Dear Portola Valley Town Council June 4, 2026 As a resident of Portola Valley and a member of the Mid Peninsula (MidPen) Open Space’s Public Access Working Group (PAWG) for the Hawthorns property, I am writing this public comment letter to clarify the unanimous decision made by the PAWG regarding the various parking options for the 14-month project. As one of the 13 voting members of the PAWG, with four of us being either Portola Valley residents or in the official sphere of influence, I have carefully reviewed all public comments and listened to all verbal comments during the meetings.
We started by looking at the several spots in the middle of the property that MidPen had been using to begin the site tours. Unfortunately, all of these spots had a few issues. The driveway from Alpine Road up to the area is pretty steep and not ideal for people to drive up to. People would start in a parking lot and then walk down to the main road to take the loop trail, which would be an awkward order in a small open space preserve. Some of these parking lots might be visible from locations within town. And several would require significant grading or destroy existing meadows. No one in the PAWG was too thrilled about any of these options.
Because Alpine is a much busier road with multiple users, I spent a considerable amount of time and effort trying to see if either of the two existing driveways on Los Trancos Road would work as a public entry point regardless of the parking lot location. Sadly, the curvature of the road simply makes it unfeasible for a safe left turn out of either these locations according to the National Safety Standards for public access roads. I could find no other open space location that violated these standards. We also discussed requiring a right turn out of the exit, but enforcing that is infeasible.
The next set of parking options utilized a historic driveway along Alpine or would create a new driveway to the furthest northeast corner of the lot. Although these lots were relatively flat, both of these potential entry points would be very dangerous for cyclists coming down Alpine Road. Because of the rapid elevation change, cyclists easily coast to 20 or even 30 mph at these locations. The final deciding factor was the sight lines at both these locations. A car trying to make a turn out of the lot would be unable to see any approaching cyclists as there is extensive tree cover and shadows along the road. A very large number of trees would have to be removed to make these entrances safe.
One PAWG member then developed a plan for a parking lot using the existing entrance with the lot bifurcated on either side of the driveway. Eventually these discussions led the MidPen and the PAWG finalizing options 9 and 10. In a simplistic way the parking lots are identical with option 9 using the existing entrance and option 10 changing the 3 way stop to a 4 way stop.
Option 9 would be less visible change for the community at large, but would be more dangerous for cyclists who might continue to speed by the 3 way stop. Option 10 would be more systematic with the higher likelihood that everyone would stop and ensure more orderly passage. Option 9 might cost everyone less money, but we will learn more as details are developed. The PAWG was comfortable with moving both options forward to the MidPen board as there are pros and cons for each.
An important note is this parking lot is effectively on top of an annual fire mitigation disc line.
Part of the transfer agreement included regular annual fire maintenance with funds set aside for the work. The soil is churned up with what is essentially an agricultural tool in order to remove plant material around the perimeter in a wide swath.
As a resident, I am concerned that we could be spending staff time (and dollars) revisiting these same discussions with the same end result. I think we need to be very cautious before using any staff or town attorney time.
On even a larger level, I do not think the town should even consider acquiring the property from MidPen if they were willing to hand it over to us. The historic district has been very challenging as the covenants do not permit any new utilities. After over 10 years of effort with two interested private parties and MidPen, no viable solution of any kind has been found. Our small town even with a large Open Space Fund balance would struggle very much with this burden.
Our open spaces are not restricted to Portola Valley residents. A substantive public trail without a parking lot is a “you are not welcome here” sign along with overflow parking problems in neighboring residential streets. Although the preserve is small, it is located much closer than most MidPen preserves to most Bay Area residents. Like nearby Arastradero Preserve, many people will come by for a quick mid day break or to walk their dog.
The option of giving up Triangle Park would effectively eliminate the park entirely with the smallest number of cars in the range, and is not large enough for the entire lot if needed as the population and usage increases. The parking lot would be significantly more visible than option 9 and 10 and would require the hikers to cross the intersection. Hawthorns also requires an ADA accessible bathroom, and with sewer and water at Triangle Park, a flush toilet would be a significantly larger cost burden than a vault toilet.
I do not support an open ended town council subcommittee, but I do think there are a few items related to this project that the town needs to work on in parallel. One, the Alpine Trail is an official safe route to school that needs to be redesigned, and an arrangement made with MidPen to perhaps route it into their property if required. The trail needs to be separated from the project as MidPen’s trails are not open at night.
The second area for a Town Council subcommittee would be to work on developing a parking plan for Windy Hill. The existing dirt lot is underutilized and MidPen also owns the adjacent field.
These two area of exploration should be lead by our Town Council or Town Manager.
Karen Vahtra, speaking as a Portola Valley resident and member of the MidPen’s Hawthorn PAWG
1 Mayor Craig Taylor June 24, 2026
Vice Mayor Mary Hufty
Council Members Rebecca Flynn, Judith Hasko, and Helen Wolter Town Manager Darcy Smith
Dear Mayor Taylor, Vice Mayor Hufty, Council Members, and Town Manager, I want to thank the Council for considering whether and how to engage with Midpen to better align the Hawthorns Area Plan with the values and principles of Portola Valley for protecting the environment, public safety, and scenic corridors. The Hawthorns is a very significant open space resource, and Midpen has the capacity to make it a gem in the regional open space network. But the Hawthorns is small (by Midpen standards), entirely within Portola Valley, historically significant, and located near the Town’s center and busiest intersection. Portola Valley has a large and valid interest in insuring that the Hawthorns Area Plan is consistent with the town’s General Plan and the needs of the community.
As a member of the Open Space Committee, I have looked closely at many of the Hawthorns documents. In this letter I am expressing a personal perspective that arises less from what I saw in the documents than from what I did not see—that even where I would expect the Town and Midpen to be in greatest alignment, they are not.
I’ll focus here on the Plan’s parking designs, which have been a source of concern to residents and committees in Portola Valley. I think many people have concluded that the Hawthorns Plan would create more parking than is needed, without addressing parking that is clearly needed for lower Windy Hill. I agree with that assessment. The Hawthorns Plan should address Windy Hill’s inadequate parking because the Hawthorns is not a preserve in itself, it is the “Hawthorns Area of the Windy Hill Open Space Preserve.”1
That context—Hawthorns is part of Windy Hill OSP—
means the Hawthorns parking plan should not be acceptable if it doesn’t address the overflow parking from Windy Hill. Overflow parking is a public safety issue for everyone—people getting in and out of vehicles, cyclists, pedestrians, equestrians, motorists, etc. The Hawthorns is part of Windy Hill OSP, and the Hawthorns Plan should address the existing parking problem.
Proximity creates some options that should have been at the top of Midpen’s list. The two main Windy Hill entrances in central Portola Valley—the Windy Hill entrance on Portola Road and the Alpine Rd entrance near Willowbrook Drive—are a mile or less from the Hawthorns, either by road or by trail (Figure 1). In both of those access locations, overflow parking onto public roads is a routine problem (Figures 2, 3). A glance at the lower Windy Hill area (Figure 2) makes one parking solution apparent. The Windy Hill meadow northwest of the parking lot is a nearly level grassland of more than 3 acres which would allow vehicle egress, with good visibility, onto Portola Road. The depth of the property would allow enough vegetation to screen an overflow parking lot that could be opened on weekends or as needed. A parking area there could take the place of parking at the Hawthorns.
1 https://www.openspace.org/sites/default/files/ATT%201-PAWG%20Summary%20Report.pdf; cover page 2 Figure 1. Windy Hill Open Space Preserve, including the Hawthorns Area. 2024 Image source: Google Earth.
Midpen has described designs like this in a general, forward-looking document on Parking Area Design Guidelines that includes overflow lots, special event lots, and off-site lots to address growing parking demands.
2 Windy Hill OSP could be a case in point for those guidelines. Midpen could go even further with, for example, a weekend shuttle loop along a triangle from the 2 https://www.openspace.org/sites/default/files/0.1%20-%2020240508 ParkingAreaDesignGuidelines R-24-55.pdf 3 Figure 2. Windy Hill Lower
Parking Lot (detail 1) and
adjoining meadow (existing
easements need to be
identified).
Figure 3. Willowbrook
parking area (detail 2).
Parking routinely overflows
onto Willowbrook Drive
from a small lot around the
corner on Alpine Road.
4 Windy Hill lot, to Willowbrook Drive, then Alpine Road, and then back to the Windy Hill lot, serving the three Windy Hill OSP access points (including Hawthorns) near the corners of that triangle (Figure 1). A shuttle is a flexible option that could be expanded, altered or ended as needed. A shuttle or even more sustainable solutions (e.g., public transit, ride-sharing, rideservices, and use of e-bikes, etc.) would minimize parking to what is required for accessibility.
Portola Valley residents have weighed in with other parking solutions that deserve a hearing.
Safe, sustainabile parking solutions are compatible with the Hawthorns Area remaining a Midpen property within Windy Hill OSP. However Midpen’s decision to proceed with environmental documents, forgoing discussion with the Town, suggests that most options will be off the table for Midpen until the permitting process begins. I have emphasized the parking plan here because it has received so much attention, and because it seems like an obvious element where Midpen and the Town would align in perspective. It is not the only example. Nothing has surprised me more about Midpen’s parking schematics than their failure to envision a safer Alpine Trail where it adjoins the Hawthorns.
Engagement with Midpen now, followed by a rigorous permitting process, should lead to safe and environmentally appropiate parking and trails. Other fundamental elements, such as the historic district, are simply outside Midpen’s mission. If acquisition of the Hawthorns by the Town is the only way to align with the Town’s General Plan on all the major elements of the Hawthorns, I hope it can and will be pursued.
Respectfully,
Nona Chiariello
PORTOLA VALLEY TRAILS & PATHS COMMITTEE
Town of Portola Valley · 765 Portola Road, Portola Valley, CA 94028 · [email protected] June 19, 2026
To:Mayor Craig Taylor
Vice Mayor Mary Hufty
Council Members Rebecca Flynn, Judith Hasko, and Helen Wolter Town Manager Darcy Smith
From:The Portola Valley Trails & Paths Committee
Subject:Recommendations on the Hawthorns Area Plan
The Trails & Paths Committee has followed the Hawthorns planning process closely for several years, and we have submitted formal feedback letters to the Hawthorns Public Access Working Group in 2023 and 2024. With the Hawthorns Area Plan now advancing through Midpen’s planning and environmental review process, we write to recommend how the Town should proceed with regards to project components within our purview, and to underscore the trail/path priorities that must be protected as the project moves forward.
We are aware that the Plan’s parking proposals have generated concern, including questions about their consistency with the Hawthorns Conservation Easement. The Trails & Paths Committee takes no position on whether the proposed parking would violate the conservation easement. That is a legal question, properly left to the Town Council, its counsel, and the easement’s grantee. Our charge and the focus of the remainder of this letter is the trails and paths dimension of the project.
The Hawthorns represents one of the most consequential trail opportunities in Portola Valley in a generation. Our committee’s role is to recommend trail routing that is safe and feasible, review and comment on plans during the permitting process, and to uphold the Trails & Paths Element of the General Plan. Whatever course the Town and Midpen ultimately take, we ask the Council to ensure the project delivers on the following recommendations:.
1. Improve the Alpine Trail. The Alpine Road trail along the Hawthorns frontage is a vital Safe Route to School and runs beside one of the Town’s busiest road corridors. The committee has consistently recommended that this trail be improved to a safe, multi-use standard for pedestrians, equestrians, and cyclists — particularly children biking to school — and that those improvements be built early, ahead of other project elements rather than deferred to a later phase. The Town’s engagement with Midpen should make Alpine Trail improvements an explicit priority and an early deliverable.
2. Parking that protects trail safety and adheres to the Trails & Paths Element of the General Plan. The conservation easement’s provisions notwithstanding, the committee is concerned that the parking proposals now under consideration would place vehicle access and circulation immediately alongside the Alpine Trail and adjacent to the Town’s busiest Trails & Paths Committee — Recommendations on the Hawthorns Area Plan · Page 1 crosswalks and intersection. This raises real safety concerns for the people who use the trails today — particularly the children who walk and bike this route to school. The committee asks that whatever parking solution is ultimately adopted be consistent with the Trails & Paths Element, and that it protect, rather than compromise, the safety of Alpine Trail users and the scenic buffer along Alpine Road. We are glad to help the Town and Midpen evaluate parking options for their effects on trail safety and use.
3. Connectors into the Town’s trail system. The Hawthorns interior trails should be multi-use (where permittable) and should connect cleanly into the surrounding Town network, including connections toward the Sweet Springs and Los Trancos trails, consistent with the Trails & Paths Element. We also ask that the trail connection study contemplated in the Hawthorns Planning Process be carried out. Thoughtful connections are what turn the Hawthorns from an isolated parcel into an integrated part of the Town’s trail system.
4. Give serious consideration to Town acquisition of the Hawthorns. The committee believes the possibility of the Town acquiring the Hawthorns property merits serious consideration by the Council. The Hawthorns is a rare open-space asset, well suited in scale to the Town; from a trails standpoint, Town ownership would give Portola Valley the greatest ability to secure the trail and access outcomes described above..
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Respectfully,
Gary Hanning
Chair, Portola Valley Trails & Paths Committee
On behalf of the Trails & Paths Committee
Trails & Paths Committee — Recommendations on the Hawthorns Area Plan · Page 2