Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20090527 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 09-17 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Meeting 09-17 SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETINGS BOARD OF DIRECTORS MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 6:30 p.m. Wednesday, May 27, 2009 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, California AGENDA The Special Meeting Closed Session will begin at 6:30 p.m. SPECIAL MEETING 6:30* SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRFCTORSOFTHE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ROLL CALL ADOPTION OF AGENDA 6:35* BOARD BUSINESS I Closed Session: Public Employees Performance Evaluation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 Title of Employees: General Manager,General Counsel and Controller REPORT ON RETURN FROM CLOSED SESSION(The Board shall publicly state any reportable action taken in Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.1) -7:01 REGULAR MEETING 71x6* REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ROLL CALL ORAL COMMUNICATIONS—Public ADOPTION OF AGENDA 7:10* CONSENT CALENDAR I Approve Minutes of the Special and Regular Board Meetings of April 22, 2009 2 Approve Revised Claims Report 3 Approve Written Communications • Marilyn Walter—Windy Hill • Marie Evitt— Bear Creek Stables `MeetingOY-|7 Page ` * Linda Williams—Bear Creek Stuhko * JennifecVVa|sh —BcurCreekStob|em � w Chris VVi||ricb—Bear Creek Stables � � /4 Approval of Communications Site Lease Agreement Amendment and Exercise of Option � with Nex1elnfCalifornia, {no.` u1Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve—B. Cuziok � � sJ Authorization to Extend Agreementsto Provide Vehicle Maintenance and Repair Services—D. \ Too|ey /6 Resolution Commemorating the Bay Trail Pmiect`u2«th Anniversary—RL Jurgensen /� � / Determination that the Recommended Actions are Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and Proposed Addition of Santa Clara County Tax-Defaulted"Hacienda Park"Parcels k/the Mt. Omnunhunn area of Sierra Azu| Open Space Preserve(Santa Clara County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 562-24-055 962-2�-049 j62-25'058 and located | ` ` ` ` | Almaden Reservoir in unincorporated Santa Clara County—h4. Williams 7:20° B0AR*|0Ns/NES8 8u Consideration of Protest of Award of Contract for Construction Services for the Second Phase of tile Administrative Office Basic Improvements Remodel Project—T. Bugg / 8b Determination that the Recommended Actions are Exempt from the California Environmental 0uu|in/ � Act and Determination Whether to Award o[Contract for Construction Services for the Second Phase of the Administrative()fOoc Basic Improvements Remodel Project—T. Bugg / i q Approval n[un Amendment hm the Contract with Tanuedhccbt, Inc. to Provide Construction � Administration Services for the Second Phase of the Administrative Office Basic Improvements Remodel Project unduIlcternminutimnthu1thrRcuoonrucndedAuhoneuu: BzcnmpthnmnthcCu|iforniu Environmental Quality Act—T. Hugg \O Consider Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Technical Addendum, and Mitigation Monitoring Program in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Authorize � Execution of Contract with Go Native Inc., in an amount not to exceed $78,000,for Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control akK4indego Ranch.—C. Koopmmunn | | /\ppvmvu| of an Amendment 0m the Contract with Wetlands and Water Resources, Inc., in tile Amount of$l5,O0U, for n Total Contract Amount Not To Exceed $79,O80,toQcfinc Results ofthe Schilling Lake Inundation Study aJ Thornewood Open Space Preserve and u Determination that the � Recommended Actions are Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act—M. Manning 12 Determination that tile Recommended Actions are Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and Authorization 0[ Revised Location Of The Commemorative Plaque Recognizing Tile Crash (]f The Airliner "Remo|udon" (]n October 29, |953u1 the Vista Point u1E| Corte de Madera Open Space Preserve— D. Sanguinetti INFORMATIONAL REPORTS— Reports onoompensuh|e meetings attended. Brief reports orannouncements concerning activities of District Directors and staff-, opportunity to refer public or Board questions to staff for factual information; request staff to report back to the Buuni on matter uiufuture meeting; or direct staff to place u matter on u future agenda. A. Committee Reports Meeting 09-17 Page 3 B. Staff Reports C. Director Reports ADJOURNMENT Times are estimated and items may appear earlier or later than listed.Agenda is subject to change of order. TOADDRESS THE BOARD: The Chair will invite public comment on agenda items at the time each item is considered by the Board of Directors. You may address the Board concerning other matters during Oral Communications. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to three minutes. Alternately,you may comment to the Board by a written communication, which the Board appreciates. Consent Calendar. All items on the Consent Calendar may be approved without discussion by one motion. Board members, the General Manager, and members of'the public may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar during consideration of the Consent Calendar. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the District Clerk at(650)691-1200. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the District to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. Written materials relating to an item on this Agenda that are considered to be a public record and are distributed to Board members less than 72 hours prior to the meeting,will be available for public inspection at the District's Administrative Office located at 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos,California 94022. CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA 1,Anna Jatczak, Interim District Clerk for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District(MROSD),declare that the foregoing agenda for the May 27,2009 Special and Regular Meetings of the MROSD Board of Directors was posted and available for review on May 22,2009 at the Administrative Offices of MROSD,330 Distel Circle,Los Altos,California,94022. The agenda is also available on the District's web site at http://www.opeuspace.ori-). Signed this 22nd day of May 2009,at Los Altos,California. Interim District Clerk Date: 05/22/09 Claims No. 09-10 Meeting 09-17 Date 5/27/09 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 10411 $8,442.00 Department Of Water Resources Rickey Dam Annual Fees 10412 $6,728.46 Santa Clara County Sheriffs Office Patrol Services 10413 $5,312.28 EQ Wine Covers Company Deposit-Carport For FFO 10414 $4,181.52 Howard Rome Martin&Ridley Legal Services-Anderson Litigation 10415 $4,163.36 *1 U.S. Postmaster Postage-Summer Newsletter 10416 $2,518.75 Condor Country Consulting Herpetological Surveys Of Mindego Hill Ranch 10417 $2,223.00 Eric Remington Review Of Nature Center Plant&Animal Specimens For Vitrine Case Refurbishment Project 10418 $1,854.87 Ergo Works Ergonomic Equipment 10419 $1,705.86 Hsieh, Benny Reimbursement-Three 48 Port Network Switches 10420 $1,496.13 Frankie's Awards Plaques For Artemas Ginzton Memorial Bench 10421 $1,476.68 Roy's Repair Service Vehicle Repairs&Service 10422 $1,319.44 CMK Automotive Vehicle Maintenance&Repairs 10423 $1,122.94 *2 Home Depot Field Supplies,Supplies For Chicken Coup Restoration,Shop Supplies, Door Trim For Bunkhouse, Materials For RSA Compost Bin 10424 $1,102.98 Sunnyvale Chevrolet Vehicle Repair 10425 $1,000.00 *3 Old Republic Title Company Escrow Deposit-Land Acquisition 10426 $907.50 Vollmer Consulting Consulting Services For Pond Management-La Honda Creek 10427 $901.99 Metro Mobile Communications Radio&CB Installation 10428 $813.50 Hoge, Fenton,Jones&Appel Legal Services-Chiocchi Litigation 10429 $800.00 Newburn, Michael Reimbursement-Tuition 10430 $655.00 All Temp Refrigeration HVAC Repair-FFO 10431 $646.77 Hertz Equipment Rental Equipment Rental-Forklift To Unload Material For Construction Of Covered Storage Area&Roller For Skyling Ridge Parking Lot Repairs 10432 $577.36 United Site Services Sanitation Services For Fremont Older Tours 10433 $515.02 Grand Prix Mule Service 10434 $459.64 California Water Service Company Water Service-FFO 10435 $430.00 Lance Bayer Legal Services 10436 $402.93 West Payment Center Legal Research&Books 10437 $375.00 Maze&Associates 2008/2009 Audit Expenses 10438 $374.00 Ravenswood City School District Bus To Spaces&Species Field Trip As Part Of The Transportation Assistance Program 10439 $350.00 Bill's Towing&Recovery Towing Services 10440 $334.33 Graniterock Base Rock For Skyline Ridge Parking Lot 10441 $326.93 Target Specialty Products Landscaping Supplies 10442 $305.90 Neopost Postage Machine Software For Rate Change 10443 $289.07 Baillie,Gordon Reimbursement-Public Information Officer's Conference Expenses 10444 $285A1 Priority 1 Public Safety Equipment Repair Code 3 Equipment 10445 $283.11 United Rentals Northwest Wheel Kit For Plate Compactor 10446 $265.91 Stanton, Elisa Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses 10447 $250.00 Ergo Vera Ergonomic Evaluations 10448 $250.00 PERS Public Agency Coalition Annual Membership 10449 $221 A7 Tires On The Go Tires 10450 $220.00 County Of San Mateo Human Supervisor Training Resources Department 10451 $212.65 Summit Uniforms Uniform Expenses 10452 $212.42 Koopmann,Clayton Reimbursement-California Native Grassland Association Conference Expenses&Mileage 10453 $183.93 Royal Brass Plumbing Supplies Page 1 of 3 Claims No. 09-10 Meeting 09-17 Date 5/27/09 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 10454 $157.00 Del Rey Building Maintenance Janitorial Supplies-AO 10455 $150.72 Hapke,Alexander Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses 10456 $149.33 Staples Office Supplies 10457 $146A7 Moffett Supply Company Sanitation Supplies 10458 $145.86 Accountemps Accounting Temp 10459 $142.95 Green Waste Garbage Service-SFO 10460 $137.90 Sears Tools For FFO Shop 10461 $135.47 Perez, Mike Reimbursement-Bike Patrol Supplies 10462 $125.00 Certified Professional In Erosion And Membership Fee Sediment Control 10463 $120.00 Roessler,Cindy Reimbursement-Cell Phone 10464 $113.94 Forestry Suppliers Field Supplies-Dust Masks&Flagging Dispenser 10465 $109.09 Ace Fire Equipment&Service Fire Extinguishers Company 10466 $101.84 Williams,Jennifer Reimbursement-Office Supplies 10467 $100.00 California Department Of Public Health Water Distribution Operator Examination Fees 10468 $78.00 Pacific Telemanagement Services Pay Phone-Black Mountain 10469 $68.04 Minton's Lumber&Supply Field Supplies 10470 $62.50 Britt, Kristi Reimbursement-Dedication Event Supplies&Mileage 10471 $61.21 FedEx Shipping Charges 10472 $60.00 Macke Water Systems Water Dispenser Rental-Two Months 10473 $59.97 Parry, Rick Reimbursement-Uniform&Training Expenses 10474 $50.00 Miller, Ken Reimbursement-EMT Recertification Fee 10475 $50.00 `4 Santa Clara County Clerk Recorders Notice Of Exemption Fee 10476 $39.21 Gibbons,Stephen Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses 10477 $36.00 Rancho Cobbler&Cleaners Sew On Uniform Patches 10478 $34.00 Department Of Motor Vehicles Class A License Renewal-C.Beckman 10479 $32.00 American Red Cross Emergency Response Training Certificates 10480 $13.11 Foster Brothers Lock&Key Services 10481 $10.87 Coastal Tractor Mule Parts 10482 $4.37 Ricoh Americas Corporation Copier-Additonal Usage Fees 10483 R $11,178.02 Lampson Tractor&Equipment Field Equipment-Flail Mower Company 10484 R $4,650.00 Summit Springs Design Construction, Plaque Mounting& Installation Of Memorial Bench At Fremont Older 10485 R $2,076.01 Roy's Repair Service Vehicle Repairs&Service 10486 R $2,031.52 Office Depot Office Supplies,Computer Supplies, Footrest, Desk Lamp, Mouse Pad, Printer Cartridges,Copy Paper, Name Plates&Laminating Supplies 10487 R $1,200.00 Santa Clara County Parks Radar Training&Certification For New Rangers 10488 R $306.46 Petty Cash Office Supplies/Parking&Mileage/Business Related Meals/Training&Conference Expenses/Docent Supplies 10489 R $274.56 AccounTemps Accounting Temp 10490 R $244.12 McKowan, Paul Reimbursement-Storage Supplies&Sign Holders 10491 R $229.30 ADT Security Services Alarm Service-SFO 10492 R $198.00 Schectman, Sue Reimbursement-Mileage 10493 R $96.39 Hugg,Tina Reimbursement-Business Related Meal 10494 R $78.00 G&K Service Shop Towel Service 10495 R $58.15 Jurich,Michael Reimbursement-Cell Phone 10496 R $41.85 Kwik Key Lock&Safe Company Lock&Key Services 10497 R $25.67 California Water Service Company Water Service-Windy Hill Page 2 of 3 f J i Claims No. 09-10 Meeting 09-17 Date 5/27/09 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description i Total $81,681.01 '1 Urgent Check Issued 5/20/09 '2 Urgent Check Issued 5/14/09 '3 Urgent Check Issued 5/14/09 `4 Urgent Check Issued 5/15/09 i I Page 3 of 3 Claims No. 09-10 Meeting 09-17 Date 5/27/09 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 10411 $8,442.00 Department Of Water Resources Rickey Dam Annual Fees 10412 $6,728.46 Santa Clara County Sheriffs Office Patrol Services 10413 $5,312.28 EQ Wine Covers Company Deposit-Carport For FFO 10414 $4,181.52 Howard Rome Martin&Ridley Legal Services-Anderson Litigation 10415 $4,163.36 *1 U.S. Postmaster Postage-Summer Newsletter 10416 $2,518.75 Condor Country Consulting Herpetological Surveys Of Mindego Hill Ranch 10417 $2,223.00 Eric Remington Review Of Nature Center Plant&Animal Specimens For Vitrine Case Refurbishment Project 10418 $1,854.87 Ergo Works Ergonomic Equipment 10419 $1,705.86 Hsieh, Benny Reimbursement-Three 48 Port Network Switches 10420 $1,496.13 Frankie's Awards Plaques For Artemas Ginzton Memorial Bench 10421 $1,476.68 Roy's Repair Service Vehicle Repairs&Service 10422 $1,319.44 CMK Automotive Vehicle Maintenance&Repairs 10423 $1,122.94 *2 Home Depot Field Supplies,Supplies For Chicken Coup Restoration,Shop Supplies,Door Trim For Bunkhouse,Materials For RSA Compost Bin 10424 $1,102.98 Sunnyvale Chevrolet Vehicle Repair 10425 $1,000.00 *3 Old Republic Title Company Escrow Deposit-Land Acquisition 10426 $907.50 Vollmer Consulting Consulting Services For Pond Management-La Honda Creek 10427 $901.99 Metro Mobile Communications Radio&CB Installation 10428 $813.50 Hoge, Fenton,Jones&Appel Legal Services-Chiocchi Litigation 10429 $800.00 Newburn,Michael Reimbursement-Tuition 10430 $655.00 All Temp Refrigeration HVAC Repair-FFO 10431 $646.77 Hertz Equipment Rental Equipment Rental-Forklift To Unload Material For Construction Of Covered Storage Area&Roller For Skyling Ridge Parking Lot Repairs 10432 $577.36 United Site Services Sanitation Services For Fremont Older Tours 10433 $515.02 Grand Prix Mule Service 10434 $459.64 California Water Service Company Water Service-FFO 10435 $430.00 Lance Bayer Legal Services 10436 $402.93 West Payment Center Legal Research&Books 10437 $375.00 Maze&Associates 2008/2009 Audit Expenses 10438 $374.00 Ravenswood City School District Bus To Spaces&Species Field Trip As Part Of The Transportation Assistance Program 10439 $350.00 Bill's Towing&Recovery Towing Services 10440 $334.33 Graniterock Base Rock For Skyline Ridge Parking Lot 10441 $326.93 Target Specialty Products Landscaping Supplies 10442 $305.90 Neopost Postage Machine Software For Rate Change 10443 $289.07 Baillie,Gordon Reimbursement-Public Information Officer's Conference Expenses 10444 $285.41 Priority 1 Public Safety Equipment Repair Code 3 Equipment 10445 $283.11 United Rentals Northwest Wheel Kit For Plate Compactor 10446 $265.91 Stanton, Elisa Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses 10447 $250.00 Ergo Vera Ergonomic Evaluations 10448 $250.00 PERS Public Agency Coalition Annual Membership 10449 $221.47 Tires On The Go Tires 10450 $220.00 County Of San Mateo Human Supervisor Training Resources Department 10451 $212.65 Summit Uniforms Uniform Expenses 10452 $212.42 Koopmann,Clayton Reimbursement-California Native Grassland Association Conference Expenses&Mileage 10453 $183.93 Royal Brass Plumbing Supplies Page 1 of 2 z Claims No. 09-10 Meeting 09-17 Date 5/27/09 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 10454 $157.00 Del Rey Building Maintenance Janitorial Supplies-AO 10455 $150.72 Hapke,Alexander Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses 10456 $149.33 Staples Office Supplies 10457 $146.47 Moffett Supply Company Sanitation Supplies 10458 $145.86 Accountemps Accounting Temp 10459 $142.95 Green Waste Garbage Service-SFO 10460 $137.90 Sears Tools For FFO Shop 10461 $135.47 Perez, Mike Reimbursement-Bike Patrol Supplies 10462 $125.00 Certified Professional In Erosion And Membership Fee Sediment Control 10463 $120.00 Roessler,Cindy Reimbursement-Cell Phone 10464 $113.94 Forestry Suppliers Field Supplies-Dust Masks&Flagging Dispenser 10465 $109.09 Ace Fire Equipment&Service Fire Extinguishers Company 10466 $101.84 Williams,Jennifer Reimbursement-Office Supplies 10467 $100.00 California Department Of Public Health Water Distribution Operator Examination Fees 10468 $78.00 Pacific Telemanagement Services Pay Phone-Black Mountain 10469 $68.04 Minton's Lumber&Supply Field Supplies 10470 $62.50 Britt, Kristi Reimbursement-Dedication Event Supplies&Mileage 10471 $61.21 FedEx Shipping Charges 10472 $60.00 Macke Water Systems Water Dispenser Rental-Two Months 10473 $59.97 Parry, Rick Reimbursement-Uniform&Training Expenses 10474 $50.00 Miller, Ken Reimbursement-EMT Recertification Fee 10475 $50.00 '4 Santa Clara County Clerk Recorders Notice Of Exemption Fee 10476 $39.21 Gibbons, Stephen Reimbursement-Uniform Expenses 10477 $36.00 Rancho Cobbler&Cleaners Sew On Uniform Patches 10478 $34.00 Department Of Motor Vehicles Class A License Renewal-C. Beckman 10479 $32.00 American Red Cross Emergency Response Training Certificates 10480 $13.11 Foster Brothers Lock&Key Services 10481 $10.87 Coastal Tractor Mule Parts 10482 $4.37 Ricoh Americas Corporation Copier-Additonal Usage Fees Total $58,992.96 *1 Urgent Check Issued 5/20/09 '2 Urgent Check Issued 5/14/09 '3 Urgent Check Issued 5/14/09 `4 Urgent Check Issued 5/15/09 Page 2 of 2 w kq% I Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District To: Board of Directors From: Stephen E. Abbors Date: May 22, 2009 Re: Written Communication i DRAFT RESPONSE PREPARED BY STAFF May 28, 2009 FOR ROAR ROARD CONSIDERATION Ms. Marilyn Walter 20 Coyote Hill Portola Valley, CA 94028 RE: Woods Property Trail to Sweet Spring Trail and Windy Hill Open Space Preserve Dear Ms. Walter, Thank you for your letters dated April 20, 2009 and April 21, 2009 in which you state an interest in improving trails within the Town of Portola Valley. In one of your letters, you mention a desire to replace the existing steep section of trail near Saddleback Street with a new trail that would traverse the Woods Property to connect to the Town's Sweet Spring Trail. We appreciate your interest in bringing this trail alternative suggestion to our attention. The Woods Property currently still remains in private ownership and we do not expect the District to take ownership until later this year, at the earliest. Because of this, any action on our part would be premature. However, your suggestion will be included in those ideas we consider when we take ownership and can begin the formal planning process. It is also important to note that a substantial amount of work will need to occur once we take ownership of the property. These tasks will include basic site security, resource data collection and site surveys to identify and catalog the natural and cultural resources on this remarkable property. I should also mention that the District has just begun the new fiscal year and we are working through a full list of projects that were pared down in response to the current statewide fiscal crisis. In addition to your suggestion for the Woods property, your request for the additional trail at Windy Mill Open Space Preserve, which I have brought to the attention of our new General Manager, will be added to the list of projects we consider as we begin budget preparation in the fall. Because the District owns and operates 26 other open space preserves, including three for which we are finalizing comprehensive Master Plans, and has limited resources with which to ri ritize our focus each year. Letters from District residents, such as the hem we must o operate t p y one you wrote, are important because they help inform our decisions about priorities. Thank you ideas with us. We will keep you r letter, ideas an d contact for taking the time to share our de p y , Y information in the file to make them available to staff as we move forward. Again, thank you for your comments. Sincerely, Nonette Hanko, Board President cc: MROSD Board of Directors Stephen E. Abbors, General Manager 20 Coyote Hill 1I'r� ��5 Portola Valley, CA 94028 April 21, 2009 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022 Re: Windy Hill Open Space Trails Dear Board Members: A few years back there was an agreement between MROSD and the Town of Portola Valley to develop a trail that would connect the Spring Ridge Trail to the Hamm's Gulch Trail. What ever happened to that trail? So few can hike the entire 8 1/2 mile loop to the top of Windy Hill, that it made sense to have a mid level trail connecting Hamm's Gulch Trail to the Spring Ridge Trail. Please explain why that trail has never been developed. Thank you, Marilyn J. Walter enc: Section of Portola Valley Trail Map, 2000 �` 711 To: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District �, cc: Portola Valley Trail Committee APr. 2:i 2bi^J From: Marilyn Walter Subject: Woods Property Trail to Sweet Spring Trail Date: April 20, 2009 Years ago a Town trail was installed that connected the Town's Sweet Spring Trail on the Portola Ranch Property to the Alpine Trail near Saddleback street., I was on the committee at that time. Although we thought the trail would be too steep, it was our only connection possibility until the Woods Property was developed. If any of you have climbed Sweet Spring Trail from Alpine, you know how steep it is; at least a 20- 25% grade. If the Woods Property were developed, the Town would then be able to reroute the trail from Alpine Road (near the existing Woods driveway) to Sweet Spring Trail. This would be a much more gradual grade, and the Town could eliminate that steep connection which starts near Saddleback off Alpine. But now the Woods property has been donated to MROSD. So I write to ask that MROSD consider developing this alternative connection to the Town's Sweet Spring Trail, and suggest that the Town then eliminate the steep connection ear Saddleback. ,/ Enc: Section of Portola Valley Town Trail map of 1994 M.J.Walter 20 Coyote Hili Portola Valley,CA 94028 71,11,.... ,.,r w.N eNOW, �i V III =if a4'�� :� I ��. �_ - .:,� 'Y� -�' �S 'q .�. -.i� y�t _• I ! ` Cod ij TV 10 C , ,;! Imo••i.ti - / s I �!• �! ' V.. r.�l4ljR p jL��u' �AI'.• ,yam R- .�_' g� c- fit` ( k .Q� 'IQ� �. IN CA S . �Yj. .h"d OI as�1�s� 2M �s�Il � i.;�',r. 1 r �4•.! .t F �1. �• � t p�� �• �� t. { ;c: �� �.�-.� ^.'�i ram' .i,�s•.•r .' t �1.b. ! � 1 p� /( 1 R ^•' � T4 h, r ?' .C' �pI•.�Ce+ .�r No, .� y d l'" ( ,r� ^ - (••v y��.H•r iy : a•,.�3-ti �.r r�'r l spa �' �8��V r. .J ns ot J $� � L�C � �C�. ,1 � ��,5 y� ::' � �`•\ �1�,c s�'•�'x: �{fY Y'.1 G � :. 1 ice•.: 1;< f �ry 1, �- ��7�T�- Le ,fin � -77GG i, G� � ., � t• �'�{;. } E ,�..®.. rC . < ♦ J' r ' f r t �� EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE DRAFT RESPONSE PREPARED BY STAFF May 14, 2009 rOR BOARD CONSIDERATION Marie Faust Evitt mfevitt@evitt.us Subject: Your Email Dated April 30, 2009 Referencing Bear Creek Stables Dear Ms. Evitt, Thank you for taking the time to send us an email message describing the Mountain View Parent Nursery School field trip held at Bear Creek Stables. Bear Creek Stables leases District property within the larger 1,345-acre Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. Currently, the Preserve is the subject of a master planning process, and as such Bear Creek Stables has been one of the many topics of discussion. Responding in part to the many comments that the District has received in support of the stables operation, the District's Master Plan Ad Hoc Committee will be forwarding a Draft Plan to the full Board of Directors that is anticipated to include consideration of a long-term lease for the stables operation. We expect to invite the public to an Open House to present the Draft Plan recommendations during the summer of 2009. If you are interested in learning more about the master plan, please visit our project website at www.openspace.org/masterplan. Also, please let us know if you would like to be added to our mailing list to receive upcoming meeting announcements and project newsletters by contacting Ana Ruiz, Project Planner, by phone at (650) 691-1200 or by email at aruiz@openspace.org. Sincerely, Nonette Hanko, Board President cc: MROSD Board of Directors Stephen E. Abbors, General Manager From: MFEvitt [mailto:mfevitt@evitt.us] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 2:52 PM To: BOARD; Steve Abbors; Ana Ruiz Subject: school fieldtrip to Bear Creek Preserve and stables Hello, I want to tell you how much I appreciate Jenny Whitman leading my parent-child preschool class on a fieldtrip to Bear Creek Stables and Bear Creek Preserve this week. This trip has now become an annual tradition with my nature fieldtrip class at the Mountain View Parent Nursery School. In previous years we didn't allow enough time to visit the horses so this year we planned our morning a bit differently. First, Jenny showed us tadpoles she'd rescued from puddles that were drying up. Then she guided us on a very informative hike through the preserve. It was fascinating to learn about the history of the area, the animals and the plants-- native and imported. Finally Jenny introduced us to a number of the horses in the stables. The children and parents were fascinated! It's so important for suburban children to learn about taking care of animals. Jenny's devotion to the horses and to the open space is clear. Thank you for allowing the stables to remain on the preserve land. I am so grateful to MROSD for the vision to preserve open space in our area. Thank you for all your efforts. Marie Faust Evitt Teacher, Mountain View Parent Nursery School 1 EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE DRAFT RESPONSE PREPARED BY STAFF May 14, 2009 FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION Ms. Linda Williams linda.williams@a ,,mail.com Subject: Your Email Dated May 1, 2009 Referencing Bear Creek Stables Dear Ms. Williams, Thank you for taking the time to send us an email message describing your family's experience visiting Bear Creek Stables during a field trip with the Mountain View Parent Nursery School. Bear Creek Stables leases District property within the larger 1,345-acre Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. Currently, the Preserve is the subject of a master planning process, and as such Bear Creek Stables has been one of the many topics of discussion. Responding in part to the many comments that the District has received in support of the stables operation, the District's Master Plan Ad Hoc Committee will be forwarding a Draft Plan to the full Board of Directors that is anticipated to include consideration of a long-term lease for the stables operation. We expect to invite the public to an Open House to present the Draft Plan recommendations during the summer of 2009. If you are interested in learning more about the master plan, please visit our project website at www.openspace.org/masteMlan. Also, please let us know if you would like to be added to our mailing list to receive upcoming meeting announcements and project newsletters by contacting Ana Ruiz, Project Planner, by phone at (650) 691-1200 or by email at aruiz@openspace.org. Sincerely, Stephen E. Abbors General Manager cc: MROSD Board of Directors Ana Ruiz, Interim Planning Manager -----Original Message----- From: Linda Williams [mai Ito:I inda.williams@gmai 1.com] On Behalf Of Linda Williams Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 1 :02 PM To: Steve Abbors; Ana Ruiz Subject: thank you for the Bear Creek Redwoods open space! Dear Mr Abbors and Ms Ruiz, I had the great pleasure of visiting the Bear Creek Redwoods open space preserve this week with my son's preschool "Adventure Day" class, part of the Mountain View Parent Nursery School. Jenny Whitman was our capable and engaging guide. What a beautiful location! We loved hiking through the bay laurel trees along the creek and then emerging on the hilltops to see such a gorgeous view. Jenny showed us many of the native, wild plants like pineapple plant (which the kids loved), owl clover and miner's lettuce. Another highlight was visiting the stables after our walk. It's such a treasure to have an open space preserve with stables attached, and the children adored saying hello to the horses and feeding some of them fistfuls of hay. Thanks for providing such a marvelous resource. We look forward to visiting again. Best regards, Linda Williams EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE DRAFT RESPONSE PREPARED BY STAFF May 14, 2009 FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION Ms. Jennifer Walsh Tenn walsh@hotmail.com Subject: Your Email Dated April 30, 2009 Referencing Bear Creek Stables Dear Ms. Walsh, Thank you for taking the time to send us an email message describing your family's experience visiting Bear Creek Stables during a field trip with the Mountain View Parent Nursery School. Bear Creek Stables leases District property within the larger 1,345-acre Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. Currently, the Preserve is the subject of a master planning process, and as such Bear Creek Stables has been one of the many topics of discussion. Responding in part to the many comments that the District has received in support of the stables operation, the District's Master Plan Ad Hoc Committee will be forwarding a Draft Plan to the full Board of Directors that is anticipated to include consideration of a long-term lease for the stables operation. We expect to invite the public to an Open House to present the Draft Plan recommendations during the summer of 2009. If you are interested in learning more about the master plan, please visit our project website at www.openspace.org/inastgMIg.n. Also, please let us know if you would like to be added to our mailing list to receive upcoming meeting announcements and project newsletters by contacting Ana Ruiz, Project Planner, by phone at (650) 691-1200 or by email at aruiz@openspace.org. Sincerely, Stephen E. Abbors General Manager cc: MROSD Board of Directors Ana Ruiz, Interim Planning Manager , - Fromm: Jennife,VVa|sh [maihojenn_yvalshOhotnnai|.con , Sent: Thursday, April 3O, ZOO9 ]:]1PM To: BOARD; Steve Abbocs; Ana Ruiz | Subject: Bear Creek OpenspacePreserve Anna Ruiz, Project Planner for Bear Creek Redwoods Preserve Steve Abbona. General Manager ofK8ROSD My name is Jennifer Walsh and I am writing to you on behalf of the Bear Creek Redwoods Preserve and Stables. C)n Tuesday, April 28. Jenny Whitman, was kind enough to take myson'm preschool class from Mountain View Parent Nursery School on a hike through the Bear Creek Redwoods Preserve and tour of the stables. I wanted t let you know how much my son and I enjoyed the property, how much we learned about the surrounding wildlife, plants and most of all petting and feeding the beautiful horses. It is so nice to have this facility so close to home. I think it is wonderful that you are preserving this beautiful property with hiking trails and allowing the stables tn remain on the propedy. Best regards, Jennifer Walsh � EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE DRAFT RESPONSE PREPARED BY STAFF May 14, 2009 FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION Chris Willrich slowspring(d)-mac.com Subject: Your Email Dated May 1, 2009 Referencing Bear Creek Stables Dear Mr. Willrich, Thank you for taking the time to send us an email message describing your family's experience visiting Bear Creek Stables during a field trip with the Mountain View Parent Nursery School. Bear Creek Stables leases District property within the larger 1,345-acre Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. Currently, the Preserve is the subject of a master planning process, and as such Bear Creek Stables has been one of the many topics of discussion. Responding in part to the many comments that the District has received in support of the stables operation, the District's Master Plan Ad Hoc Committee will be forwarding a Draft Plan to the full Board of Directors that is anticipated to include consideration of a long-term lease for the stables operation. We expect to invite the public to an Open House to present the Draft Plan recommendations during the summer of 2009. If you are interested in learning more about the master plan, please visit our project website at www.opens12ace.org/masterplan. Also, please let us know if you would like to be added to our mailing list to receive upcoming meeting announcements and project newsletters by contacting Ana Ruiz, Project Planner, by phone at (650) 691-1200 or by email at aruiz@openspace.org. Sincerely, i I Nonette Hanko, Board President cc: MROSD Board of Directors Stephen E. Abbors, General Manager I l -----Original Message----- From: Chris Willrich [mailto:slowspring@mac.com] Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 11:15 AM To: BOARD; Steve Abbors; Ana Ruiz Subject: Bear Creek Redwoods Dear Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Last Tuesday my daughter's preschool class (Mountain View Parent Nursery School) had the great privilege of walking through Bear Creek Redwoods and visiting the stables there. Thank you very much for preserving this area and allowing the stables to remain there. It was a perfect trip for a horse-loving four- year-old, and this forty-one-year-old loved the beautiful landscape. Best wishes, Chris Willrich Mountain View Midpeninsula Regional • ' Open Space District R-09-60 Meeting 09-17 May 27, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 4 AGENDA ITEM Approval of Communications Site Lease Agreement Amendment and Exercise of Option with Nextel of California, Inc., at Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION��e Adopt the attached Board Resolution authorizing approval of the attached Communications Site Lease Agreement Amendment and Exercise of Option with Nextel Communications, Inc., a Delaware corporation. DISCUSSION At the meeting of September 24, 2003, the Board approved a Communications Site Lease with Nextel Communications, Inc. (Lessee) (see report R-03-88). The Lessee has exercised the first option of the original Communications Site Lease, which extends the lease an additional five years. This option also provides for a negotiated increase in the annual rent, starting at $36,500 (retroactive to August 27, 2008), and thereafter increasing four (4)percent per year for each of the remaining four years of this extension term. This is the first of the four options for additional five (5) year terms under the 2003 Communications Site Lease. Rent for extended terms is set at the then prevailing market rate. It is in the best interest of the District to approve the subject lease amendment because it provides the District with continued rental revenue at market rates with no new impacts to District land. Should a need for a different site use arise, the provisions of Public Resources Code §5563 permit early termination. To facilitate the future exercise of subsequent options to the Nextel Communications Site Lease, the Board resolution authorizes the General Manager to approve the exercise of three subsequent options of the Communications Site Lease. The General Manager shall report in writing on any such exercise of an option at the Board of Directors following the exercise thereof. FISCAL IMPACT As a result of the Lessee exercising the option of the original Communications Site Lease, District revenue for the Nextel Communications, Inc. site for the next five years will increase annually as shown in the table below: R-09-60 Page 2 Year Proposed Communications Site Lease Rent under New Amendment 2008/2009 $36,500.00 2009/2010 $37,960.00 2010/2011 $39,478.00 2011/2012 $41,057.00 2012/2013 $42,699.00 Total $197,694.00 PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE The activity authorized is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (Guidelines Section 15378) because the extension of an existing communications lease pursuant to the exercise of an option does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. NEXT STEPS If the the Communications Site Lease Agreement Amendment is approved by the Board of Directors, staff will notify Nextel Communications Inc. of Board approval of this item. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Communications Lease Agreement Amendment 3. Location Map Prepared by: Elaina Cuzick, Real Property Specialist Contact person: Elaina Cuzick, Real Property Specialist RESOLUTION NO. 09- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPROVING THE COMMUNICATIONS SITE LEASE AMENDMENT AND EXERCISE OF OPTION AND AGREEMENT WITH NEXTEL OF CALIFORNIA INC.. (PULGAS RIDGE OPEN SPACE PRESERVE) The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby resolve: Section One. The District may, under the provisions of Section 5540 and 5563 of the Public Resources Code, lease property owned by the District for up to twenty-five(25)years,and the Board of Directors hereby finds that the premises remain presently unnecessary for open space purposes and that continuation of the Lease for communication facilities is in the best interests of the public. Section Two. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District approves the Amendment between Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and Nextel of California Inc., a copy of which is attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, and does hereby authorize the President or other appropriate officers to execute said Amendment on behalf of the District. Section Three. The General Manager is hereby authorized to approve the exercise of the three subsequent options of the Communications Site Lease on the terms and conditions set forth in the Communications Site Lease. The General Manager is further authorized to execute any and all other documents necessary or appropriate to the completion of such transactions. The General Manager shall report in writing on any such exercise of an option to continue the subject Communication Site Lease to the Board of Directors at the meeting immediately following the exercise thereof. ATTACHMENT 2: AMENDMENT No. 1 to COMMUNICATIONS SITE LEASE AGREEMENT AND EXERCISE OF OPTION This Amendment No. 1 ("Amendment") to the herein referenced Communications Site Lease Agreement is by and between the NEXTEL OF CALIFORNIA, INC., a Delaware corporation ("Lessee"), and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, a special district, formed pursuant to Article 3 of Chapter 3 of Division 5 of the California Public Resources Code ("District"). A. WHEREAS, District and Lessee are parties to that certain Communications Site Lease dated August 27, 2003 ("Lease"); and B. WHEREAS, District and Lessee desire to now amend said Lease to modify the rental terms as more particularly set out herein; and C. WHEREAS, Lessee also desires to exercise the first Option to Extend Term subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein. NOW THEREFORE, District and Lessee amend the Lease as follows: 1. In accordance with Section 25 (Option to Extend Term) of the Lease, District and Lessee agree to extend the Term of the Lease for an additional period of five (5) years, commencing August 27, 2008 (Extended Option Term). 2. Section 5(a) of the Lease is deleted in its entirety and replaced as follows: Payable on or before execution of this Amendment and annually on the Commencement Date thereafter, Lessee shall pay District the rental at the rate then in effect. The rent ("Rent") for the first year of the extended Term shall be $36,500.00. The Rent shall be increased annually during the Extended Option Term as follows: i) Second year of the Extended Option Term $37,960.00 ii) Third year of the Extended Option Term $39,478.00 iii) Fourth year of the Extended Option Term $41,057.00 iv) Fifth year of the Extended Option Term $42,699.00 3. Lessee's notice addresses set forth in Paragraph 26 of the Lease are deleted in their entirety and replaced with the following: Lessee: Sprint Nextel Property Services Mailstop: KSOPHT0101-Z2650 6391 Sprint Parkway Overland Park, KS 66251-2650 With a copy to: Sprint Nextel Law Department Mailstop: KSOPHT0101-Z2020 6391 Sprint Parkway Page I of 2 Overland Park, KS 6625 1-Z2020 Attn: Real Estate Attorney 4. If a conflict between terms in the Lease and those in this Amendment arises, the provisions of this Amendment shall control the construction and interpretation thereof. 5. Capitalized terms used in this Amendment not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Lease. 6. The Lease, as amended herein, shall continue in full force and effect with all other terms and conditions unchanged. 7. This Amendment may be executed in duplicate counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original. 8. Each of the parties represent and warrant that they have the right, power, legal capacity and authority to enter into and perform their respective obligations under this Amendment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, District and Lessee have executed this Amendment. DISTRICT: LESSEE: Midpeninsula Regional NEXTEL OF CALIFORNIA, INC. Open Space District a Delaware corporation RECOMMENDED: By: Stephen E. Abbors General Manager President APPROVED: Date: Susan M. Schectman General Counsel ACCEPTED: ATTEST: President Gregory Sam Board of Directors District Clerk Date: Page 2 of 2 PG & E Tower and Cellular Tenant 5 , ,e Location Pu Igas Ridge Open Space Preserve .... .r Crests ii ,j,•,t�' O Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve c,\ �ra ` \Gera s •, r If sle . 'has r Loop Trail .. y f- Site Location ............. E v V V. 'i 3 as ~ 3• j i• u i 3 -•• j ,, °- ........... Caltrans Park & Ride .....• dgewiod County Prk v r' 72 .......... ,• i a i i ...,.•, ............. .. 0 •` •..i .......... .. . t ........, ..,. - ..... Attachment 3: Location Map o 0.125 o.25 0.5 e Produced by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, May 2008 Miles Midpeninsula Regional • ' Open Space District r 1 R-09-62 Meeting 09-17 May 27, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 5 AGENDA ITEM Authorization to Extend Agreements to Provide Vehicle Maintenance and Repair Services GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Authorize the General Manager to extend the agreements with the following vendors to provide maintenance and repair services for the District's fleet vehicles: 1. Roy's Repair Service of La Honda 2. CMK Automotive of Mountain View 3. Sunnyvale Ford 4. Redwood General i DISCUSSION At the May 28, 2008 meeting, the Board authorized the General Manager to enter into contracts with Roy's Repair Service, CMK, Sunnyvale Ford and Redwood General to provide maintenance and repair services for District vehicles. These initial contracts were approved in June of 2008 after a competitive proposal process, and included the option to extend each of the contracts annually over the next three (3) years if overall performance remains competitive. Staff has worked with all four service providers over the last year, and all have delivered high quality work, excellent customer service and have been responsive to g q Y urgent service and repair needs in a timely manner. Their hourly shop rates and repair costs are very competitive within the market. Based on the performance of each service provider over the past year, staff recommends extending the agreements with Roy's Repair Service, CMK, Sunnyvale Ford and Redwood General for the period July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010 in an amount not to exceed $115,000, collectively. FISCAL IMPACT Full funding for these service contracts is included in the FY2009-10 Operations budget. R-09-62 Page 2 PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE This proposed action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and no environmental review is required. NEXT STEPS Execute agreement with the listed vendors to extend the contract for one year to provide maintenance and repair services for the District's fleet vehicles. Prepared by: � David Topley, Support Services Supervisor Contact person: Same as Above Midpeninsula Regional O ' Open Space District R-09-73 Meeting 09-17 May 27, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 6 AGENDA ITEM Resolution Commemorating the Bay Trail Project's 20t" Anniversary. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached Resolution Commemorating the Bay Trail Project's 20th Anniversary. DISCUSSION This year the San Francisco Bay Trail Project is celebrating its 20th Anniversary. The trails associated with this project provide varied opportunities for shoreline access through nature walks, bike rides, birding excursions, and historic strolls. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has actively supported and participated in the creation of this trail and a new segment of the Bay Trail was recently made possible when the District acquired an easement on the land adjacent to its Ravenswood Open Space Preserve. Part of the Bay Trail also runs through the District's Stevens Creek Shoreline Nature Study Area. The Bay Trail Project has provided a great benefit for the public and for this reason, the District's General Manager is recommending that the Board adopt the attached Resolution. FISCAL IMPACT None PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE The resolution is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (Guidelines Section 15378) R-09-73 Page 2 NEXT STEPS If approved, transmit an original of the Board Resolution to the Bay Trail Project. Attachment 1. Resolution Prepared by: Rudy Jurgensen, Public Affairs Manager Contact person: Same as Above i RESOLUTION NO. 09- RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO HONOR THE 20"" ANNIVERSARY OF THE BAY TRAIL PROJECT WHEREAS, close to thirty years ago, only four miles of bay shoreline were accessible to the public; and WHEREAS, the San Francisco Bay Trail Project, a nonprofit organization administered by the Association of Bay Area Governments, was created twenty years ago to provide a "Ring around the Bay," a hiking and bicycling trail that would encircle San Francisco and San Pablo bays; and WHEREAS, the Bay Trail will eventually connect the shoreline of all nine Bay Area counties, link 47 cities, and cross the major toll bridges in the region through a continuous 500-mile network of bicycling and hiking trails; and WHEREAS, to date, approximately 290 miles of the alignment—over half the Bay Trail's ultimate length—have been completed; and WHEREAS, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has actively supported and participated in the creation of this trail and supported the linking of shoreline parks, open space preserves, and other public access areas in a continuous loop around San Francisco and San Pablo Bays; and WHEREAS, a new segment of trail was made possible when the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District acquired an easement on the land adjacent to its Ravenswood Open Space Preserve; and WHEREAS, the District is currently working to acquire easements across San Francisco Public Utilities Commission land which would extend the Bay Trail and allow public access from University Avenue in East Palo Alto; and WHEREAS, the District's Stevens Creek Shoreline Nature Study Area, adjacent to Mountain View's Shoreline Park, offers part of the Bay Trail where visitors may spot pied- billed grebes, great blue herons, coots, and shovelers; and WHEREAS, the Bay Trail will commemorate its 20th Anniversary this year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the District congratulates the Bay Trail Project's for its work and all of its efforts which have led to easily accessible recreational opportunities for outdoor enthusiasts, including hikers,joggers, bicyclists and skaters and for providing the public with a setting for wildlife viewing and environmental education, increasing public respect and appreciation for the Bay. t ' Midpeninsula Regional # ' Open Space District R-09-64 Meeting 09-17 May 27, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 7 AGENDA ITEM Proposed Addition of Santa Clara County Tax-Defaulted"Hacienda Park" Parcels to the Mt. Umunhum area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve (Santa Clara County Assessor's Parcel Numbers 562-24-055, 562-25-049, 562-25-058,and 562-25-060), located approximately one mile southwest of Almaden Reservoir in unincorporated Santa Clara County. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set out in this report. 2. Adopt the attached Resolution authorizing purchase of the above described Santa Clara County tax-defaulted"Hacienda Park"parcels for an amount not to exceed $10,000. 3. Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan as set forth in this report, and name the property as an addition to the Mt. Umunhum area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. 4. Indicate the intention to dedicate the property as public open space after approval of the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve Master Plan. DISCUSSION At the meeting of July 24, 2002, the Board authorized the acceptance of a conveyance of lots in the Hacienda Park"paper subdivision" consisting of approximately 139.7 acres from the County of Santa Clara, which were acquired by the County through tax delinquency (see Report R-02- 91). Subsequent gift and tax default conveyances to the District bring District ownership to approximately 184.4 acres within the Hacienda Park subdivision. Currently there are an additional four(4) parcels consisting of ten (10) lots within the subdivision, which are available for purchase through the County of Santa Clara's tax default sale process. Staff recommends that the District exercise its right to purchase these parcels through a"Chapter 8"tax-default sale provision. Description The Hacienda Park subdivision map was filed in 1909, but the area was never developed because of its steep and inaccessible terrain. The Tax-Default sale parcels consist of ten (10) lots totaling approximately 0.62 acres (see attached map). With the purchase of these lots, District ownership i R-09-64 Page 2 would total approximately 185.4 acres. The remaining seven (7) parcels consisting of eleven (11) lots in the subdivision, totaling approximately one (1) acre, are owned by six private owners. The County of Santa Clara still owns one parcel, which is anticipated to be transferred to the District in the future. The Hacienda Park subdivision is located south of Twin Creeks in the Alamitos and Herbert Creek watersheds. The property includes the west-facing upper hillsides of the Alamitos Creek watershed, which are relatively undisturbed and are easily seen from Bald Mountain and Mt. Umunhum Road. The creek canyon and drainages are densely forested with Douglas fir and bay laurel giving way to the steep oak-scrub and chaparral-covered slopes of the upper hillsides. Views of Mt. Umunhum, Bald Mountain and Almaden Reservoir are possible from selected locations in the subdivision. Elevations range from 900 feet near Alamitos Creek to a high point of 2,173 feet along the ridgeline on the eastern boundary. An existing fire road along the eastern boundary could provide a valuable trail in the future. These lots enhance District ownership in the Hacienda Park subdivision and are a desirable addition to the Preserve because it protects valuable scenic, wildlife and watershed resources. USE AND MANAGEMENT Planning Considerations These properties are located in an unincorporated area of Santa Clara County near the southerly extent of the District's sphere of influence. These properties are zoned HS (Hillside), requiring a 20- to 160-acre minimum lot size based upon a slope density formula, although none of these sites is capable of supporting independent development. The District's Regional Open Space Study shows a regional trail corridor running from north to south through this paper subdivision. As a part of the District's due diligence in this area because of past mercury mining, Locus Technologies conducted a Phase I Environmental Assessment of the Hacienda Park subdivision in September 2001. The purpose of the Phase I Assessment was to identify the presence, or likely presence, of any hazardous substances under conditions indicating existing release, past release, or threat of release into the ground, groundwater, or surface of the property. The process included site inspections, review of public records, and interviews with persons familiar with the site. Michael Cox, a geologist having a high level of expertise and knowledge of mining activities in and around Almaden Quicksilver County Park, provided a detailed mining assessment to Locus Technologies. The results of the investigation indicated that there are no signs of a current release, or potential threat of release, of hazardous materials or waste on the property. A review of historic aerials and topographic maps did not depict conditions or the presence of structures or facilities that would suggest the presence of an potential hazardous materials. The Regional Water Quality o g gg P Y P Water Board and Santa Clara Valle r District confirmed that there were no records of y Water s contaminated water on the site. According to the 2001 Michael Cox Report, confirmed by Locus Technologies, there are no signs of mercury mining activities on or near the property. Preliminary Use and Management Plan (Next Steps) The Preliminary Use and Management Plan will take effect at the close of escrow and remain effective until the Plan is amended, or a Comprehensive Use and Management Plan or Master Plan is prepared. Ultimately, the property will be included in the Master Plan for Sierra Azul I R-09-64 Page 3 Open Space Preserve. The property will be maintained in a natural condition, and no changes to land use are anticipated. If changes to land use are proposed in the future,the Plan would be subject to further environmental review and public input. Public Access: Closed to public use. Patrol: Routinely patrol the properties. Name: Name the properties as additions to the Mt. Umunhum area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. Signs: Install Preserve boundary signs where appropriate. Dedication: Dedicate the property as public open space after approval of the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve Master Plan. Site Safety Inspection: There are no known safety hazards on the site. CEQA COMPLIANCE Project Description The project consists of the purchase of four(4)parcels totaling 0.62 acres as an addition to the Mt. Umunhum area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, and the concurrent adoption of a Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the property. The land will be permanently preserved as open space and will be maintained in a natural condition. CEQA Determination The District concludes this project will not have a significant effect on the environment. It is categorically exempt from CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) under Article 19, Sections 15316, 15317, 15325 and 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines as follows: Section 15316 exempts the acquisition of land in order to create parks if the site is in a natural condition and the management plan proposes to keep the area in a natural condition. The Preliminary Use and Management Plan specified that the land will not be developed and will remain in a natural condition. Section 15317 exempts the acceptance of fee interests in order to maintain the open space character of an area. The District will acquire fee interest and maintain the open space character of the property. Section 15325 exempts transfers of ownership of interests in land in order to preserve open space. The acquisition will transfer ownership to the District and ensure the property is preserved as open space by incorporating it into the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. The acquisition qualifies under all three sections and is also exempt under section 15061(b)(3), as there is no possibility the actions may have a significant effect on the environment. R-09-64 Page 4 TERMS & CONDITIONS The Santa Clara County Tax-Defaulted Hacienda Park properties are being acquired through Chapter 8 sale at a purchase price of approximately $6,800. A Chapter 8 sale allows qualified public agencies to acquire Tax-Defaulted properties at the minimum bid amount set by the County tax collector, without the necessity of public auction. The purchase price is set by statute as the cost of defaulted taxes and assessments and any cost of sale. The final cost figure is determined on the effective date of the sale. It is anticipated that the final amount will not exceed $10,000. FISCAL IMPACT FY2009-10 Budget for New Land Purchases: New Land $20,000,000.00 Land purchases approved this year (250,000.00) New Santa Clara Tax-Defaulted Hacienda Park 10,000.00 New Land Purchase Budget Remaining $19,740,000.00 PUBLIC NOTICE District owns all the land surrounding these Santa Clara County Tax-Defaulted "Hacienda Park" Parcels. Therefore, no there are no adjacent owners to notify.Notice required by the Brown Act has been provided. NEXT STEPS Upon approval by the District Board of Directors, staff will take the necessary steps to transfer the tax-defaulted property to District ownership. Upon close of escrow,the District's Operations Department will manage the Santa Clara County Tax-Defaulted "Hacienda Park" Parcels as an addition to the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, in accordance with the Preliminary Use and Management Plan. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Map - Exhibit A: Area Map 3. Map—Exhibit B: Detail Prepared by: Jean Chung, Real Property Administrative Assistant Michael C. Williams, Real Property Manager Contact person: Michael C. Williams, Real Property Manager Graphics prepared by: Galli Basson, Planning Technician RESOLUTION 09- RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE TAX DEFAULTED PROPERTY,AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER OR OTHER OFFICER TO EXECUTE CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT,AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (SIERRA AZUL OPEN SPACE PRESERVE—TAX DEFAULTED HACIENDA PARK PROPERTIES,SANTA CLARA COUNTY,ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS: 562-24-055,562-25-049, 562-25-058 AND 562-25-060) The Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve as follows: Section One. The Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained in that certain Agreement to Purchase Tax Defaulted Property between the County of Santa Clara and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, a copy of which purchase agreement is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof, and authorizes the President or other appropriate officer to execute the Agreement on behalf of the District to acquire the real property described therein ("the Tax Defaulted Hacienda Park Properties"). Section Two. The General Manager, President of the Board of Directors or other appropriate officer is authorized to execute Certificate of Acceptance for the Grant Deed on behalf of the District. Section Three. The General Manager or the General Manager's designee shall cause to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the seller and to extend escrow if necessary. Section Four. The General Manager is authorized to expend up to $2,500.00 to cover the cost of title insurance, escrow fees, and other miscellaneous costs related to this transaction. Section Five. The General Manager and General Counsel are further authorized to approve any technical revisions to the attached Agreement and documents which do not involve any material change to any term of the Agreement or documents, which are necessary or appropriate to the closing or implementation of this transaction. Section Six. The purpose of this Section is to enable the District to reimburse its general fund for the cost of certain land acquisitions. The District wishes to finance certain of these real property acquisitions and expects to use tax-exempt debt, such as bonds, but a tax-exempt financing is not cost justified for the District unless the principal amount of the financing is large enough to justify the related financing costs. Consequently, it is the District's practice to buy property with its general funds and, when a tax-exempt financing is cost justified based on the aggregate value of acquisitions, to issue tax-exempt obligations to reimburse itself for previous expenditures of general funds. These general funds are needed for operating and other working capital needs of the District and are not intended to be used to finance property acquisitions on a long-term basis. U.S. Income Tax Regulation Section 1.150-2 requires an issuer of tax-exempt debt to declare its intent to use a portion of tax-exempt debt proceeds for reimbursement of expenditures prior to the payment of the expenditures. Accordingly,the Board of Directors hereby declares its intent to issue tax-exempt obligations in the maximum principal amount of$10,000.00. Hacienda Park Subdivision - Sierra Azul OSP { . den Quicksilver County Park eseMoir en e Iv e ` Sierra Azul_j Open,Spaee-Preserve; % 01 Pam Hie / ^ o H ca ie da Parke Sub ivision Qf ' L� Exhibit A: Area Map Miles e Produced by Midpeninsula Open Space District, May 2009 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Tax Defaulted Property in Hacienda Park Hacienda Park MROSD t - Properties To Be Purchased Private � 7 Property f 4 4 Exhibit B: Detail Feet e Produced by Midpeninsula Open Space District, May 2009 0 250 500 750 1,000 i Midpeninsula Regional • ' Open Space District i R-09-67A Meeting 09-17 � May 27, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 8A AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of Protest of Award of Contract for Construction Services for the Second Phase of the Administrative Office Basic Improvements Remodel Project. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS Reject the Bid Protest of Guerra Construction Group as set out in this Report. DISCUSSION � On tonight's Agenda is the award of a contract (refer to Report R09-6713) for the second phase of the Administrative Office remodel project. The Invitation for Bids was released on March 30, 2009 and bids were received and opened on April 24, 2009. In reviewing the bid proposal submitted by Guerra Construction Group, staff found that the Bid Proposal Form did not contain Unit Prices for any of the Alternates as required by the Bid Package. The Bid Proposal Form that was included in the Bid Package required bidders to provide total Jump sum amounts for five Alternates. In addition, the Form required bidders to break these total lump sum amounts into unit prices for labor and materials in the event that an unforeseen project condition required a change order for more or less work associated with an Alternate. Change orders are common in public works projects due to unforeseen project specific circumstances, such as site or physical conditions encountered during project construction. Therefore, accurate unit prices are required as a basis for the additional costs for such orders. The Bid Proposal Form requested unit prices for the following Alternates on the project: 1. Alternate No. 1: Deduct for skylight tubes 2. Alternate No. 2: Add for linoleum flooring in the kitchen in lieu of existing concrete 3. Alternate No. 3: Deduct or add for Richlite kitchen counter material in lieu of Corian 4. Alternate No. 4: Add for a water filter in the kitchen 5. Alternate No. 5: Add for a new concrete accessible ramp in the building's main entry walkway (Alternate No. 5 was issued with Addendum No. 3 and addresses a City of Los Altos requirement received after the Bid Package was released.) A list of requested unit prices was specified under each Alternate, such as hourly rates for laborers and superintendents and square footage unit prices for materials. Alternate No. 5's R-09-67A Page 2 breakdown is used to illustrate the issue. Below is the Bid Proposal Form's lump sum line item and breakdown of Alternate No. 5,New Accessible Ramp (a City of Los Altos required item). Alternate No. 5, New Access. Ramp: $ Alternate 5: ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION OF ITEM UNIT UNIT PRICE 1 Concrete Finisher Hour $ 2. Superintendent Hour $ 3. Concrete CY $ 4. TekWay domed tiles SF $ (Note: "CY" is the abbreviation for"cubic yards" and "SF" stands for"square feet.") Below is Alternate No. 5's lump sum line item and breakdown from Guerra Construction's bid proposal. Alternate No. 5, New Access. Ramp: $4,200 Alternate 5: ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION OF ITEM UNIT UNIT PRICE 1. Concrete Finisher Hour $1,200 2. Superintendent Hour $500 3. Concrete CY $2,000 4. TekWay domed tiles SF $500 As noted above, Guerra Construction's total cost for Alternate No. 5 was $4,200, which is the sum of the above unit prices provided on the Bid Proposal Form. The unit prices are actually lump sums for each line item. As a result, there is no unit price information for the District to ascertain cost in the event of a change order associated with the Alternate. Pursuant to the Instructions to Bidders, the Bid Proposal Form will be appended to the final contract as an exhibit. Bid proposals may not be corrected after the bid opening. Thus, in the event that a change order is required for any Alternate, the District would lack unit prices for labor and materials and staff would be unable to determine the cost of a change order. Staff s experience is that change orders are commonplace on projects, especially ones of this size and scope. Thus it is staff s conclusion that Guerra Construction did not provide hourly wages and material unit prices for the five Alternates as instructed and therefore its bid is non-responsive to the Bid Package specifications. As defined in the Bid Package, the basis for selecting the low bid was the base bid only. The Instructions to Bidders also noted that the District's intention is to "award the contract to the responsible Bidder with the lowest responsive Bid."The failure to provide unit price information was deemed to be a material defect and led to staffs recommendation that Guerra Construction's bid proposal be determined non-responsive to the material terms of the bid package. While the Board has the discretion to waive minor deviations from bid specifications, it is not required to do so. As explained above, staff does not believe that this defect is minor. It remains staffs recommendation that the Board reject the bid protest of Guerra Construction Group. R-09-67A Page 3 Guerra Construction Group was notified in writing on May 14, 2009 that staff would recommend tonight that the Board find their Proposal non-responsive for the reasons set out above. Guerra was informed that they could submit materials for Board consideration of this matter. Guerra submitted the attached letter on May 18, 2009. They were provided with the Agenda and Board Report, including this supplemental Item. Prepared by: Tina Hugg, Open Space Planner 11 Contact person: Same as Above Attachments: 1. Letter from District to Guerra Construction Group, May 14, 2009 2. Letter from Guerra Construction Group, May 18, 2009 Attachment 1:Letter from District to Bidders ATTN: Jaime Guerra Guerra Construction Group 345 Commercial St. San Jose, CA 95112 Dear Mr. Guerra: The District's Board of Directors will consider the Award of Contract for Construction Services for the Administrative Office Basic Improvements Remodel Project at its meeting on Wednesday, May 27, 2009. Staff will recommend that the Board determine Nexgen Builders, Guerra Construction Group, and Eric F. Anderson, Inc. to be non-responsive and award the contract to B BROS Construction, Inc. The recommendation to determine Guerra Construction Group's bid as non-responsive is due primarily for the following reason. • Lump sum prices instead of unit prices for labor and materials were included in the bid proposal. Guerra Construction Group may submit written materials to the Board in response to this letter by rh meeting and will also have the opportunity to address the Board at that time. the May 27 Y i g pp Y We appreciate your interest in the project. Thank you. Sincerely, Tina Hugg Open Space Planner 11 05/20/2009 00:32 FAX 408 279 2044 CONSTRUCTIONGROUP laZ001/002 Attachment 2: Letter from Guerra Construction Group C U F. RRA FAX TRANSMITTAL LETTER ATTN; PROM: Tina Hugg Jcr-my Biight COMPANY: DATE: Wpeninsula Regional Open Space District 5-18-09 CITY/STATE: SENT VM Los Alms CA Pax- (650)691-,D,J qS PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ada n➢st mdve(.office Basic IMPI:Ovements URrM-IV FOR REVIEW PLEASE COMMENT ®PLEASE REPLY PLEASE RECYCLE COPIES DESCRIPTION 1 Letter of mponse. None JAY Bright,Project Masiager i cc Fitts 345 COMMURCIAL STREP,T, SAN )08E.CA.95112-Yi40B.279.2027 F:408.279.2044 LTC 915544 05/20/2008 00:32 FAX 408 279 2044 CONSTRUCTIONGROUP 002/002 Attachment 2: Letter from Guerra Construction Group . 4 a. .. LiC.#915544 n.w t'�'!'P«ti!:f'�"'Y'7.1fiY.•fid;' 'r�J,�„a.{:c „C"S«.t;LS f3.';.cR..Gw'? 345 COMMERCIAL STREET-SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA•95112 TEL.408.279.2027 FAX 408.279.2044 Midpenlnsula Regional Open Space District 5/18/2009 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, Ca 94022-1404 Attn:Tina Hugg Re:Administrative Office Basic improvments -Response to letter received 5-14-08 Ms. Hugg, Guerra Construction Group (GCG) is In receipt of your letter 5-14-09, Your letter states that GCG's bid will be recommended to the Hoard as"Non-Responsive"due to the fact that we provided Lump Sum prices on the bid form Instead of Unit Prices. The Unit Prices you refer to were for a break down of Alternates 1 through 5. Our interpretation of the bid proposal form was, the Unit Price breakdown were to be a breakdown of the Lump Sum values of each Alternate. Therefore,we completed the bid proposal form according to our Interpretation. Furthermore, the responsive low bidder for this project was to be determined on the basis of the base bid, leaving the Alternate pricing as a secondary item. We ask that the Board award the project to GCG and consider the following: GCG's base bid is$176,769. B Bros base bid is$222,700,a difference/savings of nearly$46,000. Our cost for the Base Bid and Alternate items remains the same regardless of how the Unit Price line Items were completed or Interpreted. We ask that you please provide a copy of B Bros bid proposal form for our review. Please contact our office If you have any questions or If you need additional Information regarding this matter. Best regards, Jeremy Bright Project Manager Guerra Construction Croup cc: File I Midpeninsula Regional • ' Open Space District R-09-67B Meeting 09-17 May 27, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 8B AGENDA ITEM Determination that the Recommended Action is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and Authorization for Award of Contract for Construction Services for the Second Phase of the Administrative Office Basic Improvements Remodel Project GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Determine that the recommended action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set out in this report. 2. Determine that the Bids submitted by Nexgen Builders, Guerra Construction Group and Eric F. Anderson Inc. are non-responsive to the specifications set out in the District's Bid Package. 3. Authorize the General Manager to enter into contract with B BROS Construction Inc., of San Leandro, CA for the base bid amount of$222,700 for the second phase of the Administrative Office Basic Improvements remodel project at 330 Distel Circle in Los Altos, California. 4. Authorize a total not-to-exceed contingency amount of$46,410, broken down as follows: a. $2,700 —a not-to-exceed additive bid amount to allow for Alternate No. 2, Kitchen Floor Finish. b. $6,100—a not-to-exceed additive bid amount to allow for Alternate No. 3, Kitchen Counter Material. c. $1,100—a not-to-exceed additive bid amount to allow for Alternate No. 4, Add Water Filter. d. $2,700 —a not-to-exceed additive bid amount to allow for Alternate No. 5, New Accessible Ramp (recently required by the City of Los Altos). e. $33,810—a 15% contingency on the total amount of$225,400, which includes the base bid amount of$222,700 and the Alternate No. 5 amount of$2,700, to cover unforeseen conditions encountered during demolition and construction. R-09-67B Page 2 SUMMARY The Request for Bids for the Second Phase of the Administrative Office Basic Improvements Remodel Project was released on Monday, March 30, 2009. Six Bid Proposals were received and opened on April 24, 2009. Evaluation of the bids revealed material irregularities that resulted in staff s recommendation that the Board determine the three lowest bids non-responsive to the specifications required by the District's Bid Package. Staff thus recommends awarding the contract for construction services to B BROS Construction for a total amount of$269,110, which includes a total not-to-exceed contingency amount of$46,410. The FY2008-09 budget for construction of the Project is $300,000. DISCUSSION Summary On August 27, 2008, the Board authorized staff to implement basic office improvements to the District's administrative office building to accommodate immediate staffing needs, improve staff productivity and health, and address infrastructure deficiencies that impact energy efficiency and require ongoing maintenance (refer to report R-08-80). The build out of the north office space was separated from the overall scope of work due to the lengthy timeline anticipated for the project and a pressing need to expedite the creation of new work stations for recently hired staff members in FY2008-09. This work was completed as the first phase of the Basic Improvements remodel project by staff with assistance from the architectural design team. The base bid scope of work for the second phase of the Basic Improvements remodel project included the following: 1. Remodel and expand the kitchen. 2. Remodel the existing server/storage room behind the reception desk. 3. Make minor modifications to existing work station walls in the Public Affairs aisle. 4. Complete the remaining build out of the north end of the building, namely a new private office, two additional work stations, and skylight tubes. 5. Make accessibility code-related modifications to the parking lot and the building's main entry walkway. 6. Make accessibility code-related modifications to the restrooms. In addition to the base bid, the Bid Package specified Alternates for the following: 1. Alternate No. 1: Deduct for skylight tubes 2. Alternate No. 2: Add for linoleum flooring in the kitchen in lieu of existing concrete 3. Alternate No. 3: Deduct or add for Riehlite kitchen counter material in lieu of Corian 4. Alternate No. 4: Add for a water filter in the kitchen 5. Alternate No. 5: Add for a new concrete accessible ramp in the building's main entry walkway (Alternate No. 5 was issued with Addendum No. 3 and addresses a City of Los Altos requirement received after the Bid Package was released.) Selection Process The Bid Package was prepared jointly by Tannerhecht Architecture and staff in keeping with typical architectural bid packages. The Bid Package included architectural and engineering drawings, contract information and requirements, and a project manual containing written R-09-67B Page 3 specifications. The Project Manual format followed the industry standard Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) format. Content was modified to adhere to District practices, where appropriate. The Request for Bids was released on Monday, March 30, 2009. The Invitation for Bids, advertised in the San Jose Mercury News on March 30, 2009, stated that copies of the Bid Package for the Administrative Office Basic Improvements project could be downloaded from the District's website, obtained at the District's administrative office, or viewed at local Builder's Exchanges. A mandatory pre-bid meeting for General Contractors was held on site on April 8, 2009. Twenty-four contractors attended. An optional pre-bid meeting for Subcontractors was held on site on April 15, 2009. The cost estimate amount announced was $225,000. Six (6) sealed bids were received and opened on Friday, April 24, 2009 with the results as follows: Bidder Location Base Bid Nexgen Builders East Palo Alto $162,105.84 Guerra Construction Group San Jose $176,769.90 Eric F. Anderson, Inc. San Leandro $195,332 B BROS Construction, Inc. San Leandro $222,700 Ruseiano Construction, Inc. San Jose $224,483 Omni Construction Service, Inc. Burlingame $259,560 As defined in the Bid Package, the basis for selecting the low bid was the base bid only. The Instructions to Bidders noted that the District's intention is to "award the contract to the responsible Bidder with the lowest responsive Bid." Evaluation of the bids revealed that the bids submitted by the three lowest bidders contained a variety of material irregularities. As a result, these bids failed to meet the specifications of the Bid Package. Accordingly staff is recommending that the Board determine that the three lowest bids are non-responsive to the requirements of the Bid Package. The deviations from the Bid Package specifications included the following: • Nexg en Builders did not submit the statutorily required Non-Collusion Affidavit and did not provide the required number of working days needed to complete the project. • Guerra Construction Group did not provide hourly wages and material unit prices for the five Alternates as instructed. • Eric F. Anderson, Inc. did not include a fire suppression subcontractor that met the BidI' Package specifications. (NOTE: The project's consulting architect and engineer consider the fire suppression system to be a critical component of the project's bid specifications, in part because the security and reliability of the District's server system is dependent on this fire suppression system.) On May 14, 2009, the bidders recommended to be determined non-responsive were informed of this staff recommendation in writing and notified of the opportunity to submit any materials or offer any information to the contrary at or before this Board meeting. The bidders have also been sent a copy of this agenda report. i R-09-67B Page 4 Upon review of the Bid Proposals, the contractors' qualifications, and discussions with the consulting architect and engineer, staff recommends awarding the contract to B BROS Construction Inc. who is the lowest responsible and responsive bidder. Should the Board choose to not award the contract, the Board retains the right to reject all bids and direct staff to re-bid the project. Rejection of all bids will impact the timing of this project due to the time needed to re- bid the project. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed budget for FY2009-10 includes $300,000 for construction of the second phase of the Administrative Office Basic Improvements remodel project. As of this Board meeting, a total of$267,230 (which includes architectural fees of$94,675) has been spent from the budgets of FY2007-08 and FY2008-09 to complete the Administrative Office Basic Improvements Remodel Project up to the Construction Documents phase. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE Staff concludes that executing the contract for construction services with B BROS Construction Inc., is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 exempts minor alterations, including interior and exterior renovations to public facilities, where there will be a negligible expansion of use. This exemption is applicable to an addition of up to 10,000 square feet, a level of development far beyond the proposed improvement design. The project will not expand use of the District's administrative p p €� office building. NEXT STEPS Upon Board authorization, the General Manager will enter into a contract with B BROS Construction Inc., who shall be given Notice to Proceed. A pre-construction meeting will be held within ten calendar days of the Notice after which construction will commence. Refer to report R-09-69 for the separate contract for project construction management that appears on this Board Meeting's agenda. Prepared b : r y Tina Hugg, Open Space Planner II Contact person: Same as Above Midpeninsula Regional ' Open Space District R-09-69 Meeting 09-17 May 27, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 9 AGENDA ITEM Approval of an Amendment to the Contract with Tannerhecht, Inc. to Provide Construction Administration Services for the Second Phase of the Administrative Office Basic Improvements Remodel Project. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION Amend the contract with Tannerhecht, Inc., in the amount of$10,500, for a total contract amount not to exceed $133,200, to provide construction administration services for the second phase of the Administrative Office Basic Improvements remodel project. SUMMARY The Administrative Office Basic Improvements Remodel Project (Project) is nearing completion. Because of the need to expedite the creation of work stations to accommodate new staff, the remodel project was split into two phases, which required additional sets of construction documents and building permit applications beyond the original scope of work. To meet schedule, staff utilized a portion of the contract contingency as well as funds allocated for subsequent tasks to fund the additional work. This amendment would cover these additional expenses and return funds to the consultant contract to complete the remaining tasks under Bidding and Construction Administration for the second phase of the remodel project. DISCUSSION On August 27, 2008, the Board authorized a contract amendment with Tannerhecht, Inc. (Tannerhecht), to implement basic improvements to the District's administrative office building to accommodate immediate staffing needs, improve staff productivity and health, and address infrastructure deficiencies that impact energy efficiency and require ongoing maintenance (refer to report R-08-80). A it R-09-69 Page 2 I A The Basic Improvements remodel project was originally intended to be completed in one phase and include the following items: l. Expand and improve the existing kitchen 2. Modify the existing server room to include a dry fire suppression system and a dedicated air conditioning unit 3. Address remodel-triggered building code upgrades 4. Build out the north office space (formerly a tenant space) However, due to the pressing need to expedite the creation of new work stations for recently hired staff members in FY2008-09, the build out of the north office space was separated from the original scope of work and placed on an accelerated timeline. Tannerhecht assisted staff by preparing drawings used to obtain quotes and acquire demolition and electrical permits from the City of Los Altos. While working on this first phase of the Basic Improvements remodel project, Tannerhecht also prepared design and permit drawings for the second phase of the project. As a result of splitting the project into two phases, Tannerhecht and their design team prepared three permit drawing sets and two pricing sets instead of the one comprehensive permit and pricing set originally scoped. In order to pay for the design team's additional services and stay on schedule, staff used a portion of the contingency and contract funds that were originally set aside for second phase tasks relating to the bidding process and construction administration. This strategy allowed staff to substantially finish the first phase of the Basic Improvements remodel project in November 2008, allowing the Planning Department to relocate into the remodeled wing to accommodate new employees in the south end of the building. On March 30, 2009, the second phase of the Basic Improvements remodel project was released for bid. Bids were received and opened on April 24, 2009, with construction expected to begin in June. In order to complete the Bidding and Construction Administration portions for the second phase of the project and cover unforeseen conditions that may be encountered during demolition and construction, staff recommends authorizing the General Manager to execute a contract amendment with Tannerhecht for an additional $10,500. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed budget for FY2009-10 includes $300,000 for the construction for the Administrative Office Basic Improvements remodel project. As of this Board meeting, a total of $94,675 has been spent from the budgets of FY2007-08 and FY2008-09 to complete the Administrative Office Basic Improvements Remodel Project up to the Construction Documents phase. Bidding and Construction Administration are the remaining phases of work for Tannerhecht. The proposed contract amendment will not result in a change in the overall project budget for FY2009-10. The project schedule is not impacted by this change. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. R-09-69 Page 3 CEQA COMPLIANCE Staff concludes that amending the existing consultant agreement to provide additional design work does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Future action taken by the Board to implement the consultant's work will be subject to CEQA review at that time. For CEQA compliance during project implementation, refer to report R-09- 67. NEXT STEPS Upon Board authorization, the General Manager will execute the contract amendment with Tannerhecht, who will complete the Bidding phase and soon after begin the Construction Administration work for the Project. Prepared by: Tina Hugg, Open Space Planner 11 Contact person: Same as Above i ii Midpeninsula Regional Open Space district R-09-20 Meeting 09-17 May 27, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 10 AGENDA ITEM Consider Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Technical Addendum, and Mitigation Monitoring Program in Accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Authorize Execution of a Contract with Go Native Inc., in an amount not to exceed $78,000, for Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Adopt the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program, including the Technical Addendum, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and make the CEQA Findings as set out in the Resolution attached to this report. 2. Authorize the General Manager to enter into an Agreement with Go Native Inc. for a total Contract amount not to exceed $78,000 over a 3-year period to implement the invasive species control program and herbicide application at the Mindego Ranch portion of Russian Space Preserve. DISCUSSION Setting The 1,047-acre Mindego Ranch property was purchased from Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST) in 2008 as an addition to Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve (Preserve) (see R-08-38). The Mindego Ranch area of the Preserve contains a wide diversity of habitats, occupying over 1.5 square miles of mountainous terrain covered by rolling grasslands, oak woodlands and mixed evergreen forests that support stands of second-growth conifers. A prominent landmark, Mindego Hill, rises 2,143 feet above sea level, is visible for miles and characterizes the terrain. Two perennial streams (Mindego and Alpine Creeks) and one intermittent stream (Rodgers Gulch) traverse the property, eventually draining into San Gregorio Creek and then to the Pacific Ocean. One large and several small seasonal ponds are found on the property. Two small lakes, Kneudler and Mindego, provide year-round water. Numerous seeps and springs are also present. The diverse mosaic of vegetation communities and water resources on the property provide potential habitat for a wide variety of plants and animals. Downstream from the project area, the two perennial creeks provide important habitat for steelhead trout, a species listed as federally R-09-20 Page 2 threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). The ponds and seeps on the property provide habitat for both California red-legged frog (CRLF), San Francisco garter snake (SFGS) and western pond turtle (WPT), species listed as threatened, endangered and special status under the ESA respectively. History Mindego Ranch has been the site of cattle ranching since 1859, when Juan Mindecoa settled in the area. Ranching continued on the property relatively uninterrupted through successive landowners up to the time of purchase by the District. Land management practices focused on providing feed and water for livestock. Supplemental feed brought in for cattle was probably the original source of invasive plant seeds. Due to the heavy cattle stocking rates and because the cattle preferred to eat pasture grasses, non-native weeds were able to spread and thrive. Invasive Plant Species A botanical survey conducted in 2008 indicated the presence of approximately 110 acres of purple starthistle (Centaurea calcitrapa) and approximately 40 acres of smooth distaff thistle (Carthamus baeticus) on Mindego Ranch ranging from sparse density to nearly 100%cover, including areas in close proximity to wetland/riparian habitat. The presence of these and other invasive plants displaces native vegetation and, if left untreated, is expected to spread further across the property and into adjacent areas. Integrated Pest Management Approach An invasive species control program utilizing an integrated pest management approach (IPMA), including the use of mechanical and manual methods and herbicide application, has been designed to control non-native plants on Mindego Ranch. The District's IPMA is a long-term strategy that specifically reviews alternatives and monitors conditions to effectively control a target pest with minimum impact to human health,the environment and non-target organisms. A key principle of the District's IPMA is to use the "least toxic" method required to obtain the desired level of pest control. The purple starthistle and smooth distaff thistle populations on Mindego Ranch are widespread, over a variety of terrain. The nature of this infestation means that large equipment or other mechanical means for control of these non-native species are impractical due to the risk of equipment rollover and potential erosion problems in steep terrain. n Practices BM Ps in addition Therefore, the use of herbicides, with effective Best Management ( ) to measures implemented by the District above and beyond those of the herbicide product labels, will be required in many areas. These BMPs and precautionary measures are described later in this report. The areas selected for herbicide control have been carefully selected to protect water quality and listed species. The pest species targeted for control, purple starthistle and smooth distaff thistle, collectively cover an area of approximately 130 acres. The control program will need to address most of this acreage annually. Due to the sheer size of this weed infestation, control is beyond the capability of field staff and volunteers and will need to be accomplished largely through the services of a contractor. R-09-20 Page 3 The specific methods that will be utilized in managing non-native vegetation are: (a) Hand removal (b) Mowing (c) Grazing (d) Spraying of aminopyralid (Milestone) (e) Spraying of glyphosate (Roundup Prop') The herbicides were selected for use on this project by District staff with the assistance of the District's Pest Control Advisor(PCA) who has worked with numerous public agencies on their IPM programs and Reduced-Risk Pesticide programs. Both Milestone and Roundup were chosen based on the effectiveness of the products in a purple starthistle eradication program conducted by UC Davis and their low toxicity. Milestone and Roundup are classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as Category III (Caution Label) pesticides, their lowest toxicity category. The District reviewed the information discussing soil and drainage rates for Milestone'that "indicates that Aminopyralid(Milestone) is likely to be non-persistent and relatively immobile in the field. Half-lives of 32 and 20 days were determined, with minimal leaching below the 15 to 30 cm soil depth." The District has used a more conservative half life estimate of 103 days in the CEQA document for the project. For Roundup, the District reviewed the information discussing soil and drainage rates that show"Glyphosate is not mobile and has a typical half-life in soils of 47 days." REGULATORY CONSTRAINTS Endangered Species Invasive species control at Mindego will implement all public and employee safety standards regarding the storage, mixture, transportation, disposal and application of herbicides in accordance with all herbicide label requirements. To better protect California red-legged frog (CRLF), San Francisco garter snake (SFGS), and western pond turtle (WPT), restricted use buffers for herbicide application were developed through consultation with the San Mateo County Agricultural Commissioner, and in accordance with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service guidance for potentially affected species, as well as the CRLF injunction which was stipulated by the California Northern District Court on October 20, 2006. The CRLF injunction imposes no-use buffer zones around CRLF upland and aquatic habitats for certain pesticides. Although aminopyralid is not included in the CRLF injunction, glyphosate is included. Use of herbicides and mechanized equipment adjacent to wetland/riparian habitat will be limited to better protect CRLF, SFGS and WPT and their primary habitat. Water Quality During spring 2008, shortly after the District's purchase of Mindego Ranch, the District received a letter from the Cuesta La Honda Guild letting the District know that their drinking water source was Mindego Creek, downstream of Mindego Ranch. The Guild requested that the District consider this fact in any management actions taken at Mindego Ranch. District staff recognized the high concern that this project would raise for the downstream users of water from Mindego Creek and shared the overriding consideration that no herbicides could be allowed to enter aquatic features on the site. The District consulted with a pest control adviser R-09-20 Page 4 to identify precautionary measures and best management practices for use prior to and during herbicide application. Additionally, District staff met with representatives from the Cuesta La Honda Guild to discuss their areas of concern and determine additional precautionary measures that could be implemented to be responsive to these concerns. These measures are discussed below. In addition, the managers of the San Francisco Log Cabin, who draw their water from the same creek as the La Honda Guild, were contacted by District Staff. They also expressed their satisfaction with the project°s BMPs and precautionary measures. The resulting precautionary measures and BMPs for the project are identified below. District Precautionary Measures and Best Management Practices The following precautionary measures and BMPs will be used by the District while implementing this project: • Annual herbicide treatment will be below the maximum allowable amount recommended by the product manufacturer. • Hand removal of invasive plant species will be required within a 15-foot aquatic buffer zone around wetland/riparian areas, and a 30-foot buffer around Big Spring. • When glyphosate is used, only spot treatments using handheld devices will be permitted beyond the 15-foot hand removal buffer and within 260 feet of the wetland/riparian areas. • To minimize the potential for spray drift near wetland/riparian areas, only power wands or hand application will be permitted in the floodplain of Mindego and Knuedler Lakes and surrounding areas draining downhill to the lakes. • Spot treatments will be preferred, but broadcast treatments using a power wand will be used in areas densely covered with non-native thistles. • Herbicide application will not be permitted on inside banks or bottoms of irrigation ditches, or channels that carry water that may be used for irrigation or domestic purposes. • Herbicide application will not be permitted during precipitation or when precipitation is predicted for the next 48 hours to allow for ample drying and adsorption of the herbicide s. • All herbicide application equipment will require daily calibration prior tooperation to provide for the most effective treatment using the least amount of herbicides. • Storage, mixing and cleaning of equipment will be located away from any water. • Herbicide application will occur at the beginning of the dry season each year to provide for maximum drying and breakdown time of the herbicides prior to the rainy season each year. • Only rubber-tire all terrain vehicles that will not uproot the landscape will be permitted within a 660 foot precautionary zone of the wetland/riparian areas to provide additional protection for the CRLF, SFGS and WPT. • A biological monitor will be required to be present on site during hand removal, herbicide application, and preceding drill seeding equipment when working within the 660 foot precautionary zone surrounding wetland/riparian areas to determine the presence of and to avoid threatened and endangered species. • To reduce potential impacts to sensitive species, the control project will have a short annual duration, estimated at one to two week periods up to twice a year for spraying and up to one week during seeding activities which will only occur a few times. • The Cuesta La Honda Guild will be notified whenever herbicide treatment is undertaken on the Mindego Ranch. R-09-20 Page 5 CONTRACTOR SELECTION Staff released a Request for Bids on March 18, 2009. A pre-bid meeting was held on site on March 27, 2009. Nine (9) contractors attended. Addenda clarifying certain issues that arose after release of the bid package were subsequently released on March 18 and on April 2, 2009. The following sealed bids were received on April 8, 2009: Average Cost Per Acre for Backpack Application Contractor and for Boom Spraying of Aminopyralid (Basis of Contract Award) Go Native, Inc $208.62 Natures Image, Inc $268.58 Go Native Inc. submitted a responsive proposal with relevant experience and lowest costs. Go Native, Inc. is a habitat restoration company located on the central California coast with extensive experience in wildland weed management. They have satisfactorily conducted invasive plant control work for the District from 2005 through 2008 and have done similar work for the Peninsula Open Space Trust and the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy. Having reviewed the bidder's qualifications, and the bid proposal, staff recommends awarding the contract to Go Native, Inc. for a period of three years. FISCAL IMPACT The FY2009-10 Budget includes $34,000 to fund contracted vegetation maintenance for the Mindego Ranch region of the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve. Annual expenditures of $22,000 are anticipated in FY2010-11 and FY2011-12 to continue invasive plant control on Mindego Ranch under this contract. PUBLIC NOTICE A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Cl earinghouse house of the Governor's Office of Planning and Research on March 20, 2009, stating that the public review period would start on March 20, 2009 and end on April 20, 2009. On that date, the Notice of Intent was also submitted to the San Mateo County Clerk for posting and mailed to 60 persons. Those notified included owners and occupants of property within 300 feet of the Mindego Ranch, the Cuesta La Honda Guild, other interested parties and relevant agency personnel. The Notice, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study were made available for public review at the District's Administrative Office and on the District's website. Therefore, all legal notice requirements of CEQA have been met, in addition to public noticing requirements of the Brown Act. i R-09-20 Page 6 CEQA COMPLIANCE District staff prepared an Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration evaluating the"Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch" project ("the project") for an implementation period of up to seven years. The Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration found that a number of CEQA impact criteria do not apply to the project due to its design, scope and isolated location. The document also found that the project either avoids impacts or minimizes them to a less-than- significant J significant level, due to the specific nature of the project or because of mitigation measures that have been incorporated into the project. Most notably, the Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration found that the project will not adversely affect aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, or utilities and service systems, based on the project design that avoids potentially significant impacts, as well as site specific conditions that minimize impacts to a less than significant level. The project will not adversely affect biological or cultural resources because the incorporation of mitigation measures into the project will reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. No mitigations to reduce impacts to water quality were required due to the design of the project and the implementation and use of District precautionary measures and BMPs that exceed those required by the product label. In April of 2009, changes to the project description that were not analyzed in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project were identified as follows: Mowing equipment will be used prior to herbicide application, and as needed throughout the duration of the project, to remove tall grasses and other vegetation. Mowing prior to herbicide application will better expose the non-native thistles, providing an opportunity for herbicide applicators to more effectively treat the p g pp Y Pp non-native thistles and to reduce the overall amount of herbicides needed for treatment. Vegetation mowing will be restricted to the ridge tops located above environmentally sensitive areas. A proposed Technical Addendum to the Initial Study and a proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in April 2009 to identify and analyze possible impacts from the addition of mowing to the project scope (see Attachment 3). Staff reviewed the Initial Study in conjunction with the mowing addition and determined that the proposed change would not result in any new or significantly adverse environmental impacts that were not identified in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. Since the Technical Addendum prepared for the project did not identify any possibility of resulting adverse environmental impacts, recirculation for additional public review is not required. A copy of the Technical Addendum is attached and is included with the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project. R-09-20 Page 7 Comments Received The Cuesta La Honda Guild (Guild) contacted the District in March of 2009 and provided written comments on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration at the close of the public review period. In order to respond to concerns raised by Cuesta La Honda Guild, staff recommended the continuance of the agenda item at the April 22, and May 13, 2009 Board of Directors meetings. The comments received and responses to these comments are attached (see Attachments 4 and 5). In responding to Cuesta La Honda Guild comments and concerns, staff conducted a site tour with the Guild's Chief Water Operator, Mr. John Chapin, on May 4, 2009, and attended the Cuesta La Honda Guild Board Meeting on May 5, 2009 to discuss the project and proposed practices to protect the water supply for the Guild. During these meetings, Cuesta La Honda Guild and the District staff agreed to expand the buffer surrounding the Big Spring area and the tributary leading from Big Spring to Mindego Creek to 30 feet. This increased buffer is not required by CEQA and does not itself create significant impacts but has been added to the project to address concerns raised by Cuesta La Honda Guild Board members and staff. Additionally, the MROSD project representative will contact the Cuesta La Honda Guild to inform them which days herbicide application will occur. Furthermore, the MROSD project representative will immediately contact the Cuesta La Honda Guild in the event that herbicides enter the water in Big Spring or the tributary leading from Big Spring to Mindego Creek. Mitigation Monitoring Program In accordance with CEQA, the District has prepared the proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program, which describes project-specific mitigation measures and monitoring process (see Attachment 5). The proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program ensures that all adopted measures intended to mitigate potentially significant environmental impacts will be implemented. The project incorporates all of these mitigation measures. CEQA Findings Pursuant to CEQA, it is determined that the project will have no significant or cumulative effects because of implementation and adherence to mitigation measures that will prevent substantial impacts to environmental resources. It is also determined that project implementation will not result in direct and indirect substantial adverse impacts or significant risk to human beings. NEXT STEPS If approved by the Board, staff will file a Notice of Determination with the Clerk of the County of San Mateo and finalize execution of the agreement with the contractor. The contractor will begin weed control in June 2009, following issuance of a Notice to Proceed. Attachments: 1. Project Map 2. Initial Study, Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Attachments 3. Proposed Technical Addendum 4. Comments Received 5. Response to Comments R-09-20 Page 8 6. Proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program 7. Resolution Prepared by: Clayton Koopmann, Rangeland Ecologist Julie Andersen, Resource Planner Contact person: Clayton Koopmann, Rangeland Ecologist RESOLUTION NO.09- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION INCLUDING THE TECHNICAL ADDENDUM, A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM,AND MAKING CEQA FINDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE HERBICIDE APPLICATION AND INVASIVE SPECIES CONTROL PROJECT AT MINDEGO RANCH,RUSSIAN RIDGE OPEN SPACE PRESERVE WHEREAS,the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District("District") has considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration including the additional Technical Addendum ("MND") analyzing the environmental effects of the Project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors that, based upon the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, all comments received, and all substantial evidence in light of the whole record presented,the Board of Directors finds that: I. Notice of the availability of the Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and all hearings on the MND was given as required by law and the actions were conducted pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and the CEQA Guidelines. 2. All interested parties desiring to comment on the proposed MND were given the opportunity to submit oral and written comments on the adequacy of the MND prior to this action by the Board of Directors and all comments raised during the public comment period and at the public hearings on the MND were responded to adequately. 3. Prior to approving the Project that is the subject of the proposed MND;the Board has considered the MND along with all comments received during the public review process. 4. The Board finds that, on the basis of the whole record before it, including the MND, initial study,and all comments received,that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment. 5. The Board adopts the proposed MND, including the Technical Addendum, and determines that it reflects the District's independent judgment and analysis. 6. Although not required by CEQA, a condition of project approval has been added increasing the buffer area adjacent to Big Spring from fifteen feet to thirty feet. This condition does not create any new significant environmental effects and is not necessary to mitigate an avoidable significant effect. 7. The Board adopts the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program and requires it to be implemented as part of the Project. 8. The location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based are located at the offices of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos,California 94022. Herbicide Application Map - Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve Mindego Ranch Boundary � Downstream Water i Diversions/Pumps e No Herbicide Application 15 foot = ?J Cuest L No Spray Zone uil P m da ` �— above highwater mark % p� ^� r Bi . + 30 foot ` '— g C3No Spray Zone p �+ above highwater mark Y R Glyphosate hand application/ spot treatment onlyInde 260 foot buffer rail it Min de o Hand application only: Lake " backpack sprayers, wicks and daubers, and power t wand (when allowable). ' No Boom Zone � `'° �' '�• y '^.✓ 11 Biological monitor required. € Use precautionary measures when using mechanical equipment .1 r Xn edl6r € �0-660 foot aka. f f 1 Precautionary Zone City an�County of San Fran isco Pump /� ...• II Map produced by _ Midpeninsula Regional 1/ ' Open Space District 04/15/2009 6 300 2,soo g Feet .� Attachment 1: Project Map Attachment 2: Initial Study MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mind go Ranch Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve San Mateo County, CA March 20, 2009 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022 650-691-1200 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District NEGATIVE DECLARATION A notice, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code 21,000, et seq.) stating that the following project: "Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch" when implemented, will not have a significant impact on the environment. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District(District)is planning herbicide application of the herbicides Milestone and Roundup Pro in conjunction with mechanical hand pulling and digging to control non-native thistles on portions of the 1,047 acre Mindego Ranch region of Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve in San Mateo County, California (Refer to Figures 1 and 2). The I project area is highly disturbed due to the large number of invasive plants and past intensive I grazing practices. The primary invasive plants that will be targeted include purple starthistle j (Centaurea calcitrapa) and smooth distaff thistle (Carthamus baeticus). Secondary invasive plants that will also be targeted include: milk thistle (Silybum marianum), Italian thistle (Cardus pycnocephalus),bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), and yellow starthistle(Centaurea solstitialis). The presence of invasive thistles at Mindego Ranch is a result of the past ranching practices on the property. It is believed that feed brought in for cattle was the original source of the invasive plant seeds. Because the cattle preferred to eat native plants and pasture grasses, the non-native plants I were able to spread and thrive. Previous efforts to control the non-native thistles through mowing may have actually increased their spread across the property. The presence of these invasive plants displaces native vegetation and, if left untreated, is expected to spread further across the property and into adjacent areas. Treatment of the invasive plant species includes herbicide application and hand removal to be completed by a qualified contracted herbicide applicator, and hand crews. The estimated level of work to control the two species is up to 150 acres of treatment per year for up to seven years. In development of the project plan, the District consulted with a licensed Pest Control Adviser to assist with selection of herbicides to be used, herbicide application methods,and time of year for application. A recent botanical survey conducted in 2008 indicated the presence of approximately 110 acres of purple starthistle (Refer to Figure 3) and approximately 40 acres of smooth distaff thistle (Refer to Figure 4) on Mindego Ranch ranging from sparse density to nearly 100% cover, including areas in close proximity to wetland/riparian habitat. The recommended treatment for purple starthistle and smooth distaff thistle is the application of the herbicide Milestone (Aminapyralid) applied at a rate of 5 ounces/acre/year. Application of Milestone will occur for up to two weeks during the spring (between March and June). A follow up application may also be applied in the summer(between July and September) of each year to eliminate any remaining plants. Herbicide application will be scheduled prior to bolting of the purple starthistle to achieve maximum effectiveness and to reduce the overall amount of herbicide that will be needed over the life of the project. No more than two Milestone applications (up to two weeks for each application) will occur each year. Spot treatments of Roundup Pro (Glyphosate) at a rate of up to 10.6 quarts/acre/year may be used between Milestone applications to treat any missed areas. The maximum allowable amount is not expected to be used each year because Glyphosate will only be used as a follow up to spot treat areas that were missed during application of Milestone.As the population of non-native thistles is reduced to an amount that can be treated primarily through spot treatment alone, the primary herbicide used for treatment will switch from Milestone to 2 Roundup Pro. Herbicides may be applied utilizing a variety of equipment, including a truck/tractor with a boom sprayer, all terrain vehicles (ATV) with a boom sprayer, and spot spraying with backpack sprayers, wicks and daubers, and power wands. Removal of plants by hand may occur in environmentally sensitive areas and in areas that limit equipment access due to steepterrain. Efficacy monitoring will occur 1-3 weeks after each treatment. y g If any areas are missed, follow up spotg Glyphosate may treatments using G1 hosate be used to further control the non-native Y 1 thistles. Erosion control methods including reseeding with pasture grasses and native perennial grasses and/or placement of groundcover will occur as needed to stabilize any exposed soils and to prevent soil erosion. Once a significant reduction in invasive species is observed, broadcast seeding and/or a drill seeder may be used to plant native perennial grass and pasture grass seeds j to further displace the non-native thistles. Daring a formal habitat assessment conducted in 2008, the presence of threatened or endangered species (TES) at Mindego Ranch was observed. Both sufficient habitat and occurrence of California red-legged frog (Rana aurora clraytonii) (CRLF), San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) (SFGS)and western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) (WPT) was documented. i To better protect TES, restricted use buffers for herbicide application were developed through consultation with the San Mateo County Agricultural Commissioner, United States Fish and Wildlife Service guidance for potentially affected species, and in accordance with the CRLF injunction. Although Milestone is not included in the CRLF injunction, Glyphosate is included. Use of herbicides and mechanized equipment adjacent to wetland/riparian habitat will be limited to better protect CRLF, SFGS and WPT and their primary habitat. Hand removal of invasive plant species will be required within a 15-foot aquatic buffer zone around wetland/riparian areas. When Glyphosate will be used, only spot treatments using handheld devices will be permitted beyond the 15-foot hand removal buffer, and up to 260 feet of the wetland/riparian areas. To minimize the potential for spray drift near wetland/riparian areas, only power wands or hand application will be permitted in the floodplain of Mindego and Knuedler Lakes and the area surrounding the lakes downhill toward the lakes (see Figure 5). Spot treatments will be preferred, but small scale broadcast treatments using a power wand will be used in areas of dense cover of non native thistles. As an additional precaution, no herbicide application will be permitted on inside banks or bottoms of irrigation ditches, or channels that carry water that may be used for irrigation or domestic purposes. Only rubber-tire all terrain vehicles that will not uproot the landscape will be permitted within a 660 foot precautionary zone of the wetland/riparian areas to provide additional protection for the CRLF, SFGS and WPT. A biological monitor will be required to be present on site during hand removal, herbicide application, and preceding drill seeding equipment when working within the 660 foot precautionary zone surrounding wetland/riparian areas to determine the presence of and to avoid threatened and endangered species. The short annual duration of the project, estimated at up to two, one to two week periods of spraying and up to one week of re-seeding in the fall, will also reduce the potential impact to sensitive species. A formal cultural resource survey has not yet been conducted to determine the presence of sensitive cultural resources at Mindego Ranch. However, knowledge of the area indicates the potential for culturally sensitive areas to occur near Mindego Lake and Big Spring. Herbicide application in these areas shall be by rubber-tire ATV or by hand spraying/removal to minimize i the potential for ground disturbance in these areas. 3 FINDINGS AND BASIS FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION The Manager of the Operations Department of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, based upon substantial evidence in the record,finds that: 1. The mitigation measures,as listed below and incorporated into the project,are adequate to mitigate the environmental effects to a less than significant level. 2. The project will have no adverse affects on air quality,mineral resources,population and housing, utilities and service systems,or transportation/traffic because such impacts simply do not arise from the proposed project,given its minor nature and rural setting. 3. The project will not adversely affect aesthetics,land use or public services,geology& soils, hazards and hazardous materials,hydrology and water quality,noise, or recreation. 4. The project will not adversely affect biological resources and cultural resources, based on project-specific mitigations that reduce impacts to a less than significant level. 5. The project will not: • Create impacts that degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community(excepting the I targeted invasive plant species),reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal,or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory,due to the project's scale and localized nature. • Create impacts that are individually limited,but cumulatively considerable,based on project-specific mitigations that reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. • Create environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly. Therefore,the Mid peninsula Regional Open Space District has determined that the project will have no significant effect on the environment. MITIGATION MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT The a biological resource mitigations identified below are discussed in section IV(a). g g ( ) (BIO-1)To minimize potential impacts to California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake,and western pond turtle, worker environmental awareness training will be conducted for all herbicide application crews and contractors that will be accessing the site. The education training will be conducted prior to starting work on the project and upon the arrival of any new worker. The training will include a brief review of the California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake,and western pond turtle,their life history, field identification, habitat requirements for each species, location of sensitive areas,possible fines for violations, avoidance measures, and necessary actions if sensitive species are encountered. 4 (BIO-2) In accordance with the United States Environmental Protection Agency's California red-legged frog injunction, no herbicide application shall be permitted within 15 feet of Big Spring, Mindego and Knuedler Lakes. When using Glyphosate, only localized spot treatments using handheld devices shall be permitted outside of the 15-foot hand removal buffer, but within 260 feet of Big Spring,Mindego and Knuedler Lakes. Herbicide application of Glyphosate beyond the 260 foot limited herbicide application zone, but within the 660 foot precautionary zone shall be restricted to hand application with a backpack pump, wicks and daubers,power wand,or by all terrain vehicle and boom sprayer. (BIO-3)No herbicide application shall occur during times of precipitation or when precipitation is forecasted during the subsequent 48 hour period. (BIO-4)To minimize potential impacts to California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter j snake,and western pond turtle,a biological monitor will be required to be present on site during j hand removal,preceding herbicide applicators,their equipment and drill seeding equipment when working within the 660 foot precautionary zone surrounding Big Spring, Mindego and Knuedler Lakes. i (BIO-5) If California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake or western pond turtle are encountered,no work shall occur until the frog, snake or turtle has left the area on its own,or until a qualified wildlife biologist is consulted,and appropriate arrangements are made with United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. Cultural resources mitigations identified below are discussed in section V(b). (ARC-1)To minimize ground disturbance and potential impacts to archaeological or paleontological resources,mechanized equipment shall be restricted to rubber-tire vehicles to prevent uprooting of soil and unintended exposure or impacts to resources. (ARC-2)To minimize ground disturbance and potential impacts to archaeological resources, a qualified archaeological monitor will survey the area prior to implementing any drill seeding activities to determine and indicate areas for avoidance. If resources cannot be avoided, mitigation measure ARC-3 shall be implemented. (ARC-3) Implementation of the following measures would reduce potential impacts to cultural and historical resources, including buried and unknown archeological,paleontological,and human remains,to a less-than-significant level: • If any commonly recognized sensitive cultural resources such as human formed artifacts including projectile points, bowls, baskets,historic bottles,cans,trash deposits,or structures etc. are encountered during herbicide application every reasonable effort shall be made to avoid the resources. Work shall stop within 30 feet of the object(s)and the contractor shall contact the District.No work shall resume within 30 feet until a qualified cultural and/or historical resources expert can assess the significance of the find. • A reasonable effort will be made by the District to avoid or minimize harm to the discovery until significance is determined and an appropriate treatment can be identified and implemented. Methods to protect finds include fencing and covering remains with protective material such as culturally sterile soil or plywood. • If vandalism is a threat, 24-hour security shall be provided. 5 • Herbicide application outside of the find location can continue during the significance evaluation period and while mitigation for cultural and/or historical resources is being carried out,preferably with a qualified cultural and/or historical resources expert monitoring any subsurface excavations. • If a resource cannot be avoided,a qualified cultural and/or historical resources expert will develop an appropriate Action Plan for treatment to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects. The District will not proceed with herbicide application activities within 30 feet of the find until the Action Plan has been reviewed and approved. • The treatment effort required to mitigate the inadvertent exposure of significant cultural and/or historical resources will be guided by a research design appropriate to the discovery and potential research data inherent in the resource in association with suitable field techniques and analytical strategies. The recovery effort will be detailed in a professional report in accordance with current professional standards. Any non-grave associated artifacts will be curated with an appropriate repository. • Project documents shall include a requirement that project personnel shall not collect cultural and/or historical resources encountered during construction. This measure is consistent with federal guideline 36 CFR 800.13(a)for invoking unanticipated discoveries. (ARC-4). If human remains are encountered,all work within 100 feet of the remains shall cease immediately and the contractor shall contact the District. The District will contact the San Mateo County Coroner to evaluate the remains,and follow the procedures and protocols set forth in §15064.5(e)of the CEQA Guidelines.No further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition, which shall be made within two working days from the time the Coroner is notified of the discovery,pursuant to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be Native American,the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission(NAHC)within 24 hours,which will determine and notify the Most Likely Descendant(MLD). The MLD may recommend within 48 hours of their notification by the NAHC the means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity,the human remains and grave goods. In the event of difficulty locating a MLD or failure of the MLD to make a timely recommendation,the human remains and grave goods shall be reburied with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance. RESPONSIBLE AGENCY CONSULTATION No agency consultation was initiated as a result of the project. INITIAL STUDY A copy of the initial study is attached. REVIEW PERIOD The Review Period begins on March 20,2009 and ends on April 20, 2009. If you have any comments about the Negative Declaration or Initial Study,have information that should be included, and/or disagree with the findings of our study as set forth in the proposed Negative Declaration,please submit your comments in writing no later than 5 p.m. on April 20,2009 to Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 330 Distel Circle,Los Altos,CA 94022. 6 CONTACT PERSON Cindy Roessler,Senior Resource Management Specialist,650-691-1200 David Sanguine Ualpen rations Manager Midpeninsula Regio Space District 7 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District INITIAL STUDY Project title: Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch Lead agency name and address: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District i 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos,CA 94022 Contact person and phone number: Cindy Roessler,(650)691-1200 Project location: The project area is located west of Skyline Boulevard(Hwy 35)within the 1,047 acre Mindego Ranch region of Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve. The Russian Ridge preserve is located within unincorporated San Mateo County,approximately 1.5 miles north of the Skyline Boulevard and Alpine Road intersection. Project APN: 080-320-060; 080-340-010; 083-310-060 Project sponsor's name and address: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle,Los Altos, CA 94022 General plan designation: General Open Space Zoning: RM,Resource Management and TPZ, Timberland Preserve Zone Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project,and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) is planning herbicide application of the herbicides Milestone and Roundup Pro in conjunction with mechanical hand pulling and digging to control non-native thistles on portions of the 1,047 acre Mindego Ranch region of Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve in San Mateo County, California (Refer to Figures 1 and 2). The project area is highly disturbed due to the large number of invasive plants and past intensive grazing practices. The primary invasive plants that will be targeted include purple starthistle (Centaurea calcitrapa) and smooth distaff thistle (Carthamus baeticus). Secondary invasive plants that will also be targeted include: milk thistle (Silybum marianum), Italian thistle (Cardus pycnocephalus), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), and yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis). The presence of invasive thistles at Mindego Ranch is a result of the past ranching practices on theproperty. I t is believed that g P gp feed brought in for cattle was the original source of the invasive plant seeds. Because the cattle preferred to eat native plants and pasture grasses,the non-native plants were able to spread and thrive. Previous efforts to control the non-native thistles through mowing may have actually increased their spread across the property. The presence of these invasive plants displaces native vegetation and, if left untreated, is expected to spread further across the property and into adjacent areas. Treatment of the invasive plant species includes herbicide F application and hand removal to be completed by a qualified contracted herbicide applicator, and hand crews. The estimated level of work to control the two species is up to 150 acres of treatment per year for up to seven years. In development of the project plan, the District consulted with a licensed Pest Control Adviser to assist with selection of herbicides to be used,herbicide application methods, and time of year for application. A recent botanical survey conducted in 2008 indicated the presence of approximately 110 acres of purple starthistle (Refer to Figure 3) and approximately 40 acres of smooth distaff thistle (Refer to Figure 4) on 8 Mindego Ranch ranging from sparse density to nearly 100% cover, including areas in close proximity to wetland/riparian habitat. The recommended treatment for purple starthistle and smooth distaff thistle is the rapplication of the herbicide Milestone (Aminopyralid) applied at a rate of 5 ounces/acre/year. Application of Milestone will occur for up to two weeks during the spring (between March and June). A follow up application ! may also be applied in the summer (between July and September) of each year to eliminate any remaining plants. Herbicide application will be scheduled prior to bolting of the purple starthistle to achieve maximum effectiveness and to reduce the overall amount of herbicide that will be needed over the life of the project. No more than two Milestone applications (up to two weeks for each application) will occur each year. Spot treatments of Roundup Pro(Glyphosate) at a rate of up to 10.6 quarts/acre/year may be used between Milestone applications to treat any missed areas. The maximum allowable amount is not expected to be used each year because Glyphosate will only be used as a follow up to spot treat areas that were missed during application of Milestone. As the population of non-native thistles is reduced to an amount that can be treated primarily through spot treatment alone, the primary herbicide used for treatment will switch from Milestone to Roundup Pro. Herbicides may be applied utilizing a variety of equipment, including a truck/tractor with a boom sprayer, all terrain vehicles (ATV) with a boom sprayer, and spot spraying with backpack sprayers, wicks and daubers, and power wands. Removal of plants by hand may occur in environmentally sensitive areas and in areas that limit equipment access due to steep terrain. Efficacy monitoring will occur 1-3 weeks after each treatment. If any areas are missed, follow up spot treatments using Glyphosate may be used to further control the non-native thistles. Erosion control methods including reseeding with pasture grasses and native perennial grasses and/or placement of groundcover will occur as needed to stabilize any exposed soils and to prevent soil erosion. Once a significant reduction in invasive species is observed,broadcast seeding and/or a drill seeder may be used to plant native perennial grass and pasture grass seeds to further displace the non-native thistles. During a formal habitat assessment conducted in 2008, the presence of threatened or endangered species (TES) at Mindego Ranch was observed. Both sufficient habitat and occurrence of California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) (CRLF), San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) (SFGS) and western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) ()NPT)was documented. To better protect TES, restricted use buffers for herbicide application were developed through consultation with the San Mateo County Agricultural Commissioner, United States Fish and Wildlife Service guidance for potentially affected species, and in accordance with the CRLF injunction. Although Milestone is not included in the CRLF injunction, Glyphosate is included. Use of herbicides and mechanized equipment adjacent to wetland/riparian habitat will be limited to better protect CRLF, SFGS and WPT and their primary habitat. Hand removal of invasive plant species will be required within a 15-foot aquatic buffer zone around wetland/riparian areas. When Glyphosate will be used, only spot treatments using handheld devices will be permitted beyond the 15-foot hand removal buffer, and up to 260 feet of the wetland/riparian areas. To minimize the potential for spray drift near wetland/riparian areas, only power wands or hand application will be permitted in the floodplain of Mindego and Knuedler Lakes and the area surrounding the lakes downhill toward the lakes (see Figure 5). Spot treatments will be preferred, but small scale broadcast treatments using a power wand will be used in areas of dense cover of non native thistles. As an additional precaution, no herbicide application will be permitted on inside banks or bottoms of irrigation ditches, or channels that carry water that may be used for irrigation or domestic purposes. Only rubber-tire all terrain vehicles that will not uproot the landscape will be permitted within a 660 foot precautionary zone of the wetland/riparian areas to provide additional protection for the CRLF, SFGS and WPT. A biological monitor will be required to be present on site during hand removal, herbicide application, and preceding drill seeding equipment when working within the 660 foot precautionary zone surrounding wetland/riparian areas to determine the presence of and to avoid threatened and endangered species. The short annual duration of the project, estimated at up to two, one to two week periods of spraying and up to one week of re-seeding in the fall,will also reduce the potential impact to sensitive species. 9 A formal cultural resource survey has not yet been conducted to determine the presence of sensitive cultural resources at Mindego Ranch. However, knowledge of the area indicates the potential for culturally sensitive areas to occur near Mindego Lake and Big Spring. Herbicide application in these areas shall be by rubber-tire ATV or by hand spraying/removal to minimize the potential for ground disturbance in these areas. The project incorporates the following guidelines: • The contractor shall secure and remove all trash at the end of each working day to maintain a clean worksite. • The contractor shall appropriately maintain all construction equipment throughout the project: fueling, cleaning and equipment maintenance shall be prohibited within 100 feet of wetland/riparian areas.The j contractor shall maintain adequate containment and cleanup materials onsite in the event of spills. • As the project location falls within the San Mateo County Sudden Oak Death Syndrome(SOD)zone of infestation,the contractor shall clean all tools and equipment to prevent spread of SOD into new areas. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: SURROUNDING LAND USES To the west of the project area are lands administered by the San Francisco Youth Authority;to the east of the project area is the remaining portion of Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve. To the north and south of the project area are privately owned rural residential parcels. In general,this area of San Mateo County is dominated by open space/recreation lands and scattered rural residential pro erties. EXISTING SETTING The project area is located within the Mindego Ranch region of Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve managed by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. The Preserve is located within unincorporated San Mateo County in the north-central section of the Santa Cruz Mountains,and lies near the headwaters of Mindego and Alpine Creeks, both tributaries to San Gregorio Creek. The Mindego Ranch portion of the Preserve,where the proposed project is located, includes 1,047 acres of agricultural/grazing land acquired by the District in 2008. The project area is located within the Timberland Preserve Zone and Resource Management zoning districts. Public use of the Mindego Ranch portion of the Preserve is currently restricted to hiking through n g p Y g docent led tours and special permits only. The project area is accessed primarily by dirt and rocked ranch roads;however some portions of the project area will require off road travel over primarily grassland habitat. Slope and aspect varies throughout the project area. Project efforts will be concentrated primarily on the north, west and east slopes of Mindego Hill located above the steep Mindego Creek drainage. The project area is dominated by annual grasslands bordering a mixed evergreen forest. Riparian species intermix with the mixed evergreen forest immediately adjacent to Mindego Creek. Soils underlying the project area are primarily highly erodible stony clay loam of the Mindego soil series. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) • None Document availability: All documents referenced in the Initial Study are available for review from 8:30 a.m.to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday at the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District administrative office at the address listed above. SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS Upon General Manager or designee certification of this negative declaration,the following actions will occur: • Contract bid and approval 10 Mindego Ranch I ;4 �t RUSSIan q' Ridge Mindega Ranch 9 k Skyline .. a Ridge s 0 0.5 1 2 Miles FIGURE 1. PROJECT VICINITY MAP (MINDEGO RANCH) 11 Mindego Ranch G t�'n ySpring ti'irdego t III m Hill y O Qi N m V o Knuedk-r m a Lake 0 a • 0 0.125 0.25 05 Miles FIGURE 2. PROJECT LOCATION MAP (MINDEGO RANCH) 12 p^ N� k VR �r v CE+CA2,Contmo r k7drapa�'pvrptc,tar 1his1lel cistrihAom&ftns4 map Mr.i.,jn iirl tMxZe,Rant on,Prwy-.j at :•Rr.F. GH LAO t,, , TN 1411l+1 .E �,• 1 "t . -asp r.x ie�r 15, =' 1.0 miles 3.0 C.5 1.5 I FIGURE 3. DISTRIBUTION OF PURPLE STAR THISTLE AT MINDEGO RANCH 13 - x 1 - s Y 4 why }gyyy � 4 .d CASA&Ca.-Iiwrn-rs dr rcus(smaath distaff this€k)c istnbasion&dcnWy rMp i! 1.1iYk 1? 2�71 al r/1JN TN M!4 IS, a to 05 r.a miles FIGURE 4. DISTRIBUTION OF SMOOTH DISTAFF THISTLE AT MINDEGO RANCH 14 Herbicide Application Map - Rwsian Ridge Open Space Preserve Mindego Ranch Boundary 0 Downstream Water Diversions(Pumps - 15 foot glraf °°Y No Spray Zone No Herbicide • Application Cuesta La Honda Guild Pump . 260 foot buffer I / Glyphosate hand Ab application spot F treatment only 7� No Boom Zone Hand application only: t' backpack sprayers, W(ks and daubers, and pots er►%and Mhen alloxNable). j, 4660 foot { Precauti onary Zone E Biological monitors required. Use r it j precatrtionari, / �� City andCountyof j measures when I San Francisco Pump using mechanical %' 4 equipment �I Miles { FIGURE 5. ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA PROTECTION BUFFERS 15 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. * Aesthetics 0 Agriculture Resources 0 Air Quality * Biological Resources 0 Cultural Resources []Geology/Soils * Hazards & Hazardous 0 Hydrology/Water Quality 0 Land Use/Planning Materials 0 Mineral Resources 0 Noise 0 Population/Housing 0 Public Services 0 Recreation 0 Transportation/Traffic 0 Utilities/Service Systems 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: 0 1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 0 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. 0 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Sig aturLUQZ-QA Date 17//-7/617 David Sanguinetti,Operation yman)ger Midl2eninsula Regional Open District 16 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS i Issues: Less Than i Potentially Significant with less Than 1. AESTHETICS Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact Would the project: 1(a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ R1 ❑ Herbicide application will be specific to targeted broadleaf vegetation. In most areas,residual grasses and other non targeted vegetation will remain, which will provide for a similar visual appearance to the existing condition. In heavily infested areas, patches of dying or dead vegetation may occur. However,this is a temporary condition, I which will be reduced or eliminated because the project area is dominated by annual grasses that naturally dry out and die back in the summer of each year. Once the drying season begins, any patches of dying or dead vegetation will be consistent with the overall visual state of the project area. Because dead plants material will remain in place, and non targeted vegetation will be minimally affected, large patches of exposed soils are not expected.Nonetheless,after herbicide application,an annual inspection will be conducted to determine if re- seeding of any disturbed areas is needed prior to the rainy season each year to promote uniform vegetation cover, thus further reducing the potential for visual impacts from patchy vegetation. I(b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not ❑ ❑ ❑ p limited to,trees,rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? I(c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 quality of the site and its surroundings? Although some die back of vegetation will occur,this is a temporary condition that will not significantly impact the overall visual character of the area(Refer to I(a)above). Herbicide application and hand removal of non native species will provide the opportunity for native grasses,pasture grasses and wildflower species to establish, which will eventually enhance the overall visual quality of the area. I(d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,which ❑ ❑ Tol Ri would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 11. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES In determiningwhether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead P g g agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Less That, Potentially Significant with Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact II(a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 Farmland of Statewide Importance(Farmland),as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to non- agricultural use? 11(b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 Williamson Act contract? II(c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,which, ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use? 17 i Ill. AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Potentially Less Than Less Than Would the project: Significant Significant with Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation III(a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable ❑ ❑ ❑ air quality plan? III(b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ❑ ❑ ❑ p substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? III(c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any ❑ ❑ ❑ Q criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions,which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? I11(d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ p ❑ concentrations? No air quality issues or odors associated with herbicide application(spraying)are expected to occur, because no application will occur during weather conditions that favor spray drift into non targeted areas. The following use restrictions have been set in place to prevent the spread of herbicide through the air:No boom sprayer application will be permitted when winds are greater than 5 mph;no backpack sprayer applications using a wand and nozzle hood will occur when winds are greater than 10 mph;no wick and dauber applications will occur when winds are greater than 15 mph. 111(e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ p number of people? See I11(d)above. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than '... Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact IV(a) Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or ❑ © ❑ ❑ through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game(CDFG)or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)? The Project will result in an improvement to the environment by removing invasive plant species that displace native vegetation. Impacts to special-status wildlife species potentially occurring on the project area can either be avoided or reduced to less than significant levels through incorporation of USF WS buffers required for the CRLF and SFGS, and by following standard District best management practices(BMP's),and project timing. The project area is currently highly disturbed due to the large number of invasive plant species and past intensive grazing practices. Special status species occur on or potentially near the project site; however the potential for g gP p p P Y p J � them to be affected by the proposed project is considered low. The short duration of the project,estimated at up to two weeks of spraying in spring of each year,and up to two additional weeks of spraying in summer(as needed) each year and up to one week of re-seeding in the fail of each year,reduces the potential for impacts to sensitive species even further. The following herbicides will be used and their potential effects are listed below: Milestone(Aminopyralid) 18 Aminopyralid is the active ingredient in Milestone,which is a broad spectrum herbicide used to control invasive annual,biennial,perennial and broadleaf plants. Aminopyralid functions by disrupting plant metabolic pathways that affect plant growth. The Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)classification for Aminopyralid is toxicity i category IV or"caution'signal word,the lowest toxicity category a chemical can receive.Aminopyralid is considered practically non-toxic to mammals,bird species, and fish and practically non-toxic to slightly toxic to aquatic insects,such as dragonflies and water bugs(Washington State Department of Transportation,2009). Direct exposure to Aminopyralid for CRLF, SFGS, and WPT will be minimized by having a biological monitor precede herbicide applicators within 660 feet of areas surrounding wetland/riparian habitat(See Figure 5). Indirect exposure may occur,but because Aminopyralid is considered practically non-toxic, impacts to wildlife will be minimized if an animal comes into incidental contact with the herbicide. Effects to aquatic species will be minimized by implementing restricted use buffers surrounding water features. A 15-foot no spray zone beyond the high water mark of wetland/riparian areas will be implemented as an additional precautionary measure. To minimize the potential for spray drift near wetland/riparian areas,only power wands or hand application will be permitted in the floodplain of Mindego and Knuedler Lakes and the area surrounding the lakes downhill toward the lakes(see Figure 5). Spot treatments will be preferred,but small scale broadcast treatments using a power wand will be used in areas with a dense cover of non native thistles.As an additional precaution,no herbicide application will be permitted on inside banks or bottoms of irrigation ditches, or channels that carry water that may be used for irrigation or domestic purposes.Aminopyralid is considered minimally to moderately mobile in soils, with a typical half life of 103 days(Washington State Department of Transportation, 2009). Due to minimal to moderate transport ability,the amount of herbicide expected to transport from the upland areas into the wetland/riparian areas is expected to be minimal. Round-Up Pro(Glyphosate) Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Round-Up Pro,which is a broad spectrum herbicide used to control a variety of invasive plant species. Glyphosate functions by interrupting cellular plant processes specific to plant function. The EPA classification for Roundup is toxicity category III with a signal word of"caution'. Glyphosate has low toxicity in humans if ingested, inhaled or touched,but it is considered an eye irritant. Due to application techniques and the distance from adjacent properties,eye irritation is unlikely outside of the immediate project area. To minimize eye irritation to herbicide applicators,appropriate eye protection will be required.Glyphosate is metabolized by soil bacteria and is not considered mobile in soils. Because of this, Glyphosate has a very low potential to contaminate groundwater. It has a typical half life of 47 days (Washington State Department of Transportation, 2006). Direct exposure to Glyphosate for CRLF, SFGS, and WPT will be minimized by having a biological monitor precede herbicide applicators in areas surrounding wetland/riparian habitat. Indirect exposure may occur, but will be minimized by implementing a 15-foot no spray boundary beyond the high water mark of wetland/riparian areas and by restricting application to hand and spot treatments only beyond 15 feet and within 260 feet of wetland/riparian areas. Due to limited to no application within the two buffer areas, limited half life of the product,inability of the product to transport in j soils, and because Glyphosate does not bioaccummulate in aquatic animals, the amount of Glyphosate expected 1 to transport from the upland areas into the wetland/riparian areas is expected to be minimal. To further minimize the potential for spray drift near wetland/riparian areas,only power wands or hand application will be permitted within the floodplain of Mindego and Knuedler Lakes and the area surrounding the lakes downhill toward the lakes(see Figure 5). Spot treatments will be preferred,but small scale broadcast treatments using a power wand will be used in areas of dense cover of non native thistles. As an additional precaution,no herbicide application will be permitted inside banks or bottoms of irrigation ditches,or channels that carry water that may be used for irrigation or domestic purposes. No special-status plant species were observed or are expected to occur at the project area. Herbicide application will be completed in areas infested with invasive thistlespecies, primarily distaff thistle, and purple star thistle. 19 A literature search was conducted utilizing the California Natural Resources Database(CNDDB), which revealed suitable habitat conditions for one special-status plant species adjacent to the project area,the Western Leatherwood(Dirca occidentalis). This species is easily identifiable,and is not present in the project area. SPECIAL-STATUS ANIMAL SPECIES Special-status animal species that occur,or have the potential to occur within or adjacent to the project area include: Coho salmon,steelhead trout,CRLF, SFGS,Cooper's hawk, Sharp-shinned hawk,and the San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat. Other sensitive animal species that could occur within the project area include a variety of migratory bird species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The natural history, potential for occurrence, and potential impacts to the species identified as affected by this project is discussed in detail below. California red-legged frog(Rana aurora draytonii) The CRLF is federally-listed as threatened and is designated as a California species of special concern. It is one of two subspecies of red-legged frog(Rana aurora)endemic to the Pacific Coast. The CRLF is distributed throughout 26 counties in California,but is most abundant in the San Francisco Bay Area. The northern red- legged frog(Rana aurora aurora)ranges from southern British Columbia,Canada south to northern Marin County. Although the project area is not currently located in critical CRLF habitat,the project area is located within the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's proposed"SNM-2"critical habitat unit. If adopted,this revision would replace the currently designated CRLF critical habitat.Although there is a proposed revision in place,this project does not result in impacts to existing CRLF critical habitat or proposed critical habitat. CRLF have been previously observed at Mindego Ranch. CRLF were found at the springs near the ranch buildings, Knuedler Lake,Big Spring and in Mindego Creek in a large pool below an 8 foot waterfall. Ponds within the project area provide habitat and breeding opportunities for CRLF.Dispersing juveniles or adult frogs in search of appropriate breeding habitat may also intermittently utilize the upland areas above the ponds. Because CRLF occupythe project are mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project that will p J � g � p J reduce the potential to affect this species to a less than significant level. With the implementation of the avoidance and minimization measures,the project is not expected to result in injury or mortality to the CRLF or in adverse affects to its designated or proposed critical habitat. San Francisco garter snake(Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) The SFGS is federally and state-listed as endangered and is a fully protected species under Section 5050 of the California Fish and Game Code.An aquatic subspecies of the common garter snake and endemic to the San Francisco Bay Area, SFGSs are distributed along the western San Francisco Peninsula from the southern San Francisco County border south to Waddell Lagoon south of Arlo Nuevo and as far east as the Crystal Springs Reservoir Watershed. It often occurs with its primary prey species,the California red-legged frog; however, it will opportunistically prey on a variety of species including other frogs,tadpoles,egg masses, newts,small fish, salamanders,reptiles,small mammals,birds and their eggs and several small invertebrates. SFGSs prefer densely vegetated habitats close to water where they can retreat when disturbed. The species often occurs near ponds,marshes, streams and other wetlands associated with cattails(Typha spp.), bulrushes (Amphiseirpus, Bolboschoenus, Isolepis, Schoenoplectus and Trichophorum spp.)and rushes(Juneus and Eleocharis spp.). Mating occurs shortly after they leave their winter retreats in May and females give birth to live young between June and September. Species may hibernate near the coastal areas in fossorial mammal 20 burrows and other refuges,or remain active year-round,weather permitting. One SFGS was found at Kneudler Lake during the 2008 habitat assessment survey. Due to the presence of this snake and because suitable habitat for this species exists at the project location,mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project that will reduce the potential to affect this species to a less than significant level. With the implementation of avoidance areas and minimization measures,the project is not expected to result in harm,harrassment, injury,or mortality to the SFGS or adversely affect its potential habitat. Western Pond Turtle (Actinemys marmorata) WPT is a federal and state species of concern. Pond turtles are primarily aquatic,and are highly dependant on basking sites such as logs or sunny slopes for thermoregulation(Swaim,2008). WPTs range from northern Baja California north to the Puget Sound of Washington state. Although they spend much of their active time in water,nearby upland habitat is essential for female WPT to burrow and deposit eggs. I WPT were observed at Mindego Lake, and Big Spring in 2008. Due to the presence of WPT within the project site, mitigation measures have been incorporated that will reduce the potential to affect the species to a less than j significant level. With the implementation of avoidance areas and minimization measures,the project is not expected to result in injury or mortality to the WPT or any adverse affects to its potential habitat. Impact 11I0-1: California red-legged frog,San Francisco garter snake,and western pond turtle occupy the project area,and could potentially be harmed or harassed by project implementation. Mitigation: (BIO- 1)To minimize potential impacts to California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake,and western pond turtle, worker environmental awareness training will be conducted for all herbicide application crews and contractors that will be accessing the site. The education training will be conducted prior to starting work on the project and upon the arrival of any new worker. The training will include a brief review of the California red- legged frog, San Francisco garter snake,and western pond turtle,their life history,field identification,habitat requirements for each species, location of sensitive areas, possible fines for violations,avoidance measures, and necessary actions if sensitive species are encountered. (BIO-2)In accordance with the United States Environmental Protection Agency's California red-legged frog injunction,no herbicide application shall be permitted within 15 feet of Big Spring, Mindego and Knuedler Lakes. When using Glyphosate,only localized spot treatments using handheld devices shall be permitted outside of the 15-foot hand removal buffer,but within 260 feet of Big Spring, Mindego and Knuedler Lakes. Herbicide application of Glyphosate beyond the 260 foot limited herbicide application zone,but within the 660 foot precautionary zone shall be restricted to hand application with a backpack pump, wicks and daubers,power wand,or by all terrain vehicle and boom sprayer. (BIO-3)No herbicide application shall occur during times of precipitation or when precipitation is forecasted during the subsequent 48 hour period. (BIO-4)To minimize potential impacts to California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake,and western pond turtle, a biological monitor will be required to be present on site during hand removal,preceding herbicide applicators,their equipment and drill seeding equipment when working within the 660 foot precautionary zone surrounding Big Spring,Mindego and Knuedler Lakes. 21 (BIO-5)If California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake or western pond turtle are encountered, no work shall occur until the frog,snake or turtle has left the area on its own,or until a qualified wildlife biologist is consulted,and appropriate arrangements are made with United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. I Cooper's and sharp-shinned hawks(Accipiter cooperi,Accipiter striatus) The Cooper's hawk and sharp-shinned hawk are both State species of special concern that are considered rare breeders in the Santa Cruz Mountains. Cooper's hawks prefer forested habitats in mountainous regions,but also use lowland riparian woodlands and forage in both dense cover and open habitats. In California,nests are usually constructed in oak trees. The local breeding season spans from February through July. Sharp-shinned hawks prey mostly on small songbirds and breed from April through July. Potentially suitable breeding habitat for sharp- shinned hawks occurs over much of the forested mountainous terrain of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Nesting sharp-shinned hawks typically inhabit dense coniferous forests adjacent to foraging habit; densely foliaged conifers that are surrounded by dense canopy cover are considered prime nesting trees. The species is considered uncommon in the project area from September to early May. I The project area may offer potential nesting and migrating habitat for Cooper's and sharp-shinned hawks. Temporary vehicle and equipment noise will be minimal due to the limited number of vehicles and types of equipment that will be used. Vehicle and equipment use,if occurring during the breeding season, is considered a less than significant disturbance to nesting hawks and is unlikely to result in nest abandonment or mortality of young. Migratory Bird Species The Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA), amended in 1992, includes all migratory bird species. MBTA generally prohibits the taking,killing,possession of,or harm to nesting migratory birds species listed in Title 50 code of federal regulation cfr Section 10.13. Section 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code supports the MTBA. g ( ) Pp The project area may offer potential nesting and migrating habitat for migratory birds. Temporary vehicle and equipment noise will be minimal due to the limited number of vehicles and types of equipment that will be used. Vehicle use and equipment noise is similar to or less than what has previously or currently occurred on the property, and if occurring during the breeding season is considered a less than significant disturbance to nesting migratory bird species and is unlikely to result in nest abandonment and mortality of young. San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat(Neotoma fuscipes annectens) The San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat is a state species of concern. Woodrats are small mammals that build nests made of sticks,typically at the base of trees and shrubs. The species prefers forested habitat with a moderate canopy and brushy understory,particularly on the upper banks of riparian forests or within poison-oak. dominated shrublands. The dusky-footed woodrat is known to feed on a variety of woody plants, fungi, flowers and seeds. Because herbicide application will primarily be located in open pasture areas, which are not the preferred habitat for this species, and no woodrat nests have been observed,no impact is anticipated. Coho salmon(Oncorhynchus kisutch) Coho salmon are federally and state listed as an endangered species. The species ranges from Santa Cruz County,northward to Alaska. Coho salmon in San Mateo County are included in the listings for the Central California Coast Evolutionarily Significant Unit(ESU).An ESU is based on genetic and regional climatic and habitat conditions that can be distinguished from other regions within the species range. 22 Coho salmon are an anadromous(ocean going)species that begin life in coastal streams during the rainy season. Eggs are deposited in stream gravels and fertilized. Small "fry"emerge from the gravels and then grow in the stream for their first year.Juvenile"smolts"out-migrate into the ocean during the spring and early summer and will typically spend two years at sea before returning to their natal stream to spawn and die. i Coho salmon populations have dramatically decreased as a result of land use practices(timber harvesting, mining, agriculture,rural and urban development),water diversions,predation,and changing oceanic conditions. f The proposed project is located in a steep headwater tributary within the San Gregorio Creek watershed. The j proposed project area is located above the known limits of anadromy,so direct impacts to this species will not occur.Coho salmon prefer low gradient streams for spawning and rearing. It is estimated that potential Coho salmon habitat exists approximately two miles downstream based on stream topography and past CDFG inventories. Coho salmon populations from San Gregorio Creek were depressed in the 1960's and are believed to have been lost from the watershed during the late 1970's and early 1980's.A few juvenile coho salmon were once again observed in the middle portion of the main stem of San Gregorio Creek in 2006,approximately seven miles downstream of the project area. No indirect impacts to Coho salmon habitat is expected as a result of herbicides impacting water quality(see section VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality).The project proposes to remove exotic vegetation species to promote habitat for native vegetation in primarily upland and grassland sites. The potential for the proposed project to impact this species is considered less than significant. Steelhead rainbow trout(Oneorhynchus mykiss) Steelhead rainbow trout are an anadromous form of rainbow trout that spend part of their lives in the ocean before returning back to streams to spawn. Steelhead range from Alaska to Southern California. Steelhead trout are federallylisted a threatened s t eatened within the Central California C o a Coast ESU, including San Mateo County. Steelhead are an anadromous(ocean going)species that begin life in San Mateo County coastal streams during the rainy season. Eggs are deposited in stream gravels and fertilized. Small "fry"emerge from the gravels and then grow in the stream typically for one to three years. Juvenile"smolts"out-migrate into the ocean during the spring and early summer where they spend between one and four years before returning to their natal stream to spawn. Unlike Coho salmon, steelhead do not necessarily die after spawning,but may once again move back to the ocean and return again to spawn. Steelhead have been documented spawning in successive years,though rarely more than two. Steelhead populations have also significantly decreased within the region due to the same factors as noted above for Coho salmon. Steelhead can utilize steeper portions of the stream network than Coho salmon,though the proposed project location is above the limits of anadromy,and no fish are present. Steelhead trout are currently known to inhabit Mindego Creek,below the proposed project area. Mindego Creek is a tributary to San Gregorio Creek. No direct or indirect impacts to steelhead habitat are expected as a result of herbicides impacting water quality (see section VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality). The project proposes to remove exotic vegetation species to promote habitat for native and non invasive vegetation in primarily upland and grassland sites. The potential for the proposed project to impact this species is considered less than significant. 23 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES(continued) Less Than Potentially significant with Less Than Would the project' significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact IV(b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ p or other sensitive natural community identified in local or ' regional plans,policies, regulations or by the California i Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Indirect impacts to habitat are not expected as a result of Aminopyralid or Glyphosate impacting water quality. See section VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality. Only targeted broadleaf species are expected to be impacted. Hand removal of the targeted species will allow for planting and natural regeneration of native plants and seeded pasture grasses to reestablish themselves in riparian and other sensitive natural communities. IWO Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Adverse impacts to federally protected wetlands are not expected to occur because no removal of water will occur and reseeding of disturbed areas above riparian areas will prevent erosion that could possibly result in filling of a wetland. Through implementation of restricted use buffers and avoidance of spraying directly into or adjacent to water features,minimal to no impacts to water quality are expected as a result of the project,refer to Section VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality for further information. IV(d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ❑ ❑ ❑ p resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nurser sites? The proposed project is located above a steep-gradient headwater stream where no fish are present. The project will not interfere with wildlife movement corridors or impede wildlife movement or wildlife nursery sites. IV(e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting ❑ ❑ ❑ p biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? IV(f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ p Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation Ian? I 24 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES less Than Potentially Significant with less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impao Impact Incorporation Impact V(a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a ❑ EI ❑ ❑ historical resource as defined in 15064.5? V(b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of ❑ © ❑ ❑ an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? Archeological resources are known to exist at the project site. These archaeological resources have not been formerly evaluated for their potential to yield information. Impact ARC-1,ARC-2 ARC-3: Use of mechanized equipment such as track mounted vehicles and drill seeders,can cause ground disturbance that can unearth or disturb historical or archaeological or paleontological features. Mitigation (ARC-1)To minimize ground disturbance and potential impacts to archaeological or paleontological resources, mechanized equipment shall be restricted to rubber-tire vehicles to prevent uprooting of soil and unintended exposure or impacts to resources. (ARC-2)To minimize ground disturbance and potential impacts to archaeological resources, a qualified archaeological monitor will survey the area prior to implementing any drill seeding activities to determine and indicate areas for avoidance.If resources cannot be avoided,mitigation measure ARC-3 shall be implemented. (ARC-3) Implementation of the following measures would reduce potential impacts to cultural and historical resources, including buried and unknown archeological,paleontological,and human remains,to a less-than- significant level: • If any commonly recognized sensitive cultural resources such as human formed artifacts including projectile points, bowls, baskets,historic bottles,cans,trash deposits,or structures etc. are encountered during herbicide application every reasonable effort shall be made to avoid the resources. Work shall stop within 30 feet of the object(s)and the contractor shall contact the District.No work shall resume within 30 feet until a qualified cultural and/or historical resources expert can assess the significance of the find. • A reasonable effort will be made by the District to avoid or minimize harm to the discovery until significance is determined and an appropriate treatment can be identified and implemented. Methods to protect finds include fencing and covering remains with protective material it it p g g psuch as culturally sterile soil or plywood. • If vandalism is a threat, 24-hour security shall be provided. ■ Herbicide application outside of the find location can continue during the significance evaluation period and while mitigation for cultural and/or historical resources is being carried out, preferably with a qualified cultural and/or historical resources expert monitoring any subsurface excavations. • If a resource cannot be avoided, a qualified cultural and/or historical resources expert will develop an appropriate Action Plan for treatment to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects. The District will not proceed with herbicide application activities within 30 feet of the find until the Action Plan has been reviewed and approved. • The treatment effort required to mitigate the inadvertent exposure of significant cultural and/or historical resources will be guided by a research design appropriate to the discovery and potential research data inherent in the resource in association with suitable field techniques and analytical strategies. The recovery effort will be detailed in a professional report in accordance with current professional standards. Any non-grave associated artifacts will be curated with an appropriate repository. • Project documents shall include a requirement that project personnel shall not collect cultural and/or 25 historical resources encountered during construction. This measure is consistent with federal guideline 36 CFR 800.13(a)for invoking unanticipated discoveries. (ARC-4). If human remains are encountered, all work within 100 feet of the remains shall cease immediately and the contractor shall contact the District. The District will contact the San Mateo County Coroner to evaluate the remains, and follow the procedures and protocols set forth in §15064.5(e)of the CEQA Guidelines.No further disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition, which shall be made within two working days from the time the Coroner is notified of the discovery, pursuant to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be Native American,the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission(NAHC)within 24 hours,which will determine and notify the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD may recommend within 48 hours of their notification by the NAHC the means of treating or disposing of,with appropriate dignity,the human remains and grave goods. In the event of difficulty locating a MLD or failure of the MLD to make a timely recommendation,the human remains and grave goods shall be reburied with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES (continued) Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with Significant No Impact Would the project: Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation V(c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑ El ❑ resource or site or unique geologic feature? No known paleontological resources exist onsite, however in the event an undiscovered resources is suspected,please see the mitigation is section V(b)above. V(d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ❑ ❑ 2 ❑ outside of formal cemeteries? See Section V(b)above. Less Than VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially Significant with Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact VI(a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated on ❑ ❑ 2 ❑ the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ p ❑ iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ 21 ❑ iv)Landslides? ❑ ❑ p ❑ 26 VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS (continued) Lessnran Potentially Significant with Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact VI(b) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 'i that would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, 1 subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? According to the California Geological Survey, Seismic Hazard Zones Mindego Hill Quadrangle map,the project area is located in an"area where previous occurrence of landslide movement, or local topographic, geologic,geotechnical and subsurface water conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements."Although the proposed project is located in an area where landslides may occur,the limited scope of the project is not expected to increase the potential for landslides.No cut, fill, or grading of material will be required as a result of this project. The project is located within an unpopulated setting,no structures are proposed, and no new roads or trails will be constructed. Little to no ground disturbance will occur. The major active faults in the vicinity of the project area are the San Andreas and San Gregorio faults,which are located approximately 4 miles northeast and 5 miles southwest, respectively. The La Honda fault passes approximately one mile to the southwest of the project area,trending from the northwest to the southeast. There is the potential for on-site fault rupture or severe ground shaking during a large magnitude earthquake.These risks are considered negligible and highly unlikely in the project area. VI(c) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Herbicide application of Milestone and Roundup Pro will target two broadleaf invasive species: distaff and purple star thistle. Targeted application rarely results in complete removal of groundcover,as the targeted broadleaf species are usually intermixed with annual grasses and wildflower species. To minimize erosion of exposed soils,targeted herbicide application will occur in the spring,after larger winter storms have passed and when most annual grasses begin seasonal dieback.The roots of dead vegetation and leaf litter will remain in place which will help to stabilize soils until reseeding occurs. Summer follow up application will occur after annual grasses and wildflowers have already set seed. To minimize ground disturbance from vehicles on steep slopes, backpack spraying and hand removal will occur. Post herbicide application inspections will be conducted prior to the rainy season each year to determine if any erosion control methods are needed to minimized soil If n 1 n v v erosion. eeded,p placement of ground cover, or seeding of native perennial grasses and pasture grasses will occur to stabilize exposed soils and to reduce the potential for erosion as a result of this project. VI(d) Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 of the Uniform Building Code(1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? VIM Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of ❑ ❑ ❑ p septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? i 27 VI1. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Potentiallyless Than Significant with Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact VII(a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ 2 ❑ environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Hazardous materials(herbicide)will be transported to and from the project site using public roads. Only a qualified contractor will be approved and selected to transport herbicide to and from the project site. Contractors will follow all necessary regulations involved in the transportation and storage of hazardous materials.No public access will be allowed to the preserve during herbicide application. Qualified applicators wearing appropriate personal protective equipment will apply the herbicide in accordance with product labels,following recommendations from a qualified pest control adviser,and under the supervision of a qualified applicator.No public entry to sprayed areas will be allowed for 48 hours following application to provide a more than adequate amount of time for the herbicide to dry to minimize hazards to the public. A staging area adjacent to the Mindego Ranch buildings will provide running water for decontamination of personnel and equipment.A portable eye wash and washing station will be available onsite to decontaminate personnel and to prevent the spread of herbicides outside of the project area. In the event an unintended spill or other hazardous material incident occurs, District Rangers trained in first aid will be available as first responders to potential emergencies, until a hazardous materials team can arrive. The District's radio and repeater system together with ranger and staff availability on call 24 hours per day provides for effective communication for prompt notification to emergency service providers in the event of a hazardous materials emergency. The nearest neighbors adjacent to the project area are greater than 0.1 mile away. Due to the rural character of their property,and the distance to neighboring structures, adjoining landowners will not be affected by hazardous materials involved with the project. VII(b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ 2 ❑ environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? See VII(a)above. VII(c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ❑ ❑ ❑ R1 acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? The nearest school, La Honda elementary school, is located over two miles to the west of the roject location. VII(d) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ❑ ❑ ❑ 21 where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? VII(e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ❑ ❑ ❑ p would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? VII(f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ❑ ❑ ❑ p adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation Ian? VII(g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? The Preserve is in the minimally developed western portion of San Mateo County in the Santa Cruz Mountains. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection,the project area is located in a high fire hazard zone,based on vegetation type(fuel loading), slope and weather. This designation notwithstanding,the 28 project would not change the degree of exposure to wildfires. Equipment operation has the potential to ignite fires;however adequate fire suppression tools including an"ABC"fire extinguisher and hand tools will be required on site during the project to extinguish any accidental ignitions. During periods of high fire danger,no vehicles having catalytic converters shall be allowed off of established roadways. Herbicide application is expected to occur during spring and fall prior to and following the fire season for the local area. The short duration of the project, and on site fire suppression capabilities reduce this potential impact to less than significant. In addition, District Ordinance 93-1, Section 404,prohibits fires and smoking on District lands. District Rangers trained in fire-fighting techniques and carrying fire suppression equipment regularly patrol the Preserve.District staff are often first responders to fire emergencies, with the primary fire protection falling to the California Department of Forestry, County Fire Departments, and municipal fire protection agencies. The District's radio and repeater system together with ranger patrols and staff on call 24 hours per day provides for effective communication for prompt notification to emergency service providers in the event of a wildland fire or emergency response call. Vill.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Would the project' Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact VI11(a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 requirements? VIII(b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ❑ ❑ ❑ p substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.,the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been ranted)? VIII(c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site ❑ ❑ ❑ p or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,in a manner,which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? V111(d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ❑ ❑ ❑ 21 site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river,or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? VIII(e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed ❑ ❑ p ❑ the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? To minimize the potential for polluted runoff from the project site,herbicide application will not occur during rainy days or when precipitation is forecasted within the next 48 hours.Aminopyralid and Glyphosate are both broken down by either sunlight or soil microbes(or both) and due to the timing of the application immediately prior to or during the dry season,the potential for polluted runoff to occur will be minimized. V111(f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? I ❑ ❑ 1 ❑ 1 p The project is located above Mindego Creek,a tributary to the impaired San Gregorio Creek. San Gregorio Creek is impaired because of high coliform count and sedimentation/siltation(San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2003). The nearest known water sources for human use are located to the west of the project area on Mindego Creek,and include the Cuesta La Honda Guild Pump located approximately 0.1 mile from the Preserve boundary and the City and County of San Francisco Pump located approximately 0.3 mile from the Preserve boundary (see Figure 5). Because limited populations of purple star and smooth distaff thistles exist within 0.5 mile of these two water sources(see Figures 3 and 4),very little herbicide application 29 will need to occur within this area. The majority of the applications will be located greater than 0.5 mile from these water sources.To further minimize impacts to water quality,no herbicides will be applied directly to any water sources,within 15 feet of water sources,or on inside banks or bottoms of irrigation ditches,or other channels that carry water for irrigation or domestic purposes. All herbicide application will be in accordance with product labels and based on pest control recommendations developed by a licensed Pest Control Adviser. A Qualified Applicator with a License(QAL)Category"B"(Landscape Maintenance)or Category "D"(Plant Agriculture)will supervise all contractor herbicide application.A Qualified Applicator with a Certificate(QAC) will supervise all District herbicide application. To prevent transport of herbicide off site,no herbicide application will occur during rain events,or if precipitation is predicted within 48 hours of application to allow thorough drying and adsorption time. Additional restricted use buffers around on site water sources have been put in place to protect water quality and sensitive biological species within the immediate project area(See Section IV). These use buffers coupled with application recommendations from a licensed Pest Control Adviser will restrict the ability of applied products to enter onsite or transport to offsite water features. Milestone is classified by the EPA as a category IV(low toxicity)with a signal word of"caution"(Washington State Department of Transportation, 2009). Aminopyralid,the active ingredient,has very low toxicity and is not regulated as a carcinogen(Washington State Department of Transportation, 2009). Milestone was selected because of its effectiveness in treating the targeted plant species at low doses in order to minimize the amount of product introduced into the environment over time(the label specifies no more than 7 ounces/acre/year). The typical half life of Aminopyralid is 103 days;both soil microbes and sunlight break down the product. The typical half life of Glyphosate is 47 days;microbes break down the product. Because herbicide application will occur near the beginning or during the dry season each year,the product is expected to break down substantially each year further minimizing the potential for product transport. The limited half life,and break down of the product over time will further reduce the potential for herbicide transport to adjacent water supplies. Roundup Pro is a commonly used product that has a signal word of"caution". Glyphosate,the active ingredient has a low toxicity level and is considered a group"D"human carcinogen(unclassifiable due to insufficient or conflicting data); however, multiple studies show that Glyphosate is not a mutagen(Washington State Department of Transportation,2006). Roundup Pro when used for spot application will not exceed the label specification of 10.6 quarts/acre/year. Glyphosate is not mobile and has a very low potential to contaminate groundwater(Washington State Department of Transportation, 2006). The District is aware of downstream water uses and has implemented best management practices(BMPs)to prevent herbicide from entering the water supply. These BMPs include: consultation with and implementation of recommendations from a licensed Pest Control Adviser;selecting herbicides with minimal transport ability that break down over time; timing herbicide application(immediately prior to or during the dry season)to allow for thorough drying of the products and maximum adsorption by plants; and limiting or excluding herbicide application in ditches and channels that carry water,and in areas surrounding water sources. Any exposed soils resulting from herbicide application will be covered or seeded prior to the rainy season each year to reduce the potential for sediment transport and run off to enter waterways. Preventing run off that can diminish water quality will reduce any impacts to water quality to a less than significant level. 30 Vill.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY(continued) Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact VIII(g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? VIII(h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, ❑ ❑ ❑ p which would impede or redirect flood flows? VIII(i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ ❑ injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? VIII(j) Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ p IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than .. Would the project' Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact IX(a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ 10 IX(b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including,but not limited to the general plan,specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The project is consistent with the San Mateo County General Plan in that the Preserve is designated is General Open Space and Agricultural/Grazing Lands. In these areas,outdoor recreation and cattle grazing are designated as compatible uses. The open space designation supports recreational uses typically found in publicly owned parks and natural preserves. The agricultural/grazing designation allows for cattle grazing. Therefore, current and future use of the land for outdoor public recreation and future cattle usage are consistent with San Mateo County's General Plan. The project area is consistent with the San Mateo County Zoning Regulation in that the Preserve is on land zoned Resource Management(RMZ)and Timberland Preserve Zones(TPZ). Within the RMZ,agriculture, livestock raising and grazing,and public recreation are permitted uses. The proposed project complies with all environmental quality criteria identified within the Zoning Regulations for the RMZ including, water resources, cultural resources,primary scenic resources areas, fish and wildlife habitat and all environmental regulations for emissions of air pollutants, introduction of noxious odors, pesticide use,noise levels, changes in vegetation cover,erosion control, and effects to wildlife resources. The proposed project is considered a compatible use within the TPZ,because it will not result in development and will not impact any timber growing or harvesting operations. Resource protection activities, such as invasive weed management, erosion control,and watershed protection, when implemented to enhance public recreation and future grazing opportunities that does not impact the ability to grow and harvest timber does not conflict with the San Mateo County General Plan or Zoning Regulations for the RMZ or TPZs. IX(c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or ❑ ❑ ❑ p natural community conservationplan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact X(a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? X(b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important ❑ ❑ ❑ p mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land useplan? 31 XI. NOISE Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Would the project result in: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact XI(a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ❑ ❑ p ❑ excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? According to the San Mateo County General Plan Noise Element, significant noise impacts occur when the noise levels are equal to or above 60 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Exterior noise exposure levels of 70 CNEL or greater are considered significant for residential developments according to the State of California. Within the Preserve, current ambient noise levels are well under 60 CNEL.Noise-generating activities such as driving of vehicles to the project area,and operation of trucks and all terrain vehicles would occur during the hours of 8 a.m.to 5 p.m. within the remote setting of the Preserve,well removed from nearby residences. XI(b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ❑ ❑ ❑ roundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? XI(c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels ❑ ❑ ❑ 21 in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? XI(d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient ❑ ❑ 2 ❑ noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? During herbicide application,vehicles and equipment will generate temporary increases in noise levels. However,given that project work will occur in a remote open space preserve that is closed to public use,the temporary, short-term increase in noise will result in a less than si nificant impact. XI(e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ❑ ❑ ❑ Rl where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XI(f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ❑ ❑ ❑ p would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XI1. POPULATION AND HOUSING Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than . Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No impact Impact Incorporation Impact XII(a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ❑ ❑ ❑ p directly(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? XII(b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ ❑ p necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XII(c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating ❑ ❑ ❑ the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? !,II 32 XIII.PUBLIC SERVICES Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact ' X111(a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical ❑ ❑ ❑ p impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: X111(b) Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ Other public facilities? I XIV.RECREATION Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact XIV(a) Would the project increase the use of existing ❑ ❑ p ❑ neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The preserve is currently closed to the public.Approximately 4 docent led hikes occur at Mindego Ranch each year. During herbicide application,the preserve will be closed to the public. Timing of the application will not interfere with currently scheduled docent led tours. Although schedulingof future tours andspraying will need to be coordinated, no reduction in the total number of tours will occur as a result of the project. XIV(b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require ❑ ❑ ❑ p the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC LessThan Potentially Significant with Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact XV(a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in ❑ ❑ ❑ p relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system(i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips,the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Due to the small scale temporary nature of the project only a few additional vehicles will be traveling on the roads to and from the project site. The number of vehicles and trips to the site are not expected to increase traffic to the surrounding area any more than occurrence of a similar small scale events(such as a cattle roundup, a private party,or other local events)that occur on adjacent properties.Although additional vehicles will be traveling to the site, implementation of the project is short term in nature(no more that two weeks per herbicide application and no more than one week for reseeding)each year,which further limits the effects of increased traffic. XV(b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of ❑ ❑ ❑ p service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? XV(c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either ❑ ❑ ❑ an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? XV(d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ❑ ❑ ❑ p (e.g.,sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses(e. .,farm equipment)? 33 i I i f XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC(continued) LesThan Potentially Significant with Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact We) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ p A staging and parking area adjacent to the Mindego Ranch buildings will allow organized assembly of vehicles and equipment to ensure that Preserve roads and trails remain open to routine Ranger patrol and allow for through access in the event of an emergency. XV(f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ p See XV(e)above. XV(g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ❑ ❑ ❑ p supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle j racks)? No existing alternative transportation programs exist within the confines of the Preserve. Less Than XVI.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Potentially Significant with Less Than Would the project: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporation Impact XVI(a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑ ❑ 23 applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? XVI(b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ❑ ❑ ❑ p wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? XVI(c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water ❑ ❑ ❑ p drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? XVI(d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ❑ ❑ ❑ p project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? XVI(e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ❑ ❑ ❑ p provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to theprovider's existing commitments? XVI(f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity ❑ ❑ ❑ p to accommodate the roject's solid waste disposal needs? XVI(g) Comply with federal, state,and local statutes and ❑ ❑ ❑ regulations related to solid waste? XVI1. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE nifi n Potentially Significantt with Less Than '... Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact '.... Impact Incorporation Impact XVII(a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the ❑ ❑ p ❑ quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The purpose of the project is to reduce invasive plant species to enhance native vegetation habitat. Implementation of mitigation measures will prevent substantial impacts to native fish, wildlife, and non targeted plants species and their habitats. Adhering to mitigation measures will prevent impacts to cultural,historical and paleontological resources that may represent important periods of California history or prehistory. 34 MIN Does the project have impacts that are individually ❑ ❑ p ❑ limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable futureprojects)? Analysis of cumulative impacts identifies existing and possible future projects that may produce related impacts, jand then examines how the proposed project and these possible future open space management actions may combine to act cumulatively. Application of herbicide will occur yearly (up to a maximum of 7 years)until the population is reduced to an amount manageable by spot application or non chemical means. Although concentration of the herbicide may buildup during the first few years,Aminopyralid has a preemergent quality which will reduce the number of thistles that grow each year, which will then reduce the total amount of herbicide needed to treat the area each subsequent year.Neither Aminopyralid nor Glyphosate bioaccumulate through the food chain, so their presence on the landscape and in the soil over time is not expected to have cumulative adverse effects.According to the Washington Department of Transportation,the typical half-life of Aminopyralid is 103 days,and the typical half-life of Glyphosate is 47 days. Because these herbicides have a limited half life,and are broken down by either sunlight or soil microbes(or both),their presence on the landscape is expected to decrease over time.Although Aminopyralid has a moderate potential to leach through soils, limited amount of the product will be used. Limited mobility of the product over time is anticipated due to the time of the year of the applications,distance to water sources, and implementation of restricted use buffers. Glyphosate is not mobile and has a very low potential to contaminate groundwater. The cumulative use of Milestone and Roundup Pro through proper use will not be cumulatively detrimental to the environment. XVII(c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will ❑ ❑ p ❑ cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Project implementation will not result in direct and indirect substantial adverse impacts to human beings. Herbicide applicators will wear necessary personal protective gear when applying herbicides. When properly mixed and applied,the proposed herbicides do not pose a significant risk to human beings. I I I 35 REFERENCES 1. Ash,Pest Control Recommendation Milestone Herbicide,March 2009. 2. California Department of Fish and Game Stream Inventory Report,Mindego Creek, 1997. 3. California Department of Fish and Game.California Natural Diversity Database.Database search of Mindego Hill and surrounding quadrangles,accessed February 5,2009. 4. California Department of Fish and Game.Draft Strategic Plan for Restoration of the Endangered Coho Salmon South of San Francisco Bay,September 1998. 5. California Geological Survey,Seismic Hazards Map,Mindego Hill Quadrangle,August 2005. 6. Durkin,Aminopyralid-Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment,Final Report prepared for USDA Forest Service and National Park Service,2007 7. Durkin,Glyphosate-Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment,Final Report prepared for USDA Forest Service,2003 8. Jennings and Hayes final report to California Department of Fish and Game,inland Fisheries Division, Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California, 1994. 9. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Mitigated Negative Declaration POST Mindego Ranch Additions to Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve,San Mateo County,CA,February 15,2008. 10. Natural Resources Conservation Service.Web Soil Survey accessed online: (http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov),February 4,2009. 11. Peninsula Open Space Trust,Mindego Hill Invasive Plant Inventory August 2008. 12. San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board,2002 CWA Section 303(d)List of Water Quality Limited Sediment,Approved by United States,Environmental Protection Agency,July 2003.Accessed online:http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/docs/2002reg2303dlist.pdf, March 19,2009. 13. San Mateo County,General Plan,Community Noise Map accessed online: (http://www.sforoundtable.org/P&B/gp/maps/gp%20community%2Onoise%20(11 x 17).pdf) February 5,2009. 14. San Mateo County,General Plan,Existing Rural Land Use Map accessed online: (http://www.sforoundtable.org/P&B/gp/maps/gp%20existing%2Orural%20land%2Ouse.pdf) February 5,2009. 15. San Mateo County,Zoning Map for Unincorporated San Mateo County,Sheet 36,accessed online: http://www.sforoundtable.org/P&B/pdf/index%20maps/sheet_36.pdf,February 5,2009. 16. Swaim Biological,Inc.Habitat Assessment for the San Francisco Garter Snake and California Red-Legged frog at True Ranch,San Mateo County,California,January 2009. 17. United States Environmental Protection Agency,Court Issues Stipulated Injunction Regarding Pesticides and the California Red-legged Frog accessed online:(http://www.epa.gov/espp/litstatus/redleg-frog/rlf.htm) 18. United States Fish and Wildlife Service,Recovery Plan for the California Red-legged Frog,2002. 19. United States Fish and Wildlife Service,Recovery Plan for the San Francisco Garter Snake, 1985. 20. United States Office of Prevention,Pesticides Environmental Protection and Toxic Substances Agency (7501C),Pesticide Fact Sheet:Aminopyralid,August 10,2005. 21. Washington State Department of Transportation,Aminopyralid,Roadside Vegetation Management Herbicide Fact Sheet,accessed online February 2009. 22. Washington State Department of Transportation,Glyphosate,Roadside Vegetation Management Herbicide Fact Sheet,accessed online February 2009. 36 Attachment 3: Proposed Technical Addendum A Technical Addendum Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act 14 Section 15164 Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch 1. Introduction This Addendum was prepared in order to identify and analyze the changes proposed to the project description, which were originally analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project known as Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch (the Project). This Addendum has been prepared pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA guidelines to make a technical addition and add clarification to the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared in March of 2009 for the Project. Section 15264 provides in pertinent part as follows: (b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration has occurred. (c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review, but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. Project Changes: The changes to the original project, which were not analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for the Project, are as follows: Mowing equipment will be used prior to herbicide application, and as needed throughout the duration of the project, to remove tall grasses and other vegetation. The tall grasses and other vegetation make it difficult for herbicide applicators to access the project site and to see the non-native thistles species. Mowing prior to herbicide application will better expose the non-native thistles, providing an opportunity for herbicide applicators to more effectively treat the non-native thistles and to reduce the overall amount of herbicides needed for treatment. Vegetation mowing will be restricted to the ridge tops located above environmentally sensitive areas. Once the project begins, herbicide application is expected to be timed each year to reduce the amount of mowing that will be required. 3. Analysis: Staff reviewed the Initial Study in conjunction with the current project and has determined that the proposed changes described in this Addendum would not result in any substantial changes to, or result in any new or significantly adverse environmental impacts identified for the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration. Analysis of the current Project compared to the previous project is as follows: The Project, as originally analyzed through the Initial Study, identified mitigation measures to reduce potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level for biological and cultural resources. Because mowing will not occur in environmentally sensitive areas, including the use of mowing does not exceed the threshold of those impacts identified in the Initial Study. Technical review regarding aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological and cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, and utilities indicated no new information and no additional impacts as a result of including the use of mowing equipment to the Project. Therefore, District staff concludes that the addition of mowing equipment to the scope of the project does not affect the conclusions in the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration and that the environmental review is adequate for the proposed project. The original sco e of the project, as analyzed in the previously completed s Initial Stud , p p J Y p YY identified mitigation measures to reduce potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level, including impacts from the use of herbicides, herbicide application and drill seeder equipment. When the Mitigated Negative Declaration was originally prepared, grasses in the area had not yet experienced spring growth and were much lower to the ground. However, after the spring rains, grasses and other vegetation has grown much taller making it more difficult to effectively access and accurately treat the invasive plants. Use of a mower will reduce the amount of herbicide that will be needed by exposing the invasive plants and making it easier to apply herbicide directly to the plants (instead of using larger amounts of herbicide to kill all of the plants in an effort to kill the invasive weeds that remain unseen below taller vegetation). Because mowed areas will be located on the ridge tops above and away from environmentally sensitive areas, no additional mitigation measures to protect biological or cultural resources have been identified. Therefore,the proposed addition of mowing as described above does not affect the conclusions in the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration and the environmental review is adequate for the proposed project. 4. Conclusion Staff concludes that the aforementioned change does not exceed the thresholds established in the Mitigated.Negative Declaration. This Addendum to the project will not result in new environmental effects or circumstances that would require substantial changes or revisions to the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. No new information showing significant effects, or more severe effects was indentified. No mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible were now determined to be feasible. No mitigation measures or alternatives that were considerably different from those analyzed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration were identified that would reduce effects to the environment. Attachment 4: Comments Received Page 1 of 1 Cindy Roessler From: Public works(Terry Adams)[tadams@clhg org) Sent: Thursday,April 16, 2009 4:23 PM To: Cindy Roessler Cc: 'John Chapin'; directors@clhg org;'Shirley Bortoli' Subject: Response to: Mitigated Negative Declaration Hi Cindy, I want to be sure we get this comment into your queue before the Monday deadline As a public water system we must pay careful attention to any activity that may affect our source water, so we may need more time to gather comments or analyses of our own, but below are some preliminary concerns 1. Do you have data on the soil/drainage propagation rates for Roundup and Milestone? Are there any studies which can assure us that the buffer zones are a safe size? I see you do have some half-life figures, but how did you come up with the specific buffer sizes? 2. We would like the seasonal tributary drainages that feed Mindego Creek to be identified and buffered against pesticide application also 3. Is Perchlorate an ingredient in either pesticide? 4. What chemical analyses can be used in the future to indicate if any pesticide has leached into our water source? 5. Do the invasive species exist at all in the deep creek canyon? 6. 1 request a meeting to walk our mutual boundary with someone from MROSD, so we can get a clearer picture of where the spraying will take place We could also use such a meeting to further discuss 1 -5, above. You may get separate comments from the Guild Board of Directors,and our Chief Water Operator, John Chapin Thank you for the thorough presentation of your project! Try er Ad ams Cuesta La Honda Guild, Public Works Operations Director P.O Box 21 La Honda, Ca 94020 (650)747-9556, 4/20/2009 Page Iofl � � � Cindy Roessler � From: Public works(Terry Adams)[tmdmms@ch0.org] � � Sent: Thunaday,April 1E\20094:40PM � To: Cindy Roessler Cc: I}ANCA|N';'DavdEhrhardf; org; 'Shirley Borto[; 'JohnChapin' Subject: FW. K4idpemimmla Open Space proposed negative declaration 'Below is"Cindy, ourChiefVVaber Operator's Comment � Terry � '____ Fromm: John [hapn [maUho:jcchnpin@mcn.oxg] Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 1:3I PM To: 'Shirley Bottoy; 'Terry Adams' Cc: 'David EhrhanIV; 'Michael VW!|inns'; 'DAN [AIN' Subject: RE: Midpeninsu|a Open Space proposed negative declaration Hello, They cannot spray anything that will get into our POD at Mindego Other water users should be notified'should this will affect them,The contractor needs to be advised of the location of our POD and every measure to insure the safety of the drinking water must 6etaken. John | � � � 4/20/2009 � / Re: Response to: Mitigated N veDecbootioo Page of Cindy Roessler From: Sarah Bachman[sorahbaoh@ooastsid net] Sent: Friday,April 17. 2U0QI2GPM To: Public works(Terry Adams); Cindy Roessler � Cc: 'John Chapin'; dinacbons@dhQorg; 'Shirley Bodo|i' � Subject: Re: Response to: Mitigated Negative Declaration Dear Cindy, Aao member of the CuestaI.aHonda Guild Board of Directors,l share the concerns io email bo]ovv- l am looking forward to working with MR0S[)to flesh out answers 10 his questions. / Best regards, � i Sally 8' LBachman POB 627 La Honda, CA94O2O At4:22 PYN 'O7O04/l6/Dg,Public works VTeoy Admmo\\ wrote: Hi Cindy, � I want to be sure we get this comment into your queue before the Monday deadline As a public water system we must pay careful attention to any activity that may affect our source water, so we may need more time to gather comments or analyses of our own, but below are some preliminary concerns � � l. Dm you have data on the soil/drainage propagation rates for Roundup and � Milestone? Are there any studies which can assure us that the buffer zones are asafe � size? | see you do have some half-life figures, but how did you come up with the specific buffer sizes? � 2. We would like the seasonal tributary drainages that feed Mindego Greek to be identified and buffered against pesticide application also � |e Perchlorate en ingredient in either pesticide? � 4. What chemical analyses can be used |nthe future to indicate if any pesticide has leached into our water source? 4/2O/2O09 ' Re: Response to. Mitigated N ipoDcclaratino Page Iof2 5' Do the invasive species exist at all in the deep creek canyon 6' | request a meeting bo walk our mutual boundary with someone from yNROSC\ suwa can get a clearer picture of where the sprayingwill take place-We could also use such a meeting ho further discuss 1 -5. above � You may get separate comments from the Guild Board of Directors, and our Chief Water Operator, John Chapin, Thank you for the thorough presentation nf your project! Terry Adams OuestaLa Honda Guild, Public Works Operations Director PO, Box 21 Lo Honda, CaQ4D2O (660)747-9556. 4/20/2009 -- � � � Re: Response to: Mitigated yJ vcDcolarutioo Page l of � Cindy Roessler From: John Chapin orQ Sent: Friday, April 17, 2OO 7:42 PM / To: 'Sarah Bachman','Public works(Terry Adsme '; Cindy Roessler � � Cc: din*cboos@chgorg; 'ShNeyBodoU Subject: RE: Response to: Mitigated Negative Declaration � � Hello, I'm just picking upon this string and have no background information about the proposed spraying of chemicals in our watershed. Does someone want to 'fill me in'?I can make a blanket statement without any foundation at the risk of sounding foolish—however this is serious enough I will blunder forth: | 1� We do an annual souoewater mon|todngfor K4indeQoand can Ukek/es establish a baseline for any | regulated(some unregulated)chemicals. 2 1 recommend we re-establish a baseline for the specific chemicals being sprayed, 3. 1 ask that the agency doing the spraying notifV us of the date and time of any spraying being done upstream of our POD atNUndeDo. 4 1 would prefer that any spraying be done after May 31 when we turn off Mindego until October. S |s this aCE[u\sanctioned event? John � � � � � � � � Cindy Roessler From: Carol Prentice[cprentice@coastside.net] Sent: Sunday,April 19, 2009 6:00 PM To: Cindy Roessler Subject: Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch Cindy Croessler Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022 April 19, 2009 Dear Ms Croessler, I am writing to express my concern about the MROSD project: Herbicide Application and Invasive Species control at Mindego Ranch. The notice of intent to adopt a mitigated negative declaration for this project has come to my attention this morning- I do not see any indication that MROSD has taken into consideration the fact that a community of nearly 300 homes (including an elementary school) relies on Mindego Creek for a significant portion of our drinking water.. Cuesta La Honda Guild has legal rights to withdraw water from Mindego Creek during the winter months for immediate domestic use and to store in our reservoirs, and this constitutes an important source of our drinking water year-round. It is essential that our drinking water not be contaminated with herbicides, or its turbidity increased by accelerated soil erosion as a result of MROSD activities upstream. While I understand and appreciate the need to eradicate invasive non-native species such as star thistle, this should not be done in a manner that so clearly has the potential to negatively impact the health of families who live downstream. Before adopting a plan for dealing with the problem of non-native species, please take into consideration the fact that a large community relies on Midego Creek for our drinking water. Sincerely, Carol Prentice PO Box 322 La Honda, CA 94020 Cindy Roessler From: David Ehrhardt[ehrhardt@stanford.edu] Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2009 11:18 PM To: Cindy Roessler Cc: Guild Directors; John Chapin; Terry Adams Subject: Comments on Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration Attachments: MROSD2 docx;ATT88428 txt r. c III f MROSD2.docx(161 A1T88428.bct(710 KB) 6) Dear Ms. Roessler, Please find attached a letter concerning MROSP's Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration. Thank you, David David Ehrhardt President Cuesta La Honda Guild Board of Directors 1 Dear Ms. Roessler, 4/19/09 The planned pesticide application in the Mindego Creek watershed by the MROSP raises concerns regarding possible contamination of the drinking water supply for the Cuesta La Honda Guild and its water customers. The Guild is a common interest development and nonprofit mutual benefit corporation that serves a community of approximately 1,000 inhabitants., The Guild supplies nearly300 families and the La Honda Elementary School with surface water from within the Woodhams and Mindego Creek watersheds. The diversion rights from Mindego Creek are described inLicense 10511, Permit 20800 and Permit 17511. These water diversion rights were affirmed by a 1993 Decree that established the rights of the various claimants to the water of the San Gregorio Stream System. Water from Mindego Creek is essential for the Guild to meet its annual water needs and is especially critical from October I until the time that the winter rains recharge flows in Woodhams Creek, typically sometime in December or January. During the summer,the Guild is not permitted to divert water from Mindego Creek and Woodhams flows do not keep up with water demand. As a result reservoir reserves are drawn down steadily over the summer and by the end of September these reserves are low. On October I we are permitted to resume diversion from Mindego Creek, a diversion that is necessary to meet demand and to prevent reservoir levels from falling to critical levels. Mindego remains the Guilds primary source of water until rains restore large flows to Woodhams. The fact that the Woodhams and Mindego watersheds supply the drinking water for 1000 people and an elementary school means that special care needs to be taken regarding all activities that have the potential to impact surface water quality. Eradication of an invasive species is a worthy goal, but the benefits need to be weighed very carefully against the risks to a safe drinking water supply for many. While the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration is detailed and describes several steps for mitigation of possible contamination of surface water sources with Milestone and Roundup, there is concern that these mitigation plans, as described, are not adequate given the potential risk to the Guild's water supply. (1) Setbacks are described for standing bodies of water,streams and channels that convey water seasonally. The standing bodies of water are described and named but streams and channels are not. All relevant streams and channels should be identified and mapped to insure that setbacks are properly utilized. (2) There is no information provided about how setback distances were determined and therefore no clear idea about how effective they might be. In addition, setbacks appear to be constant although the terrain varies with regard to slope and soil.. There should be an analysis of the affect of slope and chemical migration potential in different soil types in determining setbacks. (3) It is proposed that exposed soils will be covered to reduce runoff. It is likely that herbicides in unexposed soils are also subject to leaching and conveyance i downslope during storm events. What mitigation measures are proposed to address surface runoff from unexposed soils,especially on steep slopes? (4) The method for covering exposed soils is not described in any detail. Can evaluated methodologies used on other sites be described and utilized? (5) It is stated that a component for mitigation is the timing of application, which will be limited to the dry season and to occur end of the wet season. There is no analysis of the probability of storm events to occur during the suggested application period nor the potential for such storms to convey herbicides downslope and downstream. (6) The herbicides half lives together with dry season application are suggested to pose no risk for accumulation in the soil that could lead to erosion or migration of the herbicides into streams. The analysis of this risk assessment is not adequate and in fact is in conflict with the statement that herbicides may accumulate in the first few years of application. If the herbicides can accumulate year to year,then they are also present during the wets months when they may be subject to movement by leaching and erosion. (7) Milestone is stated to have potential to migrate through the soil,but no quantitative information is provided. The potential for migration of Milestone should to be evaluated in more detail with regard to soil type, slope and time of year it is applied. (8) Some pesticides/herbicideswith modest safety concerns breakdown into chemicals that are more toxic. Can the breakdown products for these chemicals be predicted and do they present additional safety concerns? What is the potential for breakdown products of concern to migrate? (a) The various mitigation measures described would appear to depend on good training and supervision. Who will be doing the work,how will they be trained and who will be providing supervision? Other projects on the Guild's borders have developed into much more chemically intensive operations than were initially presented to the Guild. How can the Guild be assured that the work is carried out as planned? (9) The issue of oversight is of further concern because there appears to be no overseeing agency other than MROSP. Why aren't Fish and Game and the Regional Water Quality Control Board listed as responsible agencies,for example? Have these agencies been informed of the proposed activities? (10) There is no monitoring plan to verify that applied chemicals are not making their way into Mindego Creek and to the Guild's diversion point nor is there a plan for mitigation if such contamination is found. A monitoring plan would seem to be an essential component of this project. There are a large number of water consumers, including an elementary school, directly downstream of the planned chemical application area. While this area may be several thousand feet from the Guild's water diversion point, it is not clear from the information provided that here is no reasonable chance that the chemicals or their breakdown products will not migrate to the diversion point,particularly as a result of storm events that could cause rapid transport of soil and organic matter down slope and downstream. i Sincerely, David Ehrhardt President Cuesta la Honda Guild Board of Directors Cindy Roessler From: John Chapin Ucchapin@mcn orgy Sent: Monday,April 20,2009 3:48 PM To: 'David Ehrhardt; Cindy Roessler; Eugene Leung Cc: 'Guild Directors'; 'Terry Adams' Subject: RE: Comments on Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration Dear Ms. Roessler, I'm the Chief Operator for the Cuesta La Honda water district.. Regrettably I received your complete proposal for chemical weed abatement at the Mindego Ranch on April 18th. I was only able to skim the document and I have a limited understanding of the scope of the project. There is potential for contamination of our watershed. with a mere 15, setback to protect riparian corridors from overspray and spillage I would ask that the spraying start after May 31 and stop well before October 1. 1 would also ask that as close as possible to May 31 the spraying that might influence our Point of Diversion in Mindego Creek take place. This may allow 103 days for the half-life dissipation and breakdown of Aminopyralid and 47 days for the half-life breakdown of Glyphosate. On-site operator, Terry Adams and myself, walked upstream of the Mindego POD. We noted several small streams and springs feeding Mindego Creek. These are perfect conduits to transmit chemical overspray and spillage. Although the chemicals are listed as low toxicity keep in mind we add additional chemicals to our water for disinfection. I am not aware of the by-products that may form as a result of mixing Aminopyralid and Glyphosate with sodium hypochlorite and, or ammonia. I suspect there is little information, or studies, that support the safety of the resulting chemical cocktail' . Lacking sound scientific data we ask that all measures to prevent contamination of our water supply be exercised. Our State regulator is Eugene Leung, phone 510-620-3460. 1 have notified Eugene of your proposal. He works for the California Department of Health Services. He may have some comments. If there is a public forum for discussion, or a proposed site-visit please let me/us know.. Most importantly we must be notified immediately if there is any spillage or intrusion of weed abatement chemical into the Mindego drainage/waterway. Sincerely, John Chapin Chief Operator Cuesta La Honda Guild, CA. Phone: 831 423-5953 Cell: 831 234-9565 E-mail:jcchapin@mcn.org --Original Message----- From: David Ehrhardt (mailto:ehrhardt@stanford.edul Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2009 11:18 PM To: croessler@openspace.org Cc: Guild Directors; John Chapin; Terry Adams Subject: Comments on Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration Dear Ms. Roessler, Please find attached a letter concerning MROSP's Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration. Thank you, David David Ehrhardt President Cuesta La Honda Guild Board of Directors Attachment 5: Summary of Responses to Comments Received, Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch. Summary of Comments and Correspondence Letters and Email Comments 1. 4/16/2009, Terry Adams, Public Works Operations Director, Cuesta La Honda Guild, email to C. Roessler 2. 4/16/2009, John Chapin, Chief Water Operator, Cuesta La Honda Guild, email to Terry Adams, C. Roessler copied. 3. 4/17/2009, Sally (Sarah) Bachman, Cuesta La Honda Board of Directors, email to C. Roessler 4. 4/17/2009, John Chapin, Chief Water Operator, Cuesta La Honda Guild, email to Cuesta La Honda Staff, C. Roessler copied. 5. 4/19/2009, Carol Prentice, email to C. Roessler 6. 4/19/2009, David Ehrhardt, President, Cuesta La Honda Board of Directors, email and letter attachment to C. Roessler 7. 4/20/2009, John Chapin, Chief Water Operator, Cuesta La Honda Guild, email to C. Roessler Email and Telephone Correspondence 1. 4/6/2009, C. Koopmann email to Cuesta La Honda(Kristen Petersen) informing them of the project 2. 4/7/2009, C. Koopmann telephone conversation and subsequent email to Cuesta La Honda(David Ehrhardt) 3. 4/17/2009, C. Roessler telephone conversation with Cuesta La Honda (David Ehrhardt) suggesting they submit comments 4. 4/20/2009, C. Roessler telephone conversation with Cuesta La Honda (John Chapin) providing information about the Board Meeting for the project 1 Responses to Comment Correspondence#1 (Terry Adams) and Comment Correspondence#3 (Sarah Bachman) Ia.) The District reviewed the information discussingsoil and drainage rates for Milestone®in g the Pesticide Fact Sheet prepared by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs [see http://www.epa.gov/opprd00l/factsheets/aminop rX alid.pdfJ. The Fact Sheet identifies two field dissipation studies, one of which was performed in California, that "indicate that Aminopyralid is likely to be non-persistent and relatively immobile in the field. Half-lives of 32 and 20 days were determined, with minimal leaching below the 15 to 30 cm soil depth." The District has used a more conservative half life estimate of 103 days, as identified in the Washington State Department of Transportation Herbicide Fact Sheet [see htip://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Maintenance/`pdf/Aminopyralid.pd 1 b.) The product label for Milestone® states that use is "permissible to treat non-irrigation ditch banks, seasonally dry wetlands (such as flood plains, deltas, marshes, swamps, or bogs) and transitional areas between upland and lowland areas. Milestone may be used to the water's edge. Do not apply directly to water and take precautions to minimize spray drift onto water." In addition to the product label restrictions, the District established additional buffers based on recommendations from a licensed Pest Control Adviser, and in accordance with the California red-legged frog injunction and US Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines for the San Francisco garter snake. The buffers identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (see attached map) exceed those required by the product labels ensuring safe use of the product for this project. Implementation of these additional restricted use buffers will further reduce the risk of either product from entering the water supply above and beyond those measures identified in the product labels. 2.) Seasonal drainages tributary to Mindego Creek have been identified and added to the project map (attached). No herbicide application shall be permitted within 30 feet of Big Spring or its tributary leading to Mindego Creek. I I 3.) Perchlorate is not identified as an ingredient on the product labels or the Material Data Safety Sheets for either pesticide. 4.) Industry standard laboratory analysis methodology would indicate if any pesticide used for the project had reached the Cuesta La Honda Guild water source. Based on the herbicides selected for use, Best Management Practices, mitigation measures and establishment of restricted use buffers, the overall project is designed to avoid the potential for pesticides to leach into the water supply. If water quality sampling conducted by Cuesta La Honda Guild identifies elevated levels of chemicals contained within Roundup'or Milestone', then the Guild should contact the District to discuss potential monitoring methodologies to identify the likely source. 5.) As indicated on the attached Herbicide Application Map, invasive species at Mindego Ranch are confined to upland grassy areas, away from the deep Mindego Creek canyon. 2 6.)An offer to view the project area has been extended to John Chapin, the Cuesta La Honda Guild Chief Water Operator. The District will extend this offer to other Guild Board members and staff prior to project implementation. I I I i III 3 i Response to Comment Correspondence 42 (John Chapin) I i All property owners within 300 feet of the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve (including the Cuesta La Honda Guild and the City and County of San Francisco) as well as other Russian Ridge/Mindego Ranch interested parties were notified of the project by a mailing sent on March 20, 2008. District staff sent an e-mail to the Cuesta La Honda Guild(Kristen Peterson) informing them of the upcoming project on April 4, 2009. Staff held additional telephone conversations with Guild President(David Ehrhardt) on April 7 and 17, 2009, and Guild Chief Water Operator(John Chapin) on April 20, 2009 to discuss their project questions and to encourage formal comments. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration was also sent to the Santa Clara County Clerk for public posting and a copy sent to the State Clearing House for distribution to pertinent resource agencies including the: California Department of Fish and Game, Office of Historic Preservation, Department of Parks and Recreation, Department of Water Resources, Caltrans, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Department of Toxic Substance Control. An additional notice of the public meeting scheduled for April 22, 2009 was mailed to neighboring property owners and interested parties on April 17, 2009. A map of the project area, indicating the location of the Cuesta La Honda Guild Point of Diversion(POD) and the restricted herbicide use areas will be provided to the contractor selected for the project. Based on the herbicides selected for use, Best Management Practices, mitigation measures and establishment of restricted use buffers, the overall project is designed to avoid the potential for pesticides to leach into the water supply. 4 Response to Comment Correspondence#4 (John Chapin) 1) Comment noted. 2) If water quality sampling conducted by Cuesta La Honda Guild identifies elevated levels of chemicals contained within Roundup®or Milestone®, then the Guild should contact the District to discuss potential monitoring methodologies to identify the likely source. 3) The District will notify the Cuesta La Honda Guild prior to each scheduled spray event at Mindego Ranch. 4) Herbicide application was originally scheduled to occur from March to September of each year during which time 27.2 percent of total rainfall occurs. After consideration of average monthly precipitation and product effectiveness, herbicide application has been revised to occur from April to September of each year during which only 13.9 percent of total rainfall occurs. Herbicide application during these months will reduce the risk of product transport due to rain and fog,maximize the effectiveness of the product on the target species and provide a maximum environmental break down time prior to the rainy season each year. Waiting until June 1 st of each year would seriously compromise the efficacy of the treatments. 5) The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Following an Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration(MND) was prepared by the District and released to the public on March 20, 2009. A Notice of Intent(NOI)to adopt the MND was provided to property owners within 300 feet of the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve, including the Cuesta La Honda Guild, City and County of San Francisco, and to the San Mateo County Clerk. Copies of the NOI and the MND were also sent to the California State Clearing House for distribution to responsible resource agencies including the California Department of Fish and Game, the Office of Historic Preservation,the Department of Parks and Recreation, the Department of Water Resources, Caltrans, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Department of Toxic Substance Control. A 30-day comment period for all parties was provided from March 20, 2009 to April 20, 2009. Copies of the NOI and MND were also available at the District Administrative Office and posted on the District's website. On April 17, 2009, notice was mailed to neighboring property owners and interested parties informing them of the District's Board of Directors meeting, scheduled for April 22, 2009 to consider adoption of the MND. 5 Response to Comment Correspondence#5 (Carol Prentice) The District is very sensitive to the impacts that District actions have to neighboring property owners. The District has notified adjacent landowners including the Cuesta La Honda Guild and the City and County of San Francisco who operate water supply systems from Mindego Creek. The District has specifically selected reduced risk pesticides, and implemented a project design using Best Management Practices and restricted use buffers (see attached map)to avoid the risk of soil erosion and of pesticides entering the Cuesta La Honda Guild drinking water supply. i I, 6 Response to Comment Correspondence#6 (David Ehrhardt) 1.) Ephemeral and perennial stream corridors and setback requirements (buffers) have been added to the project map (attached). 2.) The product label for Milestone® states that use is "permissible to treat non- irrigation ditch banks, seasonally dry wetlands (such as flood plains, deltas, marshes, swamps, or bogs) and transitional areas between upland and lowland areas. Milestone may be used to the water's edge. Do not apply directly to water and take precautions to minimize spray drift onto water." The buffers identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration exceed those required by the product labels ensuring safe use of the product for this project. The District established these buffers based on recommendations from a licensed Pest Control Adviser, and in accordance with the California red-legged frog injunction and US Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines for the San Francisco garter snake. Setback distances identified by the Pest Control Adviser included a slope assessment and an on-site inspection of the local terrain and soil types. Setback distances for the California red-legged frog and San Francisco garter snake are standard distances that apply in all terrain and soil types. The proposed buffers will avoid the risk of either product entering the water supply. 3.) Use of the specific herbicides proposed, coupled with implementation of Best Management Practices and the designated restricted use buffers avoids the risk of either product entering the water supply. In most areas, the presence of grasses and other non-target plants after thistle dieback will avoid the potential for erosion of any exposed soils. In areas of heavy and predominant thistle infestation, mortality of thistles may result in patches of potentially erodible exposed soils. Covering of exposed soils after treatment is designed to avoid the potential for erosion prior to the rainy season. The selected herbicides are expected to breakdown during the dry season. Restricted application times(i.e., no application within 48 hours of rain or a heavy fog event) in conjunction with restricted use buffers are designed to prevent herbicide runoff. 4.) Standard District practices for treating exposed soils include covering with weed-free straw and mulch, installation of straw waddles, rolling dips on roadways and timely reseeding with grasses by broadcast and drill seeding. One or more of these methods will be implemented to avoid the potential for soil erosion. Each of these methods has been employed on other comparable sites and has been shown to be effective in erosion control. 5.) The following information from the Western Regional Climate Center (http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/)presents average monthly precipitation and the corresponding percent of total annual precipitation. Data presented in the following graphs is from years 1950-1977. i 7 Average MonthlyPe rcent of Total Month Precipitation Annual j (in inches) Precipitation ' January 6.21 20.5 February 4.19 13.8 March 4.04 13.3 -April 2.36 7.8 May 0.79 2.6 June 0.3 5 1.2 July 0.09 0.3 August 0.18 0.6 -September 0.44 1.5 October 1.87 6.2 November 4.17 13.7 December 5.64 18.6 Total= 30.34 100% The original project design identified herbicide application from March to September during which time, 27.2 percent of total annual rainfall occurs. Average Monthly Percent of Total j Month Precipitation Annual j (in inches) Precipitation March 4.04 13.3 April 2.36 7.8 May 0.79 2.6 June 0.35 1.2 July 0.09 0.3 August 0.18 0.6 September 0.44 1.5 Total= 8.25 27.2% To reduce herbicide application during the wetter portions of the year the project herbicide application will be restricted to occur from April to September during which only 13.9 percent of total rainfall occurs. Average Monthly Percent of Total Month Precipitation Annual (in inches) Precipitation April 2.36 7.8 May 0.79 2.6 June 0.35 1.2 July 0.09 0.3 August 0.18 0.6 September 0.44 1.5 Total 4.21 13.9% l 8 Information discussing soil and drainage rates for Milestone is indentified in the Pesticide Fact Sheet prepared by the US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (http://www.epa.gov/opprd00l/factsheets/aminopyLalid.pdf). The Fact Sheet identifies two field dissipation studies (one of which was performed in California)that"indicate that Aminopyralid is likely to be non-persistent and relatively immobile in the field. Half-lives of 32 and 20 days were determined, with minimal leaching below the 15 to 30 cm soil depth." Because of the immobile to relatively immobile properties of the two herbicides, and the low amounts of rainfall expected during herbicide application the risk of storm events conveying herbicides down slope and downstream is avoided. 6.) The third sentence of Section XVII(b)of the MND should have explained that "Efficacy of the herbicide is expected to increase over time because the pre- emergent characteristic of Aminopyralid will increase the overall effectiveness of each herbicide application." Since the population of invasive plants will decrease each year, the effectiveness of the herbicide treatment is expected to increase, which will the amounts of herbicide applied at the site each year. Due to the known half life of the herbicides and expected breakdown over time due to sunlight and soil microbes, concentrations are not expected to buildup year to year. 7.) The District reviewed the information discussing soil and drainage rates for Milestone® in the Pesticide Fact Sheet prepared by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs (http://www.epa. ov/opprd00l/factsheets/aminopyLglid.pdf). The Fact Sheet identifies two field dissipation studies (one of which was performed in California) that"indicate that Aminopyralid is likely to be non-persistent and relatively immobile in the field. Half-lives of 32 and 20 days were determined, with minimal leaching below the 15 to 30 cm soil depth." The District has used a more conservative half life estimate of 103 days as identified in the Washington State Department of Transportation Herbicide Fact Sheet [see http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Maintenance/pdf/Aminopyralid.pd . 8.) According to the Pesticide Fact Sheet prepared by the US EPA, CO2, oxamic and malonamic acid are identified as the major degradates of Aminopyralid. The Fact Sheet also states that "Aminopyralid does not appear to have a toxic metabolite that is produced by other substances. For the time being, EPA has assumed that Aminopyralid does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances."According to the US EPA Re-registration Eligibility Decision for Glyphosate, aminomethyphosphonic acid (AMPA) is the major degradate (http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrdl/REDs/old reds/lyphosate.pdf) of the Round-Up herbicide. 8a.) A licensed, qualified and proven contractor will perform the pesticide application supervised by District staff. This will ensure that the work is performed in accordance with a mitigation monitoring program throughout the project. 9.) The US EPA and the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) are the regulatory agencies responsible for approval of pesticide use. Numerous studies and background information must be presented to the US EPA and DPR to inform their decision making regarding herbicide use. Prior to use, a product label is developed that dictates the safe application of each herbicide. Herbicide application will adhere to the product label and District Precautionary Measures 9 and Best Management Practices (see attached), which provide additional protections above and beyond those on the product labels. Outside agencies that may have an interest in the project, including (but not limited to)the California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Water Resources, Department of Toxic Substance Control and the Regional Water Quality Control Board have been notified of the project and no comments were received. 10.) A mitigation monitoring program that will be overseen by the District has been developed to ensure compliance with all mitigation measures. Adherence to the mitigation measures avoids the potential for herbicides to enter Mindego Creek. I 10 Response to Comment Correspondence#7 (John Chapin) 1.) The restricted use buffers identified in the Initial Study are above and beyond those required by the product labels to ensure safe use of the products. The District identified additional restricted use buffers based on recommendations from a licensed Pest Control Adviser and in accordance with the California red- legged frog injunction, and US Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines for the San Francisco garter snake. Implementation of these additional restricted use buffers will further reduce the risk of either product from entering the water supply. Herbicide application has been revised to occur from April to September each year to maximize effectiveness of the product on the target species and to provide maximum environmental break down of the product prior to the rainy season each year. Waiting until May 31 or after of each year may compromise the effectiveness of the treatment and could result in the need to apply more herbicides over time instead of minimizing the amount of the overall product used. 2.) According to the Pesticide Fact Sheet prepared for Aminopyralid by the US EPA (httr)://www.epa.gov/opprdOOl/factsheets/aminopyLglid.pdf), CO2, oxamic and malonamic acid are identified as the major degradates of Aminopyralid. The Fact Sheet also identifies that"Aminopyralid does not appear to have a toxic metabolite that is produced by other substances. For the time being, EPA has assumed that Aminopyralid does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances." According to the US EPA Reregistration Eligibility Decision for Glyphosate (http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrdl/REDs/old reds/glyphosate.pdf) aminomethyphosphonic acid (AMPA) is the major degradate. 3.) Based on the herbicides selected for use, and implementation of Best Management Practices and restricted use buffers (see attached), contamination of the water supply is not expected. Restricted application times (no application within 48 hours of a rain or heavy fog event and only permitting herbicide application during the dry season) in conjunction with restricted use buffers above and beyond those recommended by the product labels, are designed to further prevent potential contamination of the water supply. 4.) The District will notify the Cuesta La Honda Guild prior to each seasonal spray event at Mindego Ranch. Although herbicide mixing and handling will occur in a designated staging area well above and away from Mindego Creek, in the event of any spillage of herbicides, all appropriate government agencies and the Cuesta La Honda Guild will be notified immediately. 11 Attchment 6: Proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program i MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM i Mindego Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve State Clearinghouse Number TBD San Mateo County, CA April 2009 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 i MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM CONTENTS This mitigation monitoring program (MMP) includes a brief discussion of the legal basis and purpose of the program, a key to understanding the monitoring matrix, discussion and direction regarding noncompliance complaints, and the mitigation monitoring matrix itself. LEGAL BASIS AND PURPOSE OF THE MITGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Public Resources Code (PRC) 21081.6 requires public agencies to adopt mitigation monitoring or reporting programs whenever certifying and environmental impact report or mitigated negative declaration. This requirement facilitates implementation of all mitigation measures adopted through the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) process. MONITORING MATRIX The following pages provide a series of tables identifying the mitigations incorporated into the Mindego Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control project at Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve (the project). These mitigations are reproduced from the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. The columns within the tables have the following meanings: Number: The number in this column refers to the Initial Study selection where the mitigation is discussed. Mitigation: This column lists the specific mitigation identified within the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Timing: This column identifies at what point in time, review process, or phase the mitigation will be completed. The mitigations are organized by order in which they appear in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Who will This column references the District staff that will ensure implementation verify? of the mitigation. Agency / This column references any public agency or District Department with Department which coordination is required to ensure implementation f the mitigation.o e p q P Consultation: California Department of Fish and Game is listed as CDFG. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is listed as USFWS. Verification: This column will be initialed and dated by the individual designated to confirm implementation. i NONCOMPLIANCE COMPLAINTS Any person or agency may file a complaint asserting noncompliance with the mitigation measure associated with the project. The complaint shall be directed to the District's General Manager in written form, providing specific information on the asserted violation. The General Manager shall cause an investigation and determine the validity of the complaint; if noncompliance with the mitigation has occurred,the General Manager shall cause appropriate actions to remedy any violation. The complainant shall receive written confirmation indicating the results of the investigation or the final action corresponding to the particular noncompliance. f i Department Verification Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify? or Agency (Date& Consultation Initials Mitigation (BIO-1)To minimize potential impacts to California red-legged Annually, prior to each District NIA in Section frog, San Francisco garter snake,and western pond turtle,worker herbicide application, Rangeland IV(a). environmental awareness training will be conducted for all hand treatments,or drill Ecologist or herbicide application crews and contractors that will be accessing seeding and on an as their designee the site.The education training will be conducted prior to starting needed basis in the work on the project and upon the arrival of any new worker.The event of new contractor training will include a brief review of the California red-legged staff.Training will be frog, San Francisco garter snake,and western pond turtle,their life provided each year and history, field identification,habitat requirements for each species, on an as needed basis to location of sensitive areas,possible fines for violations,avoidance ensure that new staff is measures,and necessary actions if sensitive species are trained prior to each encountered. treatment and keep information current. Mitigation (BIO-2) In accordance with the United States Environmental During herbicide District N/A in Section Protection Agency's California red-legged frog injunction,no application Rangeland IV(a): herbicide application shall be permitted within 15 feet of Big Ecologist or Spring,Mindego and Knuedler Lakes. When using Yp nee GI hosate their designee only localized spot treatments using handheld devices shall be permitted outside of the 15-foot hand removal buffer,but within 260 feet of Big Spring, Mindego and Knuedler Lakes. Herbicide application of Glyphosate beyond the 260 foot limited herbicide application zone,but within the 660 foot precautionary zone shall be restricted to hand application with a backpack pump,wicks and daubers, power wand,or by all terrain vehicle and boom sprayer. Mitigation (13I0-3)No herbicide application shall occur during times of Throughout the project, District N/A in Section precipitation or when precipitation is forecasted during the prior to the contractor Rangeland IV(a). subsequent 48 hour period. accessing the treatment Ecologist or site,the District shall their designee verify precipitation in the forecast during the upcoming 48 hour period. Mitigation (13I0-4)To minimize potential impacts to California red-legged During hand removal, District N/A in Section frog, San Francisco garter snake, and western pond turtle,a herbicide application, Rangeland IV(a). biological monitor will be required to be present on site during and drill seeding work. Ecologist or hand removal,preceding herbicide applicators,their equipment their designee and drill seeding equipment when working within the 660 foot precautionary zone surrounding Big Spring, Mindego and Knuedler Lakes. Mitigation (BIO-5)If California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake If California Red- District Wildlife in Section or western pond turtle are encountered,no work shall occur until legged Frog,San Rangeland Biologist, IV(a). the frog,snake or turtle has left the area on its own,or until a Francisco Garter Snake Ecologist or USFWS,and qualified wildlife biologist is consulted,and appropriate or Western Pond Turtle their designee CDFG. arrangements are made with the United States Fish and Wildlife are encountered. Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. Mitigation (ARC-1)To minimize ground disturbance and potential impacts to Throughout project District N/A in Section archaeological or paleontological resources,mechanized implementation. Rangeland V(b). equipment shall be restricted to rubber-tire vehicles to prevent Ecologist or uprooting of soil and unintended exposure or impacts to resources. their designee Mitigation (ARC-2)To minimize ground disturbance and potential impacts to Prior to any drill District N/A in Section archaeological resources,a qualified archaeological monitor will seeding operations. Rangeland V(b). survey the area prior to implementing any drill seeding activities to Ecologist or determin e and indicate areas e s for avoidance. If resources cannot be their designee avoided,mitigation measures ARC-3 shall be implemented. Mitigation (ARC-3)Implementation of the following measures would reduce In the event cultural or District N/A in Section potential impacts to cultural and historical resources, including historical resources are Rangeland V(b). buried and unknown archeological, paleontological,and human found. Ecologist or remains,to a less-than-significant level: their designee in conjunction with • If any commonly recognized sensitive cultural resources District Cultural such as human formed artifacts including projectile points, Resources Staff bowls, baskets,historic bottles,cans,trash deposits,or structures etc. are encountered during the herbicide application every reasonable effort shall be made to avoid the resources. Work shall stop within 30 feet of the objects s and the contractor shall contact the District.No work shall resume within 30 feet until a qualified cultural and/or historical resources expert can assess the signification of the find. • A reasonable effort will be made by the District to avoid or minimize harm to the discovery until significance is determined and an appropriate treatment can be identified and implemented. Methods to protect finds include fencing and covering remains with protective material such as culturally sterile soil or plywood. • If vandalism is a threat,24-hour security shall be provided. • Herbicide application outside of the find location can continue during the significance evaluation period and while mitigation for cultural and/or historical resources is being carried out,preferably with a qualified cultural and/or historical resources expert monitoring any subsurface excavations. • If a resource cannot be avoided,a qualified cultural and/or historical resources expert will develop an appropriate Action Plan for treatment to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects. The District will not proceed with herbicide application activities within 30 feet of the find until the Action Plan has been reviewed and approved. • The treatment effort required to mitigate the inadvertent exposure of significant cultural and/or historical resources will be guided by a research design appropriate to the discovery and potential research data inherent in the resource in associated with the suitable field techniques and analytical strategies. The recovery effort will be detailed in a professional report in accordance with current professional standards.Any non-grave associated artifacts will be curated with an appropriate repository. • Project documents shall include a requirement that project personnel shall not collect cultural and/or historical resources encountered during construction.This measure is consistent with federal guidelines 36 CFR 800.13(a)for invoking unanticipated discoveries. Mitigation (ARC-4)If human remains are encountered, all work within 100 In the event human District N/A in Section feet of the remains shall cease immediately and the contractor shall remains are Rangeland V(b). contact the District. The District will contact the San Mateo encountered. Ecologist or County Coroner to evaluate the renames, and follow the their designee in E procedures and protocol set forth in §15064.5(e)of the CEQA conjunction with Guidelines.No further disturbance of the site or any nearby area District Cultural reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall occur until resources staff. the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition,which shall be made within two working days from the time the Coroner is notified of the discovery,pursuant to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be Native American,the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission(NAHC)within 24 hours,which will determine and notify the Most Likely Descendant(MLD). The MLD may recommend within 48 hours of their notification by the NAHC the means of treating or disposing of,with appropriate dignity,the human remains and grave goods. In the event of difficultly locating a MLD or failure of the MLD to make a timely recommendation, the human remains and grave goods shall be reburied with appropriate dignity on the property in a location no subject to further subsurface disturbance. � ` ` AAidDeDiOsUla Regional | Open Space District | R,09-57 MeudogO9-17 May 27, 2O0g AGENDAITEM 11 AGENDADTEM Approval of an Amendment to the Contract with Wetlands and Water Resources, Inc., in the Amount of$15,000, for a Total Contract Amount Not To Exceed $79,080,to Refine Results of the Schilling Lake Inundation Study at Thornewood Open Space Preserve and Determination that the Recommended Actions are Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS |. Determine that the cccorunucudcd actions are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality /\o1(CEI()/k) as set out in this mcyoo. 2. Amend the contract with Wetlands and Water Resources, Inc., in the amount of$15,000, for � utobu| contract amount not to csccrd $79,O8O,torefine the ccmu|tu of the Schilling Lake � inundation study a1Tbornev/ood Open Space Preserve. SUMMARY A preliminary inundation modeling study was recently performed for Schilling Lake, located at Thornewood Open Space Preserve, which showed the potential for inundation at Old La Honda and Po/1o|uRouda in the event nfu catastrophic dam failure. Since the preliminary study showed the "potential for inundation", additional funding is now required to refine the inundation model � inputs to more accurately characterize the specific conditions of this site and confirm the preliminary results. This amendment would fund additional geotcuhnicu1 investigations required � to better characterize the extent of potential inundation. This data will be used to make informed � future decisions about the management ofSchilling Luke. BACKGROUND At the regular meeting of September 24, 2008, the Board of Directors received an update on � � management and enhancement options for Schilling Lake, located utThornevvood Open Space � Preserve (Preserve) (Report R-08-103). Schilling Lake is formed by a 200-foot-long uucngiueercdcudheu dam originally constructed in the |utc 1000sand upgraded circa 1910. Despite the fact that the deposition of sediment has reduced the volume of the lake by 75%over � the last century, the lake ad11 holds approximately three (3) acre-feet of water(approximately | � million gallons, or roughly one and one-half Olympic-sized swimming pools). The update summarized several key findings, outlined potential management and enhancement options and described in detail the preferred alternative: minor intervention. This preferred alternative | R-09-57 Page 2 included completion of a downstream inundation study for the lake (Exhibit A), to be completed at the earliest possible opportunity. At the regular meeting of November 12, 2008,the Board of Directors approved funding for a preliminary inundation study (Report R-08-129) using mid-year budget funds to amend an existing contract with Wetlands and Water Resources (WWR) of San Rafael, CA. The inundation study consisted of hydraulic modeling to determine the extent of downstream inundation that could be expected in the event of a partial or total dam breach or failure. WWR managed the study and hired the engineering firm Winzler& Kelly (W&K) of San Francisco, CA to perform hydraulic modeling, and geotechnical engineers Haro, Kasunich and Associates (HKA) of Watsonville, CA to develop preliminary dam breach parameters (the extent and timing of dam failure) to input into the hydraulic model. The goal of the study was to establish or refute the potential for damage to life or downstream property resulting from a breach of Schilling Lake Dam. The objective was to perform iterative modeling in order to obtain the answer without spending unnecessary funds. For this reason, funding for a thorough geotechnical investigation was not allocated for the first round of modeling, nor did staff think it prudent to make request additional funds for this work before producing preliminary maps to establish or refute the potential for inundation. To produce inundation maps, consultants employed a preliminary, highly cost-effective, streamlined approach using a HEC-RAS hydraulic model, originally developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers. HEC-RAS, an acronym for Hydraulic Engineering Center River Analysis System, is one of the most commonly used hydraulic models in the country that is widely accepted by municipalities and agencies. Study Results Results of the inundation study identify the potential for inundation of road/stream crossings at Old La Honda and Portola Roads in the Town of Woodside, CA. Accurate prediction of severity of flooding within the downstream system was difficult to predict beyond a"presence/absence" confidence level. Consultants identified data gaps that caused the greatest uncertainty in the results, which were overwhelmingly related to the timing and extent of a dam breach (breach parameters). Core samples of the top nine (9) feet of the dam crest and embankment encountered sandy soil, which produced extremely conservative breach parameters. In other words,the model assumed that the dam was comprised entirely of the sandy soil found at the top of the dam, so the breach was very rapid,thus releasing the entire three acre feet of water in timing of apotential t , g Y p g Neither staff nor consultants believe based on professional within sixty seconds. , the lake y judgment,that such a rapid inundation event reflects reality. Given the highly con servative J g 1 is believed to 0 ver- redict inun dation at Old La Honda and Portola breach parameters, the made p Roads where the road/stream culvert crossings are not designed to convey such a high-flow event (the maps showing potential inundation will be presented at the May 27 meeting). Consultants advised staff that the most efficient next step to obtain a result with higher reliability technical investigation that refines the breach parameters, and use is to conduct a thorough geotechnical g g g these new data to perform a second HEC-RAS model run. i R-09-57 Page 3 DISCUSSION Geotechnical Investigation A more thorough subsurface field exploration would allow core samples to be collected to the bottom of the dam embankment, which is approximately 25-30 feet below the crest. The core samples would accurately locate the phreatic surface, or subsurface water table elevation, within the dam to help assess the extent of potential structural weakness in the dam. The core samples would also determine the type and structure of soil material used during the original late 1800s dam construction and the 1910 dam enlargement, and may provide information on depth and location of tree roots. These tree roots may have a significant effect on the timing and extent of dam breach. One redwood tree growing at water level on the lake side of the dam may pose the greatest threat to dam stability should the tree ever fall and leave a cavity in the crest of the dam. For this reason, staff recommends contracting with a Registered Professional Forester to determine if any of the trees growing on the dam face should be removed, perhaps at the mid- year budget cycle as an additional task under a separate budget, once the geomorphic investigation is completed. Management Implications The 2008 report on management and enhancement options for Schilling Lake identified dredging as a possible option to return the lake to its original depth. The original scope of work included funds for a second model run to map the extent of potential downstream inundation should the District increase the lake volume via dredging. Due to the results of the first model run, staff recommends allocating funds to instead perform a second model run that assumes existing lake conditions but uses more refined breach parameters.Notwithstanding, staff still sees value in modeling the effects of dredging to help inform management decisions for the lake. With this in mind, staff has been communicating with Philippe Cohen of Stanford University to solicit interest from the Engineering Department to perform successive HEC-RAS model runs. The reason for this is that Searsville Lake, owned by Stanford University, is downstream from Schilling lake and would eventually receive sediment related to a dam failure. Funding assistance for this work is anticipated to be available under the District's Small Grants Program. Monitoring Based on the results of the second model run, ongoing monitoring of the darn and preparation of an emergency response plan may be triggered. I FISCAL IMPACT i The Planning Department FY2009-10 budget includes $15,000 for this project, none of which has been expended. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE i • R-09-57 Page 4 Staff concludes that amending the consultant agreement does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Therefore, the recommended action is exempt. Future action taken by the Board to implement the consultant's work will be subject to CE QA review at that time. NEXT STEPS Pending Board approval, staff will amend the contract with W WR, thus allowing their sub- consultant to initiate the geotechnical investigation. Staff has requested Stanford University to participate in successive modeling and awaits their response. Results from this second, more definitive investigation, will be shared with the Town of Woodside Engineer. Staff will also conduct public outreach with Preserve neighbors to inform them of dam maintenance needs and solicit input on the preferred alternative for management and enhancement of Schilling Lake. Staff will consult with a Registered Professional Forester to determine if any of the trees growing on the dam face should be removed once the geomorphic investigation is completed. Attachments: Exhibit A—Schilling Lake Inundation Modeling Study Prepared by: Meredith Manning, Open Space Planner II Contact person: Same Graphics prepared by: Galli Basson, Planning Intern i I I I i I i Schilling Lake Inundation Modeling Study Thornewood Open Space Preserve #' Searsville Dennis Martin Creek Flow Direction Lake 0 Road/Stream Crossing Mai ■ Structures Located Downstream of Schilling Lake and Close to Dennis Martin Creek i ® Schilling Lake Watershed Area of Watershed Contributing to Schilling Lake 153.2 acres ' Area of Thornewood OSP within Watershed 26.8 acres Percentage of Watershed Owned by District 17.5% c ! --Bear Gulch Creek ■ \\ i Schilling Lake a D�nnlsart c � u 'a+Y m % n Dr c \� Evi..Rd. L - \ o 1 g 1 I } t I � ' Exhibit A e Produced by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District,November 2008 I Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District . r i R-09-68 Meeting 09-17 May 27, 2009 AGENDA ITEM 12 AGENDAITEM Authorization for staff to change the Board-approved location of the commemorative plaque recognizing the crash of the Airliner "Resolution" on October 29, 1953. GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) as set out in this report. 2. Approve moving the location of the commemorative plaque recognizing the crash of the Airliner "Resolution" from the Methuselah trail head to the intersection of the Fir and Vista Point trails. DISCUSSION On January 28, 2009, the Board approved the Legislative, Funding and Public Affairs Committee's (LFPAC) recommendation to install the commemorative plaque recognizing the 1953 crash of the airliner "Resolution" in El Corte de Madera Open Space Preserve along the Methuselah Trail, inset in a large sandstone boulder. The location was selected because it would be easily accessible to visitors and not be at the site of the actual crash to discourage removal of debris. Subsequent to the.January 28th Board meeting, Operations Manager David Sanguinetti revisited the area of the actual crash, hiked the Fir trail to the Resolution trail and visited the Vista Point. Based on this visit, he identified a more appropriate location for the boulder and plaque at the intersection of the Fir and Vista Point Trails. The Vista Point looks out over the area of the crash and visitors who hike the entire length of the Resolution Trail walk through the actual crash site. BYp g lacin the boulder and plaque at the intersection of the two trails,the District would be memorializing the general area of the crash without showing its exact location, thereby protect E1 Corte de Madera's fragile ecosystem continuing top stem from souvenir hunters wandering g y off trail. In addition, staff intends to replace a former picnic table at the Vista Point, installed by the previous land owner, with a District-approved picnic table. Minor brush clearing will be required i to make the location more suitable for contemplation and enjoyment of this spectacular view of the Santa Cruz, Mountains and the San Mateo County Coastline. FISCAL IMPACT The commemorative plaque was donated. The total project cost estimate is $3,500 and includes a) $1,000 to purchase a new picnic table and b) $2,500 in budgeted staff labor for installing the picnic table, brushing the Vista Point and attaching the plaque to a sandstone boulder. All costs are covered in the FY2009-10 Operations budget. PUBLIC NOTICE Notice has been provided as required by the Brown Act. No other public notification is required. However, because of his long-standing interest in this project, Mr. Chris O' Donnell was notified of this agenda item. CEQA COMPLIANCE. This project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15301: Existing Facilities. Guideline 15301 exempts minor alterations of existing public facilities which result in negligible expansion of use. This project consists of the placement of a sandstone boulder with a commemorative plaque at an existing trail intersection and the installation of a picnic table and brush clearing of a vista point. Therefore,this project is consistent with California State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301. NEXT STEPS Bring this recommendation to the Full Board for reconsideration. Field staff will then install the boulder and plaque, at the final approved location, prior to the dedication event scheduled for Saturday, June 27, 2009. In the event the vista point recommendation is approved, a picnic table will be installed and brushing will be completed to reveal the spectacular view of the San Mateo Coast. Attachment: Exhibit A— Map of proposed Resolution crash site memorial Prepared by: David Sanguinetti, Operations Manager Contact person: Same as Above Graphics prepared by: Casey Cleve, GIS Coordinator Proposed Sandstone Rock with Resolution Plaque Proposed Picnic Table Vista Poin �esolutiol� Cap\ Ell Corte de Madera Creek Open Space Pr serve 35 r_..... [Memorial Location F� 10 J 0 1 5 250 500 Feet Exhibit A: Proposal For ResolutionCrash Site Memorial W.,T414 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Midpeninsula Regional • ' Open Space District I j To: Board of Directors From: Stephen E. Abbors Date: May 22, 2009 Re: FYI's I Midpeninsula Regional Memorandum Open Space District i I To: MROSD Board of Directors From: Tina Hugg Jkt>t(, Copy: — Date: May 27, 2009 Re: Update on the Administrative Office Remodel Project This update is being provided to the Board regarding the current status of the Administrative Office remodel project as of May 22, 2009. • The permit set for the Basic Improvements project is expected to be approved by the City of Los Altos early next week. • Staffs recommendation to award the contract will be presented at the May 27"' Board Meeting. • Staff met with Monster Mechanical to discuss possible longer term improvements to the HVAC system. Next Steps: Staff will work on the following: • Determine costs for further mid-to long-term HVAC improvements for the entire AO building. • Follow up with a contract for the Basic Improvements phase of work, assuming a Board determination on May 271" An update will be provided through an informational memorandum to the Board at the next meeting. ' IMidpenunsula Regional Memorandum Open Space District To: MROSD Board of Directors From: Tina Hugg a,/GGty� Copy: _ Date: May 27, 2009 i Re: Update on the Skyline Field Office Remodel Project This update is being provided to the Board regarding the current status of the Skyline Field Office remodel project as of May 22, 2009. I • Planning,and Operations staff led a tour of the field office for Ad Hoc Committee members Larry Hassett and Curt Riffle and Board member Mary Davey. • Tannerhecht has been asked to prepare a presentation to introduce the committee to the firm and its expertise in sustainability. Tannerhecht has offered a tour of the firm's recently finished remodel of the Energy Foundation's new headquarters in San Francisco, which can be scheduled at a future date for the committee. The Energy Foundation's remodel is the first project in San Francisco to be awarded a LEED-Cl Platinum certification,the highest level awarded by the United States Green Building Council(USGBC)for commercial interiors. The project is also one of only 13 LEED-CI Platinum certifications world-wide. An article on the Energy Foundation's headquarters remodel is attached. • Staff has continued research into rough costs for green construction in preparation for the next Ad Hoc Committee meeting. Next Steps: • Compile and gather additional information on green construction costs, projected facility expansion, staff growth, priorities, and timelines in preparation for the next Ad Hoc Committee meeting, to be scheduled in July. An update will be provided through an informational memorandum to the Board at the next meeting. The Energizer Effect http://www.printthis.clic'"-'-ility.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=The+Energi... GaPRINTTHIS Powered by r Cl ckability ra Click to t'rint( I SAVE THIS EMAIL THIS Close I ChetanThe Energizer Effect � May 15, 2009 -By Holly Richmond, Photography by Cesar Rubio m Photo by Cesar Rubio There could not be a better fit than the Energy Foundation for being the first project in San Francisco—and one of only 13 worldwide—to achieve LEED-Cl Platinum certification, the highest level under the USGBC's program for commercial interiors. Since its founding in 1991, the Energy Foundation has worked with a $90 million annual budget to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy in the world's largest and fastest growing markets, most notably the United States and China. "We recognize the importance of energy efficiency in buildings, which are responsible for 39 percent of U.S. energy production alone," explains Jacqui Wilson, assistant to the Foundation's president, Eric Heitz. "For 18 years we've been the leading(and sometimes the only) P g P provider of rants to non-profit groups ou s who work to advance new energy technologies." i io it look ed for a In 200'7 when the EnergyFoundation had outgrown its previous office space in the Pres d , �' well as fulfill its mission of r its corporate character as e ace to capture t design firm that could create a newspace p p also based in San Francisco rides itself on creating projects that sustainabilit . TannerHecht Architecture g P J y P enrich their communities, and thus became the Energy Foundation's ideal partner. David Hecht, the firm's principal-in-charge, remarks, "These people truly are making a difference in the world, and the goal was to create a space to reflect that vibrancy and dedication. The design needed to support the Foundation's work style and action-oriented approach, and part of that meant conveying a sense of appropriateness to funders and other constituents." - .-ft. offices occupy the entire sixth floor of the seven-story Bentl Reserve Building The new, 17 600 s Y Y q P Y located in the heart of the ci ty.. Proximity to public Reserve Bank oc formed the San Francisco Federal e ), Y Y P � (formerly transportation was essential for LEED site selection standards because all Energy Foundation employees either take public transportation, walk, or ride their bikes to work. The design comprises 25 private offices, 42 1 of 5/19/2009 1:45 PM The Energizer Effect http://www.printthis.clic' '-ility.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=The+Energi... open workstations, three small conference rooms, two kitchenettes, a large "non-board room," and a "copy cafe." "We work collaboratively yet require spaces that are quiet enough to enable a level of privacy and promote focus on our individual tasks. People really appreciate the openness as well as the fact that it doesn't feel like a cube farm," Wilson says with a laugh. The design exposes the building's historic rustic steel, brick, and concrete, thereby reducing the use of new materials. Office walls, workstation panels, and conference room walls incorporate interior windows —including clerestories between offices—to take full advantage of the abundant natural light and city views afforded by the building's original 8-ft. by 9-ft. windows and to reduce the need for artificial lighting. Fourteen-ft. tall ceilings showcase many exposed design elements and promote the "raw" aesthetic the Foundation wished to capture. "The space is exceptionally, and obviously, environmentally focused without being too 'granola,"' says Hecht. "That sensibility was key to the design. The offices had to communicate the level of international advocacy that the Foundation undertakes without appearing ostentatious." Advanced lighting control systems, daylight harvesting, and independent climate controls allow employees to reduce energy use yet maintain their preferred level of comfort. Other resource-conserving elements include GreenGuard-certified workstations and chairs, recycled denim acoustical insulation, wood fiber ceiling tiles, and high-recycled-content carpet tiles. The "non-boardroom" a space that accommodates 40 people and enables a range of casual day-to-day uses, as well as formal board meetings—was a particular challenge for Hecht and his team. "Sustainability drove the overall design direction, yet we sought out materials that would take the project beyond predictable green palettes and let the inherent strengths of the space become the central elements," he notes. To that end, the "non-boardroom" features a 33-ft.-long table constructed of three pieces of recycled Douglas fir and decommissioned photovoltaic panels. "The dark, reflective PV panels add visual interest to a long plank of wood and also give it a techy feel," adds Hecht. The table is fitted with the latest AN functions as well as microphones for teleconferencing(essential for the Foundation's business with China). Six whiteboards surround the table, making it an ideal place for brainstorming during formal and informal gatherings. While the non-boardroom gets plenty of use, Wilson says that the staffs preferred collaboration and kick-back area is the "copy cafe," which was designed—and thus named—to be a space that incorporates the main kitchenette and break area with mail and copy functions. The space is large enough to host informal gatherings, though several clustered seating areas allow employees to interact in small groups as well. Hecht believes the project is such a success because of the push for LEED-CI Platinum certification and what that means to the employees, and because "the aesthetics have a nice vigor without being overdone." Wilson concurs, noting that the Energy Foundation could not be happier with TannerHecht's ability to deliver an office space that is both high-tech and low-impact. She says, "It's a great mix of modern design and efficient functionality. In other words, it's practical and beautiful at the same time." who Project, client: I he Enema Foundation. Architect: TANNER IIE(.'IIT Architecture. Interior designer: Gail Gordon Design. Green building consultant: Simon &Associates. Mechanicallelectrical engineer: C&Engineers. General contractor: bcci Construction. Chvner's Representative: Terrasset Management Group. Lighting designer: revolver design. Acoustical engineer, AIV design: (_'harles,Salter Associates. AV installation:Avidex. Furniture dealer: Vangard Concept Offices, COG Interiors, Prouve Contract. Photographer: Cesar Rubio Photography. what 2 of3 5/19/2009 1:45 PM The Energizer Effect http://www.printthis.clir' '-�lity.com/pt/cpt?action--cpt&title=The+Energi... Paint: Benjamin Moore. Dry wall: SheetRock. Carpet/carpet tile:TandusIC&A. Carpet fiber: Dynex. Carpet backing:Tile backing manufactured from 100%recycled content. Ceiling: Tectum (compressed Aspen fibers; 2x8'panels suspended in USG heavy-duty t-bar system. Lighting: Pinnacle, Prudential, Del Ray, Lamar, Cooper. Doors: Eggers. Door hardware: Schlage. Windowframes/wall systems: Wilson Partitions. Window treatments: MechoShade. Workstations: Teknion. Private office desks: DFM. Reception desk: DatesWeiser. Reception coffee table: OHIO Design. Task chairs: Haworth. Off ice side chairs: Stylex, Knoll. Lounge seating: Room & Board Kitchenette stools:Andreu World Reception bench: Davis, Pollack. Upholstery: Luna fabrics for workstations and private office desks. Board Room Conference table: Designed by TANNERHE(,'HT Architecture;.f"abricated by Adrian Burns Fabrication. Stacking side chairs: Davis. Kitchenette table: Design by TANNERHECHT;fabricated by SF Millwork. Other tables: DFM. Files:Allsteel. Shelving:fabricated by Adrian Burns Fabrication. Architectural woodworking: Cabinetmaking: San Francisco Millwork fabricated from FSC Apply Ply from Panel Source of Oregon. Planters, accessories: Reception area planter: Hot rolled sheet metal fabricated by Adrian Burns Fabrication. Signage: West Coast Signworks. Lighting: Lutron. Plumbing fixtures: Kohler, Sloan, Zurn, Elkay, Chicago Faucets. where Location: San Francisco, Calif. Total floor area: 17,600 sq.ft. No. of floors: 1. Total staff size: approx. 35 (accommodates 65). Links referenced within this article The Energy Foundation http//www ef.org/home.cfm TANNERHECHT Architecture http://www.tannerhecht.corn Simon&Associates http greenbuild com revolver design http llwww revo1w,,rdesign com Charles Salter Associates http//www.cmsafter,com Cesar Rubio Photography http:/I/www.ceslarrubio,com Find this article at: http://www.contracbmgazine.coryVcontracVcontent—display/design/features/corporate-design/e3if9266f24c44d2c673270celcbefldl6c Click to Print SAVE THIS I EMAIL THIS I Close Uncheck the box to remove the list of links referenced in the article. 2008 Nielsen Business Media,Inc.All rights reserved. 3 of 3 5/19/2009 1:45 PM t7 Midpeninsula Regional • ' Open Space District r To: Board of Directors From: Stephen E. Abbors Date: May 27, 2009 Re: Late FYI's i Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Memorandum I To: MROSD Board of Directors From: Anna Duong . Copy: Date: May 27, 2009 Re: Board Packet E-subscription Program Re-cap In an effort to minimize Board Packet mailing, copying and assembly costs, the District introduced an E- subscription program, which allows interested parties to subscribe to an e-mail notification when meetings' agendas and related documents are uploaded onto the District's website. A first notice was sent to current subscribers on April 1, 2009, followed by a second notice on May 1, 2009. The notice asked subscribers to: 1) Indicate continued interest in receiving District's Board Packet, and 2) Select a subscription option: e-subscription or postal mail. To date, the District has registered 37 e-mail subscribers. The number of postal mail requests has been reduced from 60 to four (4), per meeting(these numbers exclude Board of Directors' packets). i To illustrate the significant cost savings resulting from this program, please see the summary table below, which provides a cost comparison, before and after implementation of the program. Cost per meeting (cost/mtg.) includes postage, copying cost, assembly cost and staff time. Avg. # #of mail Cost/mtg. mtgs/yr subscription/mtg. Subtotal Total Cost Savings/yr Before Agenda $3.41 26 27 $2,391.37 Agenda&Minutes $7.74 26 23 $4,627.08 $17,045.06 Full Packet $29.66 26 13 $10,026.61 15 782.86 After $ � I Agenda $3.41 26 1 $88.57 Agenda&Minutes $7.74 26 2 $402.35 $1,262.20 Full Packet $29.66 26 1 $771.28 i i. ' p insula Regional Open S Memorandum Open Space District To: Board of Directors From: Andrea Christenson, Open Space Planner I Date: May 27, 2009 Re: POST's Council Circle at Mindego Meadow The District purchased the Mindego Ranch property from Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST) in July 2008. At the time of acquisition, POST reserved the right to recognize significant supporters with a Donor Recognition Site to be located near the existing barn and outbuildings on the property. The covenant in the Purchase Agreement states: "Such Recognition Site...shall be identified in an unobtrusive manner consistent with the purpose for which District is acquiring the Property including the preservation of public open space, agriculture, and natural habitat. Any and all costs associated with the construction, installation, repair and maintenance of such Recognition Site or naming plaques, shall be borne by POST." A conceptual rendering of the Donor Recognition Site was included as Exhibit G of the Purchase Agreement. POST has since finalized the design for the site, now named the Council Circle at Mindego Meadow. POST submitted 100% construction documents (dated February 6, 2009) to District staff on March 3, 2009. Major components of the design include the following. • Entrance o Trailhead adjacent to ranch road ■ -15' long by 6' wide ■ Decomposed granite paving o 3-sided trailhead sign ■ 6' tall Corten steel frame ■ 3 faces, each -3'-4" tall by 2'-6" wide ■ Anodized aluminum inset panels • Approach Path o -260' long trail between ranch road and Council Circle ■ 4' wide ■ Decomposed granite paving • Council Circle o Concrete circle I ■ 25-6" in diameter ■ Integral color concrete paving ■ Bronze solar markers ■ Engraved stone directional markers o Donor recognition wall along perimeter of circle -1'-6" high ■ —49' long ■ Integral color concrete wall ■ Engraved limestone coping stone o Donor attribution plaque ■ 2'-5" tall Corten steel frame ■ 1 face, 1'-8" tall by 2'-2"wide ■ Anodized aluminum inset panel o Terraces ■ 5' wide semicircular terrace 1'-2" below grade of Council Circle • 4' wide semicircular terrace 2'-4" below grade of Council Circle ■ Twide semicircular terrace 3'-6" below grade of Council Circle ■ Planted with native flowers After reviewing the construction documents, District staff held an on-site meeting with POST's project manager on March 11, 2009. On March 18, 2009, the District submitted a memo to POST with recommendations and comments on the proposed design. The recommendations and comments fell into five categories: grading and drainage, materials, maintenance, aesthetics, and CEQA requirements. POST responded via memos on April 21, 2009 and May 20, 2009. After staff correspondence to date, two design elements remain to be resolved between POST and the District: the size and the location of the trailhead sign. District staff is concerned that the proposed height and location of the structure will prevent the sign from blending into the landscape in an unobtrusive manner. However, staff does expect to come to mutual agreement with POST regarding modifications to the trailhead sign. POST intends to construct the Council Circle in late summer 2009. In order to keep the project on schedule and avoid any delay in the permitting process, POST needs the District to submit an Owner's Letter of Concurrence to San Mateo County as soon as possible. Staff therefore recommends that the District submit a Conditional Letter of Concurrence to the County at this time. A conditional letter will enable the permitting process to move forward while staff continues to work with POST on the design and location of the trailhead sign. GEN!RM MANAGER RegI Una l OpenSpace 1 Midperllri,,uk:t Open`.>pac Distrl(:I, � BOARD rarr}IRUCrOas r>,=:v" nr ,, Nl,iry G,:wlr , ,,,!:y; (W riffle, No l r ,Itll ,,,( h ,er[ Cecily Harris May 28, 2009 County of San Mateo Planning and Building Department 455 County Center, 2nd Floor Redwood City, CA 94063 Attn.: Summer Burlison, County Planner RE: Owner's Letter of Conditional Concurrence for construction of the Council Circle at Mindego Meadow (PLN2009-00050), Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve Dear Ms. Burlison, This letter is to confirm that the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby provide conditional consent to the Peninsula Open Space Trust to construct the Council Circle at Mindego Meadow, per the requirements of PLN2009-00050. The District is agreeable in concept to locating the Council Circle at Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve and finds the design proposal to be generally acceptable. The District reviewed 100% construction documents (dated February 6, 2009) for the Council Circle and provided POST with recommendations and comments on the proposed design. POST has incorporated or addressed the majority of the District's comments. However, two design elements remain to be resolved at this time: the size and the location of the trailhead sign. The District is concerned that the proposed height and location of the structure will prevent the sign from blending into the landscape in an unobtrusive manner. The District's consent is therefore conditional upon coming to mutual agreement with POST regarding potential modifications to reduce the visual impact of the trailhead sign. It is the District's understanding that this conditional letter will allow the permit process to proceed. Once the abovementioned design elements are resolved, I will provide a letter confirming the District's final concurrence prior to permit issuance. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Stephen E. Abbors General Manager Cc: Jeff Powers, POST f)U stel t:ir!If,I cis Alto,,, _A 94022 � o,u 0(-1 1ror) � G,o f,qt u,,85 1 wvvw r,rrcnrp,I 0rt� Robert Zatkin RECEIVED P.O. Box 139 . San Carlos, CA 94070 MAY 27 2009 (650) 599-9936 . rzatkin@gmail.com 10% NWLa iit�0i0NAL ' May 21, 2009 "ACE AiST ICT Board of Directors MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 Members of the Board: I am in receipt of a letter dated May 18, 2009 from Ana Ruiz, Interim Plan- ning Manager and Project Manager, in response to the May 10, 2009 letter I sent to your Board concerning the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Mas- ter Plan (Master Plan). Over the years my efforts to prevent the MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) from wasting public money have, in each instance, been to no avail'. In the present matter in disregard to my concerns expressed in my May 10, 2009 letter, I am asked by way of Ms. Ruiz's letter to accept post hoc that the omitted citations in the Master Plan were, in fact, incorporated into the Master Plan. This acceptance is predicated on the notion that the District performed due diligence in preparation of the Master Plan, however had such diligence in fact been performed the missing attributions would have been included in the document. Furthermore it is my understanding that some Dis- trict employees involved in the production of the Master Plan hold degrees in science from universities. No solid higher education in science would omit the necessity of full attribution in any publication. In a similar vein, the consult- ants and consultants staff that were engaged in preparation of the Master Plan should have been listed in the document, the more so given the large amount of public money spent for consultant service in preparation of the Master Plan`. These inactions by the District, past and present, are strong indicators that the paying public is not getting full value of return in its investment paid to the District. A point in my letter that was not addressed by Ms. Ruiz is the possibility that the District did not communicate with the scientist working on the San Grego= 1.For example the District ignored my concerns in — (a) turning the El Corte de Madera Creek Open Space Preserve into a de facto mountain bike park, and (b) withholding from dedication about 70 acres of the Teague Hill Open Space Preserve with the intent of selling the acerage to for development of housing. In both instances the backside cost of the District's ignorance have been hundreds of thousands of dollars of public money to remedy a foreseeable sediment transport issue in the former, and futile attempts to find stable terrain in the latter. 2.District staff informed me that the Prime Contractor to the Master Plan, Design, Community and Environment (DC&E) was paid $150,289.13 for their work on the Master Plan project. Page 1 of 2 rio Creek Watershed, manning for Restoration project. ie project is water- shed-wide and includes a base component of Limiting Factors Analysis founded on a suite of focal species in the watershed of which some likely exist on lands of the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve. Given Ms. Ruiz's lack of comment on this component of my letter I must conclude that the District staff did not communicate with scientists working on the San Gregorio Creek Watershed, Planning for Restoration project. As such, yet another deficiency in the District's production of the Master Plan. Post hoc excuses for inadequate performance in no way translate to adequate land management and ecosystem stewardship by the District. What the Dis- trict tells the paying public, and what the results are in-field from District per- formance are frequently non sequitu. However it takes a trained and perceptive mind to identify the dislocation, so the public is largely an ignorant lot, and when the public does rise to the challenge of questioning the District it generally takes the form of advocacy — for more Mountain bike access, spending public money to rehabilitate decrepit structuresl that should be demolished to conform to the District's mission, out-of-value purchase of preferential parcels to placate local interests 2, and the like. The taxpaying citizens have committed hundreds of millions of dollars over the course of almost four decades to establish, expand and embellish the MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District. After such amount of time and magnitude of monies a higher level of performance by the District is not unreasonable, it is to be expected. Sincerely, 1.For example the "Red Barn" in the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve. 2.For example, the Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. Page 2 of 2