Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

B. The Secretary shall establish the recreation area by publication of a notice to that effect in the Federal Register at such time as he determines that lands, waters, and interests therein sufficient to constitute an efficiently administrable recreation area have been acquired for administration in accordance with the purposes of this Act.

COMPOSITION

SEC. 2. A. The recreation area shall include the following areas as generally depicted on the map entitled "A Proposed Golden Gate National Recreation Area Boundary Map," numbered and dated which shall be on file and available for public inspection in the offices of the National Park Service, Department of the Interior:

(1) Fort Funston, Fort Miley, Fort Mason, and three and four-tenths acres of land adjacent to the United States veterans hospital administered by the United States Navy;

(2) Seal Rock Beach State Park, Phelan Beach State Park, Baker Beach State Park, San Francisco Maritime State Historic Park;

(3) Ocean Beach, Seal Rocks, Sutro Heights Park, Lincoln Park, Marina Green, and Aquatic Park;

(4) That area commonly known as Sutro Baths;

(5) The Marin Headlands State Parks in Marin County;

(6) Those areas of Marin County commonly known as Marincello, the Witter Ranch, the Green Gulch Ranch, the Slide Ranch, the Gaddell property, and the Banducci property;

(7) The following described property in Marin County, described generally as those parcels bounded on the north by Sir Francis Drake Boulevard; on the east by Sir Francis Drake Boulevard to its intersection with Samuel P. Taylor Sate Park on the northerly side thereof, thence along the westerly boundary of Samuel P Taylor State Park to its intersection with the land of the Marin Municipal Water District known generally as the Kent, Lagunitas, Alpine, and Bon Tempi Lakes property, thence along the westerly boundary of said Marin Municipal Water District property to its intersection with Mount Tamalpais State Park, and thence along the westerly boundary of Mount Tamalpais State Park; on the south by the westerly and northerly boundary of Mount Tamalpais State Park; and on the west by State Highway Numbered 1 to its intersection with Sir Francis Drake Boulevard at Olema; and also including the land lying to the west of State Highway Numbered 1 which borders on the easterly side of Bolinas Lagoon; and excluding the property within the community of Stinson Beach.

(8) Angel Island and Alcatraz Island in San Francisco Bay;
(9) Forts Barry, Baker, and Cronkhite in Marin County; and
(10) The Presidio of San Francisco.

B. Any acquisition of lands, waters, or interests therein shall not diminish any existing rights-of-way or easements which are necessary for the transportation of persons or materials to or from the Presidio of San Francisco or any military installations located completely within the recreation area.

ACQUISITION

SEC. 3. A. The Secretary may acquire lands and waters and interests therein within the boundaries of the recreation area by donation, purchase with donated or appropriated funds, of exchange, except that property or interest therein owned by the State of California or any political subdivision thereof may be acquired only by donation. Except as hereinafter provided, Federal property within the boundaries of the recreation area is hereby transferred to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary for the purpose of this Act, subject to the continuation of such existing uses as may be permitted by the Secretary for such reasonable periods as may be agreed upon with the head of the agency formerly having jurisdiction over the property. Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, the Secretary may develop and administer for the purposes of this Act structures or other improvements and facilities on lands in which he acquires a leasehold interest from the city and county of San Francisco.

B. The Federal property known as Forts Cronkhite, Baker, and Barry, in Marin County, together with certain additional Federal property, all as de

picted on the map entitled "Forts Baker, Barry and Cronkhite, California" numbered and dated is hereby transferred to the administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary for purposes of this Act: Provided, That the Secretary is hereby directed to negotiate with the Secretary of Defense for purposes of designating those areas for which the Secretary of Defense shall retain use and occupancy for reasons of current missions or national security: And provided further, That the Secretary is hereby directed to negotiate with the Secretary of Transportation for purposes of designating those areas for which the Secretary of Transportation shall retain use and occupancy for the use of the United States Coast Guard.

C. The Secretary of Defense is hereby directed to negotiate with the Secretary for purposes of designating those areas within the Presidio of San Francisco and Fort Mason for which the Secretary shall be granted use and occupancy for the purposes of this Act.

D. Except as hereinafter provided, no new construction or development of presently undeveloped open space may be undertaken on properties within the recreation area remaining under the control of any Federal department or agency other than the Department of the Interior without the prior written consent of the Secretary. The foregoing shall not apply to expansion of those medical facilities known as Letterman General Hospital.

ADMINISTRATION

SEC. 4. A. Prior to the establishment of the recreation area and thereafter, the Secretary shall administer the lands, waters, and interests therein acquired for the recreation area in accordance with the provisions of the Act of August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535; 16 U.S.C. 1. 2-4), as amended and supplemented, except that the Secretary may utilize such statutory authority available to him for the conservation and management of wildlife and natural resources as he deems appropriate to carry out the purposes of this Act.

The Muir Woods National Monument and Fort Point National Historic Site shall continue to be administered as separate units of the national park system in accordance with the laws applicable to such monument and historic site.

B. Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, the Secretary may provide such services and facilities, including the purchase or rental of ferry services and docking facilities, as he deems necessary or desirable for access to the recreation area. The Secretary may provide such services and facilities directly, or by negotiated contract with public or private agencies or persons without advertising and without securing competitive bids.

C. The Secretary is authorized to enter into cooperative agreements with the State of California, or any political subdivision thereof, for the rendering, on a reimbursable basis, of rescue, firefighting, and law enforcement and fire preventive agencies.

D. The authority of the Army to undertake or contribute to water resource developments, including shore erosion control, beach protection, and navigation improvements on land and/or waters within the recreation area shall be exercised in accordance with plans which are mutually acceptable to the Secretary and the Secretary of the Army and which are consistent with both the purpose of this Act and the purpose of existing statutes dealing with water and related resource development.

AUTHORIZATION

SEC. 5. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act.

Mr. TAYLOR. At the outset I ask unanimous consent from the members of the subcommittee-and in the absence of objection it will be so ordered that Channel 9, educational TV, be permitted to cover the hearings and Channel 4, NBC, be permitted to cover as much of them as they see fit.

Normally, when our subcommittee meets, we have before us recommendations of the Department of the Interior and other departments involved. This time negotiations are still underway between

the Department and these recommendations have not been received, but we will move ahead anyhow and hear testimony of the local wit

nesses.

We came here today for the purpose of letting the local people advise us as to what they recommend concerning the proposals.

Now, I might state that yesterday we spent the day visiting the proposed recreation area. We traveled on the ground, through the Presidio and sections of San Francisco. We flew over the sections further north-Marin County-and spent some time on the ground there.

So we did get a bird's-eye view of the entire proposal and we feel that we know something about it, but we know that we are not as well versed in regard to it as you are.

I might just state that if the weather out here is as beautiful every day as it has been during the last 2 days, I would like to move out here.

This hearing should help us to develop a better understanding in regard to the proposals. I know that many of the local people cannot come to Washington and additional hearings will be held in Washington before any action is taken on this legislation.

We do have a time problem which I will go into more a little later. We have more witnesses than we anticipated. I would like to point out that we are studying other park proposals on this trip while the Congress is in recess and we have to be in Boise, Idaho, tonight. So we will move on without delay.

I would now like to present the members of the committee. I might state I am Representative Roy Taylor, chairman of the subcommittee, from North Carolina. I have the Smokey Mountain National Park area in the district I represent.

On my left is Congressman Harold-we call him (Bizz)—Johnson, one of the fine Representatives from California. Bizz, do you have anything you wish to say?

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, Mr. Chairman, I just want to say I am very happy to be here in California and find such good weather. The trip we made yesterday gave us a pretty good picture of what we are going to hear about here today. So the physical characteristics of the problem were well viewed yesterday, both on the ground and in the air, as you say. So I think we are ready to hear from the local witnesses.

Mr. TAYLOR. On my immediate right is Representative Joe Skubitz from Kansas, the ranking minority member of the subcommittee. Joe?

Mr. SKUBITZ. I concur in Mr. Johnson's comments. I, too, enjoy being here. We have seen the area from the sky. Now we want to hear what you have to say to us about it on the ground.

Thank you.

Mr. TAYLOR. Further on my left is Representative James Abourezk of South Dakota.

Mr. ABOUREZK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to say I used to live in the Bay area up in Marin County and it is nice for me to be back here. I would also like to take this time to commend our distinguished colleague, Congressman Phil Burton of San Fran

cisco who represents this area so effectively in Washington. He has given up the opportunity to testify before us today so that more citizens of the Bay area will be able to express their views. Congressman Burton's deep concern that the beautiful headlands of the Golden Gate will be preserved will, I am sure, receive the full consideration of this subcommittee and he has asked that I express his personal thanks to Chairman Taylor and the members of this subcommittee for granting his bill to create a Golden Gate National Recreation Area such a prompt hearing.

Mr. TAYLOR. On the far right we have a very able and genial Representative from California, the Honorable Don Clausen

Mr. CLAUSEN. Thank you, Chairman Taylor. I am more than delighted to welcome you to the beautiful northern part of the State of California and to personally express, on behalf of the people of the north coast of California my appreciation for you once again coming out to schedule hearings permitting the people of this area to present their point of view which in certain instances may be varied. I see a number of people in the audience that have been most cooperative with us in advancing the Redwood National Park. Kings Range Conservation area and finalizing action on the Point Reyes National Seashore; and it is rather gratifying to know that we are going to be out here with our colleague, Congressman Bill Mailliard, who is going to be our first witness and to hear from the people first hand what they think should be the finest recreation area in America where you have parks close to the people. And I just want to make this final comment, that this committee went to New York to observe the Gateway proposal on the east coast, on the Atlantic, and a great similarity that exists between the Gateway proposal in New York and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area here on the west coast is more than a parallel. I think it is going to have some international significance because many people come here to enjoy your woods just to the north of us. They come to the redwoods, but to be able to have a recreational area of this magnitude this close to the people is in my judgment one of the finest legislative acts and I am glad to be a part of it. I am glad to be here.

Mr. TAYLOR. Our first witness is our able colleague, our congenial host, a Congressman in whose district much of the proposed recreation area is located, the Honorable William S. Mailliard.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE WILLIAM S. MAILLIARD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE SIXTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. MAILLIARD. Mr. Chairman, may I add my thanks for your coming and spending a long and rather arduous day to really look over this magnificent territory that we are discussing.

Having looked last night at the list of witnesses who have asked to appear, I am going to ask your permission. Mr. Chairman, to file a statement in the record and to place some additional material for inclusion in the record or file if that is acceptable to the committee. Mr. TAYLOR. In the absence of objection, so ordered.

Mr. MAILLIARD. Now, there have been some attempts here to produce conflict that always makes news where really there isn't any.

These various proposals by Senator Cranston, by Mr. Burton and myself all seek exactly the same objective. We do have some minor differences and they primarily involve the treatment of the Presidio.

One proposal would carve up the Presidio and separate the jurisdiction over different portions of it between two departments. I felt that this would lead to conflict and sometimes if you have two managers things fall between and nothing happens. So I am proposing that the military remain in control of the Presidio with use permits to the Department of the Interior for those areas where recreation is suitable and compatible with the other responsibilities that are exercised in the area and to include the entire Presidio in the recreation area as against carving part of it out for the use of the military and putting the rest in Interior.

With the Marin headlands my proposal would reverse the procedure and turn them all over to the Department of the Interior with use permits for the military for those portions which they must use, with the idea that they would be phased out.

I also propose that any lands in the area retained by any department of the Federal Government other than Interior not be developed without the permission of the Secretary of the Interior. In other words, the Army could not build on open space in the Presidio without clearance from the Secretary of the Interior.

I propose that these details be negotiated between the two Secretaries. I am advised that in fact negotiations began about the day that I introduced the bill and I am sure, Mr. Chairman, it will not be long before you will have some recommendations from the administration.

It seems to me that with your experience in this field all over the country that it is up to the committee to choose, and I am certainly willing and I am certain Mr. Burton is willing, to work out a solution with which we all can live.

I thank you for the opportunity to appear.

Mr. TAYLOR. We thank our colleague for his able statement.
Any questions? Thank you very much, sir.

Mr. MAILLIARD. Thank you.

(Prepared statement of Mr. Mailliard follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM S. MAILLIARD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. Chairman: I want to welcome you and the members of the subcommittee and commend you for holding these hearings in San Francisco so that the people of the area will have an opportunity to express their views on the proposed Golden Gate National Recreation Area.

The number of witnesses attests to the widespread public interest, not only in this proposal, but in preserving open space in general as a precious national resource. There has been a growing awareness of the need for establishing urban ports near our metropolitan center and their project, in particular, its location, its scope and its natural beauty, has captured the imagination of the people.

It is a minor miracle that there is a substantial section of undeveloped land in the midst of this densely populated area and Bay Area conservationists have urged for many years that the Golden Gate Headlands and the southern Marin coast be acquired, either by the Federal or State government for recreational use.

In 1969, the Department of the Interior began to show interest in the idea but time was running out. Several parcels of Federal land had been declared

« AnteriorContinuar »