Letter: Response to CA State Parks Regarding Saddle Mountain
Re: REIMAGINING BIG BASIN VISION SUMMARY published 5/25/2022
By Saddle Mountain Neighbors, Boulder Creek, CA
JUNE 3, 2022
TO: Will Fourt, Senior Project Planner, Reimagining Big Basin Project
Cc: Chris Spohrer, Santa Cruz District Superintendent, CA State Parks Armando Quintero, Director, CA State Parks
SUMMARY
We are a group of 28 neighbors representing 19 properties within one mile of the new proposed site of the Big Basin Redwoods State Park Headquarters & Visitor Center at Saddle Mountain. On average, we have owned these properties for 28 years. Collectively, we have been here for 722 years. 9 of our homes were lost during the CZU fire.
Our community was not given the opportunity for meaningful input into the Reimagining Big Basin Vision document while other outside groups were.
We strongly oppose the permanent relocation of a year round park headquarters, visitors center and parking lots at Saddle Mountain.
This relocation will lead to increased traffic congestion, noise, trash, road and turnout maintenance issues, and serious public safety concerns such as trespassing, crime, emergency preparedness and response in the events of fires, flooding, landslides etc. in our neighborhood. It will also have a detrimental impact to the Boulder Creek community at large.
We believe it is our right to have meaningful input into CA State Parks planning decisions that have a direct impact on our neighborhood, residences & properties.
We ask that:
CA State Parks give us a meaningful seat at the table for the redesign process going forward.
CA State Parks seriously consider and allocate resources to explore solutions for all new Big Basin Redwood State Park facilities that minimize day to day impact to our immediate neighborhood of Saddle Mountain and the Boulder Creek community at large.
INTRODUCTION:
We are a group of 28 neighbors representing 19 properties within one mile of the new proposed site of the Big Basin Redwoods State Park Headquarters at Saddle Mountain. On average, we have owned these properties for 28 years. Collectively, we have been here for 722 years. That’s over 700 years of experiences, family history, memories and knowledge of this section of the redwood forest. We know it, we love it – it is our home. We are all stewards of the land and support the protection and preservation of this habitat and its wildlife. We look forward to the park’s return so that others can continue to enjoy it as before.
STATUS & BACKGROUND
As is well known, the CZU fire destroyed all Big Basin Redwood State Park facilities including the historic headquarters and visitor facilities. Seven of our households also lost homes in the fire and are still struggling to rebuild or considering our options. This has been a difficult time for us all.
Albeit rural, prior to the CZU fire we lived in a neighborhood. Those of us who remain, or who have the ability and decided to rebuild, want to live in a neighborhood again. Because of the fire, many of us are are not even in the area to participate in the public process of Reimagining the park and rebuilding our neighborhood.
We have drafted this letter because CA State Parks did not give us an opportunity for meaningful input in the vision phase of the Reimagining Big Basin Redwoods State Park process.
First of all:
Two virtual events and one vision workshop via Zoom that were heavily skewed for the vision state parks already had. One skewed online survey. Seven pop up events, none in our own community. This was not enough.
There was no public forum for us neighbors to address our concerns until May 22, 2022 – three days before the release of the vision plan. This was an ‘informal meeting’ where we were effectively being told of plans, not asked for input that would be considered in time to influence the vision plan. And even for that meeting, we were only given a one-week notice.
Two committees were formed last year for formal input and guidance for the vision of the rebuild. No neighbors or community members representing community and neighborhood concerns had a seat on these committees.
This was highlighted to Project Manager Will Fourt and State Parks executives in a February 2022 letter by neighbor and land owner Jesus Beltran. He asked for community members to be included on the committees and asked for a thorough conversation with neighbors before this vision document was created. State Parks did nothing to address these concerns and in an informal phone call, Project Manager Will Fourt and California State Parks-Santa Cruz District Superintendent Chris Spohrer told Mr. Beltran that it was too early for our input.
We vehemently disagree. Second:
We believe that outside groups have been given an unfair level of influence in the redesign process compared to directly impacted community stakeholders such as ourselves.
If groups such as Sempervirens Fund, in the process of buying properties adjoining the park, are given committee seats, why aren’t current adjoining landowners or community members given a seat? This is undemocratic and unbalanced community development on the part of CA State Parks and every member of the community should be deeply concerned.
We are not opposed to Sempervirens Fund’s overall mission to protect and preserve the redwood forests of the Santa Cruz mountains. We just believe CA State Parks should give all stakeholders – including residents and neighboring landowners a similarly meaningful seat at the table on matters that directly impact our community.
In summary, no directly impacted residents and property owners have been given a seat at the table of the redesign process. Decisions are being made that will influence our day-to-day lives and we have been excluded from meaningful input.
RESPONSE TO THE VISION DOCUMENT
We have seen the vision document and we strongly oppose the permanent relocation of a year-round park headquarters, visitors center, and parking lots at Saddle Mountain. We are all within one mile of Saddle Mountain, some of us are literally across the street from the proposed headquarters.
We will all have to deal with increased traffic congestion, noise, trash, road, and turnout maintenance, and serious public safety concerns such as trespassing, crime, emergency preparedness, and response in the events of fires, flooding, landslides, etc. The list of concerns is exhausting. What happens when issues arise and we have hundreds of visitors on our streets, in our driveways, and an already understaffed park, CHP and Sheriff’s department?
Our neighborhood in Saddle Mountain is approximately 2.8 miles from the historic headquarters of the park and we found that distance to be a great balance. The park and the residents of Saddle Mountain peacefully co-existed for over a hundred years in this situation.
The relocation of park headquarters to Saddle Mountain will also impact the Boulder Creek community at large. Moving the headquarters 2.8 miles closer to the south entrance of the 236 at Boulder Creek will drive visitors to take that entry route over the north entrance. Planning documents show that visitors will be suggested to take this route over the north 236 entrance. This will have a detrimental impact to an already congested single stop sign at the 9 and 236 at downtown Boulder Creek.
State Parks continues to push the reasons for relocating the park headquarters as improved traffic flow and parking, and concerns about proximity to the old-growth areas.
Our stance on these is that:
1. Regarding traffic and parking, State Parks has not presented a recent traffic study breaking down seasonal or week-by-week visitors. As residents of this area, we know that there are a few high points in the season but that for the vast majority of days and weekends, the old parking area was more than adequate. You do not need to permanently move headquarters to improve a congestion issue that exists only for a few weekends of the year. A simple solution could be improved traffic flow and parking at the historic HQ area with an overflow lot at one of the former campground areas or meadows.
2. With regards to proximity to old-growth areas, we believe it’s simple. You do not need to move parking 2.8 miles into our neighborhood to back off the old-growth redwood.
It should also be added that the proposed shuttle service that relocating HQ to Saddle Mountain will require is a major departure from the old experience of visiting Big Basin that people know and love. Visitors will still want that old experience, and because Hwy 236 will remain open, many will still drive in anyway, parking in unauthorized areas and causing issues regardless. We’ll be stuck with the worst of both worlds.
The proposed HQ at Saddle Mountain is an overreaction that has severe impact to us as residents and the Big Basin Redwoods State Park Experience. Smart design and visitor management can result in a compromise solution that addresses State Park concerns at the historic headquarters area with minimal impact to the long-term residents of Saddle Mountain.
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE
We believe it is our right to have meaningful input into CA State Parks planning decisions that have a direct impact on our properties and residences. We have as much a right to a seat at the table as all outside groups. State Parks is a government entity, these project managers and employees are all government employees, and our concerns should be heard and considered in a meaningful way.
We ask that
1. CA State Parks give us a meaningful seat at the table for the redesign process going forward.
2. CA State Parks seriously consider and allocate resources to explore solutions for all new Big Basin Redwood State Park facilities that minimize day to day impact to our immediate neighborhood of Saddle Mountain and the Boulder Creek community at large.
Respectfully,
Saddle Mountain Neighbors
| SADDLE MOUNTAIN NEIGHBORS | |
| Name | Street |
| Laura Bailey | Old Big Basin Rd |
| Zach Bailey | Old Big Basin Rd |
| Jesus Beltran | Big Basin Way |
| Marvin Brees | Old Big Basin Rd |
| Theresa Brees | Old Big Basin Rd |
| Jason Corneille | Little Basin Rd |
| Sarah Corneille | Little Basin Rd |
| Mary Cronin | Big Basin Way |
| Shawn Cronin | Big Basin Way |
| Joan Donato | Old Big Basin Rd |
| Steven Travis | Old Big Basin Rd |
| Rhonda Fassbender | Old Big Basin Rd |
| Charlynn Ford | Big Basin Way |
| Tammy Galvan | Little Basin Rd |
| Adrian Galvan | Little Basin Rd |
| Al Garrahan | Big Basin Way |
| Brian Garrahan | Big Basin Way |
| Paige Garrahan | Old Big Basin Rd |
| Patrick Garrahan | Old Big Basin Rd |
| Jan Hagge | Big Basin Way |
| Stacy Hagge-Bennett | Big Basin Way |
| Leslie Keedy | Big Basin Way |
| Marty Moore | Lodge Rd |
| Laurel Neel | Little Basin Rd |
| Wayne Neel | Little Basin Rd |
| Bill Newlin | Little Basin Rd |
| Peter Reinhard | Lodge Rd |
| Gary Stewart | Big Basin Way |
Have something to contribute? The San Lorenzo Valley Post welcomes your Santa Cruz Mountains news, story ideas, photos, and letters. Send us an email.
