09-08-2022 Final BPC PacketThis will be a teleconference meeting without a physical location.
Thursday, September 8, 2022
6:30 PM
Televised Joint Parks and Recreation Commission, Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, and Sustainability
Commission Special Meeting
TELECONFERENCE / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION TO HELP STOP THE
SPREAD OF COVID-19
In accordance with Government Code 54953(e), this will be a teleconference meeting
without a physical location to help stop the spread of COVID-19.
Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting may do so in one of the following
ways:
1) Tune to Comcast Channel 26 and AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 on your TV.
2) The meeting will also be streamed live on and online at www.Cupertino.org/youtube
and www.Cupertino.org/webcast
Members of the public wishing comment on an item on the agenda may do so in the
following ways:
1) E-mail comments by 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, September 8, 2022 to the Commissions at
parksandrecreationcommission@cupertino.org, bikepedcommission@cupertino.org, and
sustainabilitycommission@cupertino.org. These e-mail comments will be received by the
commission members before the meeting and posted to the City’s website after the
meeting.
2) E-mail comments during the times for public comment during the meeting to the
Commission at parksandrecreationcommission@cupertino.org. The staff liaison will read
the emails into the record, and display any attachments on the screen, for up to 3 minutes
(subject to the Chair’s discretion to shorten time for public comments). Members of the
public that wish to share a document must email
parksandrecreationcommission@cupertino.org prior to speaking.
3) Teleconferencing Instructions
Members of the public may observe the teleconference meeting or provide oral public
Page 1
1
CITY OF CUPERTINO
AGENDA
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION,
BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION, AND
SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION
Agenda September 8, 2022
comments as follows:
Oral public comments will be accepted during the teleconference meeting. Comments may
be made during “oral communications” for matters not on the agenda, and during the
public comment period for each agenda item.
To address the Commission, click on the link below to register in advance and access the
meeting:
Online
Please click the link below to join the webinar:
https://cityofcupertino.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_A8Ve1YV-SNepT3gobVVi6A
Phone
Dial 669-900-6833, enter Webinar ID: 980 4185 8583 (Type *9 to raise hand to speak)
Unregistered participants will be called on by the last four digits of their phone number.
Or an H.323/SIP room system:
H.323:
162.255.37.11 (US West)
162.255.36.11 (US East)
213.19.144.110 (Amsterdam Netherlands)
213.244.140.110 (Germany)
103.122.166.55 (Australia Sydney)
103.122.167.55 (Australia Melbourne)
69.174.57.160 (Canada Toronto)
65.39.152.160 (Canada Vancouver)
Meeting ID: 980 4185 8583
SIP: 98041858583@zoomcrc.com
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about
joining the webinar.
Please read the following instructions carefully:
1. You can directly download the teleconference software or connect to the meeting in your
internet browser. If you are using your browser, make sure you are using a current and
up-to-date browser: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+. Certain
functionality may be disabled in older browsers, including Internet Explorer.
2. You will be asked to enter an email address and a name, followed by an email with
instructions on how to connect to the meeting. Your email address will not be disclosed to
Page 2
2
Parks and Recreation Commission
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Sustainability Commission
Agenda September 8, 2022
the public. If you wish to make an oral public comment but do not wish to provide your
name, you may enter “Cupertino Resident” or similar designation.
3. When the Chair calls for the item on which you wish to speak, click on “raise hand.”
Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak.
4. When called, please limit your remarks to the time allotted and the specific agenda topic.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to
attend this teleconference meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability
that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48
hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request, in
advance, by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the
meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative
format.
NOTICE AND CALL FOR A JOINT SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CUPERTINO PARKS
AND RECREATION COMMISSION, CUPERTINO BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN
COMMISSION, AND CUPERTINO SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special joint meeting of the Cupertino Parks and
Recreation Commission, Cupertino Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, and Cupertino
Sustainability Commission is hereby called for Thursday, September 8, 2022, commencing
at 6:30 p.m. In accordance with Government Code 54953(e), this will be a teleconference
meeting without a physical location to help stop the spread of COVID-19. Said special
meeting shall be for the purpose of conducting business on the subject matters listed below
under the heading, "Special Meeting."
SPECIAL MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission on any matter
within the jurisdiction of the Commission and not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3)
minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Commission from making any decisions with respect
to a matter not on the agenda.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
NEW BUSINESS
Page 3
3
Parks and Recreation Commission
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Sustainability Commission
Agenda September 8, 2022
1.Subject: Consider an update on Fiscal Year 2021-22 City Work Program item regarding
the Blackberry Farm Golf Course Needs Assessment
Recommended Action: Receive the public survey and Outreach Summary Report for
the Blackberry Farm Golf Course Feasibility Study and provide input and feedback on
next steps regarding alternatives for future use of the golf course.
Staff Report
A - Existing Site Conditions
B - NGF Report - Minimal Repairs to Golf Course
C - MIG Report - Convert to Natural Habitat
D - Public Survey and Outreach Summary
E - Blackberry Farm Golf Course Use Analysis Comparative Costs - 25 Year Outlook
F - Selected Pages from Parks Master Plan
G - Public Survey Questions
ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this
meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should
call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for
assistance. In addition, upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and
writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate
alternative format.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the members after publication of the agenda will
be made available for public inspection. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office in City Hall located at
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014, during normal business hours.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code section
2.08.100 written communications sent to the Cupertino City Council, Commissioners or City staff
concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These
written communications are accessible to the public through the City’s website and kept in packet
archives. Do not include any personal or private information in written communications to the City
that you do not wish to make public, as written communications are considered public records and will
be made publicly available on the City website.
Members of the public are entitled to address the members concerning any item that is described in the
notice or agenda for this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address the
members on any other item not on the agenda, you may do so during the public comment.
Page 4
4
Parks and Recreation Commission
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Sustainability Commission
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-11411 Agenda Date: 9/8/2022
Agenda #: 1.
Subject:Consider an update on Fiscal Year 2021-22 City Work Program item regarding the
Blackberry Farm Golf Course Needs Assessment
Receive the public survey and Outreach Summary Report for the Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Feasibility Study and provide input and feedback on next steps regarding alternatives for future use
of the golf course.
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 9/1/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™5
JOINT COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Special Meeting: September 8, 2022
Subject
Consider an update on Fiscal Year 2021-22 City Work Program item regarding the Blackberry
Farm Golf Course Needs Assessment
Recommended Action
Receive the public survey and Outreach Summary Report for the Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Feasibility Study and provide input and feedback on next steps regarding alternatives for future
use of the golf course.
Background
The Blackberry Farm Golf Course was constructed in 1962 and has been owned by the City
since 1991. The site is approximately 16 acres and contains a 9-hole golf course, a parking lot,
one main building and a maintenance facility. The main city-owned building houses a pro shop
and a restaurant facility that is leased by the Blue Pheasant. See Attachment A - Existing Site
Conditions for site overview. Most of the property is located within a designated floodplain and
is adjacent to Stevens Creek which contains protected and sensitive wildlife species, such as
steelhead trout.
In the early 2000’s, the Stevens Creek Corridor Master Plan (SCCMP) was initiated. Its goal was
to create an updated vision and plan for public lands along Stevens Creek, from McClellan
Road northward to Stevens Creek Boulevard. In 2014, in parallel to the SCCMP the City hired
National Golf Foundation Consulting (NGF) to assess various options for improvements to the
golf course. In 2015 and 2016 several golf course improvement options were presented to City
Council for consideration. Alternatives ranged from minor repairs to the golf course to full
reconfiguration, including construction of a new clubhouse. During meetings, comments about
converting the golf course back to natural habitat were raised.
The efforts associated with the SCCMP and improvements to the golf course were suspended
due to City Council’s decision to focus first on completion of the citywide park system master
plan. Since the adoption of the Parks and Recreation System Master Plan in 2020 the City has
reinitiated the discussion regarding the golf course. The project’s objective is to determine short-
term and long-term improvements to the golf course and amenities and is part of the Fiscal Year
6
(FY) 2021-22 City Work Program. At the June 3, 2021, Parks and Recreation Commission
meeting, the commission unanimously recommended to City Council to update the feasibility
study for Option 1 (minimal repairs) and to continue with a feasibility study for Option 3
(return to habitat). At the July 20, 2021, City Council meeting, the City Council unanimously
agreed to have staff update the feasibility study for Option 1 (minimal repairs) and to continue
with a feasibility study for Option 3 (return to habitat). The first option is intended to focus on
completing minor repairs and improvements to the golf course. See Attachment B - NGF Report
– Minimal Repairs to Golf Course. The second option is to convert the site to natural habitat. See
Attachment C - MIG Report – Convert to Natural Habitat.
Both reports were presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission at the May 18 special
meeting. The commission was given the opportunity to provide feedback on the reports and
next steps regarding public outreach. Additionally, the commission was presented with draft
survey questions related to the two alternatives. This survey was published online for public
input via the Engage Cupertino website from May 25 through July 15. Cascadia Consulting was
hired to assist with the public outreach process and has summarized findings in the Public
Survey and Outreach Summary report. See Attachment D – Public Survey and Outreach
Summary.
Discussion
Following the aforementioned direction from Council to “…update the study for minimal
repairs to the golf course (Option 1) and to study returning the golf course to natural habitat
(Option 3) …” the City hired two consultants to complete these studies, National Golf
Foundation Consulting (NGF) and Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc. (MIG) respectively.
NGF was directed to update their previous 2014 report and provide additional input to
complete minor improvements of the golf course. This scope of work did not include
assessment of the city-owned building that houses the Blue Pheasant Restaurant and pro shop,
or assessment of business uses.
MIG was asked to complete a feasibility study for habitat restoration of the entire site. This
would include a natural park focusing on a diverse ecosystem utilizing native plant species. The
park would also include walking trails and active and passive restoration actions.
A. NGF Report Summary
Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the golf course averaged approximately 28,000 rounds of golf
annually. During the pandemic, the average number of rounds increased to 41,000. The City
anticipates post-pandemic averages to be closer to pre-pandemic levels. Ongoing maintenance
of the existing tees, greens, and fairways of the golf course is a primary expenditure for the City
at this site. On average, the City annually subsidizes the golf course with $272,000 (pre-COVID)
of funding.
7
The study completed by NGF includes the following primary features for repair or
improvement.
1) Replacement of the irrigation system.
2) Replace historical ponds with lowland native vegetation.
3) Replace tees and greens as needed.
4) Installation of protective netting between tee #6 and hole #4.
5) Shorten hole #9 to limit errant shots into the existing parking lot.
6) Grading or terracing of small areas of the course to improve safety and access.
7) Assess conversion of the water source from municipal potable water to well water.
Golf Course Irrigation
The viability of the golf course is directly tied to the irrigation system. The current irrigation
system is 60 years old. It has antiquated mainline pipes and has outlived its intended lifecycle
by over 30 years. Mainline pipe failures occur no less than one time per year and lateral pipe
breaks, or leaks occur frequently. This is cause for substantial waste of water as well as financial
resources. Additionally, many replacement parts for the system are no longer available.
In 2011 the City hired Russell D. Mitchell & Associates (RDMA) to re-design the irrigation
system. The new irrigation system was not constructed due to the recognition that a wider
Stevens Creek Corridor Master Plan was needed to steer the direction of the entire corridor
prior to improvements to the golf course. RDMA is a subconsultant to NGF for this current
NGF report.
Irrigation practices since 2014 have included restrictions on total water use due to drought
conditions. Prior to 2014 no restrictions were imposed on the site. Table 1 – Irrigation Water
Use Pre-2014 and Post-2014 below demonstrates the difference in water use before and after
2014.
Table 1 – Irrigation Water Use Pre-2014 and Post-2014
Year Range Average Annual Water Use
2008 through 2013 15.9 million gallons
2014 through 2021 8.5 million gallons
The volume of potable water used after 2014 has been 53% of that used prior to 2014. The
current average use of 8.5 million gallons included measures taken to improve the irrigation
control system as well as extensively cutting back the total acreage irrigated. At times, up to 1/3
of the irrigation heads have been shut off for extensive periods to limit water use. This reflects
irrigation of about 8 acres of the 12.5-acre site. Areas designated for limited, or no irrigation
8
tend to brown and have typically included the fairways and the rough. Critical areas to keep
healthy and green include the tees and greens.
Replacement of the irrigation system will not only allow the golf course to continue operation
many years into the future but will also improve water-use efficiency and effectiveness. The
improved irrigation design allows for irrigation of up to 12.5 acres of the site. In times of water-
use restrictions the new system can readily be adjusted to meet use limitations. This may
include less water on a wide area of the golf course or irrigation of less acreage of the site.
Projections for water use with a new irrigation system as reflected in the 2011 RDMA design are
outlined below in Table 2 – Water Use Projections with New Irrigation System. Table 2
indicates that water savings over the current annual average of 8.5 million gallons can be
achieved by limiting the total acreage irrigated to less than 12.0 acres assuming a standard
irrigation regime for golf course turf. As drought conditions continue and water use restrictions
are in place for the golf course as little as 9.5 acres of turf can be watered and would reflect a
21% decrease in water use relative to the post-2014 average.
Table 2 – Water Use Projections with New Irrigation System
Projected
Irrigated Acres
Total
Reduction in
Irrigated Acres
Projected Annual
Water Use
(ETWU) (gallons)
Percentage
Reduction in
Water Use vs.
Irrigating Full
12.5 Acres
Percentage
Change from
Post-2014
Average of 8.5M
Gallons
12.5 0.0
8,825,050 0% 4% More
11.5 1.0
8,119,046 8% 4% Less
10.5 2.0
7,413,042 16% 13% Less
9.5 3.0
6,707,038 24% 21% Less
Note: ETWU = (Acres*Acre-In *Eto*PF)/IE. To calculate ETWU RDMA assumed an average
Annual Evapotranspiration Rate (ETo) of 30 inches, a Plant Factor (PF) of 0.65%, and an
Irrigation Efficiency (IE) of 75%.
Water Source Conversion – Potable vs. Well
Over the past 10 years the City has explored the option to revitalize the existing well located
near the site. This well was used as the primary source of irrigation for the golf course from
1962 until 2003. Failure of a storage tank, which held water pumped from the well, caused the
City to convert from well use to municipal potable water. Currently, potable water is the sole
source of irrigation for the site.
9
A study to test the existing well water production capacity completed in January 2012 by
Balance Hyrdologics indicated that the well could pump up to 200 gallons per minute (gpm)
but that pumping at such a high rate could have a detrimental effect on flows in Stevens Creek.
Regulatory agencies would likely require additional testing and continuous monitoring of
Stevens Creek flows to ensure the creek would not be impacted by well operations for irrigating
the golf course. This testing and monitoring of Steven Creek could be a substantial cost for the
City depending on the regulatory requirements.
NGF’s assessment to convert the well back to use for irrigation at BBF golf course indicate an
additional capital cost of approximately $932,000 with annual maintenance costs of at least
$9,900 over the cost of continuing to utilize potable water. Between initial capital costs, ongoing
maintenance costs, Valley Water groundwater use fees, and any required ongoing testing and
monitoring of the system to irrigate the golf course the revitalization of the well is not likely a
financially or environmentally sound alternative.
Replacement of Tees and Greens
The NGF Report accounts for replacement of all tees and greens. It is noted that the tees and
greens could be replaced on an as needed basis to save initial capital costs. New tees and greens
will improve the playability of the course. Regardless, typically it is recommended to replace
tees and greens every 10 years.
Shortening Hole #9
NGF recommends shortening hole #9 from approximately 560 ft. to 450 ft. to improve site safety
due to errant balls going into the existing parking lot. The space gained by shortening of hole
#9 could be converted to additional practice hitting bays and a small practice green.
Addition of Protective Netting
NGF is recommending as a minimal baseline safety measure to add netting between holes #4
and #6. This will help eliminate concerns associated with errant shots from hole #4 onto the tee
box at hole #6. NGF also notes that this measure will not eliminate other safety concerns for the
golf course. Several other safety concerns are discussed within the NGF Report but are not
included in the cost estimates provided.
Minor Repair and Improvement Costs
NGF estimates the capital costs for completing minor repairs and improvements to BBF Golf
Course to be $1.97 million. The City estimates that, over a 25-year period, the total cost of
operation and maintenance (O&M) with these improvements will be $8.12 million after
10
accounting for projected revenues. Total cost to the City over a 25-year period is projected to be
$10.09 million.
B. MIG Report Summary
The City has hired MIG, Inc. to assist with a feasibility study of the option to convert BBF Golf
Course to natural habitat. MIG’s scope includes an assessment of existing site and habitat
conditions. The plan outlined in the report is only meant to be conceptual in nature to
demonstrate the type of improvements that can be made to the property. Actual design for the
site would be generated only if this option is chosen. Generally, Stevens Creek has been a
protected resource for more than 100 years due to its value as a wildlife corridor. The value of
the corridor has increased over time, given the continued urbanization of the area.
BBF Golf Course is predominately located within the Federal Emergency Management
Agency’s (FEMA) 100-yr Flood Zone. Habitat native to the property would typically include
multiple special-status plants but currently these plants cannot be found at the site.
Additionally, MIG determined that up to three wildlife species may currently occur at the site.
At BBF Golf Course the historic ecology was likely oak savanna. This includes a low density of
oak trees with mostly open canopy. The understory was likely annual grass with scattered
shrubs and perennial grasses. MIG’s analysis accounts for adaptation to projected climate
change conditions. A return to oak savanna is compatible with anticipated ecological changes
due to climate change. MIG proposes a restoration approach that includes the delineation of a
riparian regeneration zone, the establishment of wildflower meadows, and designated habitat
islands. Habitat islands would include flowering shrubs and native oaks. Existing coastal
redwood trees would remain onsite.
Amenities for the public would include nature trails, outdoor seating, and environmental
education opportunities along with other potential recreational opportunities. Park rangers
would be present onsite through conversion of the pro shop to office space. The existing
restrooms adjacent to the pro shop will also be available. Additionally, there would be an
expansion of the parking lot located south of the golf course.
The conversion to natural habitat would include sustainable management practices. There is an
estimated three-to-five-year establishment period for plantings. During this period habitat
islands would be irrigated via drip irrigation and areas outside of the islands would either be
trail facilities or be allowed to naturally migrate to an ecological “steady state” with use of
native vegetation. This vegetation will be maintained periodically to establish standard
defensible space management practices to limit exposure to fire hazards.
Use of potable water for irrigation would be limited to the habitat islands and be operational for
a period of up to eight years to ensure establishment of vegetation. After an eight-year period
11
the irrigation can be removed from the area. MIG anticipates that the native and drought-
tolerant vegetation will survive within its natural environment without irrigation. Due to the
type of vegetation species and the limited area planned for irrigation the City anticipates a
substantial reduction in potable water use relative to continued operation of the golf course.
Natural Habitat Costs
MIG estimates a capital cost of $1.88 million to convert the golf course to natural habitat. The
City estimates that, over a 25-year period, the total cost of operation and maintenance for this
option will be $10.22 million after accounting for projected revenues. Total cost, over a 25-year
period, to convert the golf course to natural habitat is projected to be $12.10 million. The City
has high confidence some grant funding will be available for this option. Costs presented here
do to not account for potential grant funding.
Note: The City anticipates that grant funding may be available for this option. The City projects potential
grant funding of $300,000 for initial improvements and $300,000 in operational grant funding.
C. Comparative of Total Project Costs – 25 Year Outlook
Based on the planned improvements and recommendations for the site within the NGF and
MIG reports, the City has established a cost estimate for each option. The estimates reflect a 25-
year operational period. The cost estimates are provided in today’s dollars and do not account
for inflation. Costs included account for initial capital costs to construct the improvements,
projected revenues, and ongoing operations and maintenance of the respective facilities.
Attachment E – Blackberry Farm Golf Course Use Analysis Comparative Costs – 25 Year
Outlook provides a summary of costs associated with each option.
In summary, after accounting for projected revenues, costs for the option to repair the golf
course are $1.97 million in capital costs with an additional $8.12 million in ongoing O&M costs.
Costs for converting the site to natural habitat is $1.88 million in capital costs with an additional
$10.22 million in ongoing O&M costs.
Additionally, as a comparative, Attachment E provides an estimate of the total projected water
use over 25 years for each alternative. This is a relevant metric in terms of costs as well as use of
natural resources. It is anticipated that in Santa Clara County the cost of potable water will
continue to increase at a rate higher than the overall Consumer Price Index for the area. This
may lead to disproportionate costs associated with water use in the future. It is projected that
the option to convert the site to natural habitat will use less than 10% of the water needed to
irrigate the golf course over a 25-year period.
12
D. Public Outreach Process
During the Parks and Recreation System Master Plan public outreach process the City received
a variety of input about the community’s priorities for programming and use of park space.
Survey information received during the master planning process indicates that 83% of
respondents noted that improving access to natural open space is very or somewhat important.
This compares with 74% of respondents who stated that a variety of recreational opportunities
is very or somewhat important. See Attachment F – Selected Pages from Parks Master Plan for
additional detail. The Blackberry Farm Golf Course site offers great opportunities for either of
these community priorities.
The City understands the importance of allowing the community to provide input specific to
the future use Blackberry Farm Golf Course. To facilitate public input the City issued an online
survey specifically asking the community its preferences between the two alternative uses of the
site. Additionally, the City provided hard-copy surveys at the Cupertino Sports Center, Senior
Center, Library and Quinlan Community Center.
Additionally, there were several opportunities for the public to provide written and online
comments. The City established the Engage Cupertino website
(https://engagecupertino.org/bbfgolfcourse) in July 2021. The City also held a virtual
community meeting on June 6 to provide an overview of the alternatives and hear directly from
the community. Comments were received via email, the engage Cupertino website, the online
survey, two in-person open house events at the golf course (June 11 & July 11) as well as a pop-
up event at a Memorial Park during the summer concert series.
E. Public Survey Summary
The survey was open to the public the week of May 25, and closed on July 15, 2022. Residents
were notified about the project and online survey through a postcard mailed citywide. See
Attachment G – Public Survey for the specific questions associated with the survey. The City
received 4,023 survey responses. Of those responses 2,535 were Cupertino residents and 1,488
were non-residents.
Attachment D – Public Survey & Outreach Summary provides a quantitative and qualitative
analysis of the responses received. Respondents were asked about their opinions and priorities
for the future use of Blackberry Farm Golf Course. The summary report provides a breakdown
of responses completed by those reporting to be residents vs. non-residents. Key themes from
the online survey results are summarized below in Table 3.
13
Table 3 – Key Survey Result Takeaways
Topic Key Takeaways
Resident and
non-resident
responses
The survey received a total of 4,023 responses. Of those responses, 2,535
were from Cupertino residents (63% of the total responses) and 1,488 were
from non-residents (37% of total responses).
Overall option
preference
When analyzing responses from all survey respondents, over half (n =
2,081, 52%) prefer Option A (Golf Course Necessary Repairs and Minor
Improvements). However, when analyzing responses from only Cupertino
residents, more than half (n = 1,433, 57%) prefer Option B (Conversion to
Natural Habitat).
Option
preference
reasons
The top reasons cited by survey respondents for preferring Option A
include that Blackberry Farm Golf Course is a good course to play for
kids, elders, and novices, Blackberry Farm is more affordable than other
golf courses, and that there are sufficient other nature options nearby.
The top reasons cited by respondents for preferring Option B include
concerns about drought, water use, and climate change and that natural
habitat areas benefit a greater number of people and are more accessible.
Distance from
site
The majority (71%) of survey respondents who live more than 5 miles
from the site selected Option A, while most (52%) of respondents who live
5 or less miles from the site selected Option B. When filtering responses
by those who live closest to the site (“less than ½ mile” and “less than 1
mile”), the majority (57%) of respondents prefer Option B.
Age
The most represented age group among survey respondents is people
more than 60 years old (36%), followed by people 50 to 60 years old (23%).
Generally, older respondents prefer Option A and younger respondents
prefer Option B. The majority (66%) of respondents who selected Option
A are 50 or older, while 52% of respondents who selected Option B are 50
or older.
Future use
frequency
When asked how often survey respondents would use Blackberry Farm
Golf Course in the future if the repairs and improvements were made, 48%
indicated that they would use the golf course frequently or occasionally,
and 52% indicated that they would use the course rarely or never. Among
respondents that selected Option A, 87% indicated that they would use the
golf course frequently or occasionally; among respondents that selected
Option B, 4% indicated that they would use the golf course frequently or
occasionally.
14
The City is seeking input and guidance from the joint commission on the next steps for the
future of Blackberry Farm Golf Course based on these reports and the survey results. City
Council will be presented with these reports as well as any guidance or recommendations from
the joint commission.
Sustainability Impact
The primary sustainability impact for these projects is the potential for considerable water use
savings. For continued use of the golf course installation of an improved irrigation system can
decrease water use by up to 21% of current levels by reducing the total acres irrigated. If the site
is converted to natural habitat, water use will be less than 10% of that used for the golf course
over a 25-year period.
Fiscal Impact
The pre-COVID annual subsidy for operation of the golf course has averaged $272,000.
After accounting for projected revenues, costs over a 25-year period for each option is
summarized below:
A. Repair the Golf Course
a. $1.97 million (Total Capital Cost)
b. $8.12 million (Total O&M Cost)
c. Average Annual O&M Cost = $324,705
B. Converting the Site to Natural Habitat
a. $1.88 million (Total Capital Cost)
b. $10.22 million (Total O&M Cost)
c. Average Annual O&M Cost = $408,824
(Note: Potential grant funding may reduce projected capital and O&M costs)
Topic Key Takeaways
When asked how often respondents would use the natural habitat area in
the future if Blackberry Farm Golf Course were converted, 57% indicated
that they would use the nature area frequently or occasionally, and 43%
indicated that they would use the area rarely or never. Among
respondents that selected Option B, 96% indicated that they would use the
site frequently or occasionally; among respondents that selected Option A,
21% indicated that they would use the site frequently or occasionally.
Preferred golf
course
Among respondents that play golf at both Blackberry Farm and Deep Cliff,
40% of respondents prefer to play at Blackberry Farm, 35% have no
preference between the two, 11% prefer Deep Cliff, and the remaining
14% did not explicitly indicate which course they prefer. Respondents like
Blackberry Farm because the course is short and quick, better for seniors,
novices, and kids, well-located, and affordable.
15
Attachment E provides a summary of costs associated with each option.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Lisa Cameli, Project Manager
Reviewed by: Susan Michael, CIP Manager
Reviewed by: Chad Mosley, Assistant Director of Public Works
Approved for Submission by: Matt Morley, Director of Public Works
Attachments:
A – Existing Site Conditions
B – NGF Report – Minimal Repairs to Golf Course
C – MIG Report – Convert to Natural Habitat
D – Public Survey and Outreach Summary
E – Blackberry Farm Golf Course Use Analysis Comparative Costs – 25 Year Outlook
F – Selected Pages from Parks Master Plan
G – Public Survey Questions
16
THE
MEADOWS
PARK VILLAS
RIDGECREST
MONTA
VISTA
LAS PALMAS
FAIRWAY VII
VOLLEYBALL
BOCCE
OPEN LAWN
COMMUNITY
GARDENS
STAFF OFFICES
DRESSING
ROOMS
POOL
POOL
NATURE
MUSEUM
BLACKSMITH
SHOP
RANCH
HOUSE
MILK
BARN
TANK
HOUSE
GARDENER’S
SHED
BEE
HIVES
TICKET
KIOSK
GROUP
PICNIC
AREA
ORCHARD
STOCKLMEIER
HOME
GOLF PRO SHOP/
BLUE PHEASANT
RESTAURANT
HORSESHOE
PIT
HORSESHOE
PIT
CAFE
PLAY
AREA
MAINTENANCE
BLDGS
GOLF
MAINTENANCE
BLDG
BARN
POLE
BARN
SIMMS
HOUSE
4-H AREA
TANK
HOUSE
ENVIRONMENTAL
EDUCATION CENTER
BLACKBERRY FARM
GOLF COURSE
STOCKLMEIR
RANCH
BLACKBERRY FARM
PARK
McCLELLAN
RANCH
PRESERVE
McCLELLAN
RANCH
WEST
M cCLE
L
L
AN RD
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
S TEV E NS C R EEK
STE
VENS
CRE
EK T
R
A
I
L
STE
VENS
CREEK TRAIL
MONTA
VISTA
HIGH
SCHOOL
DEEP
CLIFF
GOLF
COURSE
PA
L
O
V
I
S
T
A
R
D
SCEN
I
C
C
I
R
C
L
E
LI
N
D
A
VI
S
T
A
P
L
CLUB
H O USE
LN
SC
E
N
I
C
C
I
R
C
L
E
SCEN
I
C
B
L
V
D
SCE
N
I
C
B
L
V
D
MC C
L
E
L
L
A
N
R
D
MC
CLEL
LAN RD
LI
N
D
A
VIS
T
A
D
R
SAN
F
E
R
N
A
N
D
O
A
V
E
SA
N
F
E
R
N
A
N
D
O
A
V
E
JANI
C
E
AVE
BYRNE
CT
GRANADA
AVE
HERMOSA
AVE
LOMITA AVE
ALMADEN
AVE
ALCAZAR
AVE
DOLORES
AVE
CR
E
S
C
E
N
T
R
D
MA
D
R
I
D
R
D
CU
P
E
R
T
I
N
O
R
D
R
A
E
L
N
VALLECITO RD
CA
R
M
E
N
R
D
SC
E
N
I
C
C
T
STOC
K
L
M
E
I
R
C
T
PALM AVE
DEAN CT
JANICE AVE
SC
E
N
I
C
B
L
V
D
BY
R
N
E
A
V
E
BY
R
N
E
A
V
E
PH
A
R
L
A
P
D
R
BY
R
N
E
A
V
E
SAN FE
R
N
A
N
D
O
C
T
PAR
THRE E D R
SANTA PAULA AVE
T
R
E
S
S
LE
R
C
T
MI
R
A
V
I
S
T
A
A
V
E
SC
E
N
I
C
B
L
V
D
MI
R
A
V
I
S
T
A
R
D
SC
E
N
I
C
C
I
R
C
L
E
0 100’ 200’ 250’150’50’
N
EXISTING CONDITIONS
PROJECT BOUNDARY
PARCELS
TRAIL
ON-STREET BIKE ROUTE
CREEK
BUILDING
NEIGHBORHOOD
SOURCE: CITY OF CUPERTINO
Attachment A
17
Blackberry Farm Golf Course –
Analysis of Minimal Repairs and
Conversion of Irrigation to Well
Water
Prepared For:
City of Cupertino
Parks and Recreation
10185 N Stelling Rd
Cupertino, CA 95014
Prepared By:
501 N. Highway A1a
Jupiter, FL 33477
(561) 744-6006
May 2022
Attachment B
18
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 2
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION & PROJECT BACKGROUND ....................................................................... 2
Current Scope of Services .................................................................................................. 3
Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 3
Limitations ..................................................................................................................................... 3
BLACKBERRY FARM GOLF COURSE .................................................................................... 5
History ................................................................................................................................. 5
Golf Course Overview and Summary of Facilities ............................................................... 5
Course Overview ........................................................................................................................... 5
Practice Facilities ........................................................................................................................... 5
Maintenance Facility ...................................................................................................................... 6
On-course Restrooms ................................................................................................................... 6
Pro Shop and Grounds .................................................................................................................. 6
Assessment of Current Golf Course Conditions .................................................................. 6
Current Conditions and General Deficiencies ............................................................................... 6
Changes to Hole No. 9 and Practice Area .................................................................................. 10
BLACKBERRY FARM GOLF COURSE “MINIMAL REPAIRS” IMPROVEMENT COSTS ......11
Cost Estimates – Minimal Repairs Scenario .......................................................................11
Pricing Methodology .................................................................................................................... 11
Cost Estimates ............................................................................................................................ 11
IRRIGATION AND WATER SOURCE CONVERSION .............................................................14
Current Irrigation System ...................................................................................................14
Current Water Use and Future Projections .........................................................................15
Water Source Conversion to Well ......................................................................................16
Daily Water Use Estimate – Average Summer Day .................................................................... 16
Additional Discussion on Benefits/Efficiency of New System ..................................................... 16
Well Reactivation Estimated Costs .....................................................................................18
Estimated Well Reactivation Costs ............................................................................................. 18
Irrigation Cost Comparison – Potable vs. Well ............................................................................ 19
SUMMARY BENEFITS OF UNDERTAKING MINIMAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR BFGC ...........20
Cost Efficiencies ................................................................................................................20
Environmental Orientation ..................................................................................................20
Congruence with Parks & Recreation Master Plan Goals ...................................................20
Replacing Empty Ponds with Native Lowland Landscape ..................................................20
NGF Conclusion .................................................................................................................21
APPENDICES...........................................................................................................................22
Appendix A – Assessment of Golf Course Components .....................................................23
Appendix B – Minimum Safety Set-Backs Exhibit ...............................................................27
Appendix C – Miscellaneous Exhibits .................................................................................28
19
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 2
Introduction & Project Background
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. (“NGF Consulting” or “NGF”) was retained by the City
of Cupertino (“City”) in late 2021 to formulate new probable cost estimates for the “minimal
repairs” improvement scenario for Blackberry Farm Golf Course (alternately, “Blackberry Farm
GC”). The consulting engagement was managed by Ed Getherall, NGF’s Senior Director of
Operations, with golf course architecture firm Richardson-Danner, ASGCA, and Russell D.
Mitchell & Associates, Inc., irrigation consultant, acting as subcontractors to NGF.
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. was previously retained by the City in 2014 to present
potentially viable options regarding the future of Blackberry Farm GC. That consulting
engagement was done as part of the overall due diligence related to the Stevens Creek Corridor
Master Plan.
Cost estimation for the current study applies to the following elements of “Minimal Repair”, as
defined by the City:
• Replacing the irrigation system. The two scenarios of Potable vs Well Water are
addressed here, requiring a discussion of the logistics of re-activating the well
(connection to potable water should be made regardless, as a back-up).
• Replacing the empty ponds with lowland native areas.
• Replacing tees and greens as needed (e.g., #3 tee - removing mat & replacing w/grass).
Tees and greens are replaced approximately every 6 years as needed. (NGF has
recommended replacing all greens with the irrigation system replacement, and included
this in the cost estimates).
• Installing netting to protect the #6 tee box from errant shots on the Hole #4.
• Shortening the 9th hole to eliminate the number of errant shots to the parking lot, trail,
and Hole #1. Flipping the driving net, and making it longer and with additional bays.
Adding a short game practice area (chipping/sand bunker), with protective netting.
• Identifying locations where installation of steps or terracing would be beneficial.
The NGF team was also tasked with evaluating and analyzing the logistics and cost feasibility of
reactivating the on-site well. The analysis includes professional opinion on what is needed
structurally to restore and revitalize the existing well for use as the golf course irrigation source.
This scope includes a preliminary cost estimate to reactivate the well, as well as a comparison
of annual operating costs for use of Potable water vs Well water as the irrigation source at
Blackberry Farm GC.
20
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 3
CURRENT SCOPE OF SERVICES
In late 2021, the NGF was retained to review a “Minimal Repair Scope” for Blackberry Farm Golf
Course. While some of these items represent those from the NGF’s 2014 report, the City asked the
NGF to review only the stated items in isolation from other potentially interrelated repairs. Therefore,
the current NGF reporting cannot not fully consider the contextual influence each item has on the
overall needs of the golf course.
The key areas the NGF Consulting team was asked to focus on – in addition to the aforementioned
issues around potential reactivation of the on-site well – included, but were not limited to:
(1) Playability as it relates to watering needs and turf conditions, conversion of the pond to native
lowland, character and condition of tees and greens.
(2) Safety as it relates to hole nos. 4 and 6, hole nos. 1 and 9 and accessibility for tee complexes.
(3) Water Source as it relates to potable versus well water use.
(4) Trail Protection as it relates to netting on hole nos. 8 and 9 (this item was later removed from the
scope due to the City already assuming responsibility for this item.
Methodology
The method for updating relevant aspects of the 2014 report involved site visits on two separate
occasions in November 2021 and January 2022. Interviews with key staff charged with caring for
and operating the properties were conducted. Additional data, both provided by the City and secured
independently, was used to ascertain the general maintenance needs and necessary improvements.
In late 2021 and early 2022, Golf Course Architect, Jeff Danner, ASGCA, MEIGCA conducted the
noted site visits. The focus of Mr. Danner’s reviews was to verify previous assumptions and account
for any new or additional issues needing to be addressed. The consultants met with representatives
from the City of Cupertino both in-person and via video call to obtain information to support our
observations. Updated findings are referenced throughout this report.
Limitations
This report is intended to provide a basis for further study and potential action by the City, as well as
potential integration to the Stevens Creek Corridor Master planning effort. The report is limited to the
scope of services contracted to NGF Consulting. Accordingly, information such as probable cost
estimates and conceptual planning must be viewed in their context and limitations. The City is
advised that further study, detailed analysis, specific planning and cost analysis should be
undertaken before final actions are determined. This report should be used to form decisions on
“next steps” as improvements and/or changes are considered and shifted from planning to formal
project.
The physical evaluation of the golf course is limited in that the items outlined in the Minimal Repairs
scope of work do not consider the interconnectivity of various golf course components. Because the
NGF is studying only items defined as “Minimal Repairs” by the City of Cupertino, exclusive of their
contextual influence, the NGF cannot assume liability for issues that may arise in the future related
to these recommendations.
For example, the NGF cannot thoroughly study safety without considering the spatial configuration
of golf holes. The safety guidelines for setbacks to adjacent property, the separation between golf
holes, and general “best practices” for golf course design have changed since Blackberry Farm GC
was constructed about 60 years ago. Accordingly, NGF cannot make recommendations that
conform to modern best practices for such setbacks to adjacent property or separation between golf
21
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 4
holes. Therefore, the City should make every effort to improve conditions relative to safety and
minimize the occurrence of errant ball conflicts to adjacent property and areas and uses within the
Owner’s property. The NGF shall not be held liable for any claim, actual damage, or injury arising
from errant ball issue or condition at the Owner’s property or relative to this updated study.
As it relates to costs, Probable Construction Cost prepared by the Richardson | Danner under the
auspices of NGF represents the Golf Course Architect’s best judgment as design professionals of
the potential construction cost for the golf course work. However, neither the consulting team nor the
City has control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment, or course accessories, over any
contractor’s methods of determining bid prices, or over competitive bidding, market, or negotiating
conditions. Accordingly, the NGF team does not warrant or represent that bids or negotiated prices
will not vary from any project budget which may have been proposed, established or approved by
the City or from any Statement of Probable Construction Cost or other cost estimate or evaluation
prepared by the Golf Course Architect.
22
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 5
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
In this section NGF presents a summary narrative for Blackberry Farm Golf Course, comprising a
brief synopsis of its history, golf course and facility overview, and our assessment of current golf
course conditions.
HISTORY
The Blackberry Farm Golf Course occupies a portion of an old farm (160 acres) settled by Captain
Elisha Stephens in 1848. Blackberry Farm, until 1991, was operated as a family-owned (Nelson
Family) picnic facility for 37 years and over three generations. In 1991 Cupertino residents passed a
25-year bond measure to purchase the property. Today, this 33-acre recreational facility offers a
creek-side park setting for family and group picnics, swimming pools, the 9-hole golf course and City
offices.
The course was constructed in 1962 and was designed by Robert Muir Graves, a prominent
California-based golf course architect. It was among the first designs in Graves’ career and is listed
as a “Par-3 Course” in early accounts by Graves and other resources. It may be that holes were
lengthened over the years in an attempt to achieve longer yardages and an increased par value.
Very little is reported to have been done to the course since the City acquired it. According to staff,
only minor work has been done to repair and replace aging features and irrigation components. In
recent years, work to Stevens Creek resulted in erection of barrier netting and small filtration basins
along the western edges of the course. Additionally, a new maintenance facility was built by the City
to replace an aging “garage” structure that had been used for maintenance operations dating to
original farm and golf uses.
GOLF COURSE OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY OF FACILITIES
Course Overview
The 9-hole course has a back tee yardage of 1,544 yards and a par of 29. The two par-4 holes are
quite short and barely meet USGA guidelines for the length of a par-4 golf hole. The course, with its
two short par-4s, meets the technical definition of an “Executive length” course (e.g., one made up of
at least one par-4 in addition to par-3 holes) but offers a very short total yardage (1,544 yards) from
the back tees.
The course plays in a clockwise routing, with most holes oriented north/south. Hole corridors are
tight with mature trees lining fairways. In terms of overall land use, the small footprint of the course -
approximately 13.5 acres - equates to less than 1.3 acres per golf hole. This is extremely low as
common acreage for even a par-3, 9-hole course is typically greater than 15 acres, or roughly 1.7
acres per golf hole.
Practice Facilities
Aside from a small practice putting green by the Hole No. 1, there are only “hitting cages” that may
be used for instruction and warm-up. These structures are loosely configured and immediately
adjacent to the green area for the Hole No. 9. The lack of quality practice areas and amenities that
could attract new players and those interested in learning golf are all but absent.
23
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 6
Maintenance Facility
The maintenance building and yard are relatively new replacements for an old garage that had
stored equipment. The new building is metal constructed and well-screened from view of golfers.
There are sanitary facilities, wash stations and typical appointments for a modern facility. The yard,
while small, is adequate for the limited equipment and materials necessary to care for the course.
Storage bins for sand and landscape materials are undersized, which required double handling after
loads of material are delivered.
On-course Restrooms
No restrooms are located on the course itself. The restrooms located in the maintenance building
were configured to serve the public while playing golf. Due to the small footprint of the course and
the short time it takes to play, new on-course restrooms are not considered mission critical.
Pro Shop and Grounds
The pro shop, staff office, storage, and restrooms are located on the lower level of a City-owned
building near the first tee. The upper level houses the Blue Pheasant Restaurant, which has no
affiliation with the golf course. Of important note is that the lower level lies within a designated
floodplain. The parking lot was resurfaced and configured just prior to the issuance of the original
NGF report in 2014. Today, the condition is fair and functional for its purpose. It still appears well lit
and adequately serves the restaurant and golf uses. The pro shop building and parking lot are not
part of the current study scope.
ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT GOLF COURSE CONDITIONS
The intent of this section is to provide a baseline of the current conditions and general deficiencies of
Blackberry Farm Golf Course in order to provide context to the need for facility improvements. For a
more detailed assessment of current conditions, organized by golf course component, please refer
to Appendix A.
The existing golf facility (course only) has baseline deficiencies in the six areas discussed below. In
evaluating the golf course, the criteria applied was to identify the minimum “baseline” remediation
measures to render the facility (i) safe for public use; (ii) acceptable in terms of common “best
practices” for municipal (public sector) golf facilities; (iii) compliant with ADA guidelines for public golf
facilities; and (iv) partially restored in areas where ponds were abandoned and trees removed and/or
lost to disease.
Current Conditions and General Deficiencies
1. Irrigation:
The entirety of the irrigation system was deemed to be in need of full replacement. This is consistent
with previous findings. We note that no work, except nominal emergency repairs and replacements,
have been made to the facility since NGF Consulting first consulted with the City in 2014. Our
findings now are updated to reflect newer golf irrigation technologies, including better control
systems and sprinkler nozzle technology. These newer technologies save water use and provide
more efficient coverage and delivery of water to irrigated turf. In determining the baseline
improvements for irrigation, we used similar specification assumptions to other public sector golf
courses in the market.
24
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 7
2. Features (Tees and Greens):
Tees (surfaces and alignment) are past their useful life. All tees need to be leveled and aligned. As
part of this work, nominal enlargement is anticipated as tees can, in many locations, be lowered
slightly and therefore expanded in terms of their square footage.
Greens are all in need of re-construction as they are past their useful life. Rootzones are now
approaching their 56th year of use and show decline, including an inability to drain properly and fully,
and all surface areas have shrunk markedly to the point where the square footage is not conducive
to the wear and tear through daily use. All greens are to be reconstructed to an adapted USGA
standard of 12-inches of sand greensmix over 4-inches of washed gravel with 25-foot drain tile
spacing. All outfall drainage at the newly constructed greens will be handled per best practices
where water is dispersed back onto the course areas in appropriate out-of-play zones. Nominal
enlargement is a part of the baseline work to restore green sizes closer to their original sizes and
shapes.
3. Drainage:
Current areas of the course do not drain adequately. Some areas sheet-drain directly off turf areas
and, instead, should be intercepted with appropriately located outfall points. Work performed along
Stevens Creek has established catchment basins where surface drainage should ideally be
collected and filtered before allowing to pass to the Stevens Creek watershed.
Note: While not part of the defined minimal repair scope, we recommend that baseline course
renovation work include budget allowances for minimal drainage improvements to (i) collect
water to prevent ponding; (ii) positive gravity drain lines to appropriate low points; and (iii) the
aforementioned collection at existing low points where proper filtration can be achieved.
4. Safety (refer to Appendix B Exhibit, “Minimum Safety Set-Backs”):
The existing course layout includes golf hole lengths and orientations that are too close to one
another. In some areas golf holes are too close to adjoining property, including both park (City-
owned) areas and neighboring private property. We note that the suggested remediation
measures are not costed into the Minimal Repairs improvement plan.
Forrest Richardson, ASGCA is a noted authority on golf course safety and minimum standards
applied to the layout and configuration of golf holes with regard to on-course uses and adjoining
property uses. He is the author of five books on golf course architecture, including Routing the Golf
Course (John Wiley & Sons, 2001) which contains a full chapter on safety issues and
considerations. For Blackberry Farm GC, Mr. Richardson has provided remediation
recommendations to only the most pressing areas as shown on the accompanying Appendix B
exhibit. The criteria applied in this case is described below in each area where Mr. Richardson
determined an absolute mitigation must be made. Other areas of concern remain apart from those
listed and may be reviewed in the NGF consulting report dated December, 2014.
Area A: The tee shot at Hole No. 1 is ±186 yards. A typical required minimum safety set-back to
both sides the nominal center line is calculated at .8 x the yardage, expressed in feet (186 x .8 =
148.8 feet). This dimension is shown on the exhibit. “A” references the primary area of concern,
which is the tee of Hole No. 9. To the left of Hole No. 1 is private property where errant balls
regularly fall. Because this area is a steep hillside and generally unused, it is assumed to be an
existing condition without high priority to be mitigated.
The Minimum Improvement Exhibit proposes a new tee surface for the tee realignment and
renovation work. This minor adjustment will shift a percentage of play forward to reduce set-back
requirements. Hole No. 9 tee should also be relocated out of Hole No. 1 required set-back zone and
align with the new location of Hole No. 9 green described in (E) and (F).
25
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 8
Area B: This area represents conflicts with the tee shot from Hole No. 1 to the tee at Hole No. 2.
The area “B” is within the anticipated shot zone of Hole No. 1.
Area C: The tee shot at Hole No. 2 involves a full “driver” shot for a predominance of players. At
±220-yards there should be no less than 160-feet to both sides of the nominal center line of play. “C”
represents an area on private property where balls fall. This area, despite being a steep hillside and
elevated above the golf course, does contain some degree of residential improvements that fall
within the range of the minimum set-back. The set-back zone is very close to single family homes.
The Minimum Improvement Exhibit proposes relocating the Hole No. 2 tee away from the Hole No. 1
set-back zone. Shifting the tee also angles play away from the property line to improve the
conditions described in (B) and (C) above.
Area D: The tee shot at Hole No. 4 involves a full “driver” shot for a predominance of players. At
±220-yards there should be no less than 160 feet to both sides of the nominal center line of play. “D”
represents a conflict area to the left with the existing tees at Hole No. 5.
The Minimum Improvement Exhibit proposes relocating the Hole No. 4 tee away from the Hole No. 2
set-back zone. Shifting the tee also angles play away from Hole Nos. 5 and 6 to lessen the impact
on their respective set-back zones. The tee on Hole No. 5 should also be relocated away from Hole
No. 4 set-back zone and can become part of the lowland habitat restoration of the abandoned pond.
Finally, small-scale, localized cut and fill practices are required and reflected in the cost
assumptions.
New poles and netting also need consideration between Hole Nos. 4, 5, and 6. Placement of nets
will require further study based on ball trajectory and tee location adjustments. Implementing new or
retaining existing netting and poles should occur left of Hole Nos. 7, 8, and 9.
Area E: The tee shot at Hole No. 9 is ±188 yards. A typical required minimum safety set-back to
both sides the nominal center line is calculated at .8 x the yardage, expressed in feet. (188 x .8 =
150.4 feet). This dimension is shown on the exhibit. “E” references the primary area of concern
which is the tee of Hole No. 1 and golfers staging before beginning their rounds.
Area F: Represents the parking and public areas north of Hole Nos. 1 and 9 that are impacted by
the set-back behind Hole No. 9’s tee shot.
The Minimum Improvement Exhibit proposes shifting and reconstructing the Hole No. 9 green to
relocate further South to mitigate safety set-backs to Hole No. 1 tees and the parking lot. In addition,
the City can convert the old Hole No. 9 green to become a short game practice area with adjacent
netting hitting bays.
Area X: Represents golf holes that are too close to neighboring park uses and trails, yet have been
mitigated with screening, fences and/or netting. “J-fence” has been used successfully along the trail
spans to protect trail users. Netting on higher poles has been used in other locations, but with limited
success. In many areas netting has deteriorated. In other instances, it is not high enough to fully
contain shots. These areas (“X”) are specifically removed from study as the City indicates that
replacement screening will be handled under separate contracts and work.
The minimum remediation measures outlined above and shown on the exhibit are only
representative of the absolute measures identified by Mr. Richardson that the City should undertake
to make the facility safer than it is presently. We recommend that a more comprehensive trajectory
and errant ball study be performed prior to the City renovating the facility, and prior to investing in
new, replacement screening. Such study will yield whether additional absolute measures are
appropriate.
Additional Safety Note: Installing Netting to Protect the Hole No. 6 Tee Box from Errant Shots on
Hole No. 4
26
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 9
The installation of nets between Hole Nos. 4 and 6, as proposed by the City under the Minimal
Repairs improvement plan, does not adequately address existing set-back conflicts between Hole
Nos. 4, 5 and 6. As shown on the safety exhibit, Hole No. 5 tees are in conflict with the tee shot at
Hole No. 4. This is in addition to conflicts with the Hole No. 6 tees.
Poles and netting will not mitigate the overall safety issue between these three golf holes, as the
elevated tees at Hole No. 4 in relationship to the other holes (and tees) is such that ball trajectory
from Hole No. 4 would require poles ≥130-feet in height at the most northern area. This height is
impractical and cost-prohibitive. The $172,000 probable cost estimate amount (Line Item 4.0)
represents only poles and netting to address protection of Hole No. 6 tees from Hole No. 4, and
does not address the full safety issue.
The best practices recommendation is to try and avoid any use of poles and netting and, in lieu of
these vertical structures, to shift tees at Hole Nos. 4 and 5, nominally shortening both holes. This
approach is anticipated to cost less than the investment of pole and netting, but will require further
study and cost estimating to confirm. NGF Consulting does not recommend the mitigation measure
as shown in the Probable Cost Estimate. The $172,000 should be retained and applied toward the
recommended best practices mitigation as described.
5. ADA Compliance (Golf Course Only):
The golf course must have accessible tees and greens that are able to be accessed by a standard
golf cart. In many locations there is (i) no path near to tees or greens; (ii) too steep of a grade for
access; and/or (iii) impediments between a logical parking area and the tee or green. Additionally, all
practice greens and any warm-up area must be fully accessible via a path from the clubhouse area.
Our area of focus is on the golf course itself. To mitigate these conditions as noted, the approach
assumed in the renovation/re-construction scope will be to create logical parking areas for a
standard golf car (cart) at each tee and green with removal of any existing curbing, edge material,
hedge or steps. Exceptions at tees may include steeper areas where steps or paths need to remain,
but only in the event that an alternate tee is provided.
For the purposes of this report, we have generally included ADA mitigation measures within the
probable cost estimate. It should be assumed that some mitigation measures are facilitated by the
rebuilding of tees and greens, and that the new warm-up practice area would be constructed with
ADA compliance in mind.
6. Habitat Restoration (Trees, Old Pond Areas):
Minimal work is proposed under the minimal repair approach, with only certain areas to be
considered. These include removal of tree stumps and roots - primarily for safety and efficient
maintenance access and practices - and restoration of the abandoned pond areas with appropriate
hydroseeding/planting, slope stabilization and drainage.
27
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 10
Changes to Hole No. 9 and Practice Area
The proposal for minimal improvements included changes to the areas of the property occupying
Hole No. 9 and the practice facility. The need for expanded practice facilities and efficient use of
space can be realized through aligning the practice area hitting bays with proximity to the parking lot.
Shortening Hole No. 9 frees up space to provide a short game development area between the 9th
green and eight (8) hitting bays. The spatial arrangement also has the potential to reduce the
probability of golf balls leaving the course and entering the parking lot, thus improving one of the
most bothersome safety concerns on the property.
28
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 11
Blackberry Farm Golf Course “Minimal
Repairs” Improvement Costs
Based on our analyses of the Blackberry Farm Golf Course and irrigation options, the NGF
team has developed construction cost estimates for the golf course assuming the “Minimal
Repairs” scope, as defined by the City in 2021. We have also analyzed the potential efficacy
and feasibility of reactivating BFGC’s on-site well and converting the irrigation source from
potable to well water. Summary findings follow.
COST ESTIMATES – MINIMAL REPAIRS SCENARIO
The method for evaluating the golf course and developing the improvement plan cost estimates
involved multiple site visits as well as interviews with key staff charged with caring for and
operating the property. Additional data, both provided by the City and secured independently,
was used to ascertain the general maintenance needs and necessary improvements.
Additionally, the consultant team referenced the goals outlined in Cupertino Parks and
Recreation System Master Plan, February 2020 to ascertain whether the minimal improvements
to Blackberry Farm aligned well with the same goals.
Pricing Methodology
The NGF team consulted with leading golf course and utilities contractors, suppliers, and golf
course owners who have recently executed projects to arrive at updated pricing for the various
line items included herein. Consulting team member Richardson | Danner combined the above
with their own recent experience bidding projects throughout the Bay Area and West Coast to
arrive at sampling of reasonable costs appropriate for the scope of work at Blackberry Farm GC.
Rising inflation rates, combined with increased material demands, shortages of qualified labor,
complicated shipping and logistics, and the overall demand for golf course construction services
are all significant factors that have contributed to a significant rise in pricing in recent years. In
2022, contractors are very busy, and some are completely booked through 2023.
Cost Estimates
The NGF shows cost estimates for the “Minimal Repairs” improvement scope for Blackberry
Farm Golf Course on the following pages. The total cost for the minimal repairs as defined by
the City of Cupertino ranges from approximately $1.8 million dollars to $2.7 million dollars,
depending on whether the City pursues reactivation of the well.
29
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 12
BLACKBERRY FARM GOLF COURSE - Probable Cost Estimate - Minimal Repair Scope
Quantity Unit Cost
1.0 REPLACING THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM (Potable Option)
1.1 Mobilization LS 25,000.00 $ 25,000
1.2 Valve-in-head sprinkler with swing joint 340 EA 475.00 161,500
1.3 Non-valve-in-head 3/4" rotor sprinkler with swing joint 60 EA 125.00 7,500
1.4 2" Isolation Valve with saddle and Valve box 64 EA 350.00 22,400
1.5 1" Quick Coupling Valve 26 EA 150.00 3,900
1.6 Central Computer and Communication Interface 1 EA 25,000.00 25,000
1.7 Solar Weather Station 1 EA 10,000.00 10,000
1.8 1-1/2" Remote Control Valve with box 16 EA 350.00 5,600
1.9 1" Remote Control Valve (DRIP) with box 45 EA 500.00 22,500
1.10 Square head Gate Valve with box 15 EA 650.00 9,750
1.11 4-6" PVC Main line with fittings 5,600 LF 40.00 224,000
1.12 3" PVC Lateral (sub-main) with fittings 1,100 LF 8.00 8,800
1.13 2" PVC Lateral (sub-main) with fittings 13,500 LF 6.00 81,000
1.14 Air Vent/vacuum relief 0 EA 1,000.00 -
1.15 #12 TWO WIRE CABLE 20,000 LF 1.50 30,000
1.16 6" Backflow LS 7,500.00 7,500
1.17 Salvage sprinklers, QCV's and Controllers LS 10,000.00 10,000
1.18 Performance Bond LS 4,604.50 4,605
1.19 Contingency (5%) LS 23,252.73 23,253
$ 682,308
1.20 ADDITIONAL ITEMS FOR WELL WATER OPTION
1.21
Existing Well Activation (Assumes new pump, drop pipe and controls)
(Further Study Required) LS $ 35,000
1.22 Rework Existing Delivery Line(s) LS 37,000
1.23 Water Tank (30,000 gal.) & 20-ft Wood Structure LS 750,000
1.24 Utility Allowance LS 20,000
1.25 Booster Pump LS 90,000
1.26 Water Tank Engineering LS 20,000
$ 952,000
2.0 REPLACING THE EMPTY PONDS WITH LOWLAND NATIVE AREAS
2.1 Grubbing / Turf Eradication 1.05 AC 2,000.00 $ 2,100
2.2 Native Area Hydroseeding & Tackifier 1.05 AC 10,890.00 11,435
$ 13,535
3.0 REPLACING TEES AND GREENS AS NEEDED
3.1
Grubbing / Turf Eradication (Green and Tee Sites All 9 Holes Plus
Practice Green) 1.32 AC 2,000.00 $ 2,640
3.2 Rough Grading (Green and Tee Sites All 9-Holes Plus Practice Green) 7,000 CY 5.25 36,750
3.3 Topsoil Management LS 5,000
3.4 Feature Shaping (Tees & Greens) LS 40,050
3.5 Tee Construction (New Const. / Finish Work) 24,775 SF 3.00 74,325
3.6 Green Construction (New Const. / Modified USGA & Finish Work) 32,700 SF 8.42 275,334
3.8 Soil Amendments & Fertilizers 1.32 AC 1,000.00 1,320
3.9 Hydro-sprigging (Tees) 0.57 AC 10,890.00 6,207
3.10 Sod Allowance 5,000 SF 0.55 2,750
3.11 Seed Greens Surfaces 32,700 SF 0.60 19,620
3.12 Grow-In LS 20,000
$ 483,996
30
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 13
4.0 INSTALLING NETTING TO PROTECT HOLE #6 TEE BOX FROM ERRANT SHOTS ON HOLE #4
4.1 New Netting Between Hole Nos. 4 and 6 LS 1.00 $ 172,000
$ 172,000
5.0 SHORTENING THE 9TH HOLE
5.1 Green and Tee Construction for this item included in 3.0 above NA NA $ -
5.2 Grubbing / Turf Eradication for Green Relocation 0.30 AC 2,000.00 600
5.3 Rough Grading for Non-Green Area 500 CY 5.25 2,625
5.4 Topsoil Management for Non-Green Area LS 1,500
5.5 Soil Amendments & Fertilizers 0.30 AC 1,000.00 300
5.6 Hydro-sprigging (Fairways & Roughs) 0.30 AC 10,890.00 3,267
5.7 Grow-In LS 1,500
5.8 Practice Hitting Bays Flipped (Steel Poles w/Netting & Artificial Matts) 8 bays 10,000.00 80,000
$ 89,792
6.0 STEPS OR TERRACING TO ADDRESS ADA (Golf Course Only)
6.1 Tee Construction related to this item included above in 3.0 NA NA $ -
Grubbing / Turf Eradication for Grading 0.2 AC 2,000.00 400
Rough Grading to Create Walkable Slope to Tees 350 CY 5.25 1,838
Topsoil Management for Non-Tee Area LS 550
Soil Amendments & Fertilizers 0.20 AC 1,000.00 200
Hydro-sprigging (Roughs) 0.2 AC 10,890.00 2,178
Grow-In LS 1,000
$ 6,166
7.0 TREE MANAGEMENT
7.1 Stump Removal 17 500.00 $ 8,500
$ 8,500
8.0 PROFESSIONAL FEES
8.1 Golf Course Architectural/Civil Engineering (Allowance) LS $ 250,000
8.2 Project Management LS 75,000
8.3 Permits LS 10,000
8.4 Well Permit Fees NIC n/a
$ 335,000
GOLF COURSE CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL (Potable Option) $1,791,297
CONTINGENCY (10%) $ 179,130
GOLF COURSE CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL (Well Water Option) $2,743,297
CONTINGENCY (10%) $ 274,330
9.0 Alternate - Bunkers
9.1 Bunker Construction (New Const. / Drainage & Finish Work) 14,400 SF 7.4 $ 106,560
Probable cost estimate is based on conceptual planning prepared as of this date. Environmental mitigation and/or consulting i s not
calculated in the above estimates. Unforeseen conditions, additional utility work, prolonged work due to seasonal conditions and
revenue losses during closure are not a part of the probable cost estimate. Prepared 02 -03-22, 16:11
LS – Lump Sum; EA – Each; LF – Linear Feet; AC – Acreage; CY – Cubic Yard; NA – Not Appliable; SF - Square Feet
31
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 14
Irrigation and Water Source Conversion
Irrigation of the Golf Course is a critical and costly element of the ongoing operation of the golf
course. In order to provide forecasts for water use and cost, NGF Consulting worked with
Russell D. Mitchell & Associates (“RDMA”), who previously completed a redesign of the
irrigation system for Blackberry Farm Golf Course.
CURRENT IRRIGATION SYSTEM
Irrigation of the Golf Course is a critical and costly element of the ongoing operation of the golf
course. Blackberry Farm Golf Course has approximately 12.5 acres of irrigatable land. When
constructed in 1962 the golf course was irrigated with use of a nearby shallow well and a
storage tank with gravity-fed pipes. This kept cost for irrigation relatively low. In the early 2000’s,
due to failure of the storage tank, the City converted the system to potable water use. In the
original construction the use of a hydraulic system for control of individual sprinkles made the
system relatively inefficient by today’s standards.
In 2011 the City hired Russell D Mitchell & Associates (RDMA) to provide a preliminary design
for replacement of the existing irrigation system to improve efficiency and effectiveness of use
irrigation. The new design was intended to irrigate the entire 12.5 acres while reducing water
use by 20%-25%. That project was put on hold due to the ongoing studies associated with the
overall Steven Creek Corridor Master Plan and potential renovations of the Golf Course.
Regardless, in 2014 the City decided to replace the hydraulic control system with a battery-
operated control system. The battery-operated system installed improved irrigation efficiency
considerably.
Over the past several years the state of California has experienced statewide drought conditions
and has required municipalities to restrict water use. San Jose Water (SJW) utilizes Rule 14.1 -
Water Shortage Contingency Plan to regulate water use at the municipal level. Generally, golf
courses are exempt from these restrictions until Drought Stage 4 is reached. However, the City
has included Blackberry Farm Golf Course in ongoing implementation of water use limitations.
In 2014 the City started placing water use limitations for the golf course. Table 1 - Irrigation
Water Use Pre-2014 and Post-2014 below indicates average water use for the years just prior
to 2014 and from 2014 through 2021.
Table 1 – Irrigation Water Use Pre-2014 and Post-2014
Year Range Average Annual Water Use
2008 through 2013 15.9 million gallons
2014 through 2021 8.5 million gallons
Utilizing the combination of the improvement to the irrigation control system and drought water-
use limitations, on average, the City reduced water use to 53% of pre-2014 levels. These
reductions were achieved with an irrigation system that is well past its useful life. One primary
method used to reduce water use has been to reduce the total acreage of turf being watered.
During some operational periods nearly 1/3 of all irrigation heads were turned off. This tends to
lead to browning of large areas of the golf course turf. Yet, more can be done to decrease water
use for the golf course.
32
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 15
The irrigation system is 60 years old and has outlived its useful life. There are multiple mainline
pipe breaks per year and lateral pipes break on a weekly basis. The infrastructure is outdated
and deteriorating. Irrigation system replacement parts are not available and repairs require
creative solutions to keep the system operational.
CURRENT WATER USE AND FUTURE PROJECTIONS
The average annual water use between 2014 and 2021 was 8.5 million gallons versus of 15.9
million gallons prior to 2014. Currently, that level of water reduction is primarily being met by
reducing turf irrigated. The irrigation regime varies annually based on weather, drought
restrictions, and system limitations. As the City explores water saving options updating and
improving the irrigation system is critical. The City anticipates the need to reduce irrigated
acreage during designated drought periods. A new irrigation system will give the City
opportunity to more efficiently use allotted water to provide a better golfing experience.
Table 2 – Water Use Projections with New Irrigation System - summarizes water use
projections if a new irrigation system is installed. Total water use will vary based on operational
decisions made by the City. In periods when no drought conditions exist the entire 12.5 acres
may be irrigated. In periods of water-use restrictions irrigated acreage may be reduced.
Currently, the City anticipates removing up to 3.0 acres from the irrigation regime in times of
drought restrictions.
RDMA used the Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU) method to calculate future water use
projects using different amounts of irrigated acreage.
Table 2 – Water Use Projections with New Irrigation System
Projected
Irrigated Acres
Total
Reduction in
Irrigated Acres
Projected
Annual Water
Use (ETWU)
(gallons)
Percentage
Reduction in
Water Use Vs
Irrigating Full
12.5 Acres
Percentage
Change from
Post-2014
Average of
8.5M Gallons
12.5 0.0
8,825,050 0% 4% More
11.5 1.0
8,119,046 8% 4% Less
10.5 2.0
7,413,042 16% 13% Less
9.5 3.0
6,707,038 24% 21% Less
Note: ETWU = (Acres*Acre-In *Eto*PF)/IE. To calculate ETWU RDMA assumed an
average Annual Evapotranspiration Rate (ETo) of 30 inches, a Plant Factor (PF) of
0.65%, and an Irrigation Efficiency (IE) of 75%.
33
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 16
WATER SOURCE CONVERSION TO WELL
The NGF team also analyzed the logistics and cost feasibility of reactivating the on-site well at
BFGC. A well located nearby the golf course is the original source of irrigation. The analysis
includes professional opinion on what is needed structurally to restore and revitalize the existing
well for use as the golf course irrigation source. This scope includes a preliminary cost estimate
to reactivate the well, as well as a comparison of annual operating costs for use of potable water
vs well water as the irrigation source at Blackberry Farm GC.
Current water use has averaged 26 acre-feet per year since 2014 (1 a.f. = 326,000 gal. x 26 =
8,476,000 gal./yr.). This estimated is based on actual water usage data from the water
department. Roughly 8.5 million gallons are now a baseline in terms of water use at the current
facility. According to the Balance Hydrologics well report (test performed November 2012)
provided by the City, the existing and available well is likely to produce up to160 GPM or 67,200
gallons during a 7-hour watering window. The well will produce more if the watering window is
expanded.
Daily Water Use Estimate – Average Summer Day
To utilize the existing well and provide adequate water for the 12.5 acres of turf on a hot
summer day, we estimate it will require approximately 91,000 gals. per day. Therefore, to
irrigate the course with well water a reservoir capable of holding the difference between the
ETWU and what the well can produce during the irrigation watering window (91,000 – 67,200 =
23,800 gals.) will be required. If the watering window were extended to 8 hours from the 7
hours, the storage reservoir could be smaller. If the course continues to be irrigated by City
potable water, no reservoir is required.
Conclusion: A 30,000-gallon storage reservoir is required to accommodate this turf footprint with
well water. A potable connection with level controls will be required as a backup for makeup
water or if the well is not operational for maintenance. We estimate 10% of the total water usage
during the summer months will be potable water.
Note: Fall is a good time to have a well consultant perform a new pump test, but only to
determine what maximum GPM could be obtained. With dry years experienced recently, this
would be a prudent course of action for the City. We point out that the 160 GPM was not
actually pumped but was calculated from a test at 50 GPM. NGF Consulting recommends the
City undertake this updated testing in concert with other due diligence of well fees, groundwater
use fees, verification of well reactivation requirements and costs, etc.
To properly irrigate by applying the appropriate percentage of ETo (i.e., greatly reduce or
eliminate browning of the turf) at a higher efficiency over the 12.5 acres of turf, RDMA estimates
the water use with a new system to be 8,825,000 gal./yr., as illustrated in Table 2. This is a 4%
increase in total water usage per year but the uniformity of the distribution of water over the
entire site will be greatly increased and more efficient.
Additional Discussion on Benefits/Efficiency of New System
We preface this discussion by reiterating that the primary reason to replace the current irrigation
system is that the system is past its useful life. The current system will only continue to
deteriorate. Installation of a new system will also increase the efficiency of the system on a per-
acre-irrigated basis. The existing irrigation system requires frequent repairs that redirect
resources from other maintenance needs and provides inadequate coverage and playing
conditions, likely resulting in lost revenues. (See Appendix A discussion relative to current
condition). Even the current golf course turf condition is acceptable to the City, the point at
which the irrigation system becomes unusable is approaching. (Think of replacing components /
34
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 17
appliances of a home or car). If the City is committed to continuing to offer affordable golf as a
recreation activity to its residents, the irrigation system will soon need to be replaced.
Numerous factors contribute to the potential efficiency of a new irrigation system in comparison
to the existing system being replaced. However, without understanding precisely how much
water (plus labor and material resources) is being wasted from breakages, pipe and head leaks,
equipment failures, and ongoing repairs under the existing system, it becomes difficult to
quantify the potential savings from a new system. At Blackberry Farm GC, we are confident that
using the same amount of water that has been used historically or less will result in better
conditions.
In addition to less waste from maintenance problems and costs associated with older parts, the
benefits of a new irrigation system include:
• Better coverage
• More uniform distribution
• More efficient head layout with better distribution
• Increased precision and control for the operator (more targeted watering):
▪ Easier to single out and address problem areas rather than having to switch
on/off an entire zone
▪ Automatic runtimes and water scheduling allows less wasted water
The existing turf at Blackberry Farm GC is a relatively high consumer of water in the context of
maintaining an acceptable playing surface. Our data and calculations tell us that not enough
water is currently being distributed based on the ETo and Plant Factor to achieve a specific
result. Our expert opinion is that with the same amount of water (~8.5 million gallons) currently
being used, BFGC will achieve improved conditions with a new system due to the factors
discussed above. Still, the cost does not change because the quantity of water is approximately
the same when irrigating the full 12.5 acres. Decreased water usage and potential cost savings
relative to post-2015 levels can be seen when irrigating less than 12 acres of turf.
35
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 18
WELL REACTIVATION ESTIMATED COSTS
To reactivate the on-site well for conversion from potable water to well water as an irrigation
source, new infrastructure and additional testing will be required to confirm the costs and
assumptions.
Estimated Well Reactivation Costs
The new infrastructure required to reactivate the well will include but not be limited to the
following items:
• Well upgrades
• New electrical meter
• Storage tank
• Booster pump
• New piping from well to storage tank
• New piping from potable source to storage tank with controls
Well Upgrades: Depending on the condition of the well but assuming the well casing is usable,
we estimate the cost to install a new pump, drop pipe and controls will be $35,000.
Electric Meter: We are assuming the electrical service to the well is sufficient, but a new
electrical service/meter will be required to service the booster pump located at the storage tank.
We estimate the new meter to be $20,000.
Storage Tank: Depending on which improvement plan is ultimately chosen for the golf course,
the size of the tank and required footprint will vary. We have included a place holder cost due to
the tank being installed on a tower. Based on a 30,000-gallon tank and 20’ wood structure, the
estimated cost is $750,000.
Booster Pump: A booster pump will be required at the tank locations to provide sufficient
pressure to operate the irrigation system. We estimate this booster pump will cost $90,000.
New Piping (from existing well to tank): If the existing pipe from the well is deemed unusable,
a new fill line with controls will be required from the well to the tank location. Due to the location
of the existing well, it will be difficult to get the fill line around all existing buildings and
hardscape. The length of this fill line could be 300-600 linear ft depending on the tank location.
We estimate the cost to install this pipe will cost between $15,000 and $27,000.
Potable backup source and controls to tank: The storage tank will require a potable backup
with an air gap and level controls for makeup water or if the well is down for maintenance. A
new line from the backflow to the tank with controls will cost $10,000.
Preliminary Estimated Hard Costs to Reactivate BFGC Well
6.0 Irrigation
6.1 Existing Well Activation* LS $35,000
6.2 Rework Existing Delivery Line(s) LS $37,000
6.3 Water Tank (30,000 gal.) & 20-ft Wood Structure LS $750,000
6.5 Utility Allowance LS $20,000
6.6 Booster Pump LS $90,000
Total $932,000
*Assumes new pump, drop pipe and controls (further study required)
36
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 19
Irrigation Cost Comparison – Potable vs. Well
Based on water usage data provided by the city, we analyzed the cost of potable water from
2015 through 2020. The average yearly cost of potable water was $62,176. The same usage
with well water would cost the City $39,489, resulting in annual savings of ±$22,700. Since the
potable water meter will still be in service as a backup the monthly cost of the water meter will
still be incurred. We estimate this cost to be $400 to $500 per month for a yearly cost of at least
$4,800.
The well water will require electrical costs for the two pumps (well and booster) We estimate the
two pumps will cost roughly $6,000 per year in electrical costs. The City should set aside an
additional $2,000 per year in maintenance of these pumps. Other factors being equal, and using
the low end of the estimated monthly cost for the water meter, the net annual savings on water
costs for the well vs. potable (based on inputs above, valid as of late 2021) after these
operational costs are factored in would be ±$9,900 per year (2022 dollars):
Annual Cost - Well Water vs. Potable Water
Annual Savings - Well Water ± $22,700
Operational Costs:
Potable Water Meter $4,800
Electrical $6,000
Maintenance $2,000
Net Annual Savings ±$9,900
We note that at the time of this report, NGF has not received updated monthly water meter
charge figures for the potable water meter to remain in service. Therefore, we have assumed
the $400 to $500 as stated above. We do know that the potable water at the BFGC uses the
same meter as the irrigation. As a result, the potable water rate is higher than the irrigation rate,
meaning the City is paying more than necessary for golf course irrigation water.
NGF has a call into the water department to obtain general costs by meter size. At the time of
this report, no further information has been received. San Jose Water Company has stated that
a new separate meter could cost around $30,000 for 4-inch meter installed. Adding a new
smaller potable water meter to separate the irrigation from potable water may be required.
Additionally, the City may be paying sewer fees based on water usage on the current meter.
Therefore, NGF recommends having two meters. As per the 2015 State Water Ordinance, all
irrigation must be separately metered from the potable water if there is more than 5,000 square
feet of planting.
Conclusion – Economics of Conversion from Potable to Well
Earlier, we estimated the total infrastructure costs to implement the well system will be about
$930,000. Annual irrigation expense savings, based on current assumptions and inputs, were
estimated to be ±$9,900. Therefore, the ‘payback’ period for this investment is about 94
years even longer when considering present value of the future savings.
37
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 20
Summary Benefits of Undertaking Minimal
Improvements for BFGC
The City of Cupertino should realize operational benefits by pursuing a minimal repair
improvement plan that addresses only the irrigation, empty ponds, tees, greens, netting on hole
nos. 4 and 6, hole no. 9 and driving net, and tee accessibility. Updated and expanded practice
areas will also attract golfers and facilitate new player development and other programming
opportunities. Additionally, the rehabilitated golf course will be more efficient to maintain. And,
these benefits do not consider the potential “cost of doing nothing” that could result from the
further deferral of facility improvements.
COST EFFICIENCIES
Areas where NGF Consulting sees a potential to reduce or reprioritize costs associated with the
golf facilities include:
• Reduce managed turf footprint (to save on water cost and focus maintenance effort)
• Replace aging irrigation infrastructure (to reduce annual costs on emergency repairs)
• Create more efficient circulation through addressing accessibility needs on the golf
course itself
• Replace aging tees and greens for better performance to reduce downtime during wet or
inclement weather
• Address safety issues where possible given the existing layout and configuration
• Update practice facilities to help attract customers and develop new golfers
ENVIRONMENTAL ORIENTATION
Improving the golf course as presented orients Blackberry Farm GC to a more naturalized
landscape. The additional benefit is a more pleasing aesthetic, and one that corresponds better
to the natural areas of the Stevens Creek Valley. Additionally, enhancements to upgrade the
golf course will greatly reduce or eliminate regularly occurring, but unanticipated repairs that
cost the city resources. Updating the infrastructure, especially drainage and irrigation related
items creates a more sustainable asset with lower expense and resources required for upkeep.
CONGRUENCE WITH PARKS & RECREATION MASTER PLAN GOALS
Minimal repairs to the golf course will go a long way with aligning the facilities to the Cupertino
Parks and Recreation System Master Plan environmental goals, especially as it relates to
conservation and sustainability. Advances in technology throughout the golf world have
provided better options for conserving our natural resources. The most important resource in
this case is water. The current irrigation system is old and inefficient. But upgrading to a newer
system with smart technology, on demand metrics, diagnostics and more environmentally
friendly materials in general, will allow the City to have better control over their water use and
the costs associated with irrigating turfgrass in California.
REPLACING EMPTY PONDS WITH NATIVE LOWLAND LANDSCAPE
As of early 2022, the former pond is serving the purpose of dry detention. The former pond has
been overtaken by the establishment of a variety of grasses and weeds, and resembles more of
38
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 21
a dry basin. Further work needs to be done to specify a more appropriate mix of wildflowers
and/or native plant material to realize full environmental benefit. By converting the old pond
areas to biofiltration basins, less water is required and maintenance can be aimed at greens,
tees and playable areas of turf. Converting this area into a native lowland landscape is
considered in the updated probable cost estimates.
These images depict potential “before” and “after” comparisons from the original 2014 report, showing the conversion
of the old pond area to a natural “meadow” lowland area. While this specific view shows the conceptual view of Hole
No. 8, it is also indicative of the transformation in landscape that could also be facilitated through turf reduction and
native area establishment under the Minimal Repairs improvement plan.
NGF CONCLUSION
The consultant team concludes that the scope of work outlined under a minimal repair scope
aligns very well with the City’s Master Plan goals, specifically as it relates to:
• Conservation
• Tree management
• The creation of lowland plant communities
• A reduced turf footprint
• More efficient use of water
All of these outcomes support the functionality of Cupertino’s natural environment and in a
recreational setting for people to enjoy. The way golf courses are designed, built, and managed
has evolved over time to better consider habitat needs. More than ever, ecology and
sustainability are built into the process of creating any golf facility.
Through the enhancement of access to tees and other golf features and addressing ADA issues
throughout the facilities, Blackberry Farm Golf Course becomes much more equitable in its
accessibility for the public.
The minimal repair scope is certainly one way to revitalize and improve the quality of a public
asset that would become much more usable for everyone. Better conditioning, turf performance
and visual appeal all contribute to polishing a long-standing community asset.
39
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 22
Appendices
Appendix A – Assessment of Golf Course Components
Appendix B – Minimum Safety Set-Backs Exhibit
Appendix C – Miscellaneous Exhibits
40
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 23
APPENDIX A – ASSESSMENT OF GOLF COURSE COMPONENTS
Tees: In general, tees are in poor condition and are crowned (i.e., are not level.) Turf suffers
from over-shading due to proximity of trees, and tree density (i.e., overplanting). Drainage
appears non-existent with native soils likely forming the tee subgrades. Even though tees have
been rebuilt occasionally, the extremely small sizes create constant wear and they simply
cannot keep up with the use. As of 2022, it appears that even more usable space has been lost,
particularly, at the 8th hole where the entire right half of the tee has been abandoned. This is
especially problematic because Hole No. 8 is a par-3, enduring short iron shots.
Tees also do not offer yardage flexibility to the degree necessary to serve golfers of varying
abilities. The yardage difference between the back tees and the forward tees is just 134-yards,
an average of 15 yards per hole. Developing new tees for shorter forward yardages encourages
more new players, young players and senior players, and can have the effect of promoting more
play from tee yardages appropriate to individual skill level.
During the site visits, we observed that a few tees, most notably on Holes #2 and #3, have ADA
access issues. Some customers struggle to navigate the steeper embankment leading up to
these tees. At minimum, accessibility should be reinstated through softening the embankments
or providing steps up to tees. However, steps may also be problematic depending on the needs
of the individual. The location of these areas is shown in Appendix C, Exhibit 2.
Fairways and Roughs: Turf quality is average-to-poor, with shaded areas being in the worst
condition. In recent years, the City has tried to address this through in-house tree removal.
However, as of 2022, seventeen (17) stumps ranging from 18 inches to 36 inches remain in
place. Turf conditions beyond the root structure seem to be improved, but not still cannot be
considered up to high standard. Drainage is lacking at points where natural grades do not
convey water to low areas and the few drains installed on the course. Turf is a variety of
Bermudagrass, ryegrass and kikuyugrass. Some small patches of fescue-type turf and hearty
bentgrass (likely left over from original greens planting) can also be found. Compounding turf
conditions is the antiquated irrigation system that delivers poor coverage, inefficient irrigation
pressure, and is a constant source of leaks and breaks.
Greens: Greens are very small with poa annua, an acceptable greens “turf” that overtakes
bentgrass, especially in the Bay Area region. Where the greens are not in excess shade, the
surfaces are acceptable. There are significant patches of poor quality, which is likely the result
of multiple factors: poor irrigation, shade, age and size. In terms of size, the greens are
extremely small and do not heal from day-to-day when the course is busy. Greens for a course
of this length (with many short shots played from tees that are hit high and cause deeper ball
marks) should be as much as three times (3x) the size of the greens presently managed.
Greens are reported to be original and were likely built on native soils with only a nominal
volume of sand mixed to available soils. Considering the age and other factors, the conditions
are “good.” The overall quality is well below what can be attained with new, replaced rootzones
and modern drainage systems. (Note: The No. 3 green was rebuilt in recent years and is, as a
result, in better condition than others.)
Bunkers: Sand bunkers, of which there are nine (9) in total, are well past their expected
lifecycle. Sand has been added to bunkers throughout the years, which amounts to the only
significant care they have received. Adding sand causes the floors to rise up and eventually
become elevated in relationship to green surfaces. This “volcano” effect is not only a poor
aesthetic, but it sends a signal that the course has been neglected. In most climates sand
bunkers get new sand replaced every 2-3 years with infrastructure (drainage and subgrades)
renovated every 7-10 years. According to staff there has been no work to sand bunkers (except
41
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 24
sand being added with occasional edging work) since the course was originally built in the
1960s.
Ponds: Originally the course had a series of ponds and streams that formed a water feature
through the course. These ponds were filled with a manual valve from the creek. The ponds
were taken out of service due to failure of a diversion structure between the source and the
ponds. Additionally, the upper pond does not hold water due to porous soils. The ponds never
served as an irrigation reservoir for the golf course, at least not in the past several decades.
While no detailed inspection of ponds was made by NGF Consulting, visual inspection shows
soil cracking and conditions that tend to support potential leaks should they be refilled with
water.
As of 2021, the former pond has been overtaken by the establishment of a variety of grasses
and weeds and resembles more of a dry basin. While not currently serving any significant
function, the landform presents an interesting feature on the golf course. Modern pond
construction for soil types in this region would generally call for artificial liners such as HDPE
plastic sheeting laid over a geotextile fabric. However, NGF is not recommending reconstruction
of the ponds (i.e., lining) as we feel evaporation and resulting water cost would be
counterproductive. Alternatively, we recommend conversion of the pond areas to a passive
naturalized landscape that can serve the area with biofiltration (see below).
Irrigation System: No in-depth evaluation was made of the irrigation system. In general, the
system is original to the c. 1960s course construction and has been held together with various
patches, repairs and some newer equipment. A typical irrigation system in this region will last
from 18 to 25 years. The Blackberry Farm GC system has now (tried) to outlive its intended
lifecycle by nearly three-fold. The system is “hydraulic” controlled, a method of control that is
now so old most turf suppliers no longer have personnel who have even heard of such
technology. During our visits we observed hand-watering by the grounds crew in order to
overcome this less-than-desirable system. The downside of such an older system is poor
coverage (too much overlap or not enough), leaks, breaks and the constant vigilance by staff
that takes their time and energy away from areas and maintenance that the public can see and
appreciate more.
Cart Paths: The facility has 4 carts for patrons who are not able to walk the 9-hole course.
Where paths are present (at just a few locations) they are narrow and not configured well. There
is little compliance with ADA guidelines in terms of curbing or access. The cart paths, where
present, are showing their age with declining functionality for their intended purpose. In addition,
carts are expected to navigate the hill between Hole Nos. 3 and 4. This slope and informal path
are difficult for people to navigate on foot, let alone by cart. Ground moisture and muddy
conditions can make this a challenge, further adding to the wear and tear on the golf course, but
more importantly presenting a potential accessibility and safety issue for golfers and patrons.
42
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 25
The absence of cart paths in general means guidelines for accessible ingress/egress from golf features,
use of accessible routes, and accommodation for alternative cart usage is poor. (Guidelines for
accessible golf courses can found in the separate attached report titled “Accessible Golf Courses” by the
United States Access Board).
Trees/Stumps: Trees form the landscape theme for Blackberry Farm GC. As noted, trees line
all golf holes except where poles and netting have existed along with other park uses. Overall,
trees are too prevalent and cause too much shade for turf to thrive and be healthy for golf uses.
Where shade is most pervasive, turf does not grow, and the ground is bare. Many trees are
rootbound, with roots forming into a dense, tangled mass that occupies extensive playable turf
area. Some exposed roots interfere with golfers, maintenance equipment, surface drainage, and
irrigation. However, NGF notes that many trees are in decline. This condition is likely a result of
aging trees, regional blight(s), and, in some areas, overcrowding where tree groupings are too
close in proximity.
Where trees have been cut down, several stumps remain (see image below Appendix C, Exhibit
3). As of 2022, seventeen (17) sizable stumps remain, which has somewhat improved localized
turf conditions. However, with stumps and root structure still intact, limiting the benefit to turf and
golfer experience. If left in their current state some trees and/or the remaining stumps from
removal may cause potential safety issues for golfers including but not limited to:
• If players hit their shot without being aware that persistent roots are just under the
surface, they risk significant injury.
• Roots systems, if driven over, may cause loss of control with golf course or a tripping
hazard for walkers.
43
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 26
• The remaining stumps present the possibility of ricocheting golf shots that may strike
golfers on the same or adjacent holes.
• The presence of these root systems presents challenges to accessibility in general.
44
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 27
APPENDIX B – MINIMUM SAFETY SET-BACKS EXHIBIT
45
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 28
APPENDIX C – MISCELLANEOUS EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 - Minimum Improvement Exhibit
46
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 29
Exhibit 2 – Tee Areas with Steep Embankments
47
National Golf Foundation Consulting, Inc. – Blackberry Farm Golf Course, Cupertino, CA – 30
Exhibit 3 – Areas Where Tree Stumps are Present
48
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration
Feasibility Study
Prepared for: The City of Cupertino
Prepared by: MIG
2055 Junction Avenue, Suite 205
San Jose, CA 95131
February 2022
49
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 2
Introduction
This feasibility study describes a habitat restoration scenario for the Blackberry Farm Golf
Course if use of the golf course is discontinued. Restoration of the Blackberry Farm Golf
Course parcel would focus on converting the golf course to a natural park, including a diverse
ecosystem with native oak woodland and grassland plant communities that existed in this part
of Santa Clara County over a hundred years ago. Local examples of the successful restoration
and maintenance of urban wildlands include the nearby McClellan Ranch Preserve and
Guadalupe Oak Grove Park in San Jose.
The restoration that is proposed in this plan includes both active and passive restoration
actions, and development of trails for public access. Benefits include reduced water use,
reduced greenhouse emissions and air pollution, increased habitat, increased public access to
nature, and new educational opportunities to enhance existing park programs. There are
additional opportunities for future park amenities to further encourage park use.
PART 1 – SITE ASSESSMENT
Setting
The 14.5-acre Blackberry Farm Golf Course is surrounded by residential development to the
north and east. It is part of the Stevens Creek Corridor Park, which includes the golf course,
the historic Stocklmeir Orchard, Blackberry Farm Park, and McClellan Ranch Preserve. The
Stevens Creek Trail and riparian corridor borders the western edge of the Stevens Creek
Corridor Park. The Blackberry Farm Park is immediately south of the golf course and includes
buildings, pools, and picnic areas. South of the park is the McClellan Ranch Preserve, an 18-
acre natural preserve that houses a 4-H program, environmental education facilities, and the
offices of the Santa Clara Valley Audubon and the Friends of the Stevens Creek Trail. The
preserve is separated from the open space areas in the Santa Cruz Mountains by less than a
mile of residential development, which includes the Deep Cliff Golf Course that is located
immediately south of McClellan Ranch. “Golf course” in this study refers to the Blackberry
Farm Golf Course, unless otherwise noted.
Stevens Creek is 22 miles long. It originates in the Santa Cruz Mountains on the western flank
of Black Mountain in the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve and drains an area of
approximately 46 square miles. From its headwaters the creek flows into Stevens Creek
Reservoir. Past the reservoir, the creek flows north through dense residential and commercial
development in Cupertino, Los Altos, Sunnyvale, and Mountain View before emptying into San
Francisco Bay at Whisman Slough. The creek watershed has been modified, and currently
includes a portion of the Permanente Creek Watershed, due to the Permanente diversion
channel that connects the two creeks downstream of Fremont Avenue. In addition, flows in
Stevens Creek are affected by a dam at Stevens Creek Reservoir less than a mile upstream of
the Blackberry Farm Golf Course.
50
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 3
Stevens Creek Trail is a 9.4-mile multi-use recreation trail that is planned to extend along
Stevens Creek from the Santa Cruz Mountains to San Francisco Bay, and which is substantially
built, including 1.3 miles in Cupertino.
The project area is mainly flat with elevations ranging from approximately 297 feet to 347 feet
North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) (Google Inc. 2021).
The City of Cupertino, in partnership with the Santa Clara Valley Water District, completed an
award-winning restoration project along Stevens Creek through McClellan Ranch and
Blackberry Farm in 2008. The project included improvements to Stevens Creek for steelhead
trout, and restoration of adjacent riparian and upland habitats. Restoration of the golf course
would complement these past efforts.
Existing Habitat Conditions
Methods
The methods used to evaluate the existing biological resources present at the site include a
database and literature review, field survey, an assessment of plant communities and wildlife
habitats and corridors, an assessment of sensitive habitats and aquatic features, and a habitat
evaluation for the presence of special-status species.
Data Review
Available background information pertaining to the biological resources on and near the site
was reviewed prior to conducting field surveys. Information was compiled and subsequently
compared against site conditions during the site visit. The following sources were consulted:
California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) record search for 9-quadrangles
including: Lick Observatory, Isabel Valley, Eylar Mountain, Mount Day, Calaveras
Reservoir, San José East, Santa Teresa Hills, Morgan Hill, and Mount Sizer (CNDDB
2021).
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Rare Plant Program Inventory of Rare and
Endangered Plants of California record 9-quadrangle search, including: Lick
Observatory, Isabel Valley, Eylar Mountain, Mount Day, Calaveras Reservoir, San José
East, Santa Teresa Hills, Morgan Hill, and Mount Sizer (CNPS 2021). Quadrangle-level
results are not maintained for CRPR 3 and 4 species, so we also conducted a search of
the CNPS Inventory records for these species occurring in Santa Clara County (CNPS
2021).
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) CNDDB for natural communities of
special concern that occur within near or in the site (CNDDB 2021).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC)
tool (USFWS 2021).
Other relevant scientific literature, technical databases, resource agency reports, and
Federal Register notices and other information published by the USFWS and National
51
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 4
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to assess the current distribution of special-status
plants and animals in the vicinity of the site.
Field Survey
A site visit was conducted by MIG senior biologist Tay Peterson and MIG senior biologist
David Gallagher on December 2, 2021. During the site visit, MIG biologists assessed the
existing biotic habitats and plant and animal communities at the golf course and in adjoining
areas, assessed the potential for special-status species and their habitats to occur in the golf
course area, and identified potential jurisdictional habitats (e.g., waters of the U.S./state), and
other sensitive biological resources that could trigger the need for permits from state and
federal agencies.
Limitations
This feasibility study is based on one site visit to the golf course and surrounding areas,
research, and the author’s knowledge of the area. It did not include any protocol surveys or
multiple season surveys, but these are not necessary for this site, based on the conditions
observed and our familiarity with the habitats. The feasibility study provides a concept, which
would need to be developed further with a formal restoration plan. Cost estimates are at a
rough order of magnitude and will require refinement once a site design and a detailed
restoration plan are developed.
General Site Description
Existing Land Uses, Vegetation Communities, and Habitats
The golf course is developed with tees and fairways and trees planted to separate the
fairways; it currently lacks natural vegetation communities. Most of the golf course is turf grass
that is regularly watered and mowed. There are numerous mature trees present within the
site, including planted coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), which do not naturally occur in
the Santa Clara Valley. The site is regularly cleared of understory vegetation to maintain the
golf course, which precludes the establishment of native vegetation and wildlife habitat in this
area.
The golf course currently provides low-quality habitat for wildlife species because it is primarily
maintained as turf suitable for golfing and does not provide forage or nesting habitat for most
species. The wildlife most often associated with developed areas are those that tolerate
human disturbance, such as raccoons, opossums, geese, and several common urban birds.
However, the Stevens Creek riparian corridor is species-rich, so a wider variety of wildlife, not
generally associated with urban areas, may forage in, or move through the golf course, and
would certainly occupy restored habitat in this location.
Stevens Creek is an unusual creek on the San Francisco Peninsula because it has been
protected along most of its length, and therefore forms a continuous riparian buffer from its
headwaters until it enters tidal marsh in San Francisco Bay. It has been protected as a riparian
corridor for at least a century, and its value as a wildlife corridor has only increased over time
due to the urban development that surrounds the corridor. Continuous riparian buffers
provide important wildlife migration corridors, which are critical “movement highways” for
52
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 5
terrestrial species such as mammals and reptiles as well as for water dependent species such
as amphibians and waterfowl. Wildlife corridors counter habitat fragmentation and therefore,
are essential to wildlife survival and diversity.
The creek supports a mixed riparian woodland, with mature trees as an overstory and a
diversity of shrubs as an understory. Mixed riparian woodland habitats in California generally
support animal communities that contribute disproportionately to landscape-level species
diversity. The presence of seasonal water and abundant invertebrate fauna provide foraging
opportunities for many species, and the diverse habitat structure provides cover and breeding
opportunities. The mixed riparian woodland habitat adjacent to the golf course provides cover
and foraging habitat for a wide variety of terrestrial vertebrates (e.g., amphibians, reptiles, and
mammals), as well as several guilds of birds, including insectivores (e.g., warblers, flycatchers),
seedeaters (e.g., finches), and raptors. Cavity-nesting birds (e.g., swallows and woodpeckers)
may nest in the large trees in this habitat type.
Soils
The National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soils map of the golf course identified
one soil unit, 171-Elder fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded (NRCS 2021).
The Elder series consists of very deep, well drained soils that formed in alluvium from mixed
rock sources and occur in flood plains and is often subject to overflow during severe storms.
Flood Hazard
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) National Flood Insurance
Rate Program (NFIP) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Santa Clara County, California, and
unincorporated areas (Map Number 06085C0208H, May 18, 2009), much of the Blackberry
Farm Golf Course is within a Special Flood Hazard Area subject to inundation by the 1%
annual chance flood, also known as the 100-year flood. See the attached floodway graphic,
Blackberry Farm Golf Course: Regulatory Floodway. The 1% annual flood (also known as the
100-year flood, or the base flood), is the flood that has a 1% chance of being equaled or
exceeded in any given year.
Special-Status Plants
The CNPS (2021) and CNDDB (2021) identify 74 special-status plant species as potentially
occurring in the nine 7.5-minute quadrangles containing and/or surrounding the golf course.
All 74 of those potentially occurring special-status plant species were determined to be absent
from the golf course for at least one of the following reasons: (1) a lack of specific habitat (e.g.,
freshwater marsh) and/or edaphic requirements (e.g., serpentine soils) for the species in
question, (2) the geographic range of the species does not overlap the site, (3) the species is
known to be extirpated from the site vicinity, and/or (4) the habitats within the site are too
impacted to reasonably expect any special-status species to occur there.
Special-Status Animals
Based on a review of the USFWS and CNDDB databases, the biologists’ knowledge of
sensitive species, and an assessment of the types of habitats within the site, it was determined
that three wildlife species could potentially occur within or adjacent to the site. This
determination was made due to the presence of essential habitat requirements for the
53
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 6
species, the presence of known occurrences within five miles of the site, and/or the site’s
location within the species’ known range of distribution. The legal status and likelihood of
occurrence of special-status animal species in the project area are discussed in greater detail
below.
Special-status animal species that are not expected to occur in the golf course because of the
lack of suitable habitat, or the site is outside the known range of the species, and/or the site is
isolated from the nearest known extant populations by development or otherwise unsuitable
habitat include Central California Coast Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), California
giant salamander (Dicamptodon ensatus), California tiger salamander (Ambystoma
californiense), foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii), Santa Cruz black salamander (Aneides
flavipunctatus niger), San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia), burrowing
owl (Athene cunicularia), long-eared owl (Asio otus), peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus),
white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia), pallid bat (Antrozous
pallidus), and Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii).
Because the site is adjacent to Stevens Creek, three special-status species have the potential
to be present in the developed portions of the site: California red-legged frog, western pond
turtle, and San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat. In addition, the project site provides potential
habitat for nesting birds and bats that are protected by California Fish and Game code. These
resources are discussed in detail below.
California Red-legged Frog (Rana draytonii). Federal status: Threatened; State status:
Species of Special Concern. The California red-legged frog was federally listed as threatened
in June 1996 (USFWS 1996) based largely on a significant range reduction and continued
threats to surviving populations. Critical habitat was most recently designated in March 2010
(USFWS 2010). Designated critical habitat is not present in the project area. The historical
distribution of the California red-legged frog extended from the city of Redding in the Central
Valley and Point Reyes National Seashore along the coast, south to Baja California, Mexico.
The species’ current distribution includes isolated locations in the Sierra Nevada and the San
Francisco Bay area, and along the central coast (USFWS 2002).
The California red-legged frog inhabits freshwater pools, streams, and ponds throughout the
Central California Coast Range and isolated portions of the western slope of the Sierra
Nevada (Fellers 2005). Its preferred breeding habitat consists of deep perennial pools with
emergent vegetation for attaching egg clusters (Fellers 2005), as well as shallow benches to
act as nurseries for juveniles (Jennings and Hayes 1994). However, red-legged frogs will also
breed in small, shallow pools as well as intermittent streams. Non-breeding frogs may be
found adjacent to streams and ponds and may travel up to two miles from their breeding
locations across a variety of upland habitats to other suitable non-breeding habitats (Bulger et
al. 2003; Fellers and Kleeman 2007). However, the distance moved is highly site-dependent
and is influenced by the local landscape (Fellers and Kleeman 2007). California red-legged
frogs generally disperse during the wet season from mid-October to mid-April.
The Stevens Creek corridor contains suitable aquatic breeding habitat (i.e., long-lived pools or
slow-moving streams with emergent vegetation or other egg mass attachment sites) for the
54
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 7
California red-legged frog. Additionally, the riparian corridor along Stevens Creek provides
suitable foraging and dispersal habitat. Because of the proximity of the Stevens Creek
corridor, red-legged frogs have the potential to disperse through the site. The nearest known
breeding populations of red-legged frogs are in Permanente Creek in Rancho San Antonio
County and Open Space Preserve, approximately one mile west of the site; and in the upper
reaches of Stevens Creek, near Stevens Creek Reservoir, approximately three miles upstream
of the site. However, there are no documented occurrences of red-legged frog in the
urbanized reaches, including the entire downstream section of Stevens Creek (CNDDB 2021).
Even though the site contains suitable dispersal habitat for California red-legged frog, it is
highly unlikely that red-legged frogs would currently occur in the golf course, due to active
management of the golf course. It is also extremely unlikely that an individual from
Permanente Creek and the remote upstream portions of Stevens Creek would disperse
downstream as far as the site. If the site were restored in the future, it is feasible that red-
legged frogs could find upland refuge there.
Western Pond Turtle (Actinemys marmorata). Federal status: None; State status: Species
of Special Concern. The western pond turtle occurs in ponds, streams, and other wetland
habitats in the Pacific slope drainages of California (Bury and Germano 2008). Ponds or slack-
water pools with suitable basking sites (such as logs) are an important habitat component for
this species, and western pond turtles do not occur commonly along high-gradient streams.
Females lay eggs in upland habitats, in clay or silty soils in unshaded areas. Juveniles occur in
shallow aquatic habitats with emergent vegetation and ample invertebrate prey. Nesting
habitat is typically found within 600 feet of aquatic habitat (Jennings and Hayes 1994), but if
no suitable nesting habitat can be found close by, adults may travel overland considerable
distances to nest.
The Stevens Creek corridor contains suitable aquatic habitat for western pond turtle. Also, if
present in Stevens Creek, western pond turtle could potentially move into the adjacent upland
areas within the developed, grassy areas of the golf course. The nearest known documented
occurrences of western pond turtle are from Saratoga Creek near its confluence with
Calabazas Creek at Guadalupe Slough; the salt ponds, marshes, and channels along the Bay
Trail to the west, both approximately nine miles downstream of the site; and Stevens Creek
County Park, approximately three miles upstream of the site. There are no documented
occurrences of western pond turtle in the urbanized reaches of Stevens Creek (CNDDB 2021).
Even though the open grassy areas of the site contain suitable upland habitat for western
pond turtle, it is highly unlikely that pond turtles would currently disperse into the site from
the Stevens Creek corridor due to the high levels of disturbance. Furthermore, it is extremely
unlikely that an individual from the downstream areas near the San Francisco Bay and the
remote upstream portions of Stevens Creek would disperse into the golf course. If the area
was restored to oak savanna habitat, it is feasible that western pond turtles could nest there.
San Francisco Dusky-footed Woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens). Federal status: None;
State status: Species of Special Concern. The San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat occurs in
a variety of woodland and scrub habitats throughout San Mateo County and the adjacent
55
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 8
Central Coast Range, south to the Pajaro River in Monterey County (Hall 1981, Zeiner et al.
1990). San Francisco dusky-footed woodrats prefer riparian and oak woodland forests with
dense understory cover, or thick chaparral habitat, and build large, complex houses of sticks
and other woody debris, which may be maintained by a series of occupants for several
generations (Carraway and Verts 1991; Lee and Tietje 2005). Also, they will often build these
stick houses in the canopy of trees. Woodrats also use human-made structures, and can nest in
electrical boxes, sheds, pipes, abandoned vehicles, wooden pallets, and portable storage
containers. The breeding season for dusky-footed woodrat begins in February and sometimes
continues through September, with females bearing a single brood of one to four young per
year (Carraway and Verts 1991).
The Stevens Creek corridor contains suitable habitat for dusky-footed woodrat and woodrats
may occasionally forage in the golf course, but the site does not currently contain suitable
habitat to support woodrat houses. Woodrats would be expected to colonize riparian
woodland, habitat islands, or oak trees on a restored site.
Bat Colonies. Bats are protected under Sections 4150-4155 of the California Fish and Game
Code. Bats tend to forage and roost near freshwater sources. Stevens Creek provides a
seasonal source of freshwater, and cavities within trees and structures may provide suitable
day and maternity roost habitat for many species of bats. The trees on the golf course may
provide habitat for bats that roost in foliage but are not likely to provide habitat for cavity
roosting bats. It is unlikely that the golf course supports a bat maternity colony, although bats
may forage over the golf course from roosts in the adjacent Stevens Creek corridor.
Roost sites for bats are critical resources for mating, hibernation, rearing young, conserving
energy, and protection from adverse weather and predators. Bat selection of roost sites is
influenced by distribution and abundance of food resources, risks of predation, as well as the
physical attributes of the roost itself. Roost selection is paramount to the success of a species
and the removal of roost habitat could adversely impact species survivorship (Kunz 1982).
Maternity roosts are particularly important and vulnerable to impacts.
The removal of non-native trees may temporarily impact roosting bats but will not be
significant due to the presence of higher quality roosting habitat in the nearby Stevens Creek
corridor. The planting of native oak trees, including restoring native grassland habitat and
expansion of the riparian habitat along Stevens Creek will increase the amount of available
high-quality foraging habitat. Additionally, native oaks, once mature will provide higher quality
roosting habitat for bats.
Nesting Birds. Birds may nest within the trees, shrubs, dense stands of vegetation, and man-
made structures in and around the site. All bird species are protected under California Fish
and Game code and the California Migratory Bird Protection Act; and most are protected
under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Sensitive and Regulated Plant Communities and Habitats
Natural communities have been considered part of the Natural Heritage Conservation triad,
along with plants and animals of conservation significance since the state inception of the
56
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 9
Natural Heritage Program in 1979. CDFW determines the level of rarity and imperilment of
vegetation types; and tracks sensitive communities in its Rarefind database (CNDDB 2021).
In addition to tracking sensitive natural communities, CDFW also ranks vegetation alliances,
defined by repeating patterns of plants across a landscape that reflect climate, soil, water,
disturbance, and other environmental factors (Sawyer et al. 1995). CDFW provides the
Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program’s (VegCAMP) currently accepted list of
vegetation alliances and associations and denotes which alliances are classified as sensitive
(CDFW 2021).
Natural Communities of Special Concern. There are no CDFW classified sensitive natural
communities within the golf course.
Sensitive Vegetation Alliances. There are no CDFW classified sensitive plant communities
within the golf course.
CDFW Stream/Riparian Habitat. California Fish and Game Code includes regulations
governing the use of, or impacts to, many of the state’s fish, wildlife, and sensitive habitats,
including the bed and banks of rivers, lakes, and streams. Stevens Creek and its associated
riparian habitat up to the top of bank is subject to CDFW jurisdiction under Section 1600 et
seq. of State Fish and Game Code. However, Stevens Creek and its associated riparian habitat
is entirely outside of the site.
Waters of the U.S./State. Stevens Creek meets the definition of waters of the U.S/state,
which is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). However, Stevens Creek is entirely outside of the golf
course (see the Concept Plan). Also, the USFWS’s National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map of
the site identified Stevens Creek as a seasonally flooded forested/shrub wetland. The NWI
also shows three additional jurisdictional features, including two freshwater ponds and a
freshwater emergent wetland (NWI 2021). These features correspond to water features that
are part of the landscaping but are not currently maintained because they no longer hold
water. During the site visit, no water or wetland vegetation were observed in all three
features. Additionally, the three features were not hydrologically connected to the Stevens
Creek corridor.
NWI maps are based on interpretation of aerial photography, limited verification of mapped
units, and/or classification of wetland types using the classification system developed by
Cowardin et al. (1979). These data are available for general reference purposes and do not
necessarily correspond to the presence or absence of jurisdictional waters. If restoration of the
golf course impacts the former ponds (e.g., grading), a formal wetland delineation would be
required to determine if these features meet the definition of Waters of the U.S.
Critical Habitat/Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). There is no designated critical habitat or
essential fish habitat within the site, but Stevens Creek is designated critical habitat for Central
California Coast Steelhead (NMFS 2005). Additionally, Stevens Creek has been identified as a
priority for steelhead population restoration by the Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat
Collaborative Effort (FAHCE), which includes federal, state, and local stakeholders. The FAHCE
57
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 10
is in the process of developing a Fish Habitat Conservation Plan for three local watersheds,
including Stevens Creek.
Central California Coast Steelhead are known to occur in Stevens Creek (Leidy et al. 2005,
Leidy 2007; CNDDB 2021); However, the status of steelhead populations in coastal San
Francisco Bay streams, including Stevens Creek, remains highly uncertain, and it has been
determined that sections of upper Stevens Creek, including the project site, are periodically
inaccessible due to passage barriers (Domenichelli & Associates 2017; Williams et al. 2016).
Permits
There are no regulated habitats within the boundaries of the Blackberry Farm Golf Course.
The riparian zone of Stevens Creek does not extend into the golf course and the depressions
within the golf course that may have been ponds in the past do not currently exhibit the
parameters to meet the definition of waters of the U.S./state. No activities envisioned in this
feasibility study would extend into the jurisdiction of the resource agencies and trigger Clean
Water Act, Porter Cologne Water Protection Act, or California Fish and Game Code permit
requirements.
Historic Habitat Conditions
Research on the historical ecology (pre-European settlement) of the region revealed that oak
savanna was likely the dominant vegetation community at the site (SFEI 2015). Oak savannah
woodland has a low density of oaks with a mostly open canopy. The understory was likely an
annual grassland with scattered shrubs and perennial grasses. Based on the proximity of the
site to Stevens Creek and soil type (the soil texture at the site is fine sandy loam), coast live
oak (Quercus agrifolia) was likely the dominant tree in the savannah woodland. Coast live oaks
occur on a wide range of soils derived from diverse parent materials and having a variety of
textures from sandy loam to clay. Coast live oak generally occur on mesic (wet) sites, including
slopes, savannas, alluvial terraces, canyon bottoms, and along streambanks (Sawyer and
Keeler-Wolf 1995).
Of the other native oak species known to historically occur in Santa Clara Valley, black oak
(Quercus kelloggii) may have been interspersed with coast live oak, especially farther away
from Stevens Creek, since black oaks are most common on dry, well-drained soils with sandy
loam to gravelly clay loam textures. Black oak generally occurs from level valley floors to
alluvial slopes, rocky ridges, and steep slopes, with steep slopes the most typical. Valley oak
(Quercus lobata) and blue oak (Quercus douglasii) were likely absent from the site based on
the soil type at the site. Valley oaks generally occur in deep, rich soils with silty to sandy clay
loam textures typical of floodplains and valley floors. They also depend on water-table access.
Furthermore, in the SF Bay Area, soil textures identified as fine-loamy and loamy were
positively correlated with valley oak presence, while fine, fine-silty, and sandy soil textures
were significantly negatively correlated with valley oaks (Grossinger et. al 2008; Sawyer and
Keeler-Wolf 1995). Blue oak generally occurs on dry soils characterized by a claypan or a clay-
rich subsoil layer, which is lacking at the site (Borchert et al. 1993).
58
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 11
Climate Change
Climate change refers to any significant change in the measures of climate lasting for an
extended period, including major changes in temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns,
among other effects, which occur over several decades or longer. Over the past century,
human activities have released large amounts of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases
into the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases trap energy from the sun in the Earth’s atmosphere
and cause it to warm. Trend projections indicate that atmospheric concentrations of GHG
emissions will continue to increase throughout this century. The specific effects of these
increases will vary by location, but in general average temperatures are projected to increase,
resulting in changes in precipitation, sea level rise, and increased risks of extreme weather
events, flooding, droughts, and wildfires. The following changes are projected to occur in the
coming decades over the Santa Clara Valley:
Even with substantial global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the Santa
Clara Valley will likely see a significant temperature increase by mid-century, based on
modeling through Cal-Adapt (2021).
Precipitation in the Santa Clara Valley will continue to exhibit high year-to-year
variability with very wet and very dry years. The Bay Area’s largest winter storms will
likely become more intense, and potentially more damaging, in the coming decades
(Cal-Adapt 2021).
Future increases in temperature, regardless of whether total precipitation goes up or
down, will likely cause longer and deeper California droughts, posing major problems
for water supplies, natural ecosystems, and agriculture (Cal-Adapt 2021).
Climate change will likely influence the types of plant communities that will do well at the
golf course, as some plant species may thrive in the changing conditions while others may
decline. In particular, the increased temperatures and changes in rainfall pattern are likely to
affect growing conditions on the golf course. Native species adapted to the projected
increased temperature ranges as well as to longer dry periods punctuated by shorter
periods of heavy precipitation and possible flooding would generally do well at the site
under projected climate change scenarios. The habitat restoration scenario outlined below—
of allowing the riparian corridor to naturally expand, and to foster the development of oak
savanna on the golf course—is compatible with predicted climate change effects.
59
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 12
PART 2 – RESTORATION OPPORTUNITY
Creating an Urban Wildland
Open natural spaces are increasingly important for both humans and native wildlife as an
escape from urbanization and isolation. The concept of an urban wildland is to integrate
natural landscapes in the urban environment as a different type of recreational open space
than well-manicured parks. Both children and adults need natural areas to explore and have
close contact with nature, and that are accessible in the city. Urban wildland spaces also
provide essential habitat patches and corridors to ensure the survival of native species in the
human-dominated landscape. Reconceptualizing urban parks and recreation areas to include
natural habitats, or urban wildlands, therefore has multiple health and environmental benefits.
Urban wildlands are a new and important habitat type within the urban landscape (Lundholm
and Richardson 2010).
Cities are challenging locations for native restoration projects since urban habitats tend to be
fragmented and frequently disturbed, and resources are limited. The soils have typically been
greatly disturbed and no longer provide an optimum growing environment. Restoring native
habitats in an urban landscape requires incorporating land management principles and
activities aimed at returning a damaged or degraded ecosystem back to ecosystem health and
sustainability. Many restoration projects look to ecological conditions present before the time
of European settlement as the landscape that should be restored because these are the
landscapes that are adapted to the prevailing environmental conditions.
Urban wildlands often need to balance the goals of ecological restoration and access for
outdoor recreation. Given that the Stevens Creek Corridor Park will remain a regional
recreational resource, restoration planning and goals will need to include pathways that
encourage active exploration of nature, while also maintaining ecologically intact habitats.
A successful urban wildland will give users a stronger connection with nature, which can be
further enhanced with trails, benches, and an outdoor classroom to help foster outdoor
education and stewardship. Future development of interpretive features and a nature play
area could further promote a healthy lifestyle and foster multi-cultural connections, as these
elements may attract a subset of the public focused on those activities. While connections to
nature may not have been their initial goal, they may be drawn in to enjoy the site’s natural
areas.
Ecological Benefits
The Blackberry Farm Golf Course land was formerly an oak savannah adjacent to the riparian
corridor of Stevens Creek (SFEI 2015). An oak savannah is essentially a grassland dotted with
oak trees. Oak woodlands and savannahs have the greatest species richness of any vegetation
community in California and are especially rich and diverse when adjacent to riparian corridors
(Sawyer and Keiler-Wolf 1995). A suite of locally native species, particularly birds, are strongly
associated with oaks, including white-breasted nuthatches (Sitta carolinensis), oak titmice
(Baeolophus inornatus), and acorn woodpeckers (Melanerpes formicivorus). Annual grasslands
60
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 13
are species rich with native forbs that increase floral resource abundance and diversity for
native insect floral visitors, some of which are important pollinators, as well as naturalized
honeybees (Apis mellifera).
Photo 1. An oak woodland savannah with recreation trails at Guadalupe Oak Grove Park in San Jose.
Grasslands are particularly important since populations of important pollinators have been
declining throughout much of North America over the past couple of decades. Beekeepers in
the U.S. have been suffering from unusually high rates of colony loss of the naturalized
honeybee. The abundance of several bumblebee species in the western U.S. has declined
dramatically, with at least one species now believed to be extinct. And both the eastern and
western populations of the monarch butterfly have declined precipitously, with the eastern
population reaching a new record low in recent years.
Re-establishing a natural ecosystem at the Blackberry Farm Golf Course would maximize long-
term sustainability at the site by using native plants that are adapted to the specific climate
conditions of the region and the cycles of heat and drought that are common in the Santa
Clara Valley. Once established, native oaks and native shrubs will need no irrigation and the
mixture of trees and shrubs will provide robust root systems that will prevent erosion and
substantially increase runoff infiltration and uptake of excess nutrients and other pollutants
carried by urban stormwater runoff, which will also improve aquatic habitat for steelhead in
Stevens Creek. These habitat types are also resilient to periodic flooding, which could occur in
the flood zone areas mapped in the area.
61
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 14
Natural ecosystems in urban environments can also significantly reduce greenhouse emissions
by helping to store carbon, as well as reducing urban air pollution. This will help California to
reach its targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions, adding to our state’s leadership
model around the world in slowing and reversing the rate of climate change. Climate change
models for the region predict a continued warming trend, less annual rainfall, and an increase
in the frequency and magnitude of extreme weather events. A natural ecosystem will mediate
heat island effects generated by heat absorption in and reflection by surrounding urban areas
that are dominated by asphalt, concrete, and buildings; and will compensate for swings in
local weather exacerbated by climate change.
Restoration Approach
Because the Blackberry Farm Golf Course is relatively small, highly disturbed, and surrounded
by an urban landscape, there are significant restrictions on what native ecological conditions
can be restored. For example, a full conversion of the existing grassland to a native grassland
is not a realistic goal because many non-native grasses are naturalized, and it is unlikely that
such grasses could be eradicated in a sustainable way from the site except at enormous cost
and effort. Instead, the restoration should focus on recovering or reintroducing the key flora of
oak woodland savanna and annual grassland communities. Furthermore, natural ecosystems
are spatially and temporally dynamic with shifting boundaries and species composition. This
natural state of flux, driven by natural ecosystem processes, is critical to the long-term health
of natural ecosystems. Because of the urban setting of the Blackberry Farm Golf Course, some
natural ecosystem processes will need to be suppressed or eliminated, which will require
alternative methods to maintain sustainable native habitats. For example, oak woodland will
naturally displace annual grassland through the process of ecological succession, so to
maintain grassland habitat, management actions that are suitable in an urban environment,
such as mowing or managed grazing, will be needed. While fire has historically served this
purpose it is no longer suitable to use in this location.
Restoration of natural habitats is a complex, long-term process that requires the development
of a restoration plan with planning, implementation, and monitoring components. The
restoration plan will provide a robust framework that identifies short- and long-term
restoration goals, effective and appropriate designs to meet restoration goals, regular
evaluation of restoration efforts to determine whether goals are being met, and contingency
and adaptive management measures if goals are not being met. Based on our assessment of
the site conditions at the Blackberry Farm Golf Course, the following should be considered if
the site is restored to a native ecosystem.
Overview
The recommended approach is shown on the attached graphic, Blackberry Farm Golf Course:
Urban Wildland Restoration Approach, and includes the following elements:
62
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 15
Delineate a riparian regeneration zone to allow the Stevens Creek riparian corridor to
naturally invade portions of the existing golf course. Manage the vegetation to foster
native species growth.
Establish wildflower meadows in an already existing open area of the golf course.
Establish habitat islands similar to those in McClellan Ranch, including flowering shrubs
and native oaks that support wildlife species, including pollinators.
Areas not selected for restoration will be transitioned to low maintenance zones,
managed as annual grasslands.
Allow the existing coastal redwood trees to remain.
Incorporate sustainable management practices.
Incorporate fire resiliency management practices using defensible space principles.
Plan for a minimum three-to-five-year establishment period.
Establish accessible walking trails that connect with the Stevens Creek Trail and
develop other visitor amenities, such as seating, an outdoor education area, and
Ranger space.
Allow for future recreation development along the trails, such as additional seating and
gathering areas, interpretive elements, an exercise par course, and nature play area.
These are discussed in further detail below:
Riparian Regeneration Zone. The riparian corridor along Stevens Creek will naturally expand
into the existing landscaped areas. The extent of this expansion is unknown but will be
influenced by the existing hydrology and soil composition at the site. Therefore, a 50-foot
riparian regeneration zone (buffer) is proposed to allow the riparian corridor to naturally
expand into the existing landscaped area. Invasive shrub and tree species will be removed in
this area until native species become established. The budget includes an option of planting
100 5-gallon shrubs in this area if desired.
Photo 2. Existing riparian
corridor along Stevens
Creek. The proposed
restoration approach
includes a riparian
regeneration zone, which
would allow the Stevens
Creek riparian corridor to
naturally invade portions of
the existing golf course.
63
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 16
Establish Wildflower Meadows. A wildflower meadow is an open area where herbaceous
flowering annuals and perennial bunchgrasses are dominant. Woody species are absent or
present in low numbers. A wildflower meadow is a complex and diverse interactive plant
community that provides important habitat for pollinators and other wildlife. Once a
wildflower meadow becomes a well-established plant community, it is less susceptible to weed
invasions and requires very little regular maintenance. However, long-term management is
important to maintain a meadow over time since most meadows are only a transitional stage
and will be replaced by shrubs and trees. Establishment of a wildflower meadow would involve
selecting an existing area free of woody vegetation, removal of the non-native turf grasses by
natural methods (e.g., grazing using goats), tilling of the site, and then hydroseeding or seed
drilling a diverse, locally sourced native wildflower and grass mix.
Photo 3. The proposed restoration approach includes the creation of a wildflower meadow, which could be nestled
between the existing rows of redwood trees.
Creation of Habitat Islands. Habitat islands are defined areas where focused restoration
efforts would take place. They can include upland refugia habitats for native amphibian and
reptile species when Stevens Creek experiences high flows from winter storms, and habitats
focused on pollinator conservation, which includes high density planting of a diverse array of
flowering native shrubs and herbaceous annuals. They are a manageable size for restoration
64
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 17
efforts, both in terms of cost and chances of successful establishment within the 3-to-5-year
time period. It is recommended that the composition of the islands follow three styles: islands
with oaks and grasses, islands with flowering shrubs and no oaks, and islands with a
combination of oaks and flowering shrubs.
Creation of a habitat island would involve the removal of non-native grasses, herbs, and
woody species by natural methods (e.g., hand removal and soil solarization), followed by
seeding and planting of native species. These areas are typically fenced temporarily to allow
establishment of the planted vegetation and weeds are suppressed using mulch. Generally,
downed vegetation, including trimmings and thatch (organic matter) are left in place to
provide cover for wildlife.
Photo 4. A native habitat restoration site at McClellan Ranch Preserve, south of Blackberry Farm is an example of a
habitat island with diverse flowering plants. The Stevens Creek riparian corridor is in the background.
The creation of habitat islands can occur over time to allow focused use of resources, provide
an educational element so that visitors can see how the restoration process proceeds over
time (e.g., use interpretive signage to highlight habitat islands created in the first year, second
year, etc.), and to determine what species grow best in the conditions present at the golf
course (e.g., if a species dies in the first year then it can be removed from the planting palette
and replaced with a more suitable species).
65
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 18
Low Maintenance Zones, and Potential Bioswale Planting areas. The areas outside of
restored habitat islands and wildflower meadows will be transitioned to low maintenance
zones. The turf grass in these zones will be allowed to grow naturally (i.e., no irrigation or
fertilizer) and will be grazed by goats or mowed once or twice a year. These areas can be
restored to native habitats in the future if desired or as determined in an approved detailed
restoration plan.
Existing Coastal Redwood Trees. Since coastal redwood trees are not adapted to the hot
and fog-free summers found in the Santa Clara Valley, some of the existing redwoods will
likely die-off without the supplemental water provided from irrigation of the turf grass. It is
impossible to know how many and when they may die-off since some may be tapped into the
water table associated with Stevens Creek and could persist for many more years. Therefore, it
is recommended that the existing redwood trees remain in place and be monitored yearly for
signs of overall health. Trees then can be removed on an individual basis over time and the
wood recycled for restoration purposes (e.g., downed trees can be converted to mulch for use
in the habitat islands) or for building park benches and/or other structures.
Photo 5. The proposed restoration includes keeping the existing redwood trees, which can be incorporated into a
trail network, nature play areas, and gathering spaces.
66
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 19
Sustainable Management Practices. Cost-saving and sustainable management practices can
be incorporated into the restoration plan, including native plant landscaping practices (e.g.,
leaving plant litter in place, minimal pruning and shearing, no fertilizers, etc.), mulching, and
goat/sheep grazing to control invasive species. Irrigation systems placed on the surface will be
used during the establishment period, and then will be removed, reducing the long-term need
for irrigation. The existing topography of the site can be incorporated into the restoration
plan, so that mass grading is not proposed. For example, the dry ponds can be planted with
native vegetation and used as bioswales to naturally capture and filter urban runoff, including
run-off from a trail network and the existing parking areas. A wildflower meadow could be
installed on the current fairways and habitat islands could be installed on the fairways, tees
and greens.
Photo 6. The proposed restoration approach includes using the existing depression from the dry pond as a
bioswale to collect run-off from a trail system as well as existing parking areas. The fencing will be removed.
Fire Resiliency. Standard defensible space management practices should be incorporated into
the restoration design and the regular maintenance plan. These practices will assure that
grasses are trimmed annually, that space with low growing vegetation is kept between the
habitat islands, and that trimming of lower branches that can transfer fire into the canopy is
67
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 20
completed on a regular basis. Grasses will be trimmed annually, but branch trimming is
typically every 3-5 years, depending on conditions.
Establishment Period. Natural habitats often require three to five years to become
established. Temporary irrigation systems are provided during the establishment period and
are removed once the vegetation is established. To ensure success of native restoration, long-
term management practices, including annual funding, need to be addressed in the
restoration plan.
Trails and Visitor Amenities. This new urban wildland will provide the community with passive
recreation experiences, educational opportunities, and connections to nature close to home.
Accessible walking trails are proposed to connect with the Stevens Creek Trail and existing
buildings. The decomposed granite paths will loop through the site, with occasional benches,
encouraging low-impact exploration of the area.
Outdoor education opportunities in the area could be enhanced by better on-site space for
Park Rangers and development of an outdoor education area. This could consist of
decomposed granite paving and log benches, possibly salvaged from the Redwoods on site.
The outdoor education area is best placed towards the North end of the site, which has an
existing parking lot off an arterial road and a restroom in the golf/restaurant building that
could be open to the public from an exterior door. The current golf pro shop is proposed as
office space for the Park Rangers, with some minimal interior improvements, such as flooring
and paint. An existing storage shed just south of the building can serve as storage and an
informal meetup space for the Rangers.
There is a desire for additional parking at the South end of the existing golf course. An
additional row of parking and drive aisle is proposed, with several additional accessible
parking spaces located near the new trail. The vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian access from the
south entrance along San Fernando Avenue is currently being studied separately, by others
(see Blackberry Farm Entrance Road Improvements Feasibility Study by Underwood &
Rosenblum, Inc., August 2020).
Future Recreation Development Opportunities. The restoration plan should allow for future
recreation to be developed along the trails. Some possibilities include:
Exercise Par Course
Nature Play Area
Bus Turnaround at the North End
Additional Seating and Gathering Areas
Art and Interpretive Elements
Larger Renovation of the Golf Pro Shop/Restaurant Building to support educational
activities and operation of the natural area.
68
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 21
Estimated Costs
See the attached Rough Order of Magnitude Costs for the estimated costs to implement the
above restoration approach. Specific assumptions used to develop cost line items are noted in
the cost table. General cost assumptions include the following:
Cost estimates are at a rough order of magnitude and will require refinement once a
site design and detailed restoration plan are developed.
A topographic survey and additional site studies are required to assess required ADA
upgrades at the existing building and parking area.
Site preparation does not require mass grading.
The sand traps and existing trees will be left as is.
Existing fencing and netting along the west and south edges of the golf course will be
removed, including the footings.
Four of the extra-large timber fence poles adjacent to the south parking lot (at
Blackberry Farm Park) are assumed to be removed for parking lot work while the rest
will remain for bird habitat. If desired, the remaining poles could be partially cut at
different heights for variation.
Goats will be used to remove/prepare the existing fairway grasses for restoration, and
to help with removal of invasive species on the slope on the east side of the golf
course.
Annual maintenance will be limited to weeding and selective mowing around plantings
in the habitat islands/riparian zone, and mowing/grazing grasses in the wildflower
meadow, low maintenance areas, and bioswales in the first 3 to 5 years. After that the
annual maintenance is expected to decrease as plants become established. Every 5
years a more intensive defensible space trimming plan will be implemented to address
low hanging branches and shrub spacing.
There will be eight habitat islands. The habitat islands will be planted with oak trees
and perennial plants and will be seeded with native grasses and forbs. Temporary
fencing will be installed to protect most of the plants from deer browse until they are
established, then the fence will be removed.
Where hydroseeding is noted, it will occur annually over three years with a native
wildflower meadow mix.
Irrigation to the habitat islands will be via temporary surface pipes and is expected to
be removed once the plants are established in 3 to 5 years.
The existing irrigation system at the backflow valve is suitable for re-use. All pipes will
be abandoned in place, but the risers will be capped.
A detailed restoration and management plan will be prepared prior to preparing
construction drawings and will be subject to City review. It is not currently included in
the budget.
There will be ten years of monitoring and adaptive management to assure the plan is
well-implemented. Since there are not permits, the monitoring period is flexible, but
five years is the minimum.
A more intensive restoration approach involving tree removal, soil restoration, and
additional plantings is not desired.
No permits from state or federal resource agencies are required.
69
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 22
References
Barnhart, R.A. 1986. Species Profiles: Life Histories and Environmental Requirements of
Coastal Fishes and Invertebrates (Pacific Southwest) - Steelhead. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Biol. Rep. 82(11.60). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers TR EL-82-4.
Borchert, M.I., N.D. Cunha, P.C. Krosse, and M.L. Lawrence. 1993. Blue oak plant communities
of southern San Luis Obispo and northern Santa Barbara Counties, California. Gen. Tech. Rep.
PSW-GTR-139. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture.
Bulger, J.B., N.J. Scott, Jr., and R.B. Seymour. 2003. Terrestrial activity and conservation of
adult California red-legged frogs Rana aurora draytonii in coastal forests and grasslands.
Biological Conservation 110: 85-95.
Bury, R.B. and D.J. Germano. 2008. Actinemys marmorata (Baird and Girard 1852) - western
pond turtle, Pacific pond turtle in G.J. Rhodin, C.H. Pritchard, P.P. van Dijk, R.A. Saumure, K.A.
Buhlmann, and J.B. Iverson, editors. Conservation biology of freshwater turtles and tortoises:
A compilation project of the IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group.
Chelonian Research Monographs.
Busby, P.J., T.C. Wainwright, G.J. Bryant, L.J. Lierheimer, R.S. Waples, F.W. Waknitz, and I.V.
Lagomarsino. 1996. Status Review of West Coast Steelhead from Washington, Idaho, Oregon,
and California. National Marine Fisheries Service. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-27.
Cal-Adapt. 2021. Local Climate Change Snapshot for 22100 Stevens Creek Boulevard,
Cupertino, California 95014, United States. Cal-Adapt was developed by the Geospatial
Innovation Facility at the University of California, Berkeley with funding and advisory oversight
by the California Energy Commission and the California Strategic Growth Council. Accessed
December 27 at: https://cal-adapt.org/
Carraway L.N. and B.J. Verts. 1991. Neotoma fuscipes. Mammalian Species No. 386, The
American Society of Mammalogists. 10 pp.
[CDFW] California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2021. VegCAMP Natural Communities
Lists. Accessed December 2021 from https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/data/vegcamp/natural-
communities.
[CNDDB] California Natural Diversity Data Base. 2021. Results of electronic records search.
Rarefind 5. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Biogeographic Data Branch. Accessed
December 2021 from http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/mapsanddata.asp.
[CNPS] California Native Plant Society. 2021. Inventory of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered
Plants of California. Version 8-02. Accessed December 2021 from
http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/advanced.html.
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
70
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 23
Service, Washington, D.C. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Home
Page. (Version 04DEC98).
Domenichelli and Associates. 2017. Stevens Creek Steelhead Passage Improvement Project
Feasibility Report. Prepared for Friends of Stevens Creek Trail. November 2017.
Fellers, G.M. 2005. Rana draytonii California red-legged frog. In M. Lannoo, ed. Amphibian
Declines: The Conservation Status of United States Species. University of California Press. CA:
Berkeley. Pp 552-554.
Fellers, G.M. and P.M. Kleeman. 2007. California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) movement
and habitat use: implications for conservation. Journal of Herpetology 41(2): 276-286.
[FEMA] Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2009 (May 18). National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Santa Clara County, California, and
Unincorporated Areas. Map Number 06085C0208H.
Fukushima, L. and E.W. Lesh. 1998. Adult and juvenile anadromous salmonid migration timing
in California streams. California Fish and Game 84:133-145.
Google Inc. 2021. Google Earth Pro (Version 7.1.5.1557) [Software]. Available from
earth.google.com.
Grossinger, R. M., E. E Beller, M. N Salomon, A. A Whipple, R. A Askevold, C. J Striplen, E.
Brewster, and R. A Leidy. 2008. South Santa Clara Valley Historical Ecology Study, including
Soap Lake, the Upper Pajaro River, and Llagas, Uvas-Carnadero, and Pacheco Creeks.
Prepared for the Santa Clara Valley Water District and The Nature Conservancy. A Report of
SFEI’s Historical Ecology Program, SFEI Publication #558, San Francisco Estuary Institute,
Oakland, CA.
Hall, E.R. 1981. The Mammals of North America. 2nd edition. Volume II. John Wiley and Sons,
New York, New York.
Jennings, M.R. and M.P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and reptile species of special concern in
California. California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division.
Kunz, T.H. 1982. Chapter 1 Roosting Ecology of Bats. In, T.H. Kunz, editor. Ecology of Bats.
Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York, New York
Lee, D.E. and W.D. Tietje. 2005. Dusky-footed woodrat demography and prescribed fire in a
California oak woodland. Journal of Wildlife Management 69(3):1211-1220.
Leidy, R.A. 2007. Ecology, Assemblage Structure, Distribution, and Status of Fishes in Streams
Tributary to the San Francisco Estuary, California (Report). San Francisco Estuary Institute.
Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, and B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historical distribution and current status of
steelhead/rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in streams of the San Francisco Estuary,
California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, CA.
71
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Urban Wildland Restoration Feasibility Study
MIG | February 2022 24
Lundholm J.T. and Richardson P.J. 2010. Habitat analogues for reconciliation ecology in urban
and industrial environments. Journal of Applied Ecology 47:966–975.
[NMFS] National Marine Fisheries Service. 2005. Endangered and Threatened species:
Designation of Critical Habitat for Seven Evolutionarily Significant Units of Pacific Steelhead
and Salmon in California. Final rule. Federal Register 70:52488-52626.
[NWI] National Wetlands Inventory. 2021. Wetlands Mapper. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Accessed December 2021 from http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Wetlands-Mapper.html.
[NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2021. Web Soil Survey. U.S. Department of
Agriculture. Accessed December 2021 from http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov.
[SFEI] San Francisco Estuary Institute. 2015. "Santa Clara Valley Historical Ecology GIS Data
version 2" Accessed [date retrieved]. http://www.sfei.org/content/santa-clara-valley-historical-
ecology-gis-data.
Sawyer, J.O. and T. Keeler-Wolf. 1995. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native
Plant Society. Sacramento, CA.
Shapovalov, L., and A.C. Taft. 1954. The life histories of the steelhead rainbow trout (Salmo
gairdneri) and silver salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) with special reference to Waddell Creek,
California, and recommendations regarding their management. DFG Bulletin No. 98.
Szewczak, J.M. 2013. The Ecology and Conservation of California Bats. San Francisco State
University. SFSU Field Campus. August 5–9 2013.
[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;
Determination of Threatened Status for the California Red-legged Frog. Federal Register
61:25813-26833.
[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Recovery plan for the California red-legged frog
(Rana aurora draytonii). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1.
[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;
Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for California Red-legged Frog; Final Rule. Federal
Register 75:12815-12959.
[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2021. IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation.
Accessed December 2021 from https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/t69.
Williams, T.H., B.C. Spence, D.A. Boughton, R.C. Johnson, L.G. Crozier, N.J. Mantua, M.R.
O'Farrell, and S.T. Lindley. 2016. Viability assessment for Pacific salmon and steelhead listed
under the Endangered Species Act: Southwest. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA
Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-564.
Zeiner, D.C., W.F. Laudenslayer Jr., K.E. Mayer, and M. White, editors. 1990. California’s
Wildlife. Volume III: Mammals. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento,
California.
72
THE
MEADOWS
PARK VILLAS
RIDGECREST
MONTA
VISTA
SCENIC CIRCLE
SC
E
N
I
C
C
I
R
C
L
E
SAN FER N AN DO AVE
N
AN
D
O AVE
ALCAZAR
AVE
DOLORES
AVE
CU
P
E
R
T
I
N
O
R
D
SC
E
N
I
C
C
T
STOC
K
L
M
E
I
R
CT
DEAN
C
T
SC
E
N
I
CB
LVD
BY
R
NE
A
V
E
BYR
N
EA
V
E
SAN FERNAND
OCT
RCLE
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
ORCHARD
STOCKLMEIR
RANCH
BLACKBERRY FARM
PARK
Existing shed available for
ranger storage
Existing building: convert pro
shop to ranger office.
Restroom available for
public use.
Future bus
turnout/dropoff
Outdoor education area with
log seating
Future nature play area
Accessible trails with
benches
Existing golf maintenance
building available for parks
maintenance
See separate entry proposal
for roadway and path
improvements by others
(E) PARKING
STE
V
E
N
S
C
R
E
E
K
STEV
E
N
S
C
R
E
E
K
T
R
A
I
L
(E) PARKING
Expand parking area
Existing fairway trees
to remain
Low maintenance zone (at
areas outside habitat islands
and wildflower meadows)
Future exercise par course
along trail
0 100’ 200’
N
STUDY AREA
PARK BOUNDARY
PROPOSED BUILT FEATURE
(EXISTING)
BUILDING / STRUCTURE
EXISTING RIPARIAN CORRIDOR WILDFLOWER MEADOW
HABITAT ISLAND
DRY POND
- POTENTIAL BIOSWALE PLANTING
RIPARIAN REVEGETATION ZONECREEK
(E) STEVENS CREEK TRAIL
(E) PATHS
PROPOSED PATHS
MAP LEGEND
(E) BRIDGE
URBAN WILDLAND RESTORATION APPROACH
BLACKBERRY FARM GOLF COURSE
FEBRUARY 2022
73
THE
MEADOWS
PARK VILLAS
RIDGECREST
MONTA
VISTA
SCENIC CIR
CLE
SC
E
N
I
C
C
I
R
C
L
E
SAN FER N AN DO AVE
N
AN
D
O
A
VE
ALCAZAR
AVE
DOLORES
AVE
CU
P
E
R
T
I
N
O
R
D
SC
E
N
I
C
C
T
STOC
K
L
M
E
I
R
C
T
DEAN
C
T
SC
E
N
I
CB
LVD
BY
R
NE
A
V
E
BYR
N
EA
V
E
SANFERNAND
OCT
RCLE
STEVENS CREEK BLVD
ORCHARD
STOCKLMEIR
RANCH
BLACKBERRY FARM
PARK
CHARD
OCKLMEIR
RANCH
B
ORCH
STO
R
BLACKACK
S
0 100’ 200’
N
STUDY AREA
PARK BOUNDARY
(EXISTING)
BUILDING / STRUCTURE
AE - REGULATORY FLOODWAY
CREEK
(E) STEVENS CREEK TRAIL
(E) PATHS
MAP LEGEND
(E) BRIDGE
BLACKBERRY FARM GOLF COURSE
REGULATORY FLOODWAY
FEBRUARY 2022
74
Blackberry Farm Golf Course Restoration - Feasibility Study
Cupertino, CA
OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS
Rough Order of Magnitude
March 2022 by MIG, Inc.
DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT COST
ITEM TOTAL TOTAL COMMENTS
DEMOLITION & CLEARING $114,340
Remove Existing Golf Facilities - tee markers, cups at greens, small
windmill pump structure
1 LS $15,000 $15,000
Sand traps to remain
Cap/shut down existing irrigation valve/heads and risers 1 LS $25,000 $25,000
Assuming existing 100 valve-in-head sprinklers to be
capped if existing rotors are not re-useable
Partial fencing removal at South parking area 1 LS $25,000 $25,000
Remove 4 Large wood poles and footings at south
parking area, lower section of chainlink fence and upper
section of netting
Fencing removal along Stevens Creek 1 LS $18,000 $18,000
Includes fencing/footings along bike trail & driving
range/cage
Initial Goat grazing/clearing 11 AC $1,000 $11,340
Invasive tree removal (with root grinding on some species) 1 ALLOW $20,000 $20,000
Includes one-time removal of invasive Privet (existing).
Fairway trees to remain as is.
Assumes no other utility work
IRRIGATION $101,223
Riparian Revegetation Zone - Install temporary drip irrigation system with
above-ground lines (no mowing or goats)
50,723 SF $0.50 $25,362
Includes battery operated controllers, valves, on-grade
piping, fittings, on-grade poly tubing and emitters at
Riparian Revegetation Zone
Habitat Islands - Install temporary drip irrigation system with above-ground
lines (no mowing or goats)
41,715 SF $0.50 $20,858
Includes battery operated controllers, valves, on-grade
piping, fittings, on-grade poly tubing and emitters at each
Habitat Island area
Wildflower Meadows - Install temporary rotor irrigation system with buried
lines (due to mowing and goats)
44,388 SF $0.75 $33,291
Includes battery operated controllers, valves, piping,
fittings, rotors, nozzles and swing joints at each
Wildflower Meadow area
Field verify and install water points of connection to existing irrigation
system main line piping.
12 EA $500 $6,000
Short-term Maintenance of Irrigation by installation contractor
(assume 6 months)
136,826 SF $0.06 $8,210
Square footage represents Irrigated Areas only
Ongoing tree maintenance: Yearly removal of dangerous limbs or trees ALLOW $7,500 $7,500
Per Lisa's comment: What might ongoing tree
maintenance look like? Tay: line item with explanation
id dSEEDING & LANDSCAPE $225,325
Estimate / 175
Blackberry Farm Golf Course Restoration - Feasibility Study
Cupertino, CA
OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS
Rough Order of Magnitude
March 2022 by MIG, Inc.
DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT COST
ITEM TOTAL TOTAL COMMENTS
Note: Overall area of work not including hillside trees to remain and
existing parking area
494,132 SF
Riparian Revegetation Zone - sparse planting, mainly letting the riparian
corridor enlarge on its own.
1 LS $10,000 $10,000
Approx. 50' wide
Riparian Revegetation Zone - mulch 50,723 SF $0.50 $25,362
Habitat Islands - planting 41,715 SF $1 $41,715
Planting mixture of 2 (5) gallon trees, 30 (5) gallon
shrubs, (27) mix of 1 gallon oaks and perennials on each
island for estimating purposes (assuming islands of the
same size).
Habitat Islands - mulch 41,715 SF $0.50 $20,858
Habitat Islands - temporary fencing 2,000 LF $10 $20,000
Assume metal stakes and plastic deer netting
Native Wildflower Meadow - hydroseeding 44,388 SF $1 $44,388
Low Maintenance Zone (annual grasslands) including Bioswale areas -
no planting, see maintenance section
329,604 SF
Remainder areas (excluding special areas noted above
and decomposed granite surfacing)
Short-term Maintenance of Riparian Reveg. Zone, Habitat Islands &
Wildflower Meadows by installation contractor (assumes 6 months)
1 LS $18,000 $18,000
Weeding around new plants, check irrigation is working
Soil Samples & Testing for Habitat Islands 1 LS $5,000 $5,000
Soil Amendment for Habitat Islands 1 ALLOW $40,000 $40,000
VISITOR AMENITIES $814,325
Trails - Pedestrian Stabilized Decomposed Granite Trail 26,892 SF $16 $430,272
Assume agg. Base, 6' wide with wood edging to maintain
accessibility
Ranger office space - Allowance for Minimal Upgrades at Pro Shop 1 ALLOW $35,000 $35,000
New flooring, interior paint, approx. 1050 sf
Outdoor Education Area
Pedestrian Stabilized Decomposed Granite with wood edging 900 SF $20 $18,000
Assumes ~30x30' area
Log Benches 1 ALLOW $35,000 $35,000
May be possible to salvage from onsite redwoods
Site Furnishings Drinking Fountain - NIC
Benches along Trail with DG pullout 8 EA $3,000 $24,000
Estimate / 276
Blackberry Farm Golf Course Restoration - Feasibility Study
Cupertino, CA
OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS
Rough Order of Magnitude
March 2022 by MIG, Inc.
DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT COST
ITEM TOTAL TOTAL COMMENTS
Bike Racks near North parking lot 1 ALLOW $8,000 $8,000
Trash and Recycling Receptacles 6 EA $2,000 $12,000
South Parking Area - Additional parking row and drive aisle 1 ALLOW $150,000 $150,000
Including wheel stops, parking signage, striping and some
concrete at ADA spaces and exits to path system
Misc. Signage - Simple laminated "Restoration zone" signs, etc. 1 ALLOW $15,000 $15,000
More extensive Interp/Educational Signage - NIC, future
Estimate / 377
Blackberry Farm Golf Course Restoration - Feasibility Study
Cupertino, CA
OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS
Rough Order of Magnitude
March 2022 by MIG, Inc.
DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT COST
ITEM TOTAL TOTAL COMMENTS
Design Fees (Design & Permitting, public outreach, CDs, Bid/Award 4-6
SITE VISITS, RFIs, etc)
$87,050 $87,050
SUB TOTAL $1,255,213
Design Contingency (20% of construction subtotal)$251,045 This number is included to allow for clarifications,
refinements, and revisions that take place during the
design phase.
Mobilization (5%)$62,762
General Conditions + O&P (10%)$125,522
Construction Contingency (15%)$188,284
CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE TOTAL* $1,882,825
MAINTENANCE & MONITORING $242,500
Year 1-3
Hand weeding & Selective Mowing of Riparian Revegetation Zone &
Habitat Islands (monthly)
3 YEAR $9,600 $28,800
Mowing/Grazing for Wildflower Meadows, once annually 3 YEAR $1,200 $3,600
Mowing/Grazing for Low Maintenance Area and Bioswales 3 YEAR $7,000 $21,000
Irrigation Maintenance for Riparian Area, Habitat Islands & Wildflower
Meadows
3 YEAR $8,000 $24,000
Monitoring 3 YEAR $18,000 $54,000
Years 4-10
Min. Hand weeding & Selective Mowing of Riparian Revegetation Zone &
Habitat Islands
7 YEAR $2,000 $14,000
Mowing/Grazing for Wildflower Meadows, once annually 7 YEAR $2,000 $14,000
Mowing/Grazing for Low Maintenance Area and Bioswales 7 YEAR $1,000 $7,000
Irrigation Maintenance - years 4 and 5, if needed (final years) 2 YEAR $4,200 $8,400
Increased maintenance due to age of equipment- may
require more equipment replacement than years 1-3
Irrigation decommissioning/removal of backflow preventer (cap water
supply), on-grade piping, drip tubing and emitters, valves, and controllers.
1 EA $5,000 $5,000
Remove backflow, remove/cap meter, remove remote
control valves and controllers, remove on-grade drip
systems.
Monitoring 7 YEAR $6,000 $42,000
Estimate / 478
Blackberry Farm Golf Course Restoration - Feasibility Study
Cupertino, CA
OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS
Rough Order of Magnitude
March 2022 by MIG, Inc.
DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT COST
ITEM TOTAL TOTAL COMMENTS
Pruning for Defensible Space (Every 5 years, Twice during 10 year period) 2 EA $6,600 $13,200
Irrigation decommissioning in Riparian Revegtation Zone & Habitat Islands 1 EA $7,500 $7,500
*Cost Notes/Assumptions:
Costs based on Feb. 2022 Feasibility Study by MIG and accompanying site graphic, Urban Wildland Restoration Approach.
Does not include review of existing irrig. system, topographic or utility surveys or additional studies.Design Contingency" stated above? We will want to know
this estimate. Tay: Design fees note removed from here
and fees are included on line 64
Does not include additional work to existing ADA parking, access, restrooms, etc. (topo and existing conditions survey needed).
Assumes an allowance of $7500/year for tree removal. Reduced irrigation may result in more trees lost in the first ten years, so costs may not be spread evenly.
See final page of the Feasibility Study for a comprehensive list of cost assumptions.
Estimate / 579
1
Cupertino Blackberry Farm Golf Course Feasibility Study Public Survey & Outreach Summary | August 2022 Project Objective In 2021, the City of Cupertino conducted a needs assessment to identify improvements for the Blackberry Farm Golf Course. City Council further directed staff to study 1) conducting necessary repairs and minor improvements to the golf course and 2) discontinuing the use of the site as a golf course and restoring the site to natural habitat and trails. The City sought public input on these options by asking community members to share their feedback on the preferred future use of the Blackberry Farm Golf Course site. Outreach Overview Starting in May 2022, the City engaged with the community on this topic through a variety of outreach platforms and channels. The City solicited feedback from the community through the online survey, and additional events and engagement channels were used to provide information about the project and direct community members to the survey. The engagement process for this project included the following components:
• Ongoing: Engage Cupertino website
• May: Citywide distribution of informational postcards about the project
• May 18: Parks and Recreation Commission meeting
• May 25: Online community survey launch
• June 6: Virtual community meeting
• June 11: Open house event #1
• July 7: Pop-up event at summer concert series at Memorial Park
• July 11: Open house event #2
• July 15: Online community survey closed The online community meeting on June 6 received 77 registrants and 66 attendees (in addition to City and consultant staff). The Q&A box at the community meeting received 53 questions and comments, and 15 questions and comments were provided verbally by workshop participants during the meeting. City of Cupertino staff also received 37 emails from community members about the project and option preferences and suggestions. Staff encouraged community members to share their opinions through the online survey. Survey Overview The City of Cupertino released an online community survey designed to gauge public opinions and priorities regarding the City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation’s Blackberry Farm Golf Course Feasibility Study. The City is considering the following two options regarding the site: A. Golf Course Necessary Repairs and Minor Improvements – Replace the irrigation system, tee boxes, and greens. The ninth hole would be shortened to increase safety and eliminate errant shots to the parking lot, trail, and first tee box. This includes the possible expansion of the short game practice area. The empty ponds would be replaced with lowland native plantings. The Golf Course is estimated to be closed for 9–12 months if this option is chosen. On course ADA issues would be addressed. The preliminary 25-year cost estimate is $10.2 million for Option A. B. Conversion to Natural Habitat – Establish accessible walking trails, free to the public, that connect with the Stevens Creek Trail and develop other visitor amenities, such as seating, an outdoor education area, and a ranger’s office. Allow the Stevens Creek riparian corridor vegetation to naturally occupy portions of the existing golf course. Plant and manage vegetation to foster the growth of drought-tolerant and native species. Establish a wildflower meadow and preserve the existing Coastal Redwoods. Incorporate fire resilient management practices. This includes a study, with a preliminary conceptual design, to facilitate the feasibility discussion of the conversion to natural habitat option. This is not meant to be a finalized design for the site. The preliminary 25-year cost estimate $12.1 million for Option B. The results from the survey help the City understand the community’s preferred future use of the Blackberry Farm Golf Course site. The survey included a total of 14 questions and received a total of 4,023 responses.
80
2
Survey Methodology Survey responses were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively by the consultant team. Quantitative survey analysis was conducted through the online platform used to host the survey (Engagement HQ through Granicus). The website summarizes the results from close-ended questions and allows for filtering. Responses to most questions include two summary figures—one figure based on all respondents and one figure depicting only responses from Cupertino residents (those who checked “I live in Cupertino” on Q1). Qualitative survey analysis was conducted through the software Dedoose, which allows assignment of “codes” to open-ended survey responses to organize and analyze qualitative data. The consultant team coded all open-ended responses for Q5, Q12, and Q13. See “Appendix” for the codebook used. Survey response data were also reviewed to ensure validity. Any user ID (i.e., IP address) that appeared more than four times was manually reviewed. Most responses were assumed to be legitimate entries and kept (e.g., different email addresses entered, varied responses), but four responses were assumed to be duplicates from a single user and removed (all responses had the same email address and similar responses to open-ended questions; one of the five responses from that user ID was kept). The four removed responses preferred Option A; it should be noted that the removed responses comprised less than 0.1% of total responses and therefore did not impact overall survey findings. Eleven additional responses were removed that were “test” responses submitted by project team members. Overarching Survey Takeaways Respondents were asked about their opinions and priorities for the future use of Blackberry Farm Golf Course. Key themes from the online survey results are summarized below.
Topic Key Takeaways
Resident and non-
resident responses
The survey received a total of 4,023 responses. Of those responses, 2,535 were from Cupertino residents (63% of the total responses) and 1,488 were from non-residents (37% of total responses).
Overall option
preference
When analyzing responses from all survey respondents, over half (n = 2,081, 52%) prefer Option A (Golf Course Necessary Repairs and Minor Improvements). However, when analyzing responses from only
Cupertino residents, more than half (n = 1,433, 57%) prefer Option B (Conversion to Natural Habitat).
Option preference
reasons
The top reasons cited by survey respondents for preferring Option A include that Blackberry Farm Golf Course is a good course to play for kids, elders, and novices, Blackberry Farm is more affordable than
other golf courses, and that there are sufficient other nature options nearby. The top reasons cited by respondents for preferring Option B include concerns about drought, water use,
and climate change and that natural habitat areas benefit a greater number of people and are more
accessible.
Distance from site
The majority (71%) of survey respondents who live more than 5 miles from the site selected Option A, while most (52%) of respondents who live 5 or less miles from the site selected Option B. When filtering responses by those who live closest to the site (“less than ½ mile” and “less than 1 mile”), the majority
(57%) of respondents prefer Option B.
Age
The most represented age group among survey respondents is people more than 60 years old (36%), followed by people 50 to 60 years old (23%). Generally, older respondents prefer Option A and younger respondents prefer Option B. The majority (66%) of respondents who selected Option A are 50 or older, while 52% of respondents who selected Option B are 50 or older.
Future use frequency
When asked how often survey respondents would use Blackberry Farm Golf Course in the future if the repairs and improvements were made, 48% indicated that they would use the golf course frequently or
occasionally, and 52% indicated that they would use the course rarely or never. Among respondents that selected Option A, 87% indicated that they would use the golf course frequently or occasionally; among respondents that selected Option B, 4% indicated that they would use the golf course frequently or occasionally.
81
3
Survey Results This section provides the results of each survey question, presented for all respondents and for Cupertino residents (when applicable). Note that percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number, so values may not total to 100%. Contents Q1. Which of the following describes you… (check all that apply) ................................................................................................................................................ 3 Q2. How far do you live from Blackberry Farm Golf Course? ........................................................................................................................................................... 4 Q3. What is your age? ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Q4. Which of the following describes you… (choose one) ................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Q5. Do you prefer to play at one golf course over the other? If so, why? ................................................................................................................................... 5 Q6. On average, my household plays golf at Blackberry Farm Golf Course… ............................................................................................................................ 7 Q7. On average, my household uses the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail… ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Q8. Currently, my household uses the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail for… (select all that apply) .................................................................................... 8 Q9. If Blackberry Farm Golf Course is repaired and improved as outlined in the NGF Study how often would you use the Golf Course in the future? .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Q10. If Blackberry Farm Golf Course is converted to natural habitat as outlined in the MIG Study how often would you use the site in the future? ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Q11. Considering the costs of both options, which recreational opportunities would you like to see prioritized at the Blackberry Farm Golf Course site? (Choose one) .................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Q12. Why do you prefer one option over the other? .......................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Q13. Do you have any other thoughts about the future of the site you would like to share? ........................................................................................... 15 Q14. Provide your email address to receive periodic updates. ..................................................................................................................................................... 16 Appendix ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 17 Q1. Which of the following describes you… (check all that apply)
Total responses: 4,023 As shown in Figure 1, over half of survey respondents live in Cupertino (63%) or visit shops, restaurants, and service businesses in Cupertino (59%). Less than 14% of respondents work in Cupertino, and about 5% of respondents go to school in Cupertino. Respondents were able to select as many options as applicable, which is why the percentages do not add to 100% (e.g., a respondent could select “I live in Cupertino” and “I work in Cupertino”).
Topic Key Takeaways When asked how often respondents would use the natural habitat area in the future if Blackberry Farm Golf Course were converted, 57% indicated that they would use the nature area frequently or occasionally, and
43% indicated that they would use the area rarely or never. Among respondents that selected Option B, 96% indicated that they would use the site frequently or occasionally; among respondents that selected Option A, 21% indicated that they would use the site frequently or occasionally.
Preferred golf course
Among respondents that play golf at both Blackberry Farm and Deep Cliff, 40% of respondents prefer to play
at Blackberry Farm, 35% have no preference between the two, 11% prefer Deep Cliff, and the remaining 14% did not explicitly indicate which course they prefer. Respondents like Blackberry Farm because the course is short and quick, better for seniors, novices, and kids, well-located, and affordable.
82
4
Figure 1. Relationship to Cupertino.
Q2. How far do you live from Blackberry Farm Golf Course?
Total responses: 4,023 As shown in Figure 2, about half of all respondents live 1–5 miles from Blackberry Farm Golf Course (53%); the remaining respondents live more than 5 miles (17%), less than 1 mile (16%), and less than ½ mile (14%) from the golf course. A similar trend was indicated among Cupertino residents, except a smaller proportion of residents indicated living more than 5 miles from the golf course. Specifically, among respondents who identify as Cupertino residents, 53% live 1–5 miles from Blackberry Farm Golf Course, 24% live less than 1 mile, 21% live less than ½ mile, and only 2% live more than 5 miles from the course.
Figure 2. Distance from Blackberry Farm Golf Course.
All Respondents (n = 4,023) Cupertino Residents (n = 2,535)
Q3. What is your age?
Total responses: 4,023 The majority (59%) of survey respondents are older than 50: 36% are over 60 years old, and 23% are 50 to 60 years old. Respondents 40 to 50 years old make up 17% of responses, and respondents 30 to 40 years old make up 12% of responses. The remaining 12% is comprised of respondents 18 to 30 years old (7%), respondents under 18 years old (2%), and respondents who prefer not to answer (3%). Trends among Cupertino residents are consistent.
83
5
Figure 3. Age of respondents.
All Respondents (n = 4,023) Cupertino Residents (n = 2,535)
Q4. Which of the following describes you… (choose one)
Total responses: 4,023 Over half of respondents (55%) do not play golf at Blackberry Farm Golf Course nor at Deep Cliff Golf Course. About a quarter of respondents (28%) play golf at both courses. Fewer respondents (15%) play golf at Blackberry Farm but not Deep Cliff, and 2% play golf at Deep Cliff but not Blackberry Farm. Similar trends were indicated by Cupertino residents, but with a higher proportion of people who do not play golf at either course; 64% do not play golf at either course, 21% play golf at both courses, 12% play at Blackberry Farm but not Deep Cliff, and 2% play at Deep Cliff but not Blackberry Farm.
Figure 4. Local golf course(s) used by respondents.
All Respondents (n = 4,023) Cupertino Residents (n = 2,535)
Q5. Do you prefer to play at one golf course over the other? If so, why?
Total responses: 1,597 Among respondents that play golf at both Blackberry Farm and Deep Cliff, 40% of respondents prefer to play at Blackberry Farm, 35% have no preference between the two, 11% prefer Deep Cliff, and the remaining 14% did not explicitly indicate which course they prefer. Among respondents who golf at Blackberry Farm but not Deep Cliff, the following themes emerged:
84
6
- Respondents appreciate that Blackberry Farm is a quick, short course (31% of respondents). - Blackberry Farm is a better course to play for seniors, novices, kids, and families (26% of respondents). - Respondents like the location of Blackberry Farm (17% of respondents). - Blackberry Farm Golf Course is affordable, especially compared to other courses in the area (15% of respondents). - Respondents appreciate the atmosphere and environment of Blackberry Farm (12%) and the fact that it is less crowded (5%) than other courses. Many respondents indicated that they like golfing at both courses for different reasons (based on day of the week, who they are golfing with, or mood). Respondents who prefer Deep Cliff appreciate that the course is longer, more challenging, and well-maintained.
Figure 5. Commonly used words from responses to Q5 (note that for the purpose of this graphic, some words were removed, such as golf, course,
Cupertino, Blackberry, natural, habitat, Deep, and Cliff).
Select quotes that reflect these themes are provided below. Note that some quotes were edited for grammar and clarity.
• “Blackberry is a walkable course. It allows for a beautiful walk, a great sport experience, comradery between friends and strangers
alike, a place for beginners to learn without the pressure of an 18 hole course where more experienced golfers would be less
understanding.”
• “I prefer to play at Blackberry because it's more affordable, more interesting, less crowded, and is quicker to finish a round than Deep
Cliff.”
• “Blackberry is good for beginners and children who are learning as there is less pressure on the course. Deep Cliff is a busier and more
expensive course.”
• “Blackberry is a beautiful course and manageable size for seniors. It is also more affordable than any other golf course in the vicinity.”
• “My daughter and I prefer Blackberry Farm. The course is in better shape than Deep Cliff. Play is faster than Deep Cliff. It is easier to
get on than Deep Cliff. Overall, the golf experience at Blackberry Farm is much better in our view.”
• “I love Deep Cliff. Tight narrow challenging. But often too busy. Need Blackberry as a plan B.”
• “Prefer to play at Deep Cliff because it is a more challenging course and more scenic.”
• “I prefer Deep Cliff because it is 18 holes and is much better taken care of.”
• “As a more skilled golfer, Deep Cliff has 18 more challenging holes and is a nicer natural setting. Deep Cliff has better separation
between holes that provides more isolation and more pleasant environment.”
• “I enjoy both golf courses and golf at both. Blackberry Golf Course would benefit from a renovation. I would golf there more often if it
was maintained better.”
85
7
• “The venues are very different. I play Blackberry Farm because it is easy to walk (i.e., it is flat and short). I play Deep Cliff because I
want a more complete, full-length golf experience.”
• “As an ex-golfer it's clear that the two courses are serving different audiences. Those who are at all serious about their game will play
Deep Cliff, those who (for whatever reason) don't care will play the cheaper/easier/casual Blackberry and still have a great day.”
• “Both courses are very unique to Cupertino and should be kept.”
• “They are both very different courses. I love Blackberry as a quick 9-hole round during the week to get out of the house, and Deep Cliff
provides 18 holes on the weekends.” Q6. On average, my household plays golf at Blackberry Farm Golf Course…
Total responses: 4,023 Most survey respondents rarely play golf at Blackberry Farm Golf course. Half of respondents’ households (51%) never play golf at Blackberry Farm Golf Course. The remaining half of households play at Blackberry Farm 1–5 times per year (18%), 6–12 times per year (13%), 13–24 times per year (9%), and more than 24 times per year (10%). Among Cupertino residents, a greater number reported that their households never play golf at Blackberry Farm (59%). The remaining households play at Blackberry Farm 1–5 times per year (15%), 6–12 times per year (10%), 13–24 times per year (7%), and more than 24 times per year (9%).
Figure 6. Frequency of use of Blackberry Farm Golf Course.
All Respondents (n = 4,023) Cupertino Residents (n = 2,535)
Q7. On average, my household uses the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail…
Total responses: 4,023 About a quarter of respondents’ households never use the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail (28%); 24% use the trail less than 1 time per month, 21% use the trail 1 to 3 times per month, 14% use the trail 4 to 11 times per month, and the remaining 13% use the trail more than 12 times per month. Among Cupertino residents, households use the trail more frequently. Fewer households never use the trail (19%); 22% use the trail less than 1 time per month, 23% use the trail 1 to 3 times per month, 17% use the trail 4 to 11 times per month, and 18% use the trail more than 12 times per month.
86
8
Figure 7. Frequency of use of Stevens Creek Corridor Trail.
All Respondents (n = 4,023) Cupertino Residents (n = 2,535)
Q8. Currently, my household uses the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail for… (select all that apply)
Total responses: 3,599 Most respondents use the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail for walking for leisure or exercise (selected by 73% of respondents), followed by biking for leisure (19%), dog walking (18%), commuting (4%), and other (3%). About 20% of respondents indicated that their household does not use the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail. Respondents were able to select as many options as applicable, which is why the percentages do not add to 100% (e.g., a respondent could select “Dog walking” and “Commuting”). Among Cupertino residents, a higher proportion of respondents use the trail; 80% of respondents use the trail for walking for leisure or exercise, 20% use it for dog walking, 19% use it for biking for leisure, 4% use it for commuting, and 3% indicated “other.” About 14% of respondents indicated that their household does not use the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail.
Figure 8. Types of use of Stevens Creek Corridor Trail.
All Respondents (n = 3,599) Cupertino Residents (n = 2,365)
Q9. If Blackberry Farm Golf Course is repaired and improved as outlined in the NGF Study how often would you use the Golf Course in the future?
Total responses: 4,023 About 34% of respondents indicated that they would use the course frequently in the future if it is repaired and improved; 15% would use the course occasionally, and 9% would use the course rarely. Just under half of respondents (44%) indicated that they would never use Blackberry Farm Golf Course in the future.
87
9
Cupertino residents generally indicated that they would use the golf course less often. Among Cupertino residents, 26% said they would use the course frequently, 13% they would use the course occasionally, and 10% said they would use the course rarely. About half (51%) of respondents indicated that they would never use Blackberry Farm Golf Course in the future.
Figure 9. Anticipated future use of Blackberry Farm Golf Course if repaired and improved as outlined in the NGF Study.
All Respondents (n = 4,023) Cupertino Residents (n = 2,535)
Q10. If Blackberry Farm Golf Course is converted to natural habitat as outlined in the MIG Study how often would you use the site in the future?
Total responses: 4,023 About 35% of respondents indicated that they would use the natural habitat frequently in the future if it is converted from Blackberry Farm Golf Course; 22% would use the natural area occasionally, and 20% would use the natural area rarely. Just under a quarter of respondents (23%) indicated that they would never use the natural habitat area in the future. Cupertino residents indicated they would use the natural habitat more frequently. Among Cupertino residents, 44% said they would use the natural area frequently, 24% they would use the natural area occasionally, and 17% said they would use the natural area rarely. About 15% of respondents indicated that they would never use the natural habitat area in the future.
Figure 10. Anticipated future use of the Blackberry Farm site if converted to natural habitat as outlined in the MIG Study.
All Respondents (n = 4,023) Cupertino Residents (n = 2,535)
88
10
Q11. Considering the costs of both options, which recreational opportunities would you like to see prioritized at the Blackberry Farm Golf Course site? (Choose one)
Total responses: 4,023 Just over half (51.7%) of all survey respondents prefer Option A, necessary repairs and minor improvements to Blackberry Farm Golf Course. However, when viewing responses by only Cupertino residents, over half of respondents (56.5%) prefer Option B, conversion of the golf course to natural habitat.
Figure 11. Preference for future use of the site.
All Respondents (n = 4,023) Cupertino Residents (n = 2,535)
Generally, Option A (golf course) is preferred by those living further from the golf course and Option B (natural habitat) is preferred by those living closer to the golf course. Most respondents (71%) who live more than 5 miles from the site selected Option A, while 52% of respondents who live 5 or less miles from the course selected Option B. When filtering responses by those who live closest to the course (“less than ½ mile” and “less than 1 mile”), the majority (57%) of respondents prefer Option B.
Figure 12. Preference for future use of the site by distance from site.
Lives more than 5 miles from site (n = 697) Lives 5 or fewer miles from site (n = 3,326)
Generally, Option A (golf course) is preferred by older respondents and Option B (natural habitat) is preferred by younger respondents. When filtering responses by those who selected Option A (golf course), 66% of respondents are 50 or older in age. The remaining respondents are 40 to 50 years old (15%), 30 to 40 years old (10%), 18 to 30 years old (5%), under 18 years old (2%), or responded “prefer not to answer” (3%). Comparing these age demographics to those who selected Option B (natural habitat), 52% of respondents are 50 or older in age. The remaining respondents are 40 to 50 years old (19%), 30 to 40 years old (14%), 18 to 30 years old (9%), under 18 years old (2%), or responded “prefer not to answer” (3%).
89
11
Figure 13. Age of respondents by option selection.
Selected Option A (n = 2,081) Selected Option B (n = 1,942)
Q12. Why do you prefer one option over the other?
Total responses: 3,134 (1,627 selected Option A (golf course) and 1,507 selected Option B (natural habitat)) Top reasons given by respondents for choosing Option A (Necessary Repairs and Minor Improvements to Blackberry Farm Golf
Course) include the following. Percentages refer to the proportion of respondents within the specified option (i.e., 29% of respondents who selected Option A and responded to Q12 indicated the given theme). - There are sufficient other natural areas and walking trails nearby (29% of respondents). - Blackberry Farm Golf Course is a good course to play for seniors, kids, novices, and people who want to play on a shorter course (29% of respondents). - Respondent plays golf (25% of respondents) (note: likely more than 25% of respondents who selected Option A play golf, but 25% of respondents to this question specifically indicated that playing golf was a reason for preferring Option A). - Blackberry Farm Golf Course is affordable and/or more cost-effective than Option B (11% of respondents). - Blackberry Farm Golf Course provides healthy outdoor exercise (8% of respondents). Additional themes (each representing less than 5% of responses) include that the golf course brings in revenue, benefits community members’ mental health and quality of life, benefits many people in the community, acts as a fire break, and provides habitat for wildlife.
Figure 14. Frequency of commonly identified rationale for preferring Option A.
90
12
Figure 15. Commonly used words from respondents who selected Option A (note that for the purpose of this graphic, some words were removed,
such as golf, course, Cupertino, Blackberry, natural, and habitat).
Select quotes that reflect these themes are provided below. Note that some quotes were edited for grammar and clarity.
• “Golf was a life saver during the covid pandemic closures. It is a relative flat course easy for seniors to walk and enjoy a recreational
activity well into their 90's (the new 70's). It is a source of beauty to walk and enjoy the wildlife – hawks, coyotes, deer and my favorite,
the squirrels!”
• “When our kids were teenagers, playing golf every week was the only set-aside time for us to communicate as a family. Currently, we
play as a couple, or with our adult children or our friends. It’s a time we catch up with each other.”
• “There is a shortage of golf courses for our community and a wide variety of existing open space areas. Having a short executive course
is a terrific value for the community. This option also provides exercise and development for our youth and school golf teams to
practice their golf skills.”
• “I wouldn't use the natural habitat, since there are many nearby existing options that are bigger and nicer that I already use.”
• “It's convenient and keeps me out getting exercise and socializing with friends.”
• “Restoration back to natural habitat will see only those that live bordering the space or within a few hundred yards walking distance
use it. The golf course is a destination that people come to and then perhaps shop and visit stores and restaurants in the vicinity
afterward.”
• “There are very few inexpensive golf courses in the SF Bay Area. Golf can be an expensive sport to learn and we need smaller
community courses like this one to remove some of the barriers to entry. I learned to golf at Blackberry Farm. My kids learned to golf at
Blackberry Farm. It gets kids OUT OF DOORS, away from monitors, interacting with wildlife and other people. I can't tell you enough
how important I think this small golf course is to our community at large.”
• “I play golf and enjoy the exercise the game provides with the habitat it creates.”
• “We are a growing community in need of recovering from the isolation of Covid and need to get back to exercising. We are aging but
still like to play golf.”
• “When I play, I frequently witness seniors and youth of all ages on the course. The green fees are reasonable, and the shortness of the
course makes it accessible to beginners as well as seniors. It would be a shame to lose this golfing option.”
• “Blackberry Farms is my favorite local golf course. There are already plenty of places for me to walk the dog.”
• “I play golf and cannot afford anywhere else.”
• “I golfed with my dad at Blackberry Farm and it holds a lot of great memories for me. In addition, my dad enjoyed the senior golfing
and social opportunities that Blackberry provided.”
• “The golf course creates a good open space and fire break. It is far better maintained than the natural preserve which is poorly
maintained. The grounds and creek need to be cleaned up.”
91
13
Top reasons given by respondents for choosing Option B (Conversion to Natural Habitat) include the following. Percentages refer to the proportion of respondents within the specified option (i.e., 49% of respondents who selected Option B and responded to Q12 indicated the given theme). - Respondent is concerned about drought and water use of the golf course (49% of respondents). - Conversion to natural habitat benefits a greater number of people than golf (44% of respondents). - Conversion to natural habitat is better for the environment (respondents noted concern about climate change, fertilizers, pesticides, and other pollutants) (18% of respondents). - Natural areas provide wildlife habitat (13% of respondents). - There are sufficient other options for golf nearby (10% of respondents). - A natural area is more affordable and/or cost-effective than a golf course (10% of respondents). - Natural areas provide mental health benefits and nature connection (9% of respondents). - Respondent does not play golf (9% of respondents) (note: likely more than 9% of respondents who selected Option B do not play golf, but 9% of respondents to this question specifically indicated that not playing golf was a reason for preferring Option B). - A natural area provides opportunities for outdoor exercise (6% of respondents). Additional themes (representing less than 5% of responses) include that natural areas are good for seniors, kids, and dogs.
Figure 16. Frequency of commonly identified rationale for preferring Option B.
92
14
Figure 17. Commonly used words from respondents who selected Option B (note that for the purpose of this graphic, some words were removed,
such as golf, course, Cupertino, Blackberry, natural, and habitat).
Select quotes that reflect these themes are provided below. Note that some quotes were edited for grammar and clarity.
• “Climate change will continue to exacerbate drought conditions. Natural Habitat is far more equitable. Many more people will have the
ability to access the natural habitat than the golf course (golf equipment costs money, walking does not; skill, talent & time are needed
to golf; walking can be done by most everyone; walking in nature is a family-friendly activity, golf not so much).”
• “With more people living in Cupertino it is good to have a place like blackberry farm area/trails for people to do walk, exercise,
walking dogs, enjoy the outdoor nature reserve areas. The golf course does not benefit the majority of the population. It is only for a
selected few.”
• “If water use was not a concern, retaining the course would be my preference. However, given the severe ongoing drought conditions in
California, the days are past when we can continue wasting vast quantities of water on thirsty non-native vegetation for a purpose
enjoyed by only a few. Converting to natural habitat is the environmentally-conscious choice, which also provides benefit to more
members of the community.”
• “Native plants and pollinators can find refuge at this natural habitat as climate change continues to destroy habitats and disrupt
ecological systems.”
• “During a period of severe drought and a biodiversity crisis, both of which threaten to intensify in coming years, we should invest our
public funds in solutions that mitigate both rather than exacerbating them.”
• “I think expansion of the Stevens Creek Trail is a lot more beneficial for the entire community. A free, public space is a lot more
inclusive.”
• “The majority of residents in Cupertino and Saratoga do not play golf. Renovating the old golf course will cost close to $2 million but
will only serve a very small portion of the community. Restoring valuable wetlands not only benefits the residents, but all of the plants
and species that could thrive in a wetland ecosystem.”
• “We need more open green space for the people of California to destress, exercise and relax.”
• “Rich diverse natural habitat close to an urban area is better than a monoculture of turf.”
• “We already have Deep Cliff Golf Course, I think more people, including more diverse ages, would use the natural habitat choice for
more diverse activities.”
• “Multiple reasons: (1) Extreme water shortage. (2) We need to cater to a wider audience and not just the rich. (3) Alternative golf
course available less than half a mile away. (4) We are paying to live in California's loving weather – let’s find more ways to be
outside.”
• “Given the challenges of climate change, drought, and biodiversity loss, we need to be looking for every opportunity to restore habitat
for native species.”
• “Option B supports and encourages neighborhood walks, outdoor exercise and enjoyment of a natural environment.”
93
15
Q13. Do you have any other thoughts about the future of the site you would like to share?
Total responses: 1,498 Additional thoughts about the future of the site (that weren’t already reflected in responses to Q12) include the following themes. A “theme” is classified as an idea that was mentioned more than two (2) times. - Provide educational opportunities such as signage along trails, ranger-led classes and workshops, and guided nature walks to educate visitors on the site’s ecology, history, conservation, restoration, and sustainability. - Plant native, drought-tolerant trees and plants along the trail. - Extend the existing pool. - Build additional public bathrooms. - Develop water ponds to create habitat for birds. - Design the site as a central community space that is welcoming to all residents. - Include shade in the design of the site to accommodate long and hot summers. - Include benches, picnic areas, and water fill stations in the design. - Build a playground to accommodate children. - Utilize the space as an outdoor theater, meeting space, outdoor festival/music venue, farmers market, and amphitheater for outdoor programs. - Build a café/snack shack/club house. - Build trails that accommodate bikers (asphalt) and hikers (soft-surfaces tails). - Consider developing a bike or skate park. - Involve Indigenous communities throughout the entire site development process. - Accommodate dogs in the design, either by creating dog friendly/off-leash trails or a designated off-leash dog park. - Provide a driving range/mini golf course and natural areas. - Include sports fields for sports such as disc golf and courts for pickleball, bocci ball, volleyball, tennis courts. - Connect trails to surrounding nature areas (i.e., Stevens Creek Corridor, Fremont Older Open Space). - Include a community garden/food forest in the site design. - Remodel/modernize golf course to be a low-to-no-water golf course (use reclaimed/grey water). - Concern that the presence of natural predators that accompany the natural habitat will post a safety risk to visitors and nearby residents. - Concern that converting site into a natural area will attract people who are houseless and pose a security risk to surrounding neighbors. - Concern that converting the site into a natural area will increase car and foot traffic. - Mix of concern and support related to developing housing at the site. - Mix of concern and support related to remodeling or replacing the Blue Pheasant restaurant. Additional ideas related to the future of the site include the following: - Provide additional public parking. - Develop a Japanese tea garden/rose garden. - Consider a low-maintenance design approach to a natural area. - Raise green fees to generate more revenue. - Concern that converting the golf course into a natural site would destroy a historical site and course. Select quotes that reflect these themes are provided below. Note that some quotes were edited for grammar and clarity.
• “I would like to see this group consult with native Ohlone tribes to include some signage and understanding of native plants & animals.
I also would like to see this group consult with the Native California Plant Society Santa Clara Chapter, and Audubon. Let’s make this a
grassroots participation and a model we can do in other parts of Cupertino.”
• “Please work with Audubon Society at McClellan Ranch for ideas.”
• “Upgrade the ponds to catch and retain water to allow for water all throughout the year.”
• “Convert the course to a nature trail but also build a small retail strip mall that has pedestrian paths in front – so maintain the parking
lot but not allow car traffic so then there can be shops that generate rental income for the city but also more retail and food options for
those in park - e.g., cafes, boutiques, coffee shops, etc. – a quaint downtown feel.”
• “I’m worried that having a nature preserve would cause The Blue Pheasant to go out of business.”
• “ADA corrections and expansion could be part of the A plan and the Golf Course could serve another purpose – an outdoor area for
disabled citizens.”
94
16
• “Changing its habitat will increase my allergies if your suggestions are followed. That will make it impossible to go in certain areas
during my allergy seasons. We already have a lovely park in that area.”
• “The city should partner with the restaurant. So many opportunities there. Please look to the city of Sunnyvale as an example. The city
could partner with the Blue Pheasant the same way Sunken Gardens is partnered with Gold Rush Eatery. Both restaurants are on site.
Don't lose this opportunity!”
• “Some have suggested combing a bit of both options. I like that idea. Also, it would be better to consider converting to using reclaimed
water and grazes that require fewer chemicals to maintain. If available now or in the future, using electric lawn mowers would be less
polluting to the air (yes, I do understand that the manufacture of batteries can pollute the environment in the country that produces
them, and recycling used batteries is not yet available).”
• “The golf course is already a great place to see local wildlife. The birds on course are spectacular. By planting native plants in the
features, you can increase that.”
• “Stevens Creek Boulevard is a major thoroughfare through Cupertino and the Blackberry Farm Golf Course stretch can be a high-speed
raceway, especially at night when many cars regularly exceed 60 mph. If Blackberry Farm Golf Course is eliminated and a wildlife
preserve/hiking trail is put in its place, many more vulnerable wild animals will cross Stevens Creek Bl. and the death toll of deer,
opossums, raccoons, skunks and, tragically, maybe even unsuspecting drivers, will inevitably increase. This would be an extreme safety
hazard and I have not heard anybody even start to address it.”
• “A butterfly garden would be a wonderful addition.”
• “I think the binary approach – either keep the course or return it to natural conditions – is short-sighted and to be honest not very
creative. For a city that prides itself on being a hub of new ways of thinking and contributor to Silicon Valley, I might say even a bit
lazy. A new approach to the current state of Blackberry Farms Golf Course would be to transition those areas of the golf course not
typically part of play (between tees and greens) could be planted with native plants. This would save water (and money!) and provide
less park-like and a more natural setting. You could find an area to incorporate the wildflower meadow. But most importantly, the City
should consider opening up the golf course to walkers/hikers on Sundays and Mondays (or some similar days of the week). Course
maintenance could continue, and certain areas of the course could be off limits (stick to cart paths and fairways, for example). Walkers
would have to pick up after themselves and their pets, the same as our City and County parks. Multi-use settings provide the most
benefit for the most residents. I would hope the City could look at what is possible instead of finding reasons to try something new. Good
luck on your project!”
• “Walkers, joggers, bikers would not have to be scared of getting hit with a golf ball, if the place was converted into a natural habitat.” Q14. Provide your email address to receive periodic updates.
Total responses: 2,213
95
17
Appendix The following codes were used in Dedoose to analyze open-ended survey responses.
Q5: Do you prefer to play at one golf course over the other? If so, why? 1 Prefers BBF 2 Prefers Deep Cliff 3 No preference/like both/depends 4 Affordability 5 Atmosphere/environment 6 Better maintained 7 Location 8 Less crowded 9 Better for seniors/novices/kids 10 Shorter course 11 Longer/harder course 12 Safer course
Q12: Why do you prefer one option over the other? 1 Plays golf 2 Does not play golf 3 Affordability/costs 4 Wildlife habitat 5 Outdoor exercise 6 Mental health/quality of life 7 Mental health/nature connection 8 Revenue 9 Fire break/risk 10 Good for seniors/novices/kids/shorter course 11 Other nature options nearby 12 Other golf options nearby 13 Water use/drought 14 Climate/environment/pollutants 15 Benefits whole community/greater # of people/more accessible 16 Good for dogs
Q13: Do you have any other thoughts about the future of the site you would like to share?
1 Any responses that are unique from the reasons given in Q12 were tagged as “other” and reviewed for content (e.g., “recommend Tribal engagement” and “add classes about composting”)
96
Attachment D
Item #Item Repair Golf Course Natural Habitat
1 Capital Cost $1,970,000 $1,882,825
2 Total O&M Expenditure (0-25 yr)$17,496,250 $10,720,594
O&M Expenditure
Breakdown
2A Irrigation Water Cost***$1,575,000 $100,800
2B Sewer Discharge Cost $525,000 $297,200
2C City Labor Costs $7,569,500 $9,591,844
2D Contracted O&M Services $7,610,000 $562,000
2E O&M Miscellaneous $216,750 $168,750
3 Estimated Revenue (0-25 yrs)$9,378,624 $500,000
4 O&M Expenditure minus Revenue (0-25 yrs)$8,117,626 $10,220,594
5
Total Cost minus Revenue (0-25 yrs)$10,087,626 $12,103,419
6 Irrigation Water Use (0-25 yrs) Gallons*168 to 212 million Gallons 14 million Gallons
7 Grant Funding Potential**N/A $600,000
Average Annual O&M Cost over 25 Years =$324,705 $408,824
* based on current average use in drought conditions (8.5 M gal) and represents minimal use.
**assume $300k for construction and $300k on-going
***assumes use of current annual volume of water. Could be 15% reduction.
Blackberry Farm Golf Course Use Analysis
Comparative Costs - 25 Year Outlook
97
18
VISION & GOALS | cupertino parks and recreation system master plan
Nature Experience
Community members
want more opportunities to
connect to nature.
Expanding access to nature is a top priority
for the community. Throughout all outreach
activities, participants consistently favored
incorporating nature and increasing access
to natural open space over other potential
enhancements. Community priorities include
improving or restoring creeks, meadows, and
wildlife habitat in existing parks, as well as
planting more trees and native plants in public
spaces. Stakeholders, Council members and
residents noted the importance of environmental
education and nature programs in connecting
people to nature. Gardening and nature play
were seen as additional opportunities to connect
to nature. As the City renovates its parks,
residents would like to see a decreased emphasis
on large lawn areas and more focus on retaining
a site’s natural character. City parks could
better highlight existing natural amenities and
tree cover, adding to the City’s overall “natural
capital.”
85% of Citywide Survey
respondents noted that improving
access to natural open space is
needed
FIGURE 7: NATURE RECEIVES THE MOST AND STRONGEST SUPPORT OF THE
PRIORITY GOALS FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM
(VISION AND GOALS QUESTIONNAIRE)
98
23
cupertino parks and recreation system master plan |CHAPTER TWO
Recreation Variety
Residents and visitors
desire a wide range of
recreation options.
Cupertino is a diverse community with a keen
interest in diverse recreation. Outreach fi ndings
indicate that residents expect a greater variety
of recreation options, including unique, high-
quality attractions for residents and visitors. The
wide range of recreation interests includes a need
for diff erent types of facilities and programs that
support visual and performing arts, nature and
environmental education, sports and fi tness, and
more. Community members want to see diff erent
types of facilities that go beyond standard
recreation off erings, such as non-traditional,
multi-purpose facilities.
Community members recommended adding
varied facilities such as a parcourse, outdoor
exercise equipment, and moveable seating to
City parks, as well as traditional elements such
as basketball courts.
74% of Questionnaire
respondents believe that having
a greater variety of facilities and
programs is important
FIGURE 10: DIVERSE INTERESTS IN EIGHT TYPES OF PROGRAMMING
ENHANCEMENTS (CITYWIDE SURVEY)
Performing, visual,
cultural arts
Classes for lifelong
learning
Before and after school
programs
Nature and
environmental programs
Aquatic programs
Adult sports/fi tness
Youth sports/fi tness
Special events (i.e. Earth
Day, 4th of July, festivals,
etc.)
99
BLACKBERRY FARM GOLF COURSE
FUTURE USE OPTIONS
The City wants to hear your thoughts about the future use of
Blackberry Farm Golf Course
Please take a short survey!
This survey will take about 10 minutes to complete. For ages 12 and under, parents are encouraged to
help their children complete the survey. This survey is also available online in Simplified Chinese and
Hindi.
Introduction
As a Fiscal Year 2021-2022 City Work Program item, the Cupertino City Council included a needs
assessment study of Blackberry Farm Golf Course. Blackberry Farm Golf Course is located adjacent to
Blackberry Farm Park and the Stevens Creek Trail. Currently, the City is looking into two options for the
site, 1) Conduct necessary repairs and minor improvements to the golf course, or 2) Discontinue use of
the site as a golf course and restore to natural habitat and trails.
Call to Action: Let the City know which of the two options you prefer to see implemented at the
Blackberry Farm Golf Course site.
Survey Introduction: Whether you are a Cupertino resident, golfer, walker, or neighbor, the City wants
to hear from you. The City is deciding between two options for the use of the Blackberry Farm Golf
Course site:
Option A:
Golf Course Necessary Repairs and Minor Improvements – Replace the irrigation system, tee boxes,
greens, and sand traps. The ninth hole would be shortened to increase safety and eliminate errant shots to
the parking lot, trail, and first tee box. This includes the possible expansion of the short game practice
area. The empty ponds would be replaced with lowland native plantings. The Golf Course is estimated to
be closed for 9-12 months if this option is chosen. On course ADA issues would be addressed. National
Golf Foundation Consulting completed this Study.
Option B:
Conversion to Natural Habitat - Establish accessible walking trails, free to the public, that connect with
the Stevens Creek Trail and develop other visitor amenities, such as seating, an outdoor education area,
and ranger’s office. Allow the Stevens Creek riparian corridor vegetation to naturally occupy portions of
the existing golf course. Plant and manage vegetation to foster growth of drought tolerant and native
species. Establish a wildflower meadow. Existing Coastal Redwoods would remain. Incorporate fire
resiliency management practices. MIG, Inc completed this study. It includes a preliminary conceptual
design for the purposes of facilitating this feasibility discussion and is not meant to be a finalized design.
100
25-Year Comparative Cost Estimate for Option A and Option B:
Below is a summary table of the projected cost estimates for each option over a 25-year period.
Additionally noted is the projected water use for each option. Capital Costs include the initial cost of the
repair or improvement. These costs are in 2022 dollars and not adjusted for inflation. Costs include
projected revenues as identified in the table below.
You can review the reports for each option or sign up for email notifications regarding this topic at:
engagecupertino.org/bbfgolfcourse
101
1. Which of the following describes you…(check all that apply)
□ I live in Cupertino
□ I work in Cupertino
□ I go to school in Cupertino
□ I visit shops, restaurants, and service businesses in Cupertino.
□ Other (please describe)
2. How far do you live from Blackberry Farm Golf Course?
□ Less than ½ mile
□ Less than 1 mile
□ Between 1-5 miles
□ More than 5 miles
3. What is your age?
□ Under 18 years old
□ 18 – 30 years old
□ 30 – 40 years old
□ 40-50 years old
□ 50-60 years old
□ Over 60 years old
□ Prefer not to answer
4. Which of the following describes you…(Choose one)
□ I play golf at both Blackberry Farm Golf Course and Deep Cliff Golf Course.
□ I play golf at Blackberry Farm Golf Course but not at Deep Cliff Golf Course.
□ I play golf at Deep Cliff Golf Course but not at Blackberry Farm Golf Course.
□ I do not play golf at Blackberry Farm Golf Course or at Deep Cliff Golf Course.
❖ Do you prefer to play at one golf course over the other? If so, why? (Fill in
Blank)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
102
5. On average, my household plays golf at Blackberry Farm Golf Course…
□ Never
□ 1-5 times per year
□ 6-12 times per year
□ 13-24 times per year
□ More than 24 times per year
6. On average, my household uses the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail…
□ Never
□ Less than 1 time per month
□ 1-3 times per month
□ 4-11 times per month
□ More than 12 times per month
7. Currently, my household uses the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail for…(Select all that
apply)
□ Walking for leisure or exercise
□ Dog walking
□ Commuting
□ Biking for leisure
□ Other (fill in blank)
□ My household does not use the Stevens Creek Corridor Trail
8. If Blackberry Farm Golf Course is repaired and improved as outlined in the NGF
Study how often would you use the Golf Course in the future?
□ Frequently
□ Occasionally
□ Rarely
□ Never
103
9. If Blackberry Farm Golf Course is converted to natural habitat as outlined in the
MIG Study how often would you use the site in the future?
□ Frequently
□ Occasionally
□ Rarely
□ Never
10. Considering the costs of both options, which recreational opportunities would you
like to see prioritized at the Blackberry Farm Golf Course site? (Choose one)
□ Necessary repairs and minor improvements to the existing 9-hole golf course
□ Conversion of the golf course to natural habitat with an extension of the Stevens
Creek Corridor Trail
11. Why do you prefer one option over the other?
o (Fill in the Blank)
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
12. Do you have any other thoughts about the future of the site you would like to share?
(Fill in Blank)
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
OPTIONAL
o Provide your name and email address to receive periodic updates.
______________________________________________________________________________
104