http://paloaltoonline.com/square/print/index.php?i=3&d=&t=21863


Town Square

Open Space District unveils sweeping 'vision plan'

Original post made on Oct 4, 2013

Bay Area residents could gain access to much more open space, including more family-friendly areas, according to a new Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District "vision plan" unveiled Wednesday night.


Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, October 4, 2013, 11:28 AM

Comments

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Boy Howdy
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Oct 4, 2013 at 1:18 pm

Now THIS makes me happy!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by resident
a resident of College Terrace
on Oct 4, 2013 at 4:54 pm

I think open space is really great, however it would be even better if it were more accessible without driving private cars. Burning gallons of gasoline to visit these open space preserves seems counter productive in many different ways. How about focusing on opening up some of the gaps that prevent easy non-car access to the open space, like a direct family-friendly way to cross I-280 from Palo Alto? Surely we can do much better than that deathtrap bike lane in the middle of Page Mill Expressway traffic.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kazu
a resident of University South
on Oct 6, 2013 at 12:52 pm

If it brings additional traffic and parking problems, the rural communities affected will be much less than happy. That also needs to be taken into account.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Chris Zaharias
a resident of Crescent Park
on Oct 7, 2013 at 10:39 am

I grew up and live in Palo Alto, love the foothills, and am here to say that the unspoken truth of the Open Space movement is that the tens of thousands of middle class worker bees who would *LOVE* to spend <$2M on new homes above our elite rich in Woodside, Portola Valley & Los Altos Hills have zero voice.

Not proactively working development into the hills' future will eventually harm said hills' protection much more than modest development ever would.

Please feel free to jump down my throat now, I can take it, and no, I'm neither a developer nor a Republican, nor a knucklehead.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Enid Pearson
a resident of Crescent Park
on Oct 9, 2013 at 11:42 am

MidPen has accomplished a great deal against a lot of odds. The amount of development in this whole area will bring thousands of more people and all parks and open space and recreation areas will become over-used. In my opinion, the primary goal of MidPen for the next 40 years is to acquire 40,000 new acres (at least). The second role might be to make open areas more available to this burgeoning public and connect MidPen's spaces with as many other agencies/parks as possible. Both these goals will require active public support.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Bob
a resident of Mountain View
on Oct 9, 2013 at 1:22 pm

The stated reason for acquiring open space is to preserve it for use by future generations. Who defines just what those approved uses will be,is the key. Protection of things "culturally significant" is a stated goal. Camping, fishing, hunting, biking, equestrian uses are all significant parts of our cultural heritage, but are never allowed to be seriously considered as open space uses. The decision makers in the district allow public input, but carefully channel and direct that input into areas that they want, and away from those they consider undesirable.
As to future open space uses, if the past is any indication of the future, unless you are a card carrying, sandal wearing, Prius driving environmentalist, this open space is not going to be for you