able to enjoy the property. ❖ Manage for public health and safety. ❖ Address three common concerns – traffic, trash, and trauma – to ensure safe and enjoyable access. ❖ Minimize impacts to sensitive natural and cultural resources and the local community (e.g., security, privacy, and rural character). ❖ Engage a variety of partners to support public access management.

“We need to find a way to manage the public and private landowner interests and uses to be good and respectful neighbors.” (Workshop Participant)

BLM PLANNING PROCESS Participants underscored that the BLM must have a comprehensive management plan before offering access. Attendees often highlighted that the BLM should carefully consider and analyze how parking demand will grow as people become more aware of the access site, which should inform access point(s), parking lot / staging, and trail network design.

Workshop participants identified several agencies, organizations, stakeholders, and landowners to engage during the planning process: ▪ Land trusts. The Trust for Public Lands conducted a survey in 2004 of the area (e.g., historical watershed and tributaries) that BLM should use for comprehensive background to inform this process. ▪ Bay Area interested parties to determine what other potential heavy users want the BLM to consider for public access.

December 2018 8 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

▪ Emergency response agencies and organizations, such as CAL FIRE, local fire safe councils, and the local police and fire departments, to develop adequately responsive emergency protocols. ▪ CA Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to evaluate appropriate uses (e.g., hunting and sustainable fishing guidelines/permits) and other wildlife considerations. ▪ Cemex Plant on access. ▪ Tribal and indigenous peoples. ▪ Local recreational associations. Mountain Bikers of Santa Cruz frequently participates in trail building and maintenance efforts. ▪ County, Caltrans, State Parks, Sempervirens, Rails to Trails, etc. to learn from their planning and management efforts. ▪ Landowners and community groups, such as the Davenport North Coast Association.

Participants found it challenging to give specific and meaningful feedback on sites without having seen them. They suggested conducting site visits with stakeholders. They also suggested presenting maps that identify the neighboring property owners, land uses, parking, and trails to give sufficient context.

ACCESS AND ACTIVITIES Use and Activities Common Recreational Users: Bikers, Hikers, and Equestrians Biking, hiking, and horseback riding were the most frequently mentioned recreational uses. Attendees recommended Ft. Ord as a good example of compatible management of biker and equestrian use.

Hunting Attendees often cited safety and ecological impact concerns related to hunting. They stated that if allowing hunting on these lands, the BLM should ensure people stay on trails to avoid accidentally encountering hunting areas. There was a suggestion for the BLM to provide seasonally appropriate access, specifically in the southern portion, for on-foot access for hunters. A few suggested that hunting should not be allowed on this property.

Electric Bikes Some participants felt that the BLM should not provide opportunities for e-bikes. Others suggested allowing e-bikes on fire roads.

Camping Some attendees suggested that camping should not be allowed at access points. If camping at access points were allowed, participants raised concerns about monitoring the campgrounds and parking lots for theft, vandalism, illegal fires, and other related issues. Instead of camping at access points, some attendees expressed a desire for backpacking or bike-packing camping opportunities.

Other Recreational Uses Additional desired opportunities included rock climbing, off-leash dog areas, archery, and events at staging areas.

December 2018 9 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

Education and Research Participants often emphasized education as a crucial component to address many of the user conflicts and concerns. Participants listed several topics for education and raising awareness, including natural resources and the onsite ecosystem, cultural history, local community, regulations, trail maps, and trail etiquette. Educational methods including interpretative signs, trail stewards, an on-site ranger, and field tours would also be helpful. Interpretative signs at trailheads, staging areas, and overlooks would provide benefit.

Workshop participants recommended the BLM offer research opportunities for partners such as the University of California system. There was a suggestion to research proper management actions that would allow for public access while protecting natural resources.

Trailheads and Access Points Workshop attendees varied on the desired number of access points. Some preferred at least three or more access points (at least one each for the northern, central, and southern areas). Some wanted access in the northern and central areas to connect to existing or forthcoming trails. Others preferred access in the southern area rather than the northern area to limit impact on the local communities. Some suggested that multiple access points could help “dilute” people across dispersed access points. A few suggested that large parts of the property should only be accessible by hiking to minimize impacts on the landscape.

Participants frequently mentioned trail connectivity, both with neighboring properties (e.g., San Vicente Redwoods, Wilder Ranch State Park, and the Rail Trail) and with other access points within the property. Commenters suggested that BLM could coordinate with trail planning efforts already underway. Mountain bikers particularly wanted trail connectivity with the San Vicente Redwoods trail system and suggested that only an informal trailhead would be necessary to demarcate entering BLM lands. Hikers promoted trail connectivity and loop trails to create longer hikes.

Attendees varied on whether access points should stay closer to Highway 1 or offer some inland access points. Generally, attendees supported providing convenient, equitable access and offering scenic opportunities while minimizing traffic and other safety risks and landscape impacts. Keeping access points near Highway 1 would minimize inland traffic and reduce emergency logistics and response times. A central access point or access further inland could accommodate people with limited physical capabilities (e.g., young, elderly, and physically disabled) who want to enjoy the inland landscape, not just the coast. Large rigs would also not do well on narrow, steep roads or blind curves. Likewise, some access points may be unsuitable for recreational vehicles (RVs). Participants also shared a desire to retain open access for local residents.

“I’d like access to a variety of areas for people to enjoy this rich, diverse landscape.” (Workshop Participant)

Participants expressed an interest in a variety of access opportunities to enjoy the landscape’s diversity while also minimizing impact on the land and local communities. There was a suggestion to provide at least one access point to a historical site.

December 2018 10 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

Parking and Staging Areas Workshop participants who lived nearby generally did not want parking lots or staging areas located in their neighborhoods. If trailheads and parking lots were to be located near their neighborhoods, participants identified road conditions, signage, traffic, and privacy as important issues to address for safety and minimal disturbance to the community.

Attendees cautioned that a parking lot must not be visible from Highway 1, the coast, or any public parklands. Many suggested placing parking facilities in places that do not obstruct the view of the ocean (e.g., put parking on the inland side of the road).

Participants often said staging areas should have restrooms, trash receptacles, recycling receptacles, potable water, interpretative signs, dog poop bag stations, trail information (e.g., maps, distance, and elevation), and multilingual information. There was a request to offer space for events at one of the staging areas.

Participants varied on whether they preferred fewer, larger parking lots compared to more numerous, smaller lots. A few indicated a preference for fewer, larger lots. Others generally indicated the number and size of the lots depends on several factors, including whether the BLM can leverage parking options in neighboring properties. Attendees frequently recommended that the BLM work with neighboring properties to design an accessible regional parking network rather than just build more parking lots. If connectivity with existing trails and parking lots is sufficient, fewer parking or staging opportunities may be necessary. For instance, people could start at Yellow Bank Canyon instead, eliminating the need to create an entry point at Bonny Doon Road or the Marina Ranch Gate. Participants suggested that parking should be available at both ends of the property (but not necessarily on public land if a neighboring property has sufficient parking).

Equestrians requested that parking lots be large enough for rigs to either turn around with their trailers or pull straight through the parking spot. The lot does not need to accommodate large rigs because mostly two-horse trailers use these trails. Wilder Ranch and Henry Cowell State Park are good examples of adequate parking for equestrian use. Parking lots should also have enough room for equestrian staging, including troughs.

Other comments included: ▪ Increase parking capacity at access points. ▪ Discourage parking along the roads. ▪ Manage for parking lot stormwater runoff and erosion control. Prioritize permeable surfaces for parking and avoid erosion and environmental impacts. ▪ Consider providing a visitor center for wayfinding for Cotoni-Coast Dairies and adjacent lands (e.g., at the Cemex Plan site). ▪ Allow parking space for school bus access. ▪ Provide at least 30 spaces at each site. ▪ Consider consolidated parking and charging (like Wilder Ranch State Park); consider how to avoid highway parking.

Bridges and Tunnels Participants evaluated options for safe crossing of Highway 1. Bridges are cheaper and faster to build than tunnels, Caltrans may potentially fund construction of a bridge, and those

December 2018 11 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

who dislike being in enclosed areas may prefer a bridge. Tunnels work better for horses, have less of a visual impact on the landscape, and possibly provide safer wildlife crossing at night.

User Experience and Trail Design Participants acknowledged that trail design has more latitude and can come later in the planning process once feasible trailheads are identified. Participants did provide several suggestions for the BLM to consider for trail design that may inform trailhead selection: ▪ Offer multiple-use trails where appropriate. Provide single-use trails to avoid user conflicts, particularly to separate bikers and equestrians for safety. ▪ Design trails to consider the dynamics of users’ activities. For instance, bike trails should start in a high-elevation area and end at a road for convenience. Also, horses do not like “threats” above them, therefore, avoid stacking trails on top of each other along slopes. ▪ Create one-way trails for bikers (which may call for shuttles back to the trailhead). Horses and bikers can possibly be on the same trail only if they are both going uphill. ▪ Remember to consider the impact on local communities when designing the trail network. ▪ Limit human-made trails to minimize impacts on the land and communities. ▪ Provide a variety of trails (e.g., short and long; steep and flat) to accommodate different user groups’ physical abilities and interests.

PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY Workshop participants shared major public health and safety concerns, including traffic, road safety, trash and sanitation, fire and storm risks, illegal activities (e.g., theft, trespassing, and vandalism), and degradation of the local communities’ rural character.

Traffic and Road Safety Attendees universally acknowledged the traffic and road safety risks and concerns; several underscored the planning process needs to incorporate projected changes in long-term traffic and road conditions. Attendees often shared ideas to alleviate some of these traffic and road safety concerns. Comments and suggestions included: ▪ If the Rail Trail is connected to the San Vicente Trail, the area will become extremely popular. The BLM needs to consider the exponential increase in user volume (e.g., create overflow parking options). ▪ Provide a bus service for some of the trailheads (e.g., Davenport to the Rail Trail) to reduce traffic and provide a more carbon-friendly transportation alternative. ▪ Ensure pedestrian safety, especially for children. ▪ Consider an entry permit system to limit the number of people on a daily basis. ▪ Roads like Warrenella Road often have farm operators, which will conflict with increased recreational user traffic.

Trash & Sanitation Attendees emphasized that whatever facilities the BLM decides to provide, it must have the infrastructure to ensure clean facilities (e.g., cleaned restrooms and trash pick-up).

Attendees shared a few cost-saving options that still supported sanitation: ▪ Implement a “pack it in, pack it out” waste policy.

December 2018 12 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

▪ Provide wildlife-proof trashcans at access points only. ▪ Trash pick-up should occur more frequently for access points near Highway 1. Inland access points will likely require less frequent trash pick-ups.

Emergency Response and Illegal Activities Workshop participants identified safety, illegal activities, and local emergency response capacity as major concerns. Residents noted that local law enforcement and fire departments lack the capacity and resources to adequately address an influx of recreational users. Participants would like staff at all locations and ideally a full-time ranger present during open hours for surveillance and enforcement. Staff would help prevent illegal activities, such as theft, vandalism, and trespassing. They also suggested staff to monitor the backcountry to prevent illegal camping, fires, and trail building.

Participants recommended the BLM set up gates at access points to close if needed (e.g., if the area is day-use only, seasonal, or closed during storms). Several recommended closing access during wet weather to ensure safety and prevent trail erosion.

Other suggestions to address emergency and illegal response concerns included: ▪ Build or mend fencing and post adequate signs to minimize trespassing since many areas will be next to cattle operations where fencing is often in poor condition. ▪ Use technology to monitor trails. Look to San Vicente Redwoods as an example. Also set up security cameras at each parking site. ▪ Use volunteer stewardship groups for patrolling trails (e.g., horse and bike patrols). ▪ Work with CAL FIRE to create fire breaks and thin vegetation around housing before allowing access. ▪ Create an emergency plan for major natural disasters.

Minimize Impact on Communities Preserving the rural character of the local communities and minimizing impacts on the neighborhoods (e.g., security and privacy) were key points. Participants did not want their towns to become busy weekend tourist destinations.

Attendees also generally preferred a “no lighting at night” approach to prevent light pollution impacts on the local community and wildlife.

Davenport residents emphasized a concern that an influx of recreational users will increase water demand that their water infrastructure may be unable to withstand (i.e., water pressure is already low in Davenport).

NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES Workshop participants conveyed they strongly value the natural and cultural resources on this property and desire to minimize impacts. They recommended avoiding areas where species of interest are (e.g., mountain lion dens and other sensitive species). They also suggested fostering opportunities for multi-benefits that support ecosystem health. For example, implement restorative / regenerative grazing at the staging areas / parking lots. A few stated that BLM should preserve pristine lands where they exist, however, remember that much of this land has already been altered by human activities.

December 2018 13 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

Other comments and suggestions included: ▪ Employ a watershed approach to land management. ▪ Restore native habitat with local plant species where possible; plant natives and remove nonnative / invasive plants. Source native seeds / plants from local nurseries with clean practices. Preserve grazing to control invasive weeds. ▪ Keep some areas untouched to protect species and sensitive or pristine habitats. Avoid creating too many trails. ▪ Avoid creating raptor perching habitat (e.g., structures and signs) near special status prey species. ▪ Create a wildlife corridor between State Parks at Davenport and Wilder Ranch. ▪ Avoid bright white light or motion sensor light that would disturb wildlife. ▪ Create wildlife crossings where high road mortality currently exists across Highway 1 (from Cotoni-Coast Dairies to State Park land). Minimize fencing that may impair wildlife movement. ▪ Avoid removing large native trees or burrows when selecting trailheads / parking areas or building trails. ▪ Maintain a wide riparian buffer (e.g., avoid water crossings or long sections of trail along creeks). ▪ Conduct water monitoring to preserve and protect fish in creeks. ▪ Remember to consider agriculture’s value and needs. ▪ Implement prescribed burns aligned with Native American cultural practices.

PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT Workshop participants often questioned how the BLM plans to fund planning, construction, management, monitoring, enforcement, and maintenance. Participants often articulated that the BLM must consider plan roll-out and ongoing management when selecting access points.

Construction and Maintenance Several attendees suggested phasing construction projects and access. There was a suggestion that the BLM prioritize southern access point(s) first to see what access opportunities arise. Participants also wanted to know who would be responsible for reinforcing and maintaining infrastructure like roads, signs, and fences.

Funding and Partnerships Attendees frequently emphasized that the BLM needed to identify a sustainable source of funding to support public access and property management (e.g., parking fees or selling maps). Attendees also wanted to preserve equitable access, and recommended offering some free parking options for those who cannot financially pay for parking. Other funding suggestions included: ▪ Establish a fundraising group. ▪ Have a third party, non-profit organization collect the revenue from paid parking rather than go to a general BLM fund. The revenue should go to facility upkeep and roads that lead to access points.

“Look for groups that would help protect animals and plants for future users and future generations.” (Submitted Feedback)

December 2018 14 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

Attendees also underscored the importance for fostering partnerships to leverage resources. ▪ Set up or build from existing volunteer stewardship programs. Look to State Parks’ program as an example. Several user groups and local communities also have very active volunteer stewardship programs (e.g., horse and bike patrols). ▪ Seek groups with younger members so groups are infused with long-term, invested members.

December 2018 15 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

SECTION 5 | FEEDBACK ON SPECIFIC ACCESS POINTS

This section summarizes the advantages, disadvantages, opportunities, risks, and uncertainties that stakeholders identified during the public workshops and post-workshop submitted comments for the specific potential access points.

The following is intended to capture the range of ideas and feedback, not consensus recommendations.

NORTHERN AREA Site 1. Swanton Road Advantages or Opportunities ▪ This is a beautiful site. ▪ Existing road lowers construction costs. ▪ Parking off of Swanton Road may be safer than off of Highway 1. ▪ Parking lot on the east side of Swanton Road will be better for horses because they can avoid road crossing. ▪ Additional parking opportunities may be necessary if user volume increases. ▪ Trail plans already exist and are under County review for the nearby San Vicente Redwoods property. Good opportunity to utilize planning efforts is already underway. Having large parking lot options for increased user volume would be helpful. ▪ Traffic impacts on Bonny Doon should be considered. ▪ This is possibly the best site of the northern region options due to fewer conflicts and concerns. ▪ This site is possibly less dangerous than some of the other site options (e.g., Bonny Doon). ▪ There is the potential to create a loop. Disadvantages or Risks ▪ Poor road visibility makes turns and turnouts dangerous. Road has a dangerous, tight hairpin turn. Certain vehicles cannot easily access (e.g., large emergency vehicles, and RVs). ▪ Swanton Road conditions are already poor, especially by the Firehouse. Likely to have high user volume (higher potential for increased traffic and user conflicts). Make trail one-way and separate coastal and inland uses. ▪ Safety risks will increase on Swanton Road as user volume and traffic increases. ▪ Potential for negative impacts on the local community (e.g., increased traffic and RVs) is a concern. Keep parking lots close to Highway 1. ▪ Trespassing and security concerns exist for nearby cattle operations. Fences will need more signage and maintenance. Post large signs on both sides of the road that state, “Private lands from this point on.” ▪ Parking lot on the hill slope seems more costly than the flatter area.

Site 2. Warrenella Road Advantages or Opportunities ▪ Existing road lowers construction costs.

December 2018 16 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

▪ This site provides a good opportunity to have access from top to bottom of Warrenella Road. ▪ Several groups indicated a preference to use Cement Plant Road over creating a new entrance to Warrenella Road. ▪ This site is likely to have less traffic than Swanton Road or Bonny Doon Road. Good to have the parking off the road and near Highway 1. Disadvantages or Risks ▪ Could become very popular. May not have enough parking spaces. ▪ Increased traffic would exacerbate existing traffic issues. It is hard to turn left onto Warrenella Road from southbound Highway 1. ▪ View from the parking lot is not great (e.g., eucalyptus is blocking the ocean view). Public Questions ▪ Are there other parking expansion opportunities? ▪ Will the Cement Plant Road be accessible? If it is, that parking entrance will have safer egress.

Site 3. Warrenella Road – Oaks Advantages or Opportunities ▪ Existing road lowers construction costs. ▪ This site seems safer than Sites 5 or 6. ▪ Potential exists for overnight backpacking / bike-packing. ▪ This site provides an opportunity for access closer to the center of the property. Disadvantages or Risks ▪ This site has aesthetic concerns. ▪ Moving trailheads further up may be necessary for safety. ▪ Inland and higher trailheads could make exiting dangerous in a fire emergency. ▪ Going uphill may be difficult for the physically challenged.

Site 4. Warrenella Road – Top Advantages or Opportunities ▪ Existing road lowers construction costs. ▪ This site seems safer than Sites 5 (San Vicente Creek) or 6 (Liddell Creek at Bonny Doon Road). ▪ Potential exists for overnight backpacking / bike-packing. ▪ This site provides good opportunity for access closer to the center of the property ▪ This site provides good opportunity for access from top to bottom of Warrenella Road. ▪ Parking lot looks large enough for large vehicles like horse trailers. Disadvantages or Risks ▪ This site has aesthetic concerns. ▪ Moving trailheads further up may be necessary for safety. ▪ Increased fire risks is a possibility. Inland and higher trailheads could make exiting dangerous in a fire emergency. ▪ This site likely will not link easily to other neighboring trails.

December 2018 17 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

CENTRAL AREA Site 5. San Vicente Creek Advantages or Opportunities ▪ Existing parking lowers construction costs. Disadvantages or Risks ▪ Safety is a concern. The road dips, so cars on Highway 1 drive very fast. Walking along Highway 1 is dangerous, and horses dislike being so close to Highway 1. ▪ Summertime traffic in this area will exacerbate traffic and safety concerns.

Site 6. Liddell Creek at Bonny Doon Road Advantages or Opportunities ▪ Existing road lowers construction costs. ▪ Very beautiful nearby areas exist. Near the creek is very nice. ▪ Access to fantastic ridge and canyon trails (much richer habitats than the grassland ridges at the Marina Ranch gate) would be an advantage. ▪ If built well, this site could be very good. ▪ Trees offer nice shade. ▪ Brush along Bonny Doon Road could be cleared to enhance visibility of traffic for entrance and exits. ▪ The site would be invisible from both Highway 1 and along a potential trail (one that utilizes an old existing road along Liddell Creek). Disadvantages or Risks ▪ Safety concerns and poor visibility could be problematic. No line of sight is dangerous. ▪ Parking lot is too small. The site has low potential for additional parking opportunities. ▪ Area may be too narrow for horses. ▪ People may parallel park on the road, causing road congestion and potential crashes, especially around curves. ▪ Low visibility around curves makes driving more hazardous. ▪ Potential for negative impacts on the local community (e.g., increased traffic and RVs) is a concern. ▪ There is increased potential for conflict partly due to complicated property ownerships. ▪ Riparian habitat concerns and impacts on steelhead may affect this site. Public Questions ▪ Is there a different parking option? There could be other alternatives, such as an old farm that has a more gentle sloping area southwest of the site. ▪ Are there other trailhead options along Bonny Doon Road? There is also an old home site about 100 yards from where Bonny Doon Road intersects Highway 1 that could serve as a good trailhead and use the existing beach parking lot as secondary parking.

December 2018 18 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

SOUTHERN AREA Site 7. Yellow Bank Creek Gate Advantages or Opportunities ▪ Several groups suggested building a tunnel rather than a bridge. A tunnel would support wildlife crossing and American with Disabilities Act accessibility more than an overpass. ▪ Allowing traffic into the Yellow Bank Corral area could help address Coastal Commission considerations related to no parking lots visible from Highway 1, the coast, or any public parklands. ▪ This site provides an opportunity to improve the existing parking situation. ▪ Possibly use the existing road up the creek. ▪ Potential exists to create (e.g., up Yellow Bank Canyon) and/or connect to other great trails (e.g., Laguna Trail and potential Liddell Creek Canyon Trail). ▪ Safe passage across Highway 1 is a good and necessary component to this design. ▪ This site has a great beach nearby. ▪ Property ownership conflict complicating access is less of an issue with this site. Disadvantages or Risks ▪ Costly construction would be necessary to build bridge / tunnel. This more complex construction would also take more time. ▪ Aesthetic concerns exist about the bridge. ▪ Horses will not like crossing the overpass. ▪ Vandalism, safety, and theft issues are already present with the existing lot. ▪ Yellow Bank Creek trail is heavily overgrown and offers fewer aesthetic benefits. Public Questions ▪ Is there a different parking option? Across Highway 1 from the proposed overpass is a gate across a short road that leads to a level area where there is an old corral. This spot could also provide access to the second marine terrace and other proposed trails (e.g., Liddell Creek and Laguna Road).

Sites 8 and 9. Marina Ranch Gate Advantages or Opportunities ▪ This site is a very beautiful area. ▪ Many good hiking opportunities exist. ▪ Creating trails in this flatter area will be easier than in drainages or riparian corridors (where there would be habitat impact and public safety concerns). ▪ Safer access is possible compared to the other sites due to better road line of sight (better than Bonny Doon Road visibility). ▪ This could be a good equestrian site. ▪ This site is already a working landscape, which reduces potential to impact sensitive wildlife. Disadvantages or Risks ▪ This site seems overly complicated and might require costly construction. ▪ High runoff down the drainages could be problematic. The road washes out during the rainy season. ▪ Aesthetic concerns exist. Vistas above (i.e., the third marine terrace east of Bonny Doon Road) would be impacted by parked cars on this second marine terrace.

December 2018 19 BLM Cotoni-Coast Dairies Planning Public Workshop Summary Report

▪ This site might violate the deed requirements prohibiting motor vehicles on that property. ▪ This site may be harder to patrol than other sites. ▪ Potential exists to negatively impact nearby agriculture operations.

Site 10. Laguna Road Gate Advantages or Opportunities ▪ Opportunity exists to connect to Wilder Ranch State Park through easements. ▪ Good trail access is available to this spot if the public can access Laguna Road. ▪ This site could help disperse traffic and uses: have cars park at Yellow Bank Creek; equestrians can park at Laguna Road Gate (if there is enough space for trailers). ▪ Better road visibility exists here than Bonny Doon Road. Disadvantages or Risks ▪ Laguna Road parking area is already unsafe. Remote parking areas could have similar or worse safety issues. ▪ Trail opportunities from the proposed parking lot are not very good. The actual parking lot site is not aesthetically pleasing. ▪ Property concerns may emerge – fire road goes to private property. ▪ Parking lot looks too small with little opportunity for expansion. ▪ Access on to and off of Highway 1 looks dangerous. Public Questions ▪ Is Laguna Road open to the public? ▪ Is it possible to increase parking size, especially to fit horse trailers?

December 2018 20