Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20200311 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 20-06 SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Administrative Office 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022 Wednesday, March 11, 2020 Special Meeting starts at 6:00 PM* Regular Meeting starts at 7:00 PM* REVISED A G E N D A TELECONFERENCE NOTICE Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953, Subdivision (b), the Special meetings will include teleconference participation by Director Kishimoto from 12330 Anderson Valley Road, Boonville, CA 95415. This Notice and Agenda will be posted at the teleconference location. Accessibility to and public comment from this address shall be provided as required by Government Code Section 54954(b)(3). 6:00 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT – CLOSED SESSION ROLL CALL 1. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Government Code Section 54956.8) Property: 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, Santa Clara County APN: 170-04-051 Agency Negotiator: Allen Ishibashi, Senior Real Property Agent Negotiating Party: Diane New, Santa Clara County and Chris Jordan, City of Los Altos Under Negotiation: Purchase Terms ADJOURNMENT 7:00 REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The Board President will invite public comment on items not on the agenda. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to three minutes; however, the Brown Act (Open Meeting Law) does not allow action by the Board of Directors on items not on the agenda. If you wish to address the Board, please complete a speaker card and give it to the District Clerk. Individuals are limited to one appearance during this section. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Meeting 20-06 Rev. 1/3/20 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. 1. Approve March 3, 2020 Minutes 2. Claims Report 3. Approval of the Funding and Acquisition Agreement between the County of Santa Clara and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to support the Purchase of the former Gupta- Khan Property as an Addition to El Sereno Open Space Preserve located at 17045 Bohlman Road in unincorporated Santa Clara County (Assessor’s Parcel Number 517-24-030) (R-20- 24) Staff Contact: Jasmine Leong, Real Property Agent I General Manager’s Recommendation: 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 the General Manager to negotiate and execute a Funding and Acquisition Agreement with the County of Santa Clara for a County contribution of half the purchase price of the former Gupta-Khan Property, or $192,500, in exchange for the conveyance of a conservation easement. 4. Addition of a new project to the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Capital Improvement and Action Plan and Award of Contract for Remediation Design of a ranch debris cleanup site at the former Madonna Creek Ranch located in Miramontes Ridge Open Space Preserve (R-20-23) Staff Contact: Aaron Hébert, Senior Resource Management Specialist General Manager’s Recommendation: 1. Approve the addition of Madonna Creek Ranch Debris Clean Up project (MAA01-004), to the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Capital Improvement and Action Plan. 2. Authorize the General Manager to enter into a contract with Rincon Consultants Inc., for hazardous materials consulting services and remediation plan development to implement the Madonna Creek Ranch Debris Cleanup for a not-to-exceed base amount of $63,365. 3. Authorize a 10% contingency of $6,337 to be reserved for unanticipated issues, thus allowing the total contract amount not-to-exceed $69,702. 4. Adopt a Resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2019-20 budget to fund the project, transferring funds from General Fund 10 to Measure AA Fund 30, for a net-zero adjustment. 5. Adoption of a Records Retention Schedule (R-20-06) Staff Contact: Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk/Assistant to the General Manager General Manager’s Recommendation: Adopt a resolution approving the records retention schedule and authorizing destruction of certain records consistent with California law. BOARD BUSINESS The President will invite public comment on agenda items at the time each item is considered by the Board of Directors. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to three minutes. Alternately, you may comment to the Board by a written communication, which the Board appreciates. Rev. 1/3/20 6. Approval of Basis of Design recommendations to complete the Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Structural Stabilization Project at Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve (R-20-27) Staff Contact: Leigh Guggemos, Capital Project Manager III, Engineering and Construction Department General Manager’s Recommendation: Approve the structural stabilization measures for the Deer Hollow Farm White Barn as recommended in the Basis of Design Report prepared by Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc., dated December 18, 2019. 7. Legislative Action Recommendations (R-20-26) Staff Contact: Joshua Hugg, Governmental Affairs Specialist General Manager’s Recommendation: Approve the recommended list of legislative actions for the 2020 state legislative session. INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM • Interest on Measure AA Bond Proceeds • Implementation Update: Rancho San Antonio Multimodal Access Study & Short-Term Measures INFORMATIONAL REPORTS – Reports on compensable meetings attended. Brief reports or announcements concerning activities of District Directors and staff; opportunity to refer public or Board questions to staff for information; request staff to report to the Board on a matter at a future meeting; or direct staff to place a matter on a future agenda. Items in this category are for discussion and direction to staff only. No final policy action will be taken by the Board. Committee Reports Staff Reports Director Reports ADJOURNMENT *Times are estimated and items may appear earlier or later than listed. Agenda is subject to change of order. 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 I, Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD), declare that the foregoing agenda for the special and regular meetings of the MROSD Board of Directors was posted and available for review on March 5, 2020, at the Administrative Offices of MROSD, 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos California, 94022. The agenda and any additional written materials are also available on the District’s web site at http://www.openspace.org. Rev. 1/3/20 Jennifer Woodworth, MMC District Clerk March 3, 2020 Board Meeting 20-05 SPECIAL MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Mitchell Park Community Center El Palo Alto West Community Room 3700 Middlefield Rd. Palo Alto, CA 94303 Tuesday, March 3, 2020 9:30 AM DRAFT MINUTES CALL TO ORDER President Holman called the special meeting of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to order at 9:32 a.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Jed Cyr, Larry Hassett, Karen Holman, Yoriko Kishimoto, and Curt Riffle Members Absent: Zoe Kersteen-Tucker, Pete Siemens Staff Present: General Manager Ana Ruiz, General Counsel Hilary Stevenson, Assistant General Manager Brian Malone, Assistant General Manager Susanna Chan, Chief Financial Officer/Director of Administrative Services Stefan Jaskulak, Controller Mike Foster, District Clerk/Assistant to the General Manager Jennifer Woodworth, Planning Manager Jane Mark, Public Affairs Specialist Leigh Ann Gessner, Engineering and Construction Manager Jay Lin, Human Resources Manager Candice Basnight, Information Systems Technology Manager Casey Hiatt, Visitor Services Manager Matt Anderson, Land and Facilities Manager Michael Jurich, Natural Resources Manager Kirk Lenington, Real Property Manager Mike Williams, Finance Manager Andrew Taylor, Budget and Analysis Manager Carmen Narayanan ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Dan Olstein, Director of Land Programs and Stewardship at Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST), spoke in favor of collaborating with the District to support its strategic priorities and projects. Mr. Olstein spoke in support of agriculture on the San Mateo Coast, wildlife linkages Meeting 20-05 Page 2 and corridors, and public access through regional trails. Shani Kleinhaus from the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society and local chapter of the Sierra Club spoke in support of wildlife corridors. Ms. Kleinhaus spoke regarding roadkill along Alma Bridge Road and the need to remediate the impact of increased public access and traffic on wildlife to create a net benefit to wildlife. Ms. Kleinhaus spoke against opening District trails to e-bikes. Director Kersteen-Tucker arrived at 9:38 a.m. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director Riffle seconded the motion to adopt the agenda. VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Siemens absent) BOARD BUSINESS General Manager Ana Ruiz provided opening comments summarizing the agenda topics for the retreat and describing the various organizational changes the District has undergone in the past five years to increase efficiency, ability to deliver projects, and manage an expanding amount of open space. Chief Financial Officer/Director of Administrative Services Stefan Jaskulak reviewed the budget planning cycle. Mr. Jaskulak reviewed the preliminary fiscal year 2020-21 (FY21) budget including proposed expenditures and estimated revenues and reviewed the key themes and updates to the Strategic Goals and Objectives from the December 9, 2019 Board retreat. Director Kersteen-Tucker suggested updating Goal 3, Objective 3 to refer to “a regional environmental protection vision” to be consistent with the other strategic goals and objectives. Motion: Director Kersteen-Tucker moved, and Director Riffle seconded the motion to approve the following language Goal 3, Objective 3 to refer to “a regional environmental protection vision” for the FY20-21 Strategic Goals and Objectives. VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Siemens absent) Director Kishimoto commented on the need to address increased conflict between wildlife and human travel throughout the region as public access to open space increases. Director Riffle commented on the need to balance funds used to fulfill the District’s mission with infrastructure costs associated with staff facilities. Director Riffle also spoke in support of a regional, multi-modal approach to improving access to District open spaces, through parking, transportation/transit, etc. President Holman suggested the Board may need to consider the net benefit of opening District lands to the public in order to continue to protect wildlife as public access increases. Meeting 20-05 Page 3 Ms. Ruiz spoke regarding the District’s recent projects to protect wildlife while providing a public benefit, such as the wildlife refuge islands at Ravenswood Open Space Preserve to provide safe havens to wildlife from predators and humans during high tide events. Assistant General Manager Brian Malone reviewed the FY21 Capital Improvement and Action Plan (CIAP) priorities and Measure AA five-year list of projects and progress on each. Mr. Malone described the development of the proposed FY21 CIAP, including resource loading, application of the Board-approved Measure AA prioritization criteria, and the Vision Plan. President Siemens arrived at 10:20 a.m. Director Kishimoto requested staff provide the list of Board-approved 5-year Measure AA projects for future retreats. Mr. Malone reviewed the grant and partnership funding secured for FY21 projects. The Board reviewed the four programs of the draft CIAP, requested and received clarification regarding the projects included. The Board also requested edits to various project descriptions. Assistant General Manager Susanna Chan reviewed the land acquisition and preservation program describing potential opportunities for new land acquisitions, including Gordon Ridge, Cloverdale Ranch, and Johnston Ranch, and potential opportunities to acquire watershed lands. Ms. Chan described the lot line adjustment process required for several acquisitions, which includes outreach to several advisory bodies. Director Kersteen-Tucker commented regarding the lot line adjustment process and responding to the comment letter from San Mateo County Farm Bureau and suggested creating a high-level District response related to lot line adjustment issues. General Counsel Hilary Stevenson reported the comment letter received was directed at San Mateo County, and District staff will be working with County staff to respond. Ms. Ruiz reported staff will review the draft a response letter to determine if a separate response from the District is warranted or if the County response letter should carbon copy the District. Director Kishimoto requested a copy of the San Mateo County Farm Bureau response letter be provided to the Board. Director Siemens expressed his hesitation in the District becoming responsible for the water system at Cloverdale Ranch. Director Kishimoto suggested creating public access guidance documents similar to the proposed project that will establish land conservation guidance documents. General Manager Ruiz responded by offering to hold consideration for inclusion of the item as part of the CIAP for Fiscal Year 2022, recognizing that the proposed CIAP for Fiscal Year 2021 is fully resource loaded. The Board recessed at 11:30 a.m. and reconvened at 11:47 p.m. with all directors present. Meeting 20-05 Page 4 Mr. Malone reviewed projects associated with the natural resource protection and restoration program, including the Highway 17 wildlife crossing, review and development of an agricultural policy, programmatic permitting for routine maintenance and facilities improvements program, badger and burrowing owl habitat assessment, wildland fire resiliency program, and continued implementation of the Climate Action Plan. Director Riffle spoke in support of the District’s Climate Action Plan, wildlife linkages, and building a more collaborative relationship with the San Mateo County Farm Bureau to provide input. Director Kersteen-Tucker spoke in support of working with additional agricultural organizations along the San Mateo Coast. Mr. Malone commented on the San Mateo County Farm Bureau’s acknowledgement and appreciation of the District and its staff engaging with them on District projects. Director Hassett requested and received clarification regarding the sequestration-carbon farm plan at October Farm. President Holman suggested providing a map and documentation of when and where mountain lion sightings and encounters have occurred. Ms. Ruiz and Mr. Malone provided a summary of the types of tracking and documentation the District has related to mountain lions and stated that the District passes along all of the information to the California Department of Fish & Wildlife, which monitors mountain lion activity. The Board received an update on the various projects within the Wildland Fire Resiliency Program, including the prescribed fire program, District-wide fuel reduction, and Los Trancos eucalyptus removal project. Ms. Chan reviewed projects in the public access, education, and outreach program, including Ravenswood Bay Trail, Purisima-to-the-Sea Trail and parking lot, Highway 35 pedestrian crossing and parking/multi-modal access, Alpine Road Regional Trail, Beatty trailhead and parking area, and Districtwide ADA barrier removal. Director Riffle suggested the Board may want to consider taking a leading role in a regional collaboration effort to address parking and transportation issues related to helping the public safely access open space and regional trails. Mr. Malone reported the Santa Cruz Mountain Stewardship Network and Peninsula Working Group both have trail subgroups that are working cooperatively on a mapping effort for regional trail connections, allowed trail uses, parking, and accessibility. President Holman also noted the District will need to balance public access with the carrying capacity of District preserves. Meeting 20-05 Page 5 Director Siemens spoke in favor of pursuing additional land acquisitions, where possible, to support parking and public access at various preserves. Director Riffle requested an update on the Cooley Landing Education Center Business & Operating Plan. Ms. Ruiz provided an update reporting that an operator has been identified, and the District will largely fund the development of a business and operation plan for the center and park. Director Kishimoto requested an update on the District’s diversity initiatives. Public Affairs Specialist Leigh Ann Gessner reported that District staff implements the various diversity initiatives throughout its outreach and engagement efforts and is looking to replicate the successful Latino Outdoors partnership with other diversity groups. Mr. Malone reviewed projects in the vehicles, equipment, facilities, and other program, including repainting the La Honda Creek Red Barn, structural improvements, District facilities, increased efficiencies in business systems, and communications and outreach initiatives. Mr. Malone reviewed CIAP projects to support various areas of interest, including agriculture and diversity. Director Cyr reported the Special Parks District Forum will be in May in Ohio and encouraged the Board members to attend. President Holman and the other Board members thanked staff for their efforts to prepare for the retreat and ongoing support for the District. Director Riffle spoke in support of safe public access to open space and suggested the Board will need to address this issue. Director Kersteen-Tucker spoke in support of protecting land health. Public comments opened at 2:07 p.m. No speakers present. Public comments closed at 2:07 p.m. ADJOURNMENT President Holman adjourned the Special Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 2:08 p.m. ________________________________ Jennifer Woodworth, MMC District Clerk MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT CLAIMS REPORT MEETING # 20-06 MEETING DATE: March 11, 2020 Fiscal Year to date EFT:54.08% Fiscal Year 18-19 EFT:29.44% Payment Number Payment Type Payment Date Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Payment Amount 1779 EFT 02/28/2020 10343 - GRANITE ROCK COMPANY Mud Lake Improvements Project - BCR 11/1 - 11/30 322,197.56 1800 EFT 03/06/2020 12111 - Agbayani Construction Corporation South Area Field Office Renovation Project 195,985.00 1815 EFT 03/06/2020 12002 - NOLL & TAM ARCHITECTS New Administration Offices (AO) Facility - January 2020 126,201.64 81013 Check 02/28/2020 11603 - SAN MATEO COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT Honda Pioneer ATV and Transport Trailer per Agreement 56,731.56 1803 EFT 03/06/2020 11539 - BELZ CONSTRUCTION Kitchen Remodel at 1195 Skyline/Reconstruction of Bergman Residence 48,281.71 1809 EFT 03/06/2020 10005 - GRASSROOTS ECOLOGY Nursery Plants for Revegetation Projects - BCR/Mt Um 23,387.70 1769 EFT 02/28/2020 *12052 - 4984 EL Camino LLC A02/A03 Rent - March 2020 23,243.00 1805 EFT 03/06/2020 *10214 - Delta Dental Dental Benefits - 03/01/2020-03/31/2020 17,403.32 1812 EFT 03/06/2020 10794 - John Northmore Roberts & Associates Bear Creek Stables Improvements - January 2020 15,234.48 81005 Check 02/28/2020 10463 - DELL BUSINESS CREDIT 5 Dell Laptops with Pro Support Plus 12,422.40 1774 EFT 02/28/2020 12106 - CSG Consultants, Inc.General Engineering Consulting Services 11,382.50 1780 EFT 02/28/2020 12088 - GSL Fine Lithographers Employee Business Cards (6)/Mailing Services/Wildland Postcard 10,300.11 1777 EFT 02/28/2020 10642 - Forensic Analytical Consulting Services, Inc.SAO Inspection and Oversight 10,296.50 81014 Check 02/28/2020 11996 - SPATIAL INFORMATICS GROUP, LLC Fire Ecology Services: Prescribed Fire Program 10,239.75 1772 EFT 02/28/2020 12109 - CHRISTINE SCULATI Grants Program Support Services 8,093.75 1798 EFT 02/28/2020 11665 - Waterways Consulting Alpine Road 65% coordination box culvert evaluation 7,861.25 1806 EFT 03/06/2020 11748 - ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY CONSULTING State Funding Consulting and Lobbying Services - February 2020 7,860.41 1813 EFT 03/06/2020 *10419 - LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY Life/LTD/AD&D - March 2020 7,744.93 81031 Check 03/06/2020 11728 - KIDDER MATHEWS OF CALIFORNIA, INC Appraisal fee - SJWC lands 7,500.00 1793 EFT 02/28/2020 12107 - San Francisco Estuary Institute Science Advisory Panel 6,964.23 1790 EFT 02/28/2020 11241 - QUESTA ENGINEERING CORPORATION Ravenswood Bay Trail Connection Project 5,608.35 1784 EFT 02/28/2020 10925 - Papé Machinery Replacement knives for masticator/mower/JD 310 Maintenance Service 5,076.25 1810 EFT 03/06/2020 12088 - GSL Fine Lithographers Quarterly Newsletter Postage 4,659.52 1818 EFT 03/06/2020 10140 - PINE CONE LUMBER CO INC Lumber & Material for Redwood Trail Picnic Tables/Manure Storage (RSA-DHF)4,617.70 1811 EFT 03/06/2020 11593 - H.T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES Alma College Bat Surveys - 11/1/2019 - 12/31/2019 4,468.80 1768 EFT 02/28/2020 11434 - 2M ASSOCIATES Hist. Resources Pol. Dev. Consultant Proj. Mgr. Srvs. Jan 2020 4,420.00 81022 Check 03/06/2020 10509 - GEOCON CONSULTANTS INC Beatty Phase II ESA - 12/30 - 1/26 3,380.63 1783 EFT 02/28/2020 10190 - MetroMobile Communications Radio, Antenna, And Equipment Installation For A106 3,231.92 1789 EFT 02/28/2020 10211 - PUBLIC POLICY ADVOCATES Legislative Consulting and Lobbying Services 3,230.00 81029 Check 03/06/2020 *11730 - STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY RV Basic Life/Supplemental - March 2020 2,772.90 1792 EFT 02/28/2020 11479 - Rootid, LLC Website Support and Maintenance 2,740.50 1817 EFT 03/06/2020 11523 - PGA DESIGN, INC.Hawthorns Public Access Study thru January 31, 2020 2,730.00 1787 EFT 02/28/2020 11519 - PRICE, POSTEL & PARMA LLP Burkhart legal service fees - January 2020 2,271.50 1794 EFT 02/28/2020 11868 - San Jose Conservation Corps & Charter School Ravenswood Encampment Clean-up 2,155.00 1785 EFT 02/28/2020 *10212 - PINNACLE TOWERS LLC Tower Rental Skeggs Point - March 2020 2,042.30 1822 EFT 03/06/2020 10447 - SIMMS PLUMBING & WATER EQUIPMENT Replace Hot Water Heater at 5701 La Honda Rd/Water Pump Service at Lobitos 1,969.06 1814 EFT 03/06/2020 11617 - MIG, INC.ADA Peer Review of Alma College Cultural Landscape Rehabilitatio 1,938.75 1816 EFT 03/06/2020 10079 - PAGE & TURNBULL Historic Resources Policy - Training 1,938.75 81015 Check 02/28/2020 *10309 - VERIZON WIRELESS Monthly Wireless Services 1/13 - 2/12 1,793.40 81007 Check 02/28/2020 11489 - HARO KASUNICH & ASSOCIATES INC.Toto Ranch Ponds Geotechnical Analysis Project 1,785.00 1782 EFT 02/28/2020 11906 - LAW OFFICES OF GARY M. BAUM Legal Services - January 2020 1,738.50 1824 EFT 03/06/2020 11665 - Waterways Consulting Quam and Toto Driveway Improvement Projects 1,680.00 81006 Check 02/28/2020 10287 - GRAINGER INC Papr System Kit/Belt Mounted/Filter 1,556.97 81002 Check 02/28/2020 10141 - BIG CREEK LUMBER CO INC Lumber for Stock-Stiles-ADA 1,555.75 1823 EFT 03/06/2020 *10213 - VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA Vision Premium - March 2020 1,421.36 Electronic funds transfer (EFT) for accounts payable disbursements to reduce check printing and mailing, increase payment security, and ensure quicker receipt by vendors page 1 of 11 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT CLAIMS REPORT MEETING # 20-06 MEETING DATE: March 11, 2020 Fiscal Year to date EFT:54.08% Fiscal Year 18-19 EFT:29.44% Payment Number Payment Type Payment Date Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Payment Amount Electronic funds transfer (EFT) for accounts payable disbursements to reduce check printing and mailing, increase payment security, and ensure quicker receipt by vendors 1796 EFT 02/28/2020 10152 - Tadco Supply Janitorial Supplies (RSA&CP)1,198.64 81020 Check 03/06/2020 11556 - BAY AREA MONITOR League of Women Voters 2019-2020 Ad program, April/May 1,000.00 1799 EFT 03/06/2020 10001 - AARON'S SEPTIC TANK SERVICE Septic Tank Service (RSACP)990.00 1776 EFT 02/28/2020 11935 - ESSENTIAL OPERATIONS Septic System Monitoring (RSACP)973.00 1791 EFT 02/28/2020 12031 - Ray & Jan's Mobile Truck Service M209 Standard Service/T38 Chipper Maintenance 917.36 81019 Check 03/06/2020 11863 - ALBION ENVIRONMENTAL INC Mud Lake Construction Improvements January 2020 909.32 1797 EFT 02/28/2020 11895 - TIMMONS GROUP, INC.Work Order and Asset Management thru 12/31/19 770.00 1801 EFT 03/06/2020 11170 - ALEXANDER ATKINS DESIGN, INC.Bear Creek Redwoods OSP Logo Revised 700.00 1773 EFT 02/28/2020 11989 - CONIFER CREATIVE, INC.Photo Contest Marketing Materials Design 625.00 1771 EFT 02/28/2020 11483 - Cartwright Design Studio Winter Ad - 2 designs, 6 edits 616.25 1770 EFT 02/28/2020 11170 - ALEXANDER ATKINS DESIGN, INC.Revise Ravenswood Open Space Logo and Log Guidelines 611.25 81011 Check 02/28/2020 10292 - SAN JOSE BOILER WORKS INC Check Hydronic System End Boiler 601.50 81023 Check 03/06/2020 10058 - LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE Human Resources Legal Consulting thru 01/31/20 600.00 81009 Check 02/28/2020 10578 - OLD REPUBLIC TITLE CO Preliminary Search 500.00 81010 Check 02/28/2020 10176 - RE BORRMANN'S STEEL CO District pipe gate material 495.23 1820 EFT 03/06/2020 11732 - SANTA CLARA UNIVERSITY Slender False Brome Research 485.37 1788 EFT 02/28/2020 11923 - PROVOST & PRITCHARD Spring Consulting for McDonald Ranch 481.00 1821 EFT 03/06/2020 11920 - Sequoia Ecological Consulting, Inc.Bio On-Call Task Order 2 - Mud Lake Bio Monitoring 438.00 81016 Check 02/28/2020 11852 - WESTERN EXTERMINATOR CO.Exterminator Service (RSA-Annex)426.50 1775 EFT 02/28/2020 10032 - DEL REY BUILDING MAINTENANCE Cleaned Carpets at 18171 Pheasant Road 380.00 81025 Check 03/06/2020 10924 - PACIFIC COAST TRAIL RUNS LLC Release of deposit for permit # 24037 300.00 1808 EFT 03/06/2020 11151 - FASTENAL COMPANY Hardware for Stock 265.56 81030 Check 03/06/2020 10959 - STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD Annual Permit Fees - Webb Creek Bridge 7/1 - 6/30 260.00 1781 EFT 02/28/2020 10394 - INTERSTATE TRAFFIC CONTROL PRO Mt Um Summit - replace ped walk area sign 257.83 81003 Check 02/28/2020 10545 - COMMUNITY UNITED METHODIST CHURCH Room Rental Fee for Committee Meeting 250.00 1804 EFT 03/06/2020 11318 - CONFLUENCE RESTORATION Plant Site Maintenance for BCR/Alma/Webb Creek 240.00 81024 Check 03/06/2020 10160 - OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Office supplies - post-its, stackable docupockets 200.09 81021 Check 03/06/2020 10168 - CINTAS Shop Towel Service (FFO & SFO)168.95 1786 EFT 02/28/2020 12060 - Preferred Alliance, Inc.16 Off-Site Participants - Testing 165.76 1778 EFT 02/28/2020 10187 - GARDENLAND POWER EQUIPMENT Stihl Equipment Parts/Axe,Wedge Set & Hose Clamp 138.25 1795 EFT 02/28/2020 11042 - SANTA CLARA COUNTY-OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF Live Scan - January 2020 134.00 1807 EFT 03/06/2020 10524 - ERGO WORKS Ergo supplies: Adj chair armrests 111.31 81004 Check 02/28/2020 10545 - COMMUNITY UNITED METHODIST CHURCH Refundable Deposit for Event 4/2 100.00 81012 Check 02/28/2020 *10136 - SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY Water Service (SAO-Cristich)92.88 1802 EFT 03/06/2020 10815 - AMERICAN RED CROSS 1-EMR, 1-CPR 90.00 81028 Check 03/06/2020 11054 - SAN MATEO COUNTY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Training: Editing & proofreading (1 employee)85.00 1819 EFT 03/06/2020 10228 - RHF INC Radar Unit Repair 75.00 81001 Check 02/28/2020 11880 - A T & T (CALNET3)Mt. Um Safety Phone 1/7/2020 - 2/6/2020 45.70 81026 Check 03/06/2020 10135 - PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION, INC.Welding Jacket 44.96 81027 Check 03/06/2020 10182 - ROYAL BRASS INC FFO - supplies for air hose reel 30.86 81018 Check 02/28/2020 0000A - CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS Application Permit Fee for Event on 3/4/20 25.00 81017 Check 02/28/2020 0000A - ART JOHNSON Reimburse Carbon Monoxide Alarm 21.80 81008 Check 02/28/2020 10421 - ID PLUS INC Name tags - Ranger Augustine 19.50 1,016,955.58 page 2 of 11 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT CLAIMS REPORT MEETING # 20-06 MEETING DATE: March 11, 2020 Fiscal Year to date EFT:54.08% Fiscal Year 18-19 EFT:29.44% Payment Number Payment Type Payment Date Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Payment Amount Electronic funds transfer (EFT) for accounts payable disbursements to reduce check printing and mailing, increase payment security, and ensure quicker receipt by vendors *Annual Claims **Hawthorn Expenses A### = Administrative Office Vehicle HR = Human Resources P### = Patrol Vehicle SCNT = Stevens Creek Nature Trail AO2, AO3, AO4 = Leased Office Space IPM = Invasive Plant Maintenance PCR = Purisima Creek Redwoods SCS = Stevens Creek Shoreline Nature Area BCR = Bear Creek Redwoods ISM = Invasive Species Management PIC= Picchetti Ranch SFO = Skyline Field Office CAO = Coastal Area Office LH = La Honda Creek PR = Pulgas Ridge SG = Saratoga Gap CC = Coal Creek LR = Long Ridge RR = Russian Ridge SJH = Saint Joseph's Hill DHF = Dear Hollow Farm LT = Los Trancos RR/MIN = Russian Ridge - Mindego Hill SR= Skyline Ridge ECdM = El Corte de Madera M### = Maintenance Vehicle RSA = Rancho San Antonio T### = Tractor or Trailer ES = El Sereno MB = Monte Bello RV = Ravenswood TC = Tunitas Creek FFO = Foothills Field Office MR = Miramontes Ridge SA = Sierra Azul TH = Teague Hill FOOSP = Fremont Older Open Space Pres.OSP = Open Space Preserve SAO = South Area Outpost TW = Thornewood GP = General Preserve SAU = Mount Umunhum WH = Windy Hill Abbreviations page 3 of 11 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT CLAIMS REPORT Wells Fargo Credit Card - January 2020 MEETING # 20-06 MEETING DATE 03-11-20 Posting Date Amount Description 2/10/2020 8,489.69 Nutanix server maintenance renewal 2yrs 2/10/2020 8,030.03 AO Internet Service - October 2019 2/10/2020 4,800.00 Brushing crew equipment transport toter 2/10/2020 4,305.00 Purisima North Ridge Entrance Gate + Installation 2/10/2020 3,299.00 Material Safety Data Sheet online account renewal - all offices 2/10/2020 2,928.89 District phone service & SAO T1 2/10/2020 2,575.00 2020 State of the Valley event sponsorship 2/10/2020 2,558.61 Rotorooter sewer service at main line - AO 2/10/2020 2,500.00 Bay Nature Local Hero event sponsorship 2/10/2020 2,220.00 Descale main line sewer line - clogged (AO) 2/10/2020 1,854.00 Esri software training course for Data Analyst I 2/10/2020 1,423.60 San Mateo County Planning department permit fees. 2/10/2020 1,409.05 Construction document drawings for the new AO 2/10/2020 1,176.87 District Uniforms - Coveralls 2/10/2020 1,107.38 Additional storage for HR Manager office 2/10/2020 1,090.00 Training for California Public Municipal Clerk Certification 2/10/2020 1,050.00 Reg for Annual Clerks Conf for J. Woodworth & M. Soria 2/10/2020 1,049.36 A100 Auto Repair 2/10/2020 975.00 New World/Tyler Conference for Brian Lee 2/10/2020 850.00 RGS Training 2/10/2020 841.68 SFO Alarm Services - Quarterly 2/10/2020 777.03 Desk for HR office remodel 2/10/2020 741.81 Clear clogged restroom drains at AO 2/10/2020 653.85 Rental of portable restrooms for AO - cancelled refund to follow 2/10/2020 649.00 CalGOVHR conference in Sonoma 2/10/2020 626.36 Saddle Bags and Hand Guards for two Zero Motorcycles 2/10/2020 615.00 FTO course for new Lead Ranger 2/10/2020 602.53 Storage cabinet for IT office realignment 2/10/2020 597.56 SFO Propane 2/10/2020 592.00 The State Bar of Ca - Membership Renewal for Vakharia - 2020 2/10/2020 547.74 Wireless mesh for nature center 2/10/2020 544.36 Additional extinguishers for new vehicles 2/10/2020 529.74 Replacement District - provided fire boots 2/10/2020 525.00 UC Davis Ext - Two Day CEQA Course 2/10/2020 509.46 Labor Law Digest and Annual Posters 2/10/2020 498.00 Grants Program Manager Advertising 2/10/2020 492.90 SA - Kennedy Rd - Sanitation Service 2/10/2020 471.41 Turnouts for new ranger 2/10/2020 450.00 Room rental fee for Board Meeting - 3/3/20 2/10/2020 450.00 Website hosting - January 2020 2/10/2020 450.00 District Uniforms- Sewing of District Patches 2/10/2020 440.00 IRWA Course 400: Principles of Real Estate Appraisals 2/10/2020 437.90 Sit/stand desk for IT cubicle 2/10/2020 437.66 Building to Building wireless link. 2/10/2020 435.46 Action packer tote for trucks 2/10/2020 433.51 Water pump for maintenance trucks 2/10/2020 425.98 IPM Workshops -- pesticide license continuing education 2/10/2020 425.24 Parts / tool washer periodic service 2/10/2020 425.00 SA - Mt Um - Pedestrian Canopy Rental 2/10/2020 424.87 Lodging for Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Annual Law Conference 2/10/2020 420.26 Pre-printed checks for Accounting 2/10/2020 420.00 GFOA Annual Conference - Registration 2/10/2020 420.00 Annual CA Natural Diversity DB subscription renewal 2/10/2020 420.00 HVAC Service at 10688 Mora Dr. 2/10/2020 410.00 Nat'l Assoc for Interp. Regional Reg for (2) 2/10/2020 400.00 Vehicle Towing for M24 2/10/2020 392.40 Beatty Project Area parking & aerial maps for 1/14 PNR Meeting. 2/10/2020 385.90 Shop Tool Supplies 2/10/2020 385.00 EMT recertification 2/10/2020 385.00 EMT Class 2/10/2020 377.77 Base board material accent wall color - green 2/10/2020 348.51 Dewalt tool 2/10/2020 346.81 IT sit/stand table base cubical 2/10/2020 336.96 Lodging - R.Wolfe for Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Annual Conf 2/10/2020 333.21 Equipment for SFO fire cache 2/10/2020 330.00 Monthly storage unit fee 2/10/2020 326.99 Motorcycle Jacket Demo 2/10/2020 325.86 SCC FY 2019-2020 Property Tax Payment for Cogliandro 2/10/2020 325.00 CMCI Construction Manager Certification Application Fee 2/10/2020 320.00 Legal ads -1/17 and 21 for Alma College Demo Project bid walks 2/10/2020 319.56 GFOA Committee Meeting - Lodging 2/10/2020 317.70 Calwater payment for 330 Distel Cir 2/10/2020 317.00 FFO - Shop Supplies 2/10/2020 314.49 Dewalt tool 2/10/2020 304.41 Calwater payment for 16060 Skyline Blvd 2/10/2020 304.38 Annual fire extinguisher inspection AOs 2/10/2020 303.32 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 302.89 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 301.70 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 301.70 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 301.27 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 300.00 Mower Operator Safety Training 2/10/2020 300.00 Tiger mower operator safety training - Hopp/Scilingo 2/10/2020 300.00 PRAC Registration Fee 2/10/2020 300.00 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 300.00 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 300.00 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 290.00 Analytical Skills course 2/10/2020 276.98 Fence rental Jan 13 to Feb 09 2/10/2020 275.00 Advertise Grants Program Mgr vacancy 2/10/2020 273.13 District Uniforms - Field baseball caps 2/10/2020 270.00 Ads for the WFRP Scoping Meeting 2/10/2020 269.98 Shop Supplies 2/10/2020 256.71 SFO Garbage and recycle 2/10/2020 250.00 GFOA - Submission PAFR Award 2/10/2020 245.35 Lunch for Leadership Academy 2/10/2020 243.58 Wheelworks Oil Service - Refund to follow 2/10/2020 237.38 M24 Materials for Lumber Rack 2/10/2020 231.37 Vehicle Battery for P96 2/10/2020 225.17 Door cover plate for JD 85 Ex 2/10/2020 224.98 Flight back from New World Conference - Orlando to SJC 2/10/2020 219.00 SHRM membership renewal 2/10/2020 218.40 Mobile field office rental 2/10/2020 217.99 M226 Ratchet Set for EMO Truck 2/10/2020 207.58 Lobby mission statement graphics 2/10/2020 200.50 Lunch for Leadership Academy 2/10/2020 195.22 Office Supplies - file folders, desk lamp, pens, post-its 2/10/2020 195.00 NCHRA membership renewal 2/10/2020 195.00 NCHRA membership 2/10/2020 194.65 E-mail marketing 2/10/2020 194.54 Finishing nails 2/10/2020 194.08 Trenching shovel 2/10/2020 193.05 Metal for gate posts 2/10/2020 187.21 FFO - Paint 2/10/2020 186.70 Tyvek Suits PPE 2/10/2020 184.64 Box lunches for NR grazing meeting in RWC (12) 2/10/2020 184.42 Vehicle Accessories - First Aid and flashlights for vehicles 2/10/2020 181.64 RW - Debris Disposal 2/10/2020 181.38 Paint for AO Lobby base color off-white 2/10/2020 179.21 Clinometer repair parts and calibration 2/10/2020 176.60 Set of resource books for ranger use & reference 2/10/2020 175.40 Flight to New World Conference - SFO - Orlando 2/10/2020 170.29 Deposit for lodging at the CalGOVHR 2/10/2020 168.90 Visitor Services - Ranger Skills Lunch 2/10/2020 167.99 Panels for mounting tools - P123 2/10/2020 167.22 Shop Supplies 2/10/2020 163.53 Filing cabinet for planning department 2/10/2020 158.95 Battery for M210 2/10/2020 155.59 Daily Vehicle Report Books 2/10/2020 155.21 Vehicle Maintenance Repairs A94 2/10/2020 154.90 Printing - RR & WH for Restroom and ADA Improvements 2/10/2020 152.25 Helmet and gloves for Bike Patrol 2/10/2020 151.68 Shop Supplies 2/10/2020 151.11 Clinometer and compass cover 2/10/2020 150.16 Replacement laptop battery 2/10/2020 148.51 Locks for Insierpe Residence 22322 Skyline Blvd 2/10/2020 148.24 Replace Broken Office Pictures 2/10/2020 143.89 Coffee, paper plate and bowls 2/10/2020 142.85 DHF - Materials for Sheep Gutter 2/10/2020 140.41 Shop tools - punch sets, safety glasses, paint brushes 2/10/2020 140.24 Lodging for Carbon Farm Planning workshop at CSU Chico 2/10/2020 135.41 Protective eyewear 2/10/2020 130.00 Electricity 2/10/2020 129.43 OC Pepper Spray x 10 2/10/2020 122.86 M226 Tools and Supplies 2/10/2020 122.00 Additional fire extinguisher annuals for AO 2/10/2020 120.01 Small tools - Shop metal mill files 2/10/2020 119.00 Webinar Reg - Conceptual Intro to Zoning for Planning Staff 2/10/2020 118.29 FFO - Kitchen Supplies 2/10/2020 118.22 Lodging for one night for IRWA Course 400 2/10/2020 117.53 FFO Shop supplies 2/10/2020 110.91 Oil Service Tire Rotation for A105 2/10/2020 108.01 Supplies for storage unit in garage of 20000 Skyline Blvd 2/10/2020 106.92 General maintenance supplies NR thermostat 2/10/2020 106.77 RSACP - Material for Bike Rack 2/10/2020 106.65 Ranger Panel Lunch 2/10/2020 100.40 Dry Cleaning - table cloths for District luncheon event 12/23/19 2/10/2020 100.28 Ranger Panel Lunch Day 2 2/10/2020 100.24 Motor Oil for Pumpers 2/10/2020 100.00 Water Resources Specialist Advertising 2/10/2020 100.00 Filing CEQA NOEs for RR & WH Restroom & ADA Imp Preserve Proj 2/10/2020 99.35 FFO Supplies 2/10/2020 98.16 PC Redwood Trail bench concrete 2/10/2020 93.79 Tools for M228 2/10/2020 93.04 Office and kitchen supplies - napkins, copy paper 2/10/2020 92.00 Payment for Wildland Fire Suppression Training 2/10/2020 92.00 Fire Training 2/10/2020 91.34 Lock for Carmens office door 2/10/2020 90.15 FFO - Plastic Storage Containers and Supplies 2/10/2020 89.00 SCC Bar Assoc Seminar - New Residential Landlord -Tenant Laws 2/10/2020 84.99 Heavy duty max power clamp 2/10/2020 84.57 M226 Combination Wrenches for EMO Truck 2/10/2020 84.14 Winch strap soft shackles for CAO utv 2/10/2020 83.49 Vehicle Maintenace 2/10/2020 81.52 Rebar for browse protection around native plant installations 2/10/2020 80.00 Annual membership fee for California Clerks Association 2/10/2020 79.61 Vehicle Service Tools 2/10/2020 77.95 Toolbox - 9M55 2/10/2020 76.13 DHF - Tool Organization 2/10/2020 75.00 MMANC Membership Renewal 2/10/2020 75.00 MB Pay Phone 2/10/2020 75.00 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 75.00 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 75.00 Annual Water Rights Fee 2/10/2020 74.94 Extra key for P43 2/10/2020 74.63 Kitchen and office supplies 2/10/2020 73.97 Tools 2/10/2020 73.70 FFO - Paint 2/10/2020 73.34 FFO Shop supplies 2/10/2020 71.41 FFO - Shop Supplies 2/10/2020 69.67 Fuel for P115 2/10/2020 67.72 Vehicle Inspection Reports for Field Offices 2/10/2020 67.20 Fuel for P115 2/10/2020 66.40 Frozen mice - snake food 2/10/2020 63.98 CSMFO Conference Departure Flight 2/10/2020 63.98 Tie downs 2/10/2020 63.51 RW - Sign Supplies, etc. 2/10/2020 61.39 2 new edition AP style books 2/10/2020 61.27 Snacks for volunteer projects. 2/10/2020 60.38 FFO - Air Guns / Tools 2/10/2020 60.15 WH Water 2/10/2020 60.00 Seminar - Building Risk Communications 2/10/2020 60.00 QAC renewal for Senior Resource Management Specialist 2/10/2020 58.99 Food for leadership academy 2/10/2020 57.58 RW - Debris Disposal 2/10/2020 57.12 Storage wall at 20000 skyline blvd 2/10/2020 56.68 Keys - Extra for CAT and John Deere 2/10/2020 55.88 Refreshments for Ranger Certified Interpretive Guide training 2/10/2020 55.25 Painting and Restroom Supplies 2/10/2020 54.00 GFOA Committee Meeting - Airport Parking 2/10/2020 53.98 CSMFO Conference Return Flight 2/10/2020 52.50 Filing of CEQA NOE for MB Restroom & ADA Imp Proj 2/10/2020 52.45 Midpen online webstore - January 2020 2/10/2020 52.44 Cotton Shirts for Fire Cache 2/10/2020 51.31 Sidewalk repair AO 2/10/2020 51.12 Vehicle Lights and Shop Supplies 2/10/2020 50.23 Breakfast for ranger skills test proctors 2/10/2020 50.19 Clip boards 2/10/2020 50.00 Education Workshop on Elections registration 2/10/2020 50.00 FFO Backup internet service 2/10/2020 50.00 Environmental filing - notice of CEQA exemption -Tabachnik Prop 2/10/2020 49.61 Facebook advertising - December 2019 2/10/2020 49.50 Online forms - January 2020 2/10/2020 49.00 Grazing presentation video captions 2/10/2020 49.00 Social Media Management software - January 2020 2/10/2020 45.97 Grazing Mgmt policy wildlife advocacy workshop - snacks & drinks 2/10/2020 44.57 Junction boxes for visitor counters 2/10/2020 43.75 FFO - Kitchen Supplies 2/10/2020 43.08 Quick Fist tool mounting clamps for P121, P123 2/10/2020 42.14 Staff Recognition Chili Day 2/10/2020 41.69 Refreshments for Ranger Certified Interpretive Guide training 2/10/2020 41.64 Extra Sawzall Blades 2/10/2020 41.42 Keys for lock box 2/10/2020 41.20 Shredding services 2/10/2020 41.10 Refreshments for Ranger Certified Interpretive Guide training 2/10/2020 40.90 Dishwasher magnet,scissors & binder tabs 2/10/2020 40.53 IT wall removal - AO 2/10/2020 40.00 Hot chocolate 2/10/2020 39.99 Web site registration - 2020 2/10/2020 39.50 Utility boxes and supplies for visitor counters 2/10/2020 39.22 Frozen mice - snake food 2/10/2020 39.20 Air Chuck Fittings for Shop and EMO M226 2/10/2020 39.00 Online pdf viewer - January 2020 2/10/2020 39.00 Webinar - mapping apps 2/10/2020 38.86 Snatch block for CAO utv winch 2/10/2020 38.61 Refreshments for ranger hiring skill assessment 2/10/2020 38.50 FFO - Bagels for SOSTs Last Day 2/10/2020 37.20 2 glass beverage pitchers 2/10/2020 36.98 Buckets for HazMat 2/10/2020 36.51 BCR - Solar Fan Bracket Material 2/10/2020 36.27 Volunteer Supplies 2/10/2020 35.90 Grazing Mgmt policy wildlife advocacy workshop - snacks & drinks 2/10/2020 35.00 Deposit/Return for Chainsaw Repair/Parts 2/10/2020 35.00 Ca Academy of Science Prof Dev Workshop Exploring Phenomena 2/10/2020 34.94 Programmable timers for CAO heaters 2/10/2020 34.38 Replace broken tea kettle 2/10/2020 33.89 Snacks for volunteer projects. 2/10/2020 33.74 Tools - Punch Set for M226 2/10/2020 33.09 Restroom water testing strips 2/10/2020 32.50 City Clerks Association of CA membership 2/10/2020 32.50 Room rental fee for Administrative Services Retreat Feb 5 2020 2/10/2020 32.25 Office supplies 2/10/2020 30.60 Mailing fee - documents to Army Core of Engineers & WQCB 2/10/2020 29.99 Lower PC gate concrete 2/10/2020 29.97 Keurig K-Cup Refills for AO3 2/10/2020 29.42 Coffee Maker for AO4 2/10/2020 29.00 Web Analytics - January 2020 2/10/2020 28.98 Vehicle Equipment - Toolbag for first aid items 2/10/2020 28.55 District womens polo shirt for new employee 2/10/2020 28.52 SFO Front gate battery 2/10/2020 28.46 Teas 2/10/2020 28.33 Headset with microphone for AO3 staff 2/10/2020 28.16 Attendance fee for Green Streets 2/10/2020 28.16 Reg for Carbon Farm Planning at CSU Chico on 1/16/20 2/10/2020 27.59 FFO LED upgrades 2/10/2020 27.29 Plastic for Bike Rack Work Site and more 2/10/2020 27.25 Restroom door closing measuring device 2/10/2020 27.24 Per diem meal - Leong 2/10/2020 26.15 Assorted Color Fastener File Folders 2/10/2020 24.30 Per diem meal 2/10/2020 23.31 Desiccant packs for visitor counters 2/10/2020 22.77 Laminated Tape Label Maker Refill 2/10/2020 22.00 SFO battery for electric gate 2/10/2020 21.87 Volunteer Supplies 2/10/2020 21.79 LED replacement brake light bulbs for M230 2/10/2020 20.83 Clock for break room 2/10/2020 20.70 Office Supplies 2/10/2020 20.70 Laptop vertical stand 2/10/2020 20.05 Shop Tools, M222 2/10/2020 18.52 Locking gas cap for M230 2/10/2020 18.48 Office Supplies - Yearly calendars 2/10/2020 17.46 Shipping fees for clinometer service to forestry suppliers 2/10/2020 17.39 Lumber Rack Paint M24 2/10/2020 17.31 2020 Wall Calendar, 2/10/2020 17.31 Wall calendar 2/10/2020 16.44 IT wall repair - AO cubical 2/10/2020 16.34 Garbage can for shop 2/10/2020 16.25 Name badge for employee 2/10/2020 16.25 Name badge for employee 2/10/2020 15.96 Ongoing subscription 2/10/2020 15.50 Keys for 20000 Skyline Blvd Old House 2/10/2020 15.48 Breakfast for panelists 2/10/2020 15.07 Refreshments for training 2/10/2020 14.80 The State Bar of Ca - Membership Renewal for Vakharia - Proc Fee 2/10/2020 13.61 Double sided tape for public affairs map installation 2/10/2020 13.50 Volunteer Supplies 2/10/2020 12.95 Online graphics software 2/10/2020 12.95 Online graphics software - 2nd seat 2/10/2020 12.89 FFO - Kitchen Supplies 2/10/2020 12.00 Parking for BlueEQ training 2/10/2020 11.97 Ranger Panel Breakfast 2/10/2020 11.00 Volunteer Supplies 2/10/2020 10.99 Vehicle Equipment - Marker 2/10/2020 10.28 Snacks for Ranger skills testing 2/10/2020 9.99 Vehicle Inspection for A98 2/10/2020 9.98 Refreshments for training 2/10/2020 8.21 Flagging tape 2/10/2020 7.85 Mailed staff recognition t-shirt and water bottle to staff 2/10/2020 7.33 SCC Online Payment Transaction Fee for Cogliandro 2/10/2020 7.00 GIS Helpdesk 2/10/2020 7.00 Electricity 2/10/2020 6.98 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 6.97 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 6.94 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 6.94 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 6.93 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 6.90 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 6.90 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 6.90 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 5.99 Volunteer Supplies 2/10/2020 5.64 Staff Recognition Chili Day 2/10/2020 5.18 Screws for A94 Camper Shell 2/10/2020 5.00 Room rental fee for add'l time for Admin Srvs Retreat 2/5 2/10/2020 3.74 Bolt for Masticator 2/10/2020 3.49 Coffee creamer 2/10/2020 3.28 Santa Clara Co. NOE Form for filing purpose 2/10/2020 2.59 Cream for coffee 2/10/2020 2.50 Parking garage fees for submitting permits 2/10/2020 2.50 Parking for SMC BOS meeting 2/10/2020 1.73 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 1.73 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 1.73 Credit card processing fee for annual water rights fees 2/10/2020 1.00 Parking fee for meeting with SMC regarding Master Permit 2/10/2020 0.29 Fees - Web analytics Hotjar 2/10/2020 (9.84) Credit for Returned item 2/10/2020 (16.00) returned core charge on battery purchase 2/10/2020 (30.39) LF Vehicle Parts - Credit 2/10/2020 (30.39) Auto services refund 2/10/2020 (38.48) Refund for incorrect forms 2/10/2020 (59.88) Credit for NR thermostat 2/10/2020 (74.26) Returned lock that had parts missing 2/10/2020 (100.00) Refund - cost offset for Ca Science Teachers Assoc workshop 2/10/2020 (148.63) Credited Disputed fraudulent charge 2/10/2020 (243.58) Wheelworks Oil Service Wrong Amount - Refund 2/10/2020 (270.00) Ads Refund from WFRP Scoping Meeting 2/10/2020 (290.00) Course cancelled due to low enrollment 2/10/2020 (311.69) Credit for HR storage over run materials 2/10/2020 (326.99) Return Motorcycle Jacket 100,249.79 Wells Fargo Bank Credit Card January 2020 R-20-24 Meeting 20-06 March 11, 2020 AGENDA ITEM 3 AGENDA ITEM Approval of the Funding and Acquisition Agreement between the County of Santa Clara and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to support the Purchase of the former Gupta-Khan Property as an Addition to El Sereno Open Space Preserve located at 17045 Bohlman Road in unincorporated Santa Clara County (Assessor’s Parcel Number 517-24-030). 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 the General Manager to negotiate and execute a Funding and Acquisition Agreement with the County of Santa Clara for a County contribution of half the purchase price of the former Gupta-Khan Property, or $192,500, in exchange for the conveyance of a conservation easement. SUMMARY The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) is proposing to enter into a Funding and Acquisition Agreement with the County of Santa Clara (County) who would reimburse the District for half of the purchase price of the 9.37-acre Gupta-Khan Property (Property) in exchange for a conservation easement to be conveyed to the County. The following report presents a description of the proposed funding contribution from the County and the terms and conditions of the conservation easement. The Property purchase is part of Measure AA Portfolio #19, El Sereno: Dog Trails and Connections. DISCUSSION At the February 14, 2018 Regular Meeting, the Board of Directors (Board) approved the purchase of the 9.37-acre Property along with a 1.87-acre floating trail easement as an addition to El Sereno Open Space Preserve (R-18-14). The District closed escrow on March 2, 2018. The County agreed to contribute $192,500 toward the 9.37-acre purchase, which is approximately 50% of the total $400,000 purchase price (the County is not contributing to the floating trail easement cost). The County Board of Supervisors will consider approving the Funding and Acquisition Agreement following District Board approval. The County and the District have long cooperated to jointly plan and acquire trail corridor routes where linkage of District preserves and trail routes and County park and trail routes can be achieved, leveraging funds and efforts from both organizations. The Property acquisition and conservation easement R-20-24 Page 2 will facilitate the future development of a continuous trail corridor linking El Sereno Open Space Preserve and Sanborn-Skyline County Park. In exchange for the County’s financial contribution, the District will grant a conservation easement to the County over the Property. The conservation easement requires that the District maintain the Property in a natural condition, preserve the natural habitat and wildlife, and allow for future public recreational use. The easement also requires the District to submit any proposed plans for open space facilities or significant restoration activities to the County for advisory review, and to consult with the County on any future Master Plan that includes this property. In addition, the District and County will jointly develop permanent signage on properties such as Gupta-Khan to acknowledge the District and County’s partnership in acquiring, linking, and managing parks and open space preserves. The conservation easement also includes a stipulation that the District and County will enter into a Trail Construction and Maintenance Agreement to specify future responsibilities related to linking this property to connector and regional trails systems. This Agreement would be entered into within five years after the District and County have secured all of the land entitlements necessary to connect El Sereno Open Space Preserve to Sanborn-Skyline County Park. Additionally, the conservation easement stipulates that each agency would be responsible for maintaining the trail segments located on their respective lands. The County and District have entered into five previous similar funding agreements, including for the purchase of properties along the north side of Stevens Canyon to complete the corridor of the proposed Upper Stevens Canyon Trail, to secure the 907-acre Jacques Ridge property connecting Sierra Azul to Almaden Quicksilver County Park, and to purchase the former Beatty property along Alma Bridge Road. To date, the County has contributed $9,362,500 towards the protection of approximately 2,375 acres of District lands. If this item is approved, the total contribution will increase to $9,555,000 protecting approximately 2,385 acres. CEQA COMPLIANCE This transaction was determined to be categorically exempt from CEQA at the February 14, 2018 Board meeting. The findings detailed in the prior Board Report (R-18-14) remain in effect and unchanged. The project now also includes the conveyance of a conservation easement to the County to continue preserving and maintaining the open space nature of the property. The District further concludes that the project is exempt under Article 19, Section 15317 of the CEQA Guidelines, which exempts the establishment of easements in order to maintain the open space character of an area. The District concludes that the action proposed in this report does not constitute a change to the project, which would result in any additional impact on the environment. FISCAL IMPACT The Funding and Acquisition Agreement between the County and the District would represent a positive fiscal impact of $192,500, approximately 50% of the Property purchase price. R-20-24 Page 3 The following table outlines the Measure AA Portfolio #19, El Sereno: Dog Trails and Connections allocation, costs-to-date, and the fiscal impact related to the Funding and Acquisition Agreement between the County and the District. MAA19 El Sereno: Dog Trails and Connections Portfolio Allocation: $2,254,000 County of Santa Clara Funding and Acquisition Agreement: $192,500 Life-to-Date Spent (as of 2/11/2020): ($479,526) Encumbrances: $0 Portfolio Balance Remaining (Proposed): $1,966,974 BOARD COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Real Property Committee held a meeting at the Administrative Office on January 16, 2018, to discuss the proposed property purchase and the County’s future partnership funding. Notice of the meeting was distributed to property owners of land located adjacent to and surrounding the property. Four neighbors attended the meeting, and all four neighbors asked questions or provided comment. Two members of the Real Property Committee were in attendance. Staff provided a presentation of the Property, described how it would be managed as an extension of the adjacent Preserve, and reviewed the proposed purchase terms. The Real Property Committee unanimously recommended forwarding this purchase to the full Board by a 2-0 vote. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. A copy of this agenda was mailed to the County of Santa Clara and property owners of land located adjacent to or surrounding the Property. No additional notice is required. NEXT STEPS Upon approval by the Board of Directors, the Funding and Acquisition Agreement and conservation easement will be executed, and staff will proceed with the close of escrow for the conservation easement conveyance to the County. Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Map Responsible Department Head: Michael Williams, Real Property Manager Prepared by/Contact person: Jasmine Leong, Real Property Agent I Graphics prepared by: Francisco Lopez Tapia, GIS Technician Attachment 1 Resolutions/2020/20-__Gulta-KahnFundingAgmt 1 RESOLUTION 20-__ RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE A FUNDING AND ACQUISITION AGREEMENT AND A CONSERVATION EASEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, AND AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (EL SERENO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE – FORMER LANDS OF GUPTA/KHAN) The Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION ONE. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) does hereby authorize the General Manager to negotiate and to execute a Funding and Acquisition Agreement with the County of Santa Clara on behalf of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. SECTION TWO. The General Manager or the General Manager’s designee is authorized to negotiate and execute a Conservation Easement conveying certain real property rights by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District to the County of Santa Clara. SECTION THREE. The General Manager or the General Manager’s designee is authorized to execute any and all other documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing of the transaction. SECTION FOUR. 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. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District on March 11, 2020, at a regular meeting thereof, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: Jed Cyr, Secretary Board of Directors Karen Holman, President Board of Directors Attachment 1 Resolutions/2020/20-__Gulta-KahnFundingAgmt 2 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Hilary Stevenson, General Counsel I, the District Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by the above vote at a meeting thereof duly held and called on the above day. Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk S A N B O R N C O U N T Y PA R K E L S E R E N O O P E N S PA C E P R E S E R V E Gupta-Khan Property APN: 517-24-030 9.37 Acres Trail Easement Area ~1.87 Acres L y ndon Canyon Creek B o hl m a nRoad B o h l m a nRoad Service Road Bo GillRd Mo Gill Rd M o n t e vina R i d ge Trail A m b r o s e Rd Aquinas T r a i l J o h n NicholasTrail PG &EServiceRoad McGill Rd Montevina Road M c G il l R d 2200 2000 1800 2 0 0 0 18 0 0 22 0 0 18 0 0 2200 200 0 22 0 0 20 0 0 1 8 0 0 1 6 0 0 1600 14 0 0 240 0 2 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 20 0 0 Lake Ranch Reservoir Gupta-Khan Property Pa t h : G : \ P r o j e c t s \ E l _ S e r e n o \ G u p t a K h a n \ G u p t a K h a n _ B o a r d R e p o r t _ 2 0 1 7 1 2 2 0 . m x d Cr e a t e d B y : f l o p e z 0 0.250.125 MilesI Private Property While the District strives to use the best available digital data, these data do not represent a legal survey and are merely a graphic illustration of geographic features. Private Watershed Land Gupta-Khan Properties Area of Detail ÄÆ280 ÄÆ236 ÄÆ35 ÄÆ9 ÄÆ35 ÄÆ9 ÄÆ17 ÄÆ17 ÄÆ85 Campbell Cupertino Saratoga Los Gatos Other Protected Lands MROSD Easement Over Private Land Proposed Trail Connection Existing Unpaved Road Existing Paved Road Existing Unmaintained Road Cut MROSD Preserves Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (Midpen) 2/27/2020 Attachment 2 Rev. 1/3/18 R-20-23 Meeting 20-06 March 11, 2020 AGENDA ITEM 4 AGENDA ITEM Addition of a new project to the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Capital Improvement and Action Plan and Award of Contract for Remediation Design of a ranch debris cleanup site at the former Madonna Creek Ranch located in Miramontes Ridge Open Space Preserve GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Approve the addition of Madonna Creek Ranch Debris Clean Up project (MAA01-004), to the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Capital Improvement and Action Plan. 2.1.Authorize the General Manager to enter into a contract with Rincon Consultants Inc., for hazardous materials consulting services and remediation plan development to implement the Madonna Creek Ranch Debris Cleanup for a not-to-exceed base amount of $63,365. 3.2.Authorize a 10% contingency of $6,337 to be reserved for unanticipated issues, thus allowing the total contract amount not-to-exceed $69,702. 4. Adopt a Resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2019-20 budget to fund the project, transferring funds from General Fund 10 to Measure AA Fund 30, for a net-zero adjustment. SUMMARY An approximately 0.025 acre (1,000 square foot) old ranch debris site located adjacent to Madonna Creek on the former Madonna Creek Ranch property within Miramontes Ridge Open Space Preserve requires cleanup and remediation. Car parts, household appliances, and other refuse were deposited along the creek between the 1960s and the 1980s prior to purchase of the property by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District). Subsurface testing with Rincon Consultants Inc., (“Rincon”) confirmed the presence of contaminants and some limited hazardous materials within the debris site that requires remediation. A new capital project is recommended to complete the remediation work, which is expected to span two fiscal years. A recommended contract will develop a remediation plan for the site and provide oversight of the regulatory cleanup process. The remediation plan will be used to solicit bids for a separate contract with a hazardous materials abatement firm to remove all debris. There are sufficient Ffunds for the contract in the budget period ending June 30, 2020 (FY20) requires a resolution amending the FY20 budget. Additional funds will be requested to complete the cleanup in the FY21 Budget and Action Plan development process. R-20-23 Page 2 DISCUSSION The Madonna Creek Ranch property was acquired in 2012 and superficial debris was observed in a heavily vegetated area along a segment of Madonna Creek. Recent vegetation clearing, subsurface investigations, and hazardous materials testing quantified the extent of the debris site as well as the presence of contaminants, including lead, heavy metals, and petroleum products. Staff is recommending a cleanup and restoration of the entire site in order to best protect the environment in this sensitive riparian area. Soil contamination occurs infrequently on District lands and has been occasionally found on parcels with a history of agricultural, industrial (such as oil extraction) or commercial land uses. Investigations of suspected contaminated sites are conducted by collecting soil and/or water samples to test for and delineate the extent of contaminated subsurface conditions. The sample results are used to assess health and safety risks to workers and the environment, and to determine whether remedial action or avoidance measures are warranted. Contaminant concentrations above regulatory thresholds can either be avoided (e.g. capped in place or fenced off) or fully remediated (e.g. excavated and off-hauled to a regulated landfill). The extent of the remediation effort is driven by many factors, including regulatory requirements, the risk to the environment, the chance of future disturbance, the risks to worker health and safety, remediation cost, and District policy. For this project, given the sensitive environmental area and connection to a stream system, a full cleanup of the site is warranted. If left in place, the stream could erode the site, transporting and redepositing contaminants and refuse downstream. Therefore, a new project addition (Madonna Creek Ranch Debris Clean Up, MAA01-004) is proposed for the current fiscal year. The project is located directly adjacent to a stream reach supporting steelhead trout and near a small dam and instream pond used as a water supply for leased farmlands. Development of an alternative water supply and restoration of this stream reach is identified as a priority project for Miramontes Ridge Open Space Preserve in the 5-year Measure AA Project List approved by the Board on March 15, 2018 (R-18-24). Removal of the debris is the first step in the process to restore the stream. On January 24, 2020, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for hazardous materials consulting services to a prequalified list of four (4) consultant firms in accordance with Board Policy 3.03, Public Contract Bidding, Vendor and Professional Consultant Selection, and Purchasing. Only one (1) proposal was received. Rincon has previously provided hazardous materials consulting services at Alma College in Bear Creeks Redwoods Preserve and performed preliminary subsurface testing at the Madonna Creek project site. Rincon is well qualified to perform the work at a fair and reasonable price. The previous testing confirmed the presence of contaminants and some limited hazardous materials within the debris site. The site investigations results warrant a cleanup and restoration of the entire site in order to best protect the environment in this sensitive area. The recommended contract with Rincon will build on existing characterization to develop a remediation plan for the site and oversight of the regulatory cleanup process. The remediation plan will be used to contract separately for the removal of the debris. Other project elements not included in this contract include special status species surveys, jurisdictional R-20-23 Page 3 delineation, environmental permits with California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and permits from San Mateo County. FISCAL IMPACT The scope of work included in the contract qualifies as an eligible project within Measure AA (MAA) Portfolio 01: Miramontes Ridge: Gateway to the Coast Public Access, Stream Restoration and Agricultural Enhancement. There are sufficient funds in theThe FY20 amended operating budget to cover the cost of the recommendation. includes sufficient funds for the subsurface testing work completed to date ($31,210 total). Work completed to date will be associated with the proposed project and is included in the proposed project budget table below. Note that staff is confirming with the District’s auditor that the expenditures associated with the project are of a capital nature and therefore qualify as a Measure AA project; if it does not staff will bring a budget amendment back to the Board reallocating funds to the General Fund (Fund 10) in the near future. Funding to complete the work for the proposed project requires a budget adjustment amending the FY20 budget (reducing the General Fund 10 operating budget by $100,912 and increasing Measure AA Fund 30 budget by $100,912) per Board Policy 3.04, Section IV. Future construction costs for debris removal will be included in the FY21 Capital Improvement and Action Plan as part of the annual Budget and Action Plan development process. Estimated project costs are included in the table below. Remediation Plan Development and Ranch Debris Clean Up - Madonna Creek Ranch (MAA01-004) Prior Year Actuals FY2019-20 Amended FY2020-21 Projected TOTAL Budget $8,384 $100,912 $175,000 $284,296 Spent-to-Date (as of 03/01/2020): ($8,384) ($29,985) ($38,369) Encumbrances: ($1,225) ($1,225) Proposed Contract Amendment: ($63,365) ($63,365) 10% Contingency: ($6,337) ($6,337) Budget Remaining (Proposed): $0 $0 $175,000 $175,000 The following table outlines the Measure AA Portfolio 01 Miramontes Ridge: Gateway to the Coast Public Access, Stream Restoration and Agricultural Enhancement allocation, costs-to- date, and the fiscal impact related to the proposed Remediation Plan Development and Ranch Debris Clean Up - Madonna Creek Ranch (MAA01-004) project. R-20-23 Page 4 MAA01 Miramontes Ridge: Gateway to the Coast Public Access, Stream Restoration and Agricultural Enhancement Portfolio Allocation: $27,774,000 Life-to-Date Spent (as of 03/01/2020): $0 Encumbrances: $0 MAA01-004 Remediation Plan Development & Ranch Debris Clean Up - Madonna Creek Ranch: ($284,296 ) Portfolio Balance Remaining (Proposed): $27,489,7 05 The project is potentially eligible for a $50,000 grant from CalRecycle’s Farm and Ranch Solid Waste Cleanup and Abatement Grant Program. The grant application cycles are multiple times a year and the program can fund projects that were recently remediated (i.e. the grant could be obtained after the project is complete). Staff will further evaluate this opportunity to ensure it meets the grants program criteria. BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW This item has not been reviewed by a Board Committee. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. CEQA COMPLIANCE Preparation of a remediation plan is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. Future implementation of the remediation plan may be categorically exempt under Section 15330 “Minor Actions to Prevent, Minimize, Stabilize, Mitigate or Eliminate the Release or Threat of Release of Hazardous Waste or Hazardous Substances” and if this exemption is determined to apply, a notice of exemption will be filed under the General Manager’s authority prior to the implementation of the project. NEXT STEPS If the Board approves the contract amendment, Rincon will develop a remediation plan, conduct outreach to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and assist staff in developing other project permits with San Mateo County and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Pending regulatory permits and approvals, construction under a separate project is anticipated to be completed in the fall of 2020. Attachments: 1. Resolution Amending the Budget for Fiscal Year 2019-20 2.1.Project Site Map and Photos Responsible Department Head: Kirk Lenington, Natural Resources Manager R-20-23 Page 5 Prepared by: Aaron Hébert, Senior Resource Management Specialist Rev. 1/3/18 R-20-23 Meeting 20-06 March 11, 2020 AGENDA ITEM 4 AGENDA ITEM Addition of a new project to the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Capital Improvement and Action Plan and Award of Contract for Remediation Design of a ranch debris cleanup site at the former Madonna Creek Ranch located in Miramontes Ridge Open Space Preserve GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Approve the addition of Madonna Creek Ranch Debris Clean Up project (MAA01-004), to the Fiscal Year 2019-20 Capital Improvement and Action Plan. 2. Authorize the General Manager to enter into a contract with Rincon Consultants Inc., for hazardous materials consulting services and remediation plan development to implement the Madonna Creek Ranch Debris Cleanup for a not-to-exceed base amount of $63,365. 3. Authorize a 10% contingency of $6,337 to be reserved for unanticipated issues, thus allowing the total contract amount not-to-exceed $69,702. 4. Adopt a Resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2019-20 budget to fund the project, transferring funds from General Fund 10 to Measure AA Fund 30, for a net-zero adjustment. SUMMARY An approximately 0.025 acre (1,000 square foot) old ranch debris site located adjacent to Madonna Creek on the former Madonna Creek Ranch property within Miramontes Ridge Open Space Preserve requires cleanup and remediation. Car parts, household appliances, and other refuse were deposited along the creek between the 1960s and the 1980s prior to purchase of the property by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District). Subsurface testing with Rincon Consultants Inc., (“Rincon”) confirmed the presence of contaminants and some limited hazardous materials within the debris site that requires remediation. A new capital project is recommended to complete the remediation work, which is expected to span two fiscal years. A recommended contract will develop a remediation plan for the site and provide oversight of the regulatory cleanup process. The remediation plan will be used to solicit bids for a separate contract with a hazardous materials abatement firm to remove all debris. Funds for the contract in the budget period ending June 30, 2020 (FY20) requires a resolution amending the FY20 budget. Additional funds will be requested to complete the cleanup in the FY21 Budget and Action Plan development process. R-20-23 Page 2 DISCUSSION The Madonna Creek Ranch property was acquired in 2012 and superficial debris was observed in a heavily vegetated area along a segment of Madonna Creek. Recent vegetation clearing, subsurface investigations, and hazardous materials testing quantified the extent of the debris site as well as the presence of contaminants, including lead, heavy metals, and petroleum products. Staff is recommending a cleanup and restoration of the entire site in order to best protect the environment in this sensitive riparian area. Soil contamination occurs infrequently on District lands and has been occasionally found on parcels with a history of agricultural, industrial (such as oil extraction) or commercial land uses. Investigations of suspected contaminated sites are conducted by collecting soil and/or water samples to test for and delineate the extent of contaminated subsurface conditions. The sample results are used to assess health and safety risks to workers and the environment, and to determine whether remedial action or avoidance measures are warranted. Contaminant concentrations above regulatory thresholds can either be avoided (e.g. capped in place or fenced off) or fully remediated (e.g. excavated and off-hauled to a regulated landfill). The extent of the remediation effort is driven by many factors, including regulatory requirements, the risk to the environment, the chance of future disturbance, the risks to worker health and safety, remediation cost, and District policy. For this project, given the sensitive environmental area and connection to a stream system, a full cleanup of the site is warranted. If left in place, the stream could erode the site, transporting and redepositing contaminants and refuse downstream. Therefore, a new project addition (Madonna Creek Ranch Debris Clean Up, MAA01-004) is proposed for the current fiscal year. The project is located directly adjacent to a stream reach supporting steelhead trout and near a small dam and instream pond used as a water supply for leased farmlands. Development of an alternative water supply and restoration of this stream reach is identified as a priority project for Miramontes Ridge Open Space Preserve in the 5-year Measure AA Project List approved by the Board on March 15, 2018 (R-18-24). Removal of the debris is the first step in the process to restore the stream. On January 24, 2020, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for hazardous materials consulting services to a prequalified list of four (4) consultant firms in accordance with Board Policy 3.03, Public Contract Bidding, Vendor and Professional Consultant Selection, and Purchasing. Only one (1) proposal was received. Rincon has previously provided hazardous materials consulting services at Alma College in Bear Creeks Redwoods Preserve and performed preliminary subsurface testing at the Madonna Creek project site. Rincon is well qualified to perform the work at a fair and reasonable price. The previous testing confirmed the presence of contaminants and some limited hazardous materials within the debris site. The site investigations results warrant a cleanup and restoration of the entire site in order to best protect the environment in this sensitive area. The recommended contract with Rincon will build on existing characterization to develop a remediation plan for the site and oversight of the regulatory cleanup process. The remediation plan will be used to contract separately for the removal of the debris. Other project elements not included in this contract include special status species surveys, jurisdictional R-20-23 Page 3 delineation, environmental permits with California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and permits from San Mateo County. FISCAL IMPACT The scope of work included in the contract qualifies as an eligible project within Measure AA (MAA) Portfolio 01: Miramontes Ridge: Gateway to the Coast Public Access, Stream Restoration and Agricultural Enhancement. The FY20 amended operating budget includes sufficient funds for the subsurface testing work completed to date ($31,210 total). Work completed to date will be associated with the proposed project and is included in the proposed project budget table below. Note that staff is confirming with the District’s auditor that the expenditures associated with the project are of a capital nature and therefore qualify as a Measure AA project; if it does not staff will bring a budget amendment back to the Board reallocating funds to the General Fund (Fund 10) in the near future. Funding to complete the work for the proposed project requires a budget adjustment amending the FY20 budget (reducing the General Fund 10 operating budget by $100,912 and increasing Measure AA Fund 30 budget by $100,912) per Board Policy 3.04, Section IV. Future construction costs for debris removal will be included in the FY21 Capital Improvement and Action Plan as part of the annual Budget and Action Plan development process. Estimated project costs are included in the table below. Remediation Plan Development and Ranch Debris Clean Up - Madonna Creek Ranch (MAA01-004) Prior Year Actuals FY2019-20 Amended FY2020-21 Projected TOTAL Budget $8,384 $100,912 $175,000 $284,296 Spent-to-Date (as of 03/01/2020): ($8,384) ($29,985) ($38,369) Encumbrances: ($1,225) ($1,225) Proposed Contract Amendment: ($63,365) ($63,365) 10% Contingency: ($6,337) ($6,337) Budget Remaining (Proposed): $0 $0 $175,000 $175,000 The following table outlines the Measure AA Portfolio 01 Miramontes Ridge: Gateway to the Coast Public Access, Stream Restoration and Agricultural Enhancement allocation, costs-to- date, and the fiscal impact related to the proposed Remediation Plan Development and Ranch Debris Clean Up - Madonna Creek Ranch (MAA01-004) project. MAA01 Miramontes Ridge: Gateway to the Coast Public Access, Stream Restoration and Agricultural Enhancement Portfolio Allocation: $27,774,000 Life-to-Date Spent (as of 03/01/2020): $0 Encumbrances: $0 MAA01-004 Remediation Plan Development & Ranch Debris Clean Up - Madonna Creek Ranch: ($284,296) Portfolio Balance Remaining (Proposed): $27,489,705 The project is potentially eligible for a $50,000 grant from CalRecycle’s Farm and Ranch Solid Waste Cleanup and Abatement Grant Program. The grant application cycles are multiple times a year and the program can fund projects that were recently remediated (i.e. the grant could be R-20-23 Page 4 obtained after the project is complete). Staff will further evaluate this opportunity to ensure it meets the grants program criteria. BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW This item has not been reviewed by a Board Committee. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. CEQA COMPLIANCE Preparation of a remediation plan is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. Future implementation of the remediation plan may be categorically exempt under Section 15330 “Minor Actions to Prevent, Minimize, Stabilize, Mitigate or Eliminate the Release or Threat of Release of Hazardous Waste or Hazardous Substances” and if this exemption is determined to apply, a notice of exemption will be filed under the General Manager’s authority prior to the implementation of the project. NEXT STEPS If the Board approves the contract amendment, Rincon will develop a remediation plan, conduct outreach to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and assist staff in developing other project permits with San Mateo County and the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Pending regulatory permits and approvals, construction under a separate project is anticipated to be completed in the fall of 2020. Attachments: 1. Resolution Amending the Budget for Fiscal Year 2019-20 2. Project Site Map and Photos Responsible Department Head: Kirk Lenington, Natural Resources Manager Prepared by: Aaron Hébert, Senior Resource Management Specialist Attachment 1 Resolutions/2020/20-__MadonnaDebrisCleanup 1 RESOLUTION 20-__ RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019-2020 The Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby resolve as follows: SECTION ONE. The Budget and Action Plan for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District for Fiscal Year 2019-20 is amended to approve a new Measure AA capital project (Remediation Plan Development and Ranch Debris Clean Up - Madonna Creek Ranch), decrease the District General Fund 10 operating budget by $100,912, and increase the District Measure AA Capital budget in the amount of $100,912 to fund the new project. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District on ________, 2020, at a regular meeting thereof, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: Secretary Board of Directors President Board of Directors APPROVED AS TO FORM: General Counsel I, the District Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by the above vote at a meeting thereof duly held and called on the above day. District Clerk Figure 3Map Extent Mado n n a C r e e k Acces s R o a d Mu d d y R o a d Pilarcitos Cree k MiramontesPond Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Madonna Creek Ranch, Half Moon Bay, California Site Map Figure 2 Rincon Consultants, inc. 0 300150 Feet ± Project Boundary Waterbody Creeks Imagery provided by ESRI and its licensors © 2019.Base data from Midpeninsula Open Space District, 2019. ATTACHMENT 2: Maps and Photos ATTACHMENT 2: Maps and Photos !A !A !A !A!A RB-1 RB-2 RB-3 RB-4 RB-5 RB-6 SW-1 SW-2 GS-1 GS-2 Bridge Dam Waterfall/ Spillway RidgeMadonna Creek Madonna Creek Acces s R o a d Inc i s e d C h a n n e l TP2 TP3 TP6 TP4 TP5 UpstreamSample DownstreamSample RB-8 RB-7 RB-9 RB-10RB-11 F' F B' C C' D D' B E E' MiramontesPond Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Madonna Creek Ranch, Half Moon Bay, California Sample Location Map Figure 3a Rincon Consultants, inc. 0 3015 Feet ± Project Boundary !A Approx Grab Surface Water Sample Location !A Approx Hand Auger Boring Location !A Approx Channel Sidewall Grab Sample Location !A Approx Grab Surface Water/Sediment Sample Location Trench Waterbody Creeks 2 Foot GroundElevation Contour Base data from Midpeninsula Open Space District, 2019. Estimated extent of dump debris;solid line where confirmed,dashed where unconfirmed DRAFT ATTACHMENT 2: Maps and Photos ATTACHMENT 2: Maps and Photos Rev. 1/3/18 R-20-06 Meeting 20-06 March 11, 2020 AGENDA ITEM 5 AGENDA ITEM Adoption of a Records Retention Schedule GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution approving the records retention schedule and authorizing destruction of certain records consistent with California law. SUMMARY In order to update processes consistent with California law, adopt new best management practices, and prepare for relocation of the administrative office, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) is undertaking a comprehensive records management project. The first step is to update and improve the records retention schedules for the District and each internal department. The adoption of these retention schedules (Attachment 1, Exhibit A) will result in efficiency gains and cost savings while still meeting the District’s legal requirements. Additionally, staff will use the updated retention schedules to review archives stored at the administrative and field offices to determine which may be legally disposed of and/or digitized in order to reduce the number of paper files stored, maintained, and/or moved to the new administrative office. This work will also facilitate the proper organization, filing, and storage of key documents to expedite retrieval, and assist the District in preparing for the creation of a safe and secure archival system that is backed up to prevent the potential loss of important files, including paper documents. DISCUSSION The District selected Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. (GGS), an expert in special district records, to develop an updated and comprehensive records retention schedule for the District. Government agencies in California, including local agencies such as the District, are required to maintain a records retention schedule that defines how long records (e.g. files, data, documents) must be kept and provides disposal guidelines for how these records should be discarded. Records retention schedules are periodically updated to reflect changes in state law and incorporate best management practices that reduce duplication of effort, increase efficiency, utilize new technologies, and reduce direct and indirect records retention costs. Based on GGS’s knowledge and experience in government agency records, the destruction of records that have exhausted their retention period, according to the records retention schedule, will not adversely affect District interests or the public. R-20-06 Page 2 Updates to a records retention schedule are made with the following factors in mind: • Changes in law pertaining to local agency records; • Scale of production and management of permanent records; • Propensity of storing duplicate copies across various departments and platforms; • Ongoing escalation of records storage expenses; and • Technological advancements. The retention schedules for the District were written interactively with all departments participating. The retention schedules provide clear, specific records descriptions and retention periods, and apply current law and technology to the management of District records. By identifying which department or division is responsible for maintaining the original record, and by establishing clear retention periods for different categories of records, the District will realize significant savings in labor and storage costs, reduce the amount of physical space required for storage and filing of paper documents, and realize operational efficiencies. The General Counsel and department managers reviewed and approved all retention schedules to ensure vital and important historic documents are maintained. For example, digitizing certain records will allow for electronic access to District records without the need for duplication of documents. On the other hand, various historic documents will be maintained in the original form to preserve their unique historical value. It is standard business practice for California local governments to authorize the routine destruction of records that have exceeded their adopted retention period, upon the request of staff and with the written consent of the appropriate department manager, District Clerk, and General Counsel, which is provided for in the Resolution (Attachment 1). FISCAL IMPACT The proposed records retention schedule will result in savings both in labor and storage expenses for the District. BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW This item was not previously reviewed by a Board Committee. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. CEQA COMPLIANCE This item is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. NEXT STEPS Following adoption of the records retention schedule, District staff will review District documents and identify those that should be retained, digitized, or destroyed. Additionally, as part of the next phase of the Records Management Project, staff is working to select an option for R-20-06 Page 3 an electronic document management system (EDMS) to act as a document repository, and solicit proposals to recommend a digitization expert to assist with scanning permanent documents for input into the EDMS. Staff will return to the Board with a recommendation for these aspects of the project after soliciting proposals for this work. Attachment: 1. Resolution Adopting a Records Retention Schedule and Authorizing Destruction of Certain District Records (includes the Retention Schedule as Exhibit A) Responsible Department Head: Ana M. Ruiz, General Manager Prepared by: Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk/Assistant to the General Manager Loana Lumina-Hsu, Administrative Assistant Staff contract: Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk/Assistant to the General Manager Attachment 1 Resolutions/2020/20-___Adopt Retention Schedule 1 RESOLUTION NO. 20-XX RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ADOPTING A RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE AND AUTHORIZING DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN DISTRICT RECORDS AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION 06-09 WHEREAS, the maintenance of numerous records is expensive, slows document retrieval, and is not necessary after a certain period of time for the effective and efficient operation of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District); and WHEREAS, the term “record” as used herein refers to documents, instructions, books, microforms, electronic files, magnetic tape, optical media, or papers, and any other record consisting of a “writing” as defined by the California Public Records Act (Cal. Gov’t Code section 6254 et seq.); and WHEREAS, Section 5557.1 of the California Public Resources Code provides that the Board may authorize at any time the destruction or disposition of any duplicate record, paper or document, the original or a permanent photographic reproduction of which is in the files of the District; and WHEREAS, Section 5557.2 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 60200 et seq. of the California Government Code provide that Board may, by resolution, adopt a record retention schedule that classifies the district’s records by category, and that establishes a standard protocol for destruction or disposition of records which have served their purpose, which are not expressly required by law to be filed and preserved, the destruction of which will not adversely affect any interest of the district or the public; and WHEREAS, the Board desires to authorize destruction of certain categories of records and will maintain a list of the types of records destroyed or disposed of that reasonably identifies the information contained in the records in each category; and WHEREAS, on March 8, 2006 the Board previously adopted a records retention policy as set forth in Resolution No. 06-09. NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve as follows: SECTION 1. Resolution No. 06-09 is hereby rescinded. SECTION 2. The Board of Directors finds that the destruction or disposition of the records series that have exceeded the retention periods as set forth in the Records Retention Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit A, will not adversely affect any interest of the District or the public. SECTION 3. Certain records of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, as set forth in the Records Retention Schedule, are hereby authorized to be destroyed as provided by applicable law and in accordance with the provision of said schedule, and with the approval of Resolutions/2020/20-__Records Retention Schedule 2 the General Manager, with concurrence of the General Counsel and the District Clerk. SECTION 4. The General Manager, with the concurrence of the General Counsel and the District Clerk, is authorized to make minor non-substantive revisions to the Records Retention Schedule including revisions to department names and updates to descriptions and comments regarding specific categories of records; provided however that substantive revisions, including changes to retention periods or adding new categories of records, must be approved by the Board. SECTION 5. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District on _______, 2020, at a regular meeting thereof, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: Secretary Board of Directors President Board of Directors APPROVED AS TO FORM: General Counsel I, the District Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by the above vote at a meeting thereof duly held and called on the above day. District Clerk HOW TO USE RETENTION SCHEDULES ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. (909) 337-3516 - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission A legend explaining the information presented in the retention schedule ha s been printed on the back of each page for your easy reference; an index to locate records is also provided. The specified retention period applies regardless of the media of the record: If a record is stored on paper and a computer file on a hard drive, both records should be destroyed (or erased) after the specified period of time has elapsed. Copies or duplicates of records should never be retained longer than the prescribed period for the original record. STRUCTURE: DISTRICTWIDE, DEPARTMENTS & DIVISIONS The District-wide retention schedule includes those records all departments have in common (letters, memorandums, purchase orders, etc.). These records are NOT repeated in the Department retention schedule, unless that department is the Office of Record, and therefore responsible for maintaining the original record for the prescribed length of time. Each department has a separate retention schedule that describes the records that are unique to their department, or for which they are the Office of Record. Where appropriate, the department retention schedules are organized by Division within that Department. If a record is not listed in your department retention schedule, refer to the District-wide retention schedule. An index will be provided for your reference. BENEFITS This retention schedule has been developed by Diane R. Gladwell, MMC, an expert in Municipal Government records, and will provide the District with the following benefits: • Reduce administrative expenses, expedite procedures • Free filing cabinet and office space • Reduce the cost of records storage • Eliminate duplication of effort within the District • Find records faster • Easier purging of file folders • Determine what media should be used to store records For questions, please contact the District Clerk. AUTHORIZATION TO DESTROY RECORDS: Destruction of an original record that has exceeded its retention period must be authorized according to District Policies & Procedures prior to destroying it. • If there is a minimum retention (“Minimum 2 years"), destruction of the document must be authorized before it is destroyed, as it is an original record. Copies, drafts, notes and non-records do NOT require authorization, and can be destroyed “When No Longer Required.” • If there is NOT a minimum retention ("When No Longer Required"), it does NOT need to be authorized prior to destruction, as it is a preliminary draft / transitory record or a copy. On every page of the schedules (near the top, just under the column headings) are important instructions, including instructions regarding holds on destroying records. “Litigation, complaints, claims, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).” Exhibit A RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE LEGEND ©1995 - 2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. (909) 337-3516 - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission OFR (Office of Record): The department that keeps the original or “record copy.” Usually it is the department that originates the record, unless the item is for a District Board meeting (then it is the Secretary of the District.) Records Series Title: Description of the record series (a group of like records). Non-Record: Documents, studies, books and pamphlets produced by outside agencies, preliminary drafts not retained by the District in the ordinary course of business. Total Retention: The total number of years the record will be retained. For file folders containing documents with different retention timeframes, use the document with the longest retention time. P = Permanent Indefinite = No fixed or specified retention period; used for databases, because the data fields are interrelated. Retention/Disposition: Vital? = Those records that are needed for basic operations in the event of a disaster. Media Options (guideline) – the form of the record: Mag = Computer Magnetic Media (hard drives, tapes, USB Drives, thumb drives, etc.) OD = Optical Disk, CD-r, DVD-r, WORM, or other media which does not allow changes Ppr = Paper Scan / Import (guideline): “S” indicates the record should be scanned into the document imaging system; “I” indicates the record should be electronically imported into the document imaging system; Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC’d: “Yes” indicates the electronic record may serve as the OFFICIAL record (and the paper version may be destroyed) IF the document has been imaged (electronically generated, scanned or imported and placed on Unalterable Media – DVD-R, CD-R, or WORM, or microfilmed), and both the images and indexing Quality Checked (“QC’d”). Th e electronic record or image must contain all significant details from the original and be an adequate substitute for the original document for all purposes, and other legal mandates apply. Includes all electronic records which are to serve as the Officia l Record. Legend for legal citations (§: Section) B&P: Business & Professions Code (CA) CBC: California Building Code CC: Civil Code (CA) CCP: Code of Civil Procedure (CA) CCR: California Code of Regulations (CA) CFC: California Fire Code CFR: Code of Federal Regulations (US) EC: Elections Code (CA) EVC: Evidence Code (CA) FA: Food & Agriculture Code (CA) FC: Family Code (CA) FTB: Franchise Tax Board (CA) GC: Government Code (CA) H&S: Health & Safety Code (CA) HUD: Housing & Urban Develop. (US) LC: Labor Code (CA) Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen.: Attorney General Opinions (CA) PC: Penal Code (CA) R&T: Revenue & Taxation Code (CA) UFC: Uniform Fire Code USC: United States Code (US) VC: Vehicle Code (CA) W&I: Welfare & Institutions Code (CA) WC: Water Code Exhibit A Ver. 9.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: DISTRICT-WIDE STANDARDS Page DW-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? Retentions apply to the department that is NOT the Office of Record (OFR), or the "Lead Department". If you are the OFR, refer to your department retention schedule. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). DISTRICT-WIDE Lead Dept.DW-001 Agreements & Contracts: (Agreement or Contract, Correspondence, Project Administration, Project Schedules, Logs, etc.) Includes JPAs, Memoranda of Understanding, Partnership Agreements Completion + 10 years Yes: Before Completion Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Covers E&O Statute of Limitations Statute of Limitations: Contracts & Spec's=4 years, Wrongful Death=comp. + 5 years, CCP §337 et. seq., GC §60201 Lead Dept.DW-002 Amendments to Use & Management Plans P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 et seq. Lead Dept.DW-003 CEQA Determinations, Technical Reports & Studies, Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program: Draft and Final Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs), Categorical Exemptions, Negative Declarations, etc. (California Environmental Quality Act) P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; Final environmental determinations are required to be kept a "reasonable period of time"; 14 CCR §15095(c); GC §60201 et seq. Lead Dept.DW-004 CEQA Notices, Proof of Mailings, Meeting Notices 2 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD GC §60201 et seq. Lead Dept.DW-005 Coordination Teams - Attended by employees: All Records (e.g. Wildfire Coordination Team, etc.) When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 9.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: DISTRICT-WIDE STANDARDS Page DW-2 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? Retentions apply to the department that is NOT the Office of Record (OFR), or the "Lead Department". If you are the OFR, refer to your department retention schedule. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Dept. that Authors Document DW-006 Copies or duplicates of any record Copies - When No Longer Required Mag Ppr GC §60200 Dept. that Authors Document or Receives the District's Original Document DW-007 Correspondence - ROUTINE (Content relates in a substantive way to the conduct of the public's business) (e.g. Letters, Memorandums, Administrative, Chronological, General Files, Public Comment, Reading File, Working Files, etc.) 2 years Mag, Ppr GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 9.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: DISTRICT-WIDE STANDARDS Page DW-3 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? Retentions apply to the department that is NOT the Office of Record (OFR), or the "Lead Department". If you are the OFR, refer to your department retention schedule. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Dept. that Authors Document or Receives the District's Original Document DW-008 Correspondence - TRANSITORY / PRELIMINARY DRAFTS, Interagency and Intraagency Memoranda not retained in the ordinary course of business Content NOT Substantive, or NOT made or retained for the purpose of preserving the informational content for future reference (e.g. calendars, checklists, e-mail or social media posting, invitations, instant messaging, logs, mailing lists, meeting notes, meeting room registrations, supply inventories, telephone messages, text messages, transmittal letters, thank yous, requests from other agencies, undeliverable envelopes, employment verification, voice mails, webpages, etc.) When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr Electronic and paper records are categorized, filed and retained based upon the CONTENT of the record. Records where either the Content relates in a substantive way to the conduct of the public's business, or ARE made or retained for the purpose of preserving the informational content for future reference are saved by placing them in an electronic or paper (project) file folder and retained for the applicable retention period. If not mentioned here, consult General Counsel to determine if a record is considered transitory / preliminary draft. GC §§60201, 6252, 6254(a); 64 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 317 (1981)); City of San Jose v. Superior Court (Smith). S218066. Supreme Court of California, 2017 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 9.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: DISTRICT-WIDE STANDARDS Page DW-4 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? Retentions apply to the department that is NOT the Office of Record (OFR), or the "Lead Department". If you are the OFR, refer to your department retention schedule. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Lead Dept.DW-009 Drafts & Notes: Drafts that are revised (retain final version) Content NOT Substantive, or NOT made or retained for the purpose of preserving the informational content for future reference (e.g. Budget development drafts and documents, monthly and quarterly budget reports, presentations, slides, talking points, news clippings, etc.) When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr As long as the drafts and notes are not retained in the "Regular Course of Business". Consult the General Counsel and/or District Clerk to determine if the document is considered a draft. GC §§60201, 6252, 6254(a) Lead Dept.DW-010 Hazardous Materials Disposal Manifests P Mag, OD, Ppr S/i Yes: After QC & OD Department preference (City has "cradle to grave" liability); only 3 years is mandated; 22 CCR 66262.40; GC §60201 et. seq. Lead Dept.DW-011 Meeting Notices / Public Meeting Notices / Proof of Mailings 2 years Mag, Ppr GC §60201 Lead Dept.DW-012 Monitoring Required by Grants, Agreements, Environmental Requirements, EIRS, CEQA P Mag, Ppr Department preference; GC §60201 Lead Dept.DW-013 On-Call Qualified List / Rate Sheets for Qualified Contractors / Vendors Expiration of Qualified List + 2 years Yes: Before Completion Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 Lead Dept.DW-014 Policies, Procedures, Manuals, etc: Produced by YOUR Department Superseded + 2 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 9.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: DISTRICT-WIDE STANDARDS Page DW-5 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? Retentions apply to the department that is NOT the Office of Record (OFR), or the "Lead Department". If you are the OFR, refer to your department retention schedule. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Lead Dept.DW-015 Reports and Studies (Historically significant)P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Administratively and Historically significant, therefore retained permanently; GC §60201 Lead Dept.DW-016 Reports and Studies (other than Historically significant reports - e.g. Annual Reports)10 years Mag, Ppr Information is outdated after 10 years; statewide guidelines propose 2 years; If historically significant, retain permanently; GC §60201 Lead Dept.DW-017 Training - COURSE Records - Information Technology, Records, etc. (Other Than Human Resource, Safety or Ranger Training Records) (Attendance Rosters, Outlines and Materials; includes Harassment Prevention and other Training) Minimum 7 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; Ethics Training is 5 years; Statewide guidelines propose 7 years; Calif. Labor Division is required to keep their OSHA records 7 years; EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires 3 years for promotion, demotion, transfer, selection, or discharge; State Law requires 2 -3 years for personnel actions; 8 CCR §3203 et seq., 29 CFR 1602.31; LC §6429(c); GC §§12946, 60201 Lead Dept.DW-018 Request for Solicitation / Procurement Packages: RFP, RFQ, Bids (Quotes, Proposals), Source Selection, Bid Evaluations Except Capital Projects 2 years Yes: Before Completion Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference (standard business practice); GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 3.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: BUDGET & ANALYSIS Page B&A-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). BUDGET & ANALYSIS Finance / Accounting B&A-001 Financial System Database / Budget Database (New World)Indefinite Mag Data is interrelated; system qualifies as a "trusted system"; GC §§60201, 12168.7 Budget & Analysis B&A-002 Budgets: Adopted P Yes: Current Fiscal Year Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes - After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 5.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: DISTRICT CLERK Page DC-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). DISTRICT CLERK District Clerk DC-001 Affidavit of Mailing / Proof of Publication 2 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; GC §60201 District Clerk DC-002 Agenda Packets / Agenda Staff Reports - Board of Directors, ALL Committees / Subcommittees of the Board Planning & Natural Resources Committee, Legislative, Funding and Public Affairs Committee, Real Property Committee, Bond Oversight Committee, MROSD Financing Authority, Board Appointee Evaluation Committee P Yes: Before Meeting Date Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 District Clerk DC-003 Conflict of Interest Code (Adopted by Resolution)P Yes (all)Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 District Clerk DC-004 Elections - Campaign Filings (FPPC 400 Series Forms - 460, 470, 496, 497, etc., & Form 501): UNSUCCESSFUL CANDIDATES 5 years Mag, Mfr, OD, Ppr S Yes: After 2 years Paper must be retained for at least 2 years; GC §81009(c)&(g) District Clerk DC-005 Elections - Campaign Filings (FPPC 400 Series Forms - 460, 470, 496, 497, etc., & Form 501): SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATES (Elected Officials) P Mag, Mfr, OD, Ppr S Yes: After 2 years Paper must be retained for at least 2 years; GC §81009(b)&(g) District Clerk DC-006 Elections - Campaign Filings (FPPC 400 Series Forms): THOSE NOT REQUIRED TO FILE ORIGINAL WITH DISTRICT CLERK (copies) 4 years Mag, Ppr Paper must be retained for at least 2 years; GC §81009(f)&(g) District Clerk DC-007 Elections - Campaign Filings (FPPC 400 Series Forms): OTHER COMMITTEES (PACS - not candidate-controlled) 7 years Mag, Ppr Paper must be retained for at least 2 years; GC §81009(c)&(g) Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2018 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 5.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: DISTRICT CLERK Page DC-2 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). District Clerk DC-008 Elections - Candidate File: Nomination Papers, Candidate Statement Forms, etc. - SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATES Term of Office + 4 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; Statewide guidelines proposes 4 years for successful candidates, 2 years for unsuccessful; CA law states term of office and 4 years after the expiration of term and does not delineate between the two; EC §17100 District Clerk DC-009 Elections - Candidate File: Nomination Papers, Candidate Statement Forms, etc. - UNSUCCESSFUL CANDIDATES Election + 4 years Mag, Ppr Statewide guidelines proposes 4 years for successful candidates, 2 years for unsuccessful; CA law states term of office and 4 years after the expiration of term and does not delineate between the two; EC §17100 District Clerk DC-010 Elections - GENERAL, WORKING or ADMINISTRATION Files (Correspondence, Applications to fill a Vacancy on the Board of Directors, County Election Services, Candidate Statements to be printed in the Sample Ballot, Notices, Postings, etc.) Minimum 2 years Mag, Ppr GC §34090 District Clerk DC-011 Elections - HISTORICAL (Sample ballot, copies of resolutions, final results)P Mag, Mfr, OD, Ppr S No Retained for Historical Value, GC §34090 District Clerk DC-012 Elections - Petitions (Initiative, Recall or Referendum) Results + 8 months, or Final Examination + 1 year after petition examination if petition is insufficient Ppr Not accessible to the public; The 8 month retention applies after election results, or final examination if no election, unless there is a legal or FPPC proceeding. EC §§17200(b)(3), 17400 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2018 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 5.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: DISTRICT CLERK Page DC-3 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). District Clerk DC-013 FPPC 700 Series Forms (Statement of Economic Interests): DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES & CONSULTANTS (specified in the District's Conflict of Interest code) 7 years Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After 2 years District maintains original statements; GC §81009(e)&(g) District Clerk DC-014 FPPC 700 Series Forms (Statement of Economic Interests): Filed pursuant to Government Code 87200 PUBLIC OFFICIALS who manage Public Investments (elected & not elected. Includes Board Members, Executive Director, Finance Director) 7 years Mfr, OD, Ppr S Yes: After 2 years Department preference; District maintains copies only are required for 4 years, GC §81009(f)&(g) District Clerk DC-015 FPPC Form 801 (Gift to Agency Report) 7 years Mag, Ppr S / I Yes: After 2 years Must post on website; GC §81009(e) District Clerk DC-016 FPPC Form 802 (Event Ticket / Pass Distributions Agency Report)7 years Mag, Ppr S / I Yes: After 2 years Should post on website for 4 years; GC §81009(e) District Clerk DC-017 FPPC Form 803 (Behested Payment Report)7 years Mag, Ppr S / I Yes: After 2 years GC §81009(e) District Clerk DC-018 FPPC Form 804 (Agency Report of New Positions)P Mag, Mfr, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After 2 years FPPC Regulation 18734(c); GC §81009e District Clerk DC-019 FPPC Form 805 (Agency Report of Consultants)P Mag, Mfr, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After 2 years FPPC Regulation 18734(c); GC §81009e District Clerk DC-020 FPPC Form 806 (Agency Report of Public Official Appointments)7 years Mag, Ppr S / I Yes: After 2 years Must post on website; 2 CCR 18705.5; 2 CCR 18702.5(b)(3); GC §60201; GC §81009(e) District Clerk DC-021 Historical Records - Articles of Incorporation, etc.P Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Clerk determines Historical Significance; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2018 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 5.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: DISTRICT CLERK Page DC-4 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). District Clerk DC-022 Minutes: Board of Directors, ALL Committees / Subcommittees of the Board Planning & Natural Resources Committee, Legislative, Funding and Public Affairs Committee, Real Property Committee, Bond Oversight Committee, MROSD Financing Authority, Board Appointee Evaluation Committee, Action Plan and Budget Committee P Yes (all)Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD GC §60201(d)(3) District Clerk DC-023 Ordinances & Resolutions P Yes (all)Mag, OD, Ppr S No GC §60201 et. seq. District Clerk DC-024 Policies or Procedures: Administrative Policies, Board Policies District-Wide Policies Superseded + 2 years Mag, Ppr Statewide guidelines propose superseded + 2 or 5 years; GC §60201 District Clerk DC-025 Public Records Requests 2 years Mag, Ppr GC §60201 District Clerk DC-026 Recordings (Audio) Board meetings 2 years Mag Department Preference; legally required for 30 days (or adoption of the minutes); GC §54953.5(b) District Clerk DC-027 Records Destruction Authorization Forms / Certificates of Records Destruction / Authorization to Destroy Paper to Rely on the Image as the Original P Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 et. seq. District Clerk DC-028 Records Retention Schedules - Authorization for Amendments to Retention Schedules P Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD GC §60201 et. seq. District Clerk DC-029 Secretary of State Statement of Facts 2 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 District Clerk DC-030 Subject Files / Central Files Minimum 2 years Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2018 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 3.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION Page E&C-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION Engineering & Construction ENG-001 Construction Standards Authored by the District P Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Engineering & Construction ENG-002 Contractor's Access Permits (for Repairs - access to private property) Expiration + 2 years Yes: Until Paid Mag, OD, Ppr Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Engineering & Construction ENG-003 Engineering Project Files / CIP (Capital Improvement Project) Files - Procurement Package, Unsuccessful Bids or Proposals, Bidders List, Procurement Package, Bid Summary 5 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; if there is grant funding, follow the requirements of the grant funding agreement; GC §60201 et seq. Engineering & Construction ENG-004 Engineering Project Files / CIP (Capital Improvement Project) Files / Work Orders / Repair Plans - Administration File: Project Administration, Advertising, Certified Payrolls, Complaints (project-related), Insurance Certificates from Contractors, Labor Compliance, Logs, Meeting Minutes, Pre-construction meetings, Performance Bonds/Surety, Project Security files, Project Schedules, Punch List, Real Estate Appraisals, RFIs (Construction Related Information), Stop Work Notices, Temporary Permits, etc. Completion + 10 years or After Funding Agency Audit, if required, whichever is longer Yes: Until Completed Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes - After QC & OD Department preference; Statute of Limitations for written contracts are four years from the date of breach; errors and omissions is 10 years; Death during construction is 10 years; CCP §§337., 337.1(a), 337.15 GC §60201, Contractor has retention requirements in 48 CFR 4.703 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 3.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION Page E&C-2 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Engineering & Construction ENG-005 Engineering Project Files / CIP (Capital Improvement Project) Files / Work Orders / Repair Plans - Permanent File - Large Format Drawings Design Drawings (finals), Record Drawings ("As Builts", or "As-Currents") P Yes Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes - After QC & OD For Disaster Recovery Purposes; GC §60201 et seq. Engineering & Construction ENG-006 Engineering Project Files / CIP (Capital Improvement Project) Files / Work Orders / Repair Plans - Permanent File: Specifications / RFPs, Change Orders, Building Permits, Calculations, Contract Documents (originals), Construction Photos, Correspondence, Cost of Construction, Fee & Deposit Reimbursements, Close-Out/Acceptance, Drillers Logs, Field Inspection Reports / Inspection Diaries, Materials Testing Reports, Bills of Material / Substitutions, Notice of Completion, Regulatory Agency Approvals, Shop Drawings, Soils Reports, Structural Calculations, Surveys, Permanent Encroachment Permits, Submittals, Materials Submittals, SAMPs, SWPPP, Variances, etc. P Yes: Until Completed Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes - After QC & OD For disaster preparedness purposes; Send all original Deeds, Easements and Rights of Way to the District Clerk; GC §60201 et seq. Engineering & Construction ENG-007 Engineering Studies and Reports / Feasibility Studies P Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes - After QC & OD District Preference; GC §60201 Engineering & Construction ENG-008 Hydrology Models, Calculations, Projections P Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 3.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION Page E&C-3 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Engineering & Construction ENG-009 Underground Service Alerts (USAs) 3 years Mag, Ppr GC §§4216.2(f) & 4216.3(d), 60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 6.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: FINANCE Page FIN-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). FINANCE / ACCOUNTING Finance / Accounting FIN-001 Financial System Database (New World)Indefinite Mag Data is interrelated; system qualifies as a "trusted system"; GC §§60201, 12168.7 Finance / Accounting FIN-002 1099's, 1096's 7 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; IRS: 4 years after tax is due or paid (longer for auditing & contractor delinquency); Ca. FTB: 3 years; IRS Reg §31.6001- 1(e)(2), R&T §19530, GC §60201(d)(12); 29 USC 436 Finance / Accounting FIN-003 Accounts Payable / Invoices with Purchase Orders & Backup - ALL vendors: Employee Reimbursement / Travel Expense Reimbursement / Travel Approval / Conference Approvals 7 years Yes: Until Paid Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD May contain independent contractor's compensation, expense reimbursement, or District credit card records; Meets municipal government auditing standards; 40 CFR 122.41(j)(2); WC §13263.2(b) et seq.; GC §60201(d)(12) Finance / Accounting FIN-004 Accounts Payable Reports: Check Register, Distribution, etc. When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr Department Preference (reports can not be re-created from Finance System Database; meets municipal government auditing standards); GC §60201 Finance / Payroll FIN-005 ACH Auto Pay Authorizations for Vendors / Direct Payment Authorizations for Vendors Minimum 2 years Mag, Ppr District preference; GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-006 Audited Financial Statements / Audit Reports / CAFR (Consolidated Annual Financial Reports)P Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 6.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: FINANCE Page FIN-2 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Finance / Accounting FIN-007 Bank Statements / Checking Account Reconciliation / Bank Reconciliation / Fiscal Agent Statements / Trust Statements / Petty Cash Reconciliation (Transaction Statements, Wire Transfers, Check Listing Audit Trail, Deposits, Treasury Statements, Trustee & Investment Statements, etc.) 7 years Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD District Preference (may include records pertaining to independent contractor's compensation, or expense reimbursement); Meets auditing standards; GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-008 Bonds / Debt / Transcripts / Disclosure Reports / Lines of Credit / Promissory Notes / Commercial Paper Fully Defeased or Matured + Refundings +10 years Yes: Until Maturity Mag, OD, Ppr S / I No Statute of Limitations for bonds, mortgages, trust deeds, notes or debentures is 6 years; Bonds issued by local governments are 10 years; There are specific requirements for disposal of unused bonds; CCP §§336 et seq.; 337.5(a); 26 CFR 1.6001-1(e): GC §§43900 et seq., 60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-009 Cell Phone Tower Maintenance Demolition of Tower + 2 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/i Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 et. seq. Finance / Accounting FIN-010 Checks Issued by the District (cashed - maintained by the Bank)7 years Mag, Ppr May contain independent contractor's compensation; Statute of Limitations is 4 years; Meets municipal government auditing standards; GC §60201(d)(12), CCP § 337 Finance / Accounting FIN-011 Daily Cash / Receipts / Petty Cash Slips 7 years Mag, Ppr District preference (meets municipal government auditing standards); GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-012 Deposits / Deposit Slips 7 years Mag, Ppr District preference (meets municipal government auditing standards); GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 6.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: FINANCE Page FIN-3 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Finance / Accounting FIN-013 Financial Reports: General Ledger, Journals, Ledgers, Reconciliations, Registers, Reports, Transaction Histories, Balance Sheets, Batch Proofs, Trial Balance, etc. When No Longer Required Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference (reports can not be re-created from Finance System Database; meets municipal government auditing standards); GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-014 Fixed Asset Retirements - Auction / Disposal / Sales / Surplused 7 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; GC §60201, CCP §337 Finance / Accounting FIN-015 Fund Accounting / Interfund Billing or Transfers 7 years Mag, Ppr GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-016 Investment Pools / LAIF 7 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference (meets municipal government auditing standards); GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-017 Journal Entries / Journal Vouchers / Audit Work Papers 7 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; Meets municipal government auditing standards; GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-018 Postcards / Green Bond Sales 30 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference to match the length of the bond; GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-019 Property Maintenance Contracts Demolition of Building + 2 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/i Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 et. seq. Finance / Accounting FIN-020 Returned Checks (NSF, etc.) 7 years Yes: Until Paid Mag, Ppr Meets municipal government auditing standards; Statewide guidelines propose audit + 4 years; GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-021 Revenue from Property Taxes / Assessments / Rents 7 years Mag, Ppr District preference (meets municipal government auditing standards); GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-022 State Reports: State Controller's Report 7 years Mag, Ppr District preference; Filed with the State; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 6.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: FINANCE Page FIN-4 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Finance / Accounting FIN-023 Tax Returns (Sales Tax, etc.)7 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; IRS: 4 years after tax is due or paid (longer for auditing & contractor delinquency); Ca. FTB: 3 years; IRS Reg §31.6001- 1(e)(2), 26 CFR §1.6001-1, R&T §19530, GC §60201 Finance / Accounting FIN-024 W-9's P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD District Preference; IRS: 4 years after tax is due or paid (longer for auditing & contractor delinquency); Ca. FTB: 3 years; IRS Reg §31.6001-1(e)(2), R&T §19530, GC §60201(d)(12); 29 USC 436 PAYROLL Finance / Payroll FIN-025 DE-6. DE-43, W-3, & DE-166, & 941 Forms - Quarterly Payroll Tax Returns (Federal and State) IRS 5500 Forms (Employee Benefit Plans), PERS / FICA & Medicare Adjustments - OASDI, Federal Tax Deposits, Adjustments, etc. 7 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; IRS: 4 years after tax is due or paid (longer for auditing & contractor delinquency); Ca. FTB: 3 years; IRS Reg §31.6001- 1(e)(2), 26 CFR §1.6001-1, R&T §19530, GC §60201 Finance / Payroll FIN-026 Deferred Compensation Quarterly Reports / 457 Quarterly Statements 7 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; GC §60201 Finance / Payroll FIN-027 Payroll Checks (cancelled)7 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD GC §60201(d)(12) Finance / Payroll FIN-028 Payroll Registers / Payroll Reports / Distribution / Withholding Control & Distribution Report P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201(d)(12) Finance / Payroll FIN-029 Pension Contribution Reports / CalPERS 7 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 6.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: FINANCE Page FIN-5 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Finance / Payroll FIN-030 Timesheets 7 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference to meet auditing standards; IRS Reg §31.6001- 1(e)(2), R&T §19530; LC § 1174(d); 29 CFR 516.5 & 516.6(c); GC §60201 et seq. Finance / Payroll FIN-031 W-2's 7 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; IRS: 4 yrs after tax is due or paid; Ca. FTB: 3 years; Articles show 7 years; IRS Reg §31.6001-1(e)(2), R&T §19530; 29CFR 516.5 - 516.6, 29USC 436, GC §60201(d)(12) PROCUREMENT & CONTRACTS (See District-Wide Schedule for all other Records) Finance / Procurement & Contracts FIN-032 Bid Solicitation Tool / Bid Sync Indefinite Mag Data is interrelated; GC §§60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 6.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: GENERAL COUNSEL / LEGAL, RISK MANAGEMENT Page GC-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). GENERAL COUNSEL / LEGAL General Counsel / Legal GC-001 Advice Files including memos to Staff and Board When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr GC §60201 General Counsel / Legal GC-002 Employee Investigations when Not Retained by Human Resources Department (due to involvement of Human Resources personnel) Separation + 6 years Yes: Until Separation Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference (matches the length of time that Human Resources retains their Personnel File); 29 CFR 1602.14; 1602.31 & 1627.3(b)(ii); GC §§12946, 60201; 29 USC 1113; GC §3105; GC §53235.2(b) General Counsel / Legal GC-003 Lawsuits / Litigation - Final Settlement P Yes: Until Resolution Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; Covers various statute of limitations; CCP §§ 337 et seq.; GC §§ 911.2, 60201, 60201.6; PC §832.5 General Counsel / Legal GC-004 Lawsuits / Litigation - Real Property Rights P Yes: Until Resolution Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; Covers various statute of limitations; CCP §§ 337 et seq.; GC §§ 911.2, 60201, 60201.6 General Counsel / Legal GC-005 Lawsuits / Litigation (Excludes Final Settlement) Final Resolution + 5 years Yes: Until Resolution Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; Covers various statute of limitations; CCP §§ 337 et seq.; GC §§ 911.2, 60201, 60201.6; PC §832.5 General Counsel / Legal GC-006 Memos and Analysis of Real Property Rights P Yes: Until Resolution Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; Covers various statute of limitations; CCP §§ 337 et seq.; GC §§ 911.2, 60201, 60201.6; PC §832.5 General Counsel / Legal GC-007 Notices: Beneficiary to Trustee / Trusts / Probate / Distributions P Yes: Until Resolution Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; Covers various statute of limitations; CCP §§ 337 et seq.; GC §§ 911.2, 60201, 60201.6 General Counsel / Legal GC-008 Subpoenas or Summons / Pitchess Motions 2 years Mag, Ppr GC §60201 GENERAL COUNSEL / RISK MANAGEMENT Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2018 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 6.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: GENERAL COUNSEL / LEGAL, RISK MANAGEMENT Page GC-2 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). General Counsel / Risk Management GC-009 Claims, Liability including 1st & 3rd party claims, invoices, Insurance payments, Accident/Incident Reports, etc. Final Resolution + 5 years Yes: Until Resolution Mag, OD, Ppr S Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; Covers various statute of limitations; CCP §§ 337 et seq.; GC §§ 911.2, 60201, 60201.6 General Counsel / Risk Management GC-010 Insurance Certificates (for consultant, contractor, agreements / contracts and Permits)P Yes: Before Completion Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After 2 years Covers E&O Statute of Limitations (insurance certificates are filed with agreement); Statute of Limitations: Contracts & Spec's=4 years, Wrongful Death=comp. + 5 years, Developers=comp. + 10 years; CCP §337 et. seq., GC §60201 General Counsel / Risk Management GC-011 Insurance Policies (District’s Evidence of Coverage & Insurance Premiums/Invoices)P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §§ 911.2, 60201 General Counsel / Risk Management GC-012 Pollution Coverage Applications 6 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §§ 911.2, 60201 General Counsel / Risk Management GC-013 Underwriting Reports 5 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD District preference (meets municipal government auditing standards); GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2018 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 3.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: GENERAL MANAGER Page GM-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). GENERAL MANAGER General Manager GM-001 Projects & Issues (Issues and/or projects will vary over time) Completion + 10 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2018 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 3.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: GRANTS Page GR-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? Retentions apply to the department that is NOT the Office of Record (OFR), or the "Lead Department". If you are the OFR, refer to your department retention schedule. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). GRANTS Grants GR-001 Grants Management Database Indefinite Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Grants GR-002 Grants (SUCCESSFUL - all records) After Funding Agency Audit, if required - 5 years, unless Grant Conditions requires longer retention Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD District Preference (may include records pertaining to independent contractor's compensation, or expense reimbursement); Meets auditing standards; Uniform Admin. Requirements for Grants to Local Governments is 3 years from expenditure report or final payment of grantee or subgrantee; 2 CFR 200.333;221 CFR 1403.36 & 1403.42(b); 24 CFR 85.42, 91.105(h), 92.505, 570.490, & 570.502(a&b), 28 CFR 66.42; 29 CFR 97.42; 40 CFR 31.42; 44 CFR 13.42; 45 CFR 92.42; OMB Circular A- 110 & A-133; GC §60201 Grants GR-003 Grants: UNSUCCESSFUL (Applications, Correspondence, etc.)2 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: HUMAN RESOURCES Page HR-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). HUMAN RESOURCES Human Resources HR-001 Affirmative Action Complaints - Department of Fair Employment & Housing (DFEH) or Equal Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Final Disposition + 3 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; All State and Federal laws require retention until final disposition of formal complaint; State requires 2 years after action is taken; GC §§12946, 60201 Human Resources HR-002 Affirmative Action: EEO-4 Reports and records required to generate EEO-4 report 3 years Mag, Ppr 29 CFR 1602.30 Human Resources HR-003 Benefit Plans - Employee Benefit Policies (Benefits: Health, Eye, Dental, Life Insurance, Long Term Disability, State Disability, Unemployment Insurance, etc) Plan Termination + 6 years Yes: Before Expiration Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference to be consistent with District-wide standards; EEOC / ADEA (Age) requires 1 year after benefit plan termination; Federal law requires 6 years after filing date; State Law requires 2 years after action; 29 CFR 1627.3(b)(2); 29 USC 1027; GC §§12946, 60201 Human Resources HR-004 Classification Studies / Salary Surveys Superseded + 3 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 Human Resources HR-005 Classifications / Job Descriptions Superseded + 3 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 Human Resources HR-006 DMV Pull Notices When Superseded or Separation + 6 years Mag, Ppr District preference (DMV record that the District considers a non-record used for reference); DMV audits every 2 years; Bureau of National Affairs recommends 2 years for all supplementary Personnel records; GC §60201 Human Resources HR-007 Drug & Alcohol Test Results (ALL)5 years Mag Ppr District preference; D.O.T. Requires 5 years for positive tests; EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires 3 years physical examinations; State Law requires 2 years; 29 CFR 1627.3(b)(v), GC §§12946, 60201, 49 CFR 655.71 et seq.; 49 CFR 382.401 et seq. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: HUMAN RESOURCES Page HR-2 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Human Resources HR-008 Employee Investigations & Complaints (Not Conflicting with Human Resource Personnel) Separation + 3 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD If the investigation or complaint involves Human Resource Personnel, General Counsel is the Office of Record; Department preference; EEOC / FLSA / ADEA (Age) statue of limitations is 1-3 years; State Law requires 2 years; Reports & Data used to compile EEO reports are required for 3 years; 29 CFR 1602 et seq & 1627.3(a)(5) and (6), 2 CCR 11013(c) 8 CCR §11040.7( c), GC §§12946, 60201 Human Resources HR-009 Human Resources Database Indefinite Mag, Ppr Department preference (data is inter-related); GC §60201 et seq. Human Resources HR-010 I-9s Separation + 3 years Yes: Until Separation Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Required for 1 year from termination or 3 years from hiring, whichever is later; EEOC / FLSA / ADEA (Age) requires 3 years for "any other forms of employment inquiry"; State Law requires 2 -3 years; INA 274A(b)(3); INS Rule 274a.1(b)(2); 8 CFR 274a.2; 29 CFR 1627.3(b)(i); GC §§12946, 34090 Human Resources HR-011 Labor Relations - Grievances Separation + 3 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; EEOC / FLSA / ADEA (Age) statue of limitations is 1-3 years; State Law requires 2 years; Reports & Data used to compile EEO reports are required for 3 years; 29 CFR 1602 et seq & 1627.3(a)(5) and (6), 2 CCR 11013(c) 8 CCR §11040.7( c), GC §§12946, 60201 Human Resources HR-012 Labor Relations / Negotiations / Office Supervisory and Management Correspondence (OSM) 10 years Mag, Ppr GC §60201 Human Resources HR-013 Litigation - Employee-related Resolution + 5 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §§ 911.2, 60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: HUMAN RESOURCES Page HR-3 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Human Resources HR-014 MOUs / Memoranda of Understanding (Employee Groups)P Yes: Current Version Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC § 60201 Human Resources HR-015 OSHA Inspections & Citations, Forms, loss analysis reports, safety reports, actuarial studies 5 years Ppr OSHA requires 5 years; State law requires 2 years; 8 CCR §3203(b)(1), 29 CFR 1904.33, OMB 1220-0029, 8 CCR 14300.33; GC §60201 et seq.; LC §6429c Human Resources HR-016 OSHA Log 300, 300 A, 301, 301A, etc. / Cal OSHA Logs 5 years Ppr OSHA requires 5 years; State law requires 2 years; 8 CCR §3203(b)(1), 29 CFR 1904.33, OMB 1220-0029, 8 CCR 14300.33; GC §60201 et seq.; LC §6429c Human Resources HR-017 Personnel Files - FMLA / Disability File Separation + 3 years Yes: Until Separation Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; EEOC / FLSA / ADEA (Age) statue of limitations is 1-3 years; State Law requires 2 years; Reports & Data used to compile EEO reports are required for 3 years; 29 CFR 1602 et seq & 1627.3(a)(5) and (6), 2 CCR 11013(c) 8 CCR §11040.7( c), GC §§12946, 60201 Human Resources HR-018 Personnel Files - General File (Includes Application, Awards, Backgrounds, Disciplinary Actions, Certifications, Commendations, Direct Deposit Authorization Forms, Garnishments, Child Support, Court Orders regarding Employee Wages, Evaluations, Personnel Action Forms, Policy acknowledgements, Unemployment Claims, etc. - Excludes Medical Records) Separation + 6 years Yes: Until Separation Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; statute of limitations for retirement benefits is 6 years from last action; EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires 3 years for promotion, demotion, transfer, selection, or discharge; State Law requires 2 - 3 years; 29 CFR 1602.14; 1602.31 & 1627.3(b)(ii); GC §§12946, 60201; 29 USC 1113; GC §3105; GC §53235.2(b) Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: HUMAN RESOURCES Page HR-4 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Human Resources HR-019 Personnel Files - Medical File (Includes pre-employment physicals, Hearing tests, Respirator Fit Tests, Medical Leaves, etc.) Separation + 30 years, or Termination of Benefits, Whichever is Longer Yes: Until Separation Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; Files maintained separately; Claims can be made for 30 years for toxic substance exposure; W-4s: IRS Regulation 31-6001-1 four years after the due date of such tax for the return period to which the records relate, or the date such tax is paid, whichever is the later. 26 CFR 31.6001-1; 8 CCR §3204(d)(1) et seq., 8 CCR 5144, 29 CFR 1910.1020(d)(1)(i), 29 USC 1113; GC §§12946, 60201 Human Resources HR-020 Personnel Files - Training File Documentation of completion of employment- related training, including Harassment Training Certificates, etc. Separation + 6 years Yes: Until Separation Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; OSHA requires safety training 5 years; EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires 3 years for promotion, demotion, transfer, selection, or discharge; State Law requires 2 -3 years; 29 CFR 1627.3(b)(ii), 8 CCR §3204(d)(1) et seq., GC §§12946, 60201 Human Resources HR-021 Personnel Rules & Regulations, including employee handbook P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC § 60201 Human Resources HR-022 Ranger Background 2nd Phase (Psychological, LiveScan) Separation + 5 years Yes: Until Separation Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; statute of limitations for retirement benefits is 6 years from last action; EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires 3 years for promotion, demotion, transfer, selection, or discharge; State Law requires 2 - 3 years; 29 CFR 1602.14; 1602.31 & 1627.3(b)(ii); GC §§12946, 60201; 29 USC 1113; GC §3105; GC §53235.2(b) Human Resources HR-023 Recruitment Files: Brochure, advertisement, unsuccessful applications (with or without interviews), selection materials, interview notes, results, etc. 5 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; EEOC / FLSA / ADEA (Age) requires 1-3 years; State Law requires 2 - 3 years; 29 CFR 1627.3(b)(i), 29 CFR 1602.14 et seq; 2 CCR 11013(c) GC §§12946, 60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: HUMAN RESOURCES Page HR-5 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Human Resources HR-024 Safety Committee / Safety Steering Committee Agendas & Minutes 5 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; GC §60201 et seq. Human Resources HR-025 Safety Investigations 5 years Ppr OSHA requires 5 years; State law requires 2 years; 8 CCR §3203(b)(1), 29 CFR 1904.33, OMB 1220-0029, 8 CCR 14300.33; GC §60201 et seq.; LC §6429c Human Resources HR-026 Training - ALL HUMAN RESOURCE or SAFETY COURSE RECORDS (Attendance Rosters, Outlines and Materials; includes Harassment Prevention and other Training) Minimum 7 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; Ethics Training is 5 years; Statewide guidelines propose 7 years; Calif. Labor Division is required to keep their OSHA records 7 years; EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires 3 years for promotion, demotion, transfer, selection, or discharge; State Law requires 2 -3 years for personnel actions; 8 CCR §3203 et seq., 29 CFR 1602.31; LC §6429(c); GC §§12946, 60201, Human Resources HR-028 Workers Compensation Files Separation + 30 years, or Termination of Benefits, Whichever is Longer Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; Claims can be made for 30 years for toxic substance exposure; 8 CCR 10102; 8 CCR 15400.2, 8 CCR §3204(d)(1) et seq., 29 CFR 1910.1020, GC §§12946, 60201, CCP §337 et seq. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 4.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: INFORMATION SYSTEMS & TECHNOLOGY Page IST-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). INFORMATION SYSTEMS & TECHNOLOGY Information Systems & Technology IST-001 Backups (Computer) When No Longer Required Yes Mag. (Disk) Stored On-site and Off-site. Used for Disaster Recovery Purposes Only; Considered a copy and can be destroyed when no longer required; GC §60200 et seq. Information Systems & Technology IST-002 Geographic Information System (GIS)Indefinite Yes Mag Data is interrelated; GC §60200, 60201 et seq. Information Systems & Technology IST-003 Network Configuration Maps & Plans When No Longer Required Yes Mag. (Disk)Department preference; GC §60201 et seq. Information Systems & Technology IST-004 Official Records kept on Unalterable Media such as WORM / DVD-r / CD-r / Blue Ray-R that does not permit additions, deletions, or changes P Yes OD For legal compliance for Trustworthy Electronic Records (when the electronic record serves as the official record); GC §34090 et seq., 12168.7, EVC 1550, 2 CCR 22620 et seq Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 5.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: LAND & FACILITIES Page L&F-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). LAND & FACILITIES Land & Facilities L&F-001 Aboveground Storage Tanks (Diesel, Gas) Inspections, Maintenance, Repairs 20 years, or When Superseded, Whichever is longer Mag, OD, Ppr S/i Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-002 Agriculture or Grazing License Agreements / Leases Termination + 2 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/i Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 et. seq. Land & Facilities L&F-003 Air Quality Permits / ACMD Permits Expiration + 5 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/i Yes: After QC & OD 40 CFR 70.6; GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-004 BIT Inspection & Audits (Biennial Inspection of Terminals) / DOT Program / CHP Inspections 2 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference (CHP audits every 25 months); GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-005 Cell Phone Tower Agreements Termination of Lease + 2 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/i Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 et. seq. Land & Facilities L&F-006 Daily Vehicle Inspections / Pre-Trip Inspections / Vehicle Safety Checks / Daily Equipment Checks 1 year Ppr District preference (only 90 days is required); 13 CCR 1234(e); GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-007 Generator Operation Logs & Inspections 5 years Ppr Form 400–E–13a instructions, GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-008 Operations & Maintenance Manuals (O&M Manuals) Life of Facility or Equipment Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 et. seq. Land & Facilities L&F-009 Preserve Inspections / Annual Preserve Inspections 5 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-010 Property Management / Tenant / Original Leases Termination with Tenant + 2 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/i Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 et. seq. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 5.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: LAND & FACILITIES Page L&F-2 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Land & Facilities L&F-011 Safety Data Sheets (SDS) / Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) / Chemical Use Report Form (or records of the chemical / substance / agent, where & when it was used) 30 years Yes: After 3 months Mag, OD, Ppr S/i Yes: After QC & OD MSDS may be destroyed as long as a record of the chemical / substance / agent, where & when it was used is maintained for 30 years; Applies to qualified employers; 8 CCR 3204(d)(1)(B)(2 and 3), 29 CFR 1910.1020(d)(1)(ii)(B); GC §60201 et seq. Finance / Accounting L&F-012 Security Deposits Expiration + 2 years Mag, Ppr District preference; GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-013 Underground Storage Tanks – UST – Repairs, Lining, Upgrades, Location of Tank P Mag, Ppr 23 CCR 2712(b); H&S §25284.4(i); GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-014 Underground Storage Tanks – UST Monitoring and Maintenance, Release Detection Systems, Cathodic Protection Maintenance Records 7 years Mag, Ppr Monitoring and Maintenance records are required on site for 3 years, 6 ½ years for cathodic protection maintenance, 5 years for calibration & maintenance of release detection systems; 23 CCR 2712(b); H&S §25284.4(i); GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-015 Used Oil Disposal 3 years Mag, Ppr 22 CCR 66266.130(c)(5), H&S §25250.18(b), 25250.19(a)(3) et seq. Land & Facilities L&F-016 Vehicle & Equipment Maintenance (Includes Cranes) Sale or Disposal + 1 year Mag, OD, Ppr S/i Yes: After QC & OD 8 CCR § 3203(b)(1); 49 CFR 396.21(b)(1); 49 CFR 396.3(c); CCP §337 et. seq., 13 CCR 1234(f); GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-017 Vehicle Titles ("Pink Slips")Upon Sale Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-018 Water (Potable): Customer Concerns / Customer Complaints: Odor / Taste / Visual Complaints (Correspondence) Close + 5 years Mag, Ppr 5 years is required in State and Federal law for any complaints; 40 CFR 122.41(j)(2) & 40 CFR 141.33(b); 22 CCR 64453(a) Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 5.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: LAND & FACILITIES Page L&F-3 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Land & Facilities L&F-019 Water (Potable): Lab Reports & Chains of Custody / Tabular Summaries: ALL 12 years Mag, Mfr, OD, Ppr S / I Yes - After 3 months Department Preference; Law requires for 12 years or 2 compliance cycles (18 years); Actual laboratory reports may be kept, or data may be transferred to tabular summaries; 22 CCR 64400.25; 22 CCR §64470, 40 CFR 141.33(a); 40 CFR 141.91 Land & Facilities L&F-020 Work Orders / Service Requests / Accidents / Incidents / Vehicle Maintenance - All Information Entered in CMMS Database When No Longer Required Mag Ppr Preliminary drafts (the database is the original); GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-021 Work Orders / Service Requests / Accidents / Incidents / Vehicle Maintenance - NOT entered in CMMS Database (or partial information entered into CMMS Database) (Division providing service retains originals; Division requesting service is considered a copy) 5 years Mag Ppr District Preference (covers all Potable Water requirements); CCP §§340 et seq., 342, GC §§945.6, GC §60201 Land & Facilities L&F-022 Work Orders / Service Requests / Accidents / Incidents / Vehicle Maintenance CMMS DATABASE (Computerized Maintenance Management System) Indefinite Mag Data is interrelated; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 3.1 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: NATURAL RESOURCES Page NR-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). NATURAL RESOURCES (See District-Wide for Monitoring and other Documents) Natural Resources NR-001 Correspondence - Regulatory Agencies Minimum 15 years Yes: While Active Issues Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes - After QC & OD Department Preference; Some correspondence from Regulatory Agencies needs to be retained for long periods of time; GC §60201 Natural Resources NR-002 Project Studies & Reports, Scientific Studies, etc.P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 et seq. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 4.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: PLANNING Page PL-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). PLANNING Finance PL-001 Invoices (used to ensure proper reconciliation / accounting) Copies - When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr Copies (Finance maintains originals); GC §60200 Planning PL-002 Master Plans, Site Plans, Preserve Plans P Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 District Clerk PL-003 Preserve & Use Management History - Compilation of Board Staff Reports and Plans by Preserve Copies - When No Longer Required Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD Copies (District Clerk maintains originals); GC §60200 Planning PL-004 Public Access Working Group Agenda Packets and Minutes / Citizen Advisory Groups P Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Planning PL-005 Site & Project History / Permits (Land Use Permits, Planning Permits, Encroachment Permits, Caltrans Permits, County Permits, Water Tanks, etc) - Records with Significant Content P Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 4.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: PUBLIC AFFAIRS Page PA-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). PUBLIC AFFAIRS Public Affairs PA-001 Annual District Report - POST-Digital P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference for historical purposes; GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-002 Annual District Report - PRE-Digital P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I No Department preference for historical purposes; GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-003 Historical Records - Significant Historical Value (Opening of Trails, Founders Day, etc.) - POST- Digital P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-004 Historical Records - Significant Historical Value (Opening of Trails, Founders Day, etc.) - PRE- Digital P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I No Department preference; GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-005 Information Campaigns / Fact Sheets/ Flyers (Stay on Trails, Mountain Lion Information, etc.) When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr Department preference; GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-006 Legislation - Support or Oppose 5 years Mag, Ppr Department preference; GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-007 Lobbyist Authorization / Reporting (FPPC Form 635 / 602)5 years Mag, Ppr 2 CCR 18615(d), GC §81009(e)&(g) Public Affairs PA-008 Newsletters Produced by the District - POST- Digital P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-009 Newsletters Produced by the District - PRE- Digital P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I No GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-010 Permission for Use - Volunteer or Public Submitted Photo P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-011 Photos, Videos & Slides When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr Drafts; final photos may become part of a final document; GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-012 Preserve Maps, Brochures - PRE-Digital P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I No Department preference for historical purposes; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 4.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: PUBLIC AFFAIRS Page PA-2 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Public Affairs PA-013 Preserve Maps, Brochures - POST-Digital P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference for historical purposes; GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-014 Public Relations / Press Releases When No Longer Required Mag GC §60201 Lead Dept.PA-015 Reports and Studies - White Papers, Issue Papers, Scientific Studies (other than Annual Reports) When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr Official record reside in Lead Department (that authored the Report or Study); GC §60201 Public Affairs PA-016 Special Projects & Fact Sheets (Issues and/or projects will vary over time) When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: REAL PROPERTY Page RP-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). REAL PROPERTY Real Property RP-001 Maps – Historic County maps, US Patent maps, historic USGS maps P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 Real Property & General Counsel RP-002 Neighbor Issues / Encroachments including Legal / Advice Memos P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 District Clerk RP-003 Preliminary Use & Management Plan (PUMP) P Mag, Ppr Department preference (copies - the District Clerk Maintains originals); GC §60200 Real Property RP-004 Real Property - Purchased Property Board Reports, Easements, Escrow Closing Documents, Final Title, , Land Divisions/Lot Line Adjustments, Policy Exceptions, Title Exceptions, Title Insurance, Purchase & Sale Agreements, Photos, Maps, Resolutions, etc. P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 Real Property RP-005 Real Property - Research Properties P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department preference; GC §60201 Real Property RP-006 Real Property Appraisal Reports: NOT Purchased P Mag, Ppr Department preference (not accessible to the public until close of escrow); USPAP (Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice) ethical standards require appraisers to retain records for at least 5 years, or final disposition + 2 years, if used in a judicial proceeding; GC §60201 Real Property RP-007 Real Property Appraisal Reports: Purchased Property, Funded Loans P Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Not accessible to the public until purchase has been completed; meets grant auditing requirements; 2 CFR 200.333; 24 CFR 85.42 & 91.105(h), & 570.502(b); 29 CFR 97.42, GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: REAL PROPERTY Page RP-2 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Real Property RP-008 Real Property Database (Access Db)Indefinite Mag Data is interrelated; system qualifies as a "trusted system"; GC §§60201, 12168.7 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: VISITOR SERVICES Page VS-1 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). VISITOR SERVICES / PUBLIC SAFETY Visitor Services VS-001 Access Databases: Permits, Citations / Incidents, Radar Readings Indefinite Mag Data is interrelated; GC §§60201, 12168.7 Visitor Services VS-002 Citations, Notices, Warnings / Data Ticket: All, including Parking, Marijuana / Cannabis Citations 2 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 Visitor Services VS-003 Complaints Regarding Peace Officers generated from a Civilian Final Disposition + 5 years Mag, Ppr State requires for at least 5 years for Civilian complaints; other State & Federal laws require retention until final disposition of formal complaint; State requires 2 years after action is taken; Statute of Limitations is 4 years after the discovery of the offense for misconduct in office; PC 832.5, EVC § 1045(b)(1), GC §§12946, 60201; VC §2547 Visitor Services VS-004 Court Juvenile Contact Reports 2 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 Visitor Services VS-005 Court Trial Notices When No Longer Required Mag, Ppr Court Records (Not a District Record) Visitor Services VS-006 District Attorney Prosecution and Discovery Requests 2 years Mag, Ppr GC §60201 Visitor Services/ Human Resources VS-007 Emergency Preparedness Response and Recovery Plans Superseded + 2 years Yes Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: VISITOR SERVICES Page VS-2 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Visitor Services VS-008 Evidence, Property, Photographs & Film: Crime Scenes When No Longer Required - Minimum Expiration of Appeals Period or Statute of Limitations for Crime Mag, Ppr, OD S/I Yes: After QC & OD See appropriate Crime Report; Statute of Limitations is 1 year for property seized by officers; CCP §340(4); GC §60201 Visitor Services VS-009 Incident Reports / Crime Reports of Arrests: Sealed Cases (e.g. Juveniles) (T.N.G. Order) Per Court Order (Subject 26 years old / Sealing Date + 5 years) Yes Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD Statute of Limitations runs up to age of majority + 8 years; Sealing for Juveniles and Wards of the Court retained for 5 years; CCP §§340.1, GC §60201; GC §68152(g)(1), W&I §781(d) Visitor Services VS-010 Incident Reports / Crime Reports: Capital Crimes, or Without Statute of Limitations: Arson (All) Child Abuse – Unsolved Elder Abuse – Unsolved Falsification of Public Records Homicide / Murder Kidnapping Misuse of Public Funds Treason P Yes: Before Disposition Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; Most have no limitations on commencement of action; PC §§ 261, 286, 288, 288a, 288.5, 289, 289.5, and 799; GC § 60201 et seq. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: VISITOR SERVICES Page VS-3 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Visitor Services VS-011 Incident Reports / Crime Reports: Felonies that are NOT Capital Crimes, or Without Statute of Limitations: - ALL except those otherwise specifically mentioned in this retention schedule (see Comments for exceptions) 10 years or upon DOJ Notification Yes Mag, OD, Ppr S / I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; Provided there are no outstanding warrants, unrecovered weapons, criminal deaths, they are not historically significant, no property related to the report is outstanding in the DOJ or NCIC databases, and it is not classified under PC §§799, 800, 290, 457.1 and H&S §§11590 registrant; Stat. of Limit. is 2 yrs; Destroy juvenile marijuana after age18; H&S §11361.5, GC §60201, PC §802, PC §§187, 800 et seq. Visitor Services VS-012 Internal Affairs Investigations - Individual Rangers / Complaints Against Peace Officers Final Disposition + 5 years Mag, Ppr State requires for at least 5 years for civilian's complaints; other State & Federal laws require retention until final disposition of formal complaint; State requires 2 years after action is taken; Statute of Limitations is 4 after the discovery of the offense for misconduct in office; PC 832.5. EVC § 1045(b)(1), GC §§12946, 60201; VC §2547 Visitor Services VS-013 List of Ranger Equipment Issued (Badge, Body Armor, Radios, etc.) Separation + 6 years Yes: Until Separation Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC § 60201 et seq. Visitor Services VS-014 Patrol Logs / Incidents / Documentation of Rounds Made 2 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Visitor Services VS-015 Patrol Schedules 2 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Visitor Services VS-016 Radar Readings 2 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Visitor Services VS-017 Ride-Along Waivers 5 years Mag, OD, Ppr S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: VISITOR SERVICES Page VS-4 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Visitor Services VS-018 Training - Ranger Field Safety Course Records Attendance Rosters, Outlines and Materials; includes safety training. Certificates are maintained in the employee's Training File 5 years Mag, Ppr, OD S/I Yes: After QC & OD Rosters are sent to POST; OSHA requires safety training 5 years; EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires 3 years for promotion, demotion, transfer, selection, or discharge; State Law requires 2 -3 years; 29 CFR 1627.3(b)(ii), 8 CCR §3204(d)(1) et seq., GC §§12946, 60201 Visitor Services VS-019 Training Files - Rangers / Sworn, Unsworn, Reserves Certificate copies, qualification scores, mandatory training records, POST Training Separation + 5 years Mag, Ppr, OD S/I Yes: After QC & OD Department Preference; GC §60201 VISITOR SERVICES / VOLUNTEER PROGRAMS Visitor Services VS-020 Daniels Nature Center Guestbook / Visitor's Log 2 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 Visitor Services VS-021 Online Volunteer Forms (Interest Forms, Volunteer Service Hours Reports, Participant Feedback) / WuFoo Database (Sign-ups, Permits, Waivers) Indefinite Mag Data is interrelated; GC §§60201, 12168.7 Visitor Services VS-022 Public Activity and Event Sign-in and Release of Liability / Photo Release 7 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 Visitor Services VS-023 Training Sign-in Sheets / Enrichment Rosters(may include waivers)5 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 VISITOR SERVICES / VOLUNTEERS Visitor Services VS-024 Volunteer Applications 3 years Mag, Ppr Department preference (Courts treat volunteers as employees); EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires 3 years for promotion, demotion, transfer, selection, or discharge; 29 CFR 1602.31 & 1627.3(b)(1)(i)&(ii), GC §§12946, 60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Ver. 7.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: VISITOR SERVICES Page VS-5 Office of Record Retention No.Records Description Comments / Reference (OFR)Total Retention Vital?Media Options Image: I=Import S=Scan Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC'd? If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for District-Wide Standards. Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder. Litigation, complaints, claims, audits, pending public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion). Visitor Services VS-025 Volunteer Training Records 5 years Mag, Ppr Department Preference; GC §60201 Visitor Services VS-026 Volunteers / Docents - Agreement and Release of Liability Forms, Child Abuse Prevention (CAP) form, Emergency Contacts, Documentation of LiveScan Clearance Inactive / Separation + 3 years Mag, Ppr Department preference (Courts treat volunteers as employees); EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires 3 years for promotion, demotion, transfer, selection, or discharge; 29 CFR 1602.31 & 1627.3(b)(1)(i)&(ii), GC §§12946, 60201 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Adopted: Exhibit A Rev. 1/3/18 R-20-27 Meeting 20-06 March 11, 2020 AGENDA ITEM 6 AGENDA ITEM Approval of Basis of Design recommendations to complete the Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Structural Stabilization Project at Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION Approve the structural stabilization measures for the Deer Hollow Farm White Barn as recommended in the Basis of Design Report prepared by Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc., dated December 18, 2019. SUMMARY In April 2019, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) Board of Directors (Board) authorized a contract with Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associations, Inc., (WJE) to provide engineering design services for the Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Structural Stabilization Project (Project) at Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve (R-19-49). The contract includes a site assessment, basis of design development, construction documents, permitting assistance, bidding support, and construction administration. WJE has completed the Basis of Design Report, which includes a structural condition assessment and recommended structural stabilization measures (Attachment 1). Concurrently, the District retained Garcia and Associates (GANDA) to complete a historical resource evaluation and cultural resource survey and their findings have been incorporated into WJE’s recommendations. The General Manager recommends approving the structural stabilization measures recommended in the Basis of Design report. The recommended measures factor in longevity, cost, and input from Deer Hollow Farm staff. Costs for the recommended repairs total $166,833 with escalation and can be fully funded by donations received for Deer Hollow Farm. If approved by the Board, District staff will direct WJE to proceed with design development and the production of construction documents. The Project is anticipated to begin construction in Fall 2020. BACKGROUND Deer Hollow Farm is jointly operated by the District and City of Mountain View with funding support from the Friends of Deer Hollow Farm (FODHF) and County of Santa Clara. In 2016, the District and FODHF each accepted a $165,000 donation ($330,000 total) from the George Tindall Estate to fund projects that benefit Deer Hollow Farm. The District, City of Mountain View, and Deer Hollow Farm staff collectively determined that the Deer Hollow Farm White Barn (White Barn) stabilization was the best use of the donated funds. Initial structural R-20-27 Page 2 stabilization considerations included strengthening the undersized brick foundations and structural members, and repairing damage from weathering and water intrusion. The Project began in Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18 Action Plan, with an initial scope of assessing the White Barn’s historical significance and stabilization needs. In March 2018, Page & Turnbull prepared a Historic Structure Report for the White Barn including a preliminary evaluation of historic significance and initial repair recommendations with associated costs. Page and Turnbull’s preliminary evaluation found that the White Barn may be eligible for listing but that further evaluation of the White Barn and Deer Hollow Farm would be required to make that determination. In April 2019, the District awarded a contract to WJE to provide engineering design services for the Project (R-19-49). At this meeting, the Board requested that the Basis of Design be returned to them for review and discussion. DISCUSSION Historic Significance In October 2019, GANDA was issued a Task Order through an on-call contract to prepare a Historical Resource Evaluation Report for the White Barn (Attachment 2). Deer Hollow Farm is located at the site of a working ranch, first established in 1849 as part of the Grant Homestead. In 1937, the property was purchased by George Sheldon Perham and operated as a family ranch until 1975. GANDA’s assessment concluded that the White Barn was constructed between 1937 and 1948, with evidence pointing to a narrower date range between 1940 and 1948. Therefore, the White Barn’s period of historical significance is associated with the Perham ownership period; this is after homesteading occurred in Santa Clara County (mid to late 1800s). The White Barn and Deer Hollow Farm are not currently listed on federal, state, or local historic registers. GANDA’s assessment used the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) Criteria for Designation to determine the historic eligibility for listing. GANDA’s investigation determined that although the White Barn retains its historical integrity as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it is ineligible for listing on the California Register of Historic Places. As detailed in GANDA’s report, the White Barn did not meet the criteria for listing on the CRHR under Criterion A - D. Criterion A is associated with events that have made significant contributions to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage. GANDA concluded that although Deer Hollow Farm is associated with the continued agricultural development of Santa Clara County, the White Barn itself was not used for commercial operation and had no association with the establishment or growth of ranching and dairy operations in Santa Clara County. Therefore, the White Barn is not associated with events that occurred on the property between 1937 and 1975 that contributed to broad patterns of California or local history under Criterion A. Criterion B is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. Though George Perham was important to his company and a descendant of a prominent homesteader/rancher, GANDA concluded that he himself does not rise to the level of prominence as defined under Criterion B. R-20-27 Page 3 Criterion C embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important individual. GANDA concluded that the White Barn does not contain distinctive characteristics of type, period, region, or represent the work of a master. The building itself is vernacular in construction that is ubiquitous in California and the rest of the United States. Broken gable barns have been recorded for hay and livestock use in several eastern and western states and the style is not unique to Santa Clara County or California. For Criterion D, the subject yields, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. GANDA concluded that as a built resource, the White Barn is not likely to yield or have yielded information important to prehistory or history. Although the White Barn is ineligible for listing, GANDA recommends that all stabilization and repairs to the White Barn be conducted in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. This is because the White Barn may be a contributing element of a larger historic district that was once the site of a cattle ranch and dairy farm operation in Santa Clara County. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards provide advisory guidelines for the treatment of historic properties that minimize potential impacts due to substantial changes to historic resources. Some key components of the Standards include, but are not limited to, making minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building, avoiding removal or alteration of historic materials, repairing rather than replacing historic features when possible, and when features require replacement, matching the original feature in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities where possible. Conditions Assessment The White Barn is currently used for processing milk, housing goats, and storage. The White Barn is a wood-framed building about 30 feet wide by 58 feet long; it is 25 feet tall at its highest point. The roof is clad with corrugated metal panels. The White Barn has a concrete slab foundation in the northwest corner and is otherwise supported by low brick piers. In the northwest corner there is a milk room and a goat pen. The milk room was renovated by District staff in 2016 to add a concrete floor, interior wall sheathing, and a perimeter foundation. The center section is dedicated to hay storage, with a hay loft in the gable above (accessed by a steep wood staircase). In the southeast extension, horse stalls are currently used for storage. Public access is permitted in the milk room with staff present, but the majority of the White Barn is closed to the public. No change in use is proposed as part of this Project. WJE completed a condition assessment of the White Barn as part of their Basis of Design Report. The consultant team included WJE for architecture and engineering, Langan for geotechnical, SCA Environmental for hazardous materials, and GANDA for historical and archaeological review. The review included visual observations of the interior and exterior of the White Barn, photographs of the exterior and surrounding area using a drone, archaeological soil investigations, soil borings and sampling, and material sampling. Structural calculations were prepared to assess the existing framing for gravity, wind, and seismic loads using the provisions of the California Existing Building Code. Overall, the White Barn was found to be in fair and serviceable condition owing to regular use and maintenance. However, the structural calculations concluded that areas of the roof, attic floor, and foundations are structurally deficient and in need of strengthening, seismic bracing, or other repairs: R-20-27 Page 4 1. Roof: The corrugated metal roof panels are in fair condition, though several panels appear to have biological growth and soil accumulation on them. Some panels also show signs of corrosion from the interior. Throughout the roof there are protruding fasteners, distressed flashing and gutters, missing downspouts, and many rafter tails are deteriorated. Throughout the wood skip sheathing that is supporting the metal panels there is damage from wood-boring insects and many of the skip sheathing boards are split along fastener locations. WJE’s structural analysis also shows that the roof rafters and beams are overstressed for current building code design loads. The rafters are undersized, and they do not have blocking installed between the rafters, and one set of knee braces supporting a beam is missing. 2. Attic Floor: The attic floor framing has several deficiencies that should be addressed. One of the floor joists has numerous drilled holes, a notch cut out, and cracks have formed along those holes. Joists supporting the wood stairs are overstressed for design loads. It is evident that modifications have been made to the wood columns supporting the attic floor and roof, resulting in the columns being overstressed in some locations. 3. Footings: The brick footings supporting the columns appear to be in good condition. There is no observable structural connection of the column to the brick footings. Based on WJE’s analysis and the geotechnical engineering report, the footings exceed allowable soil bearing capacity, which is the soils ability to support loads from the footings. Exceeding bearing capacity can lead to ongoing settlement of the footings or failure during a seismic event. The supports for the columns in the east section of the White Barn are not currently visible below wood flooring and WJE assumed they are inadequate. The exterior wood siding is deteriorated in several locations at the base of the building. 4. Floor: The floor in the main center section of the White Barn is exposed soil and Deer Hollow Farm staff have reported the presence of burrowing rodents. Farm staff also reported that this section does not adequately drain water. In the east section of the White Barn, the wood flooring and supporting framing shows severe signs of decay. The wood stairs that provide access to the attic are not compliant with current building code requirements. 5. WJE’s wind and seismic analysis determined that the White Barn is inadequate to resist the current building code loads. The exterior walls resist lateral wind and seismic loads, however there is no direct connection from the walls and posts to transfer those loads to the foundations. Additionally, the large openings on the north side of the White Barn along with the deteriorated siding do not leave enough continual length of wall to resist the forces. The roof rafters are also not adequately attached to the roof beams to resist design wind uplift on the roof. Hazardous Materials In August 2019, SCA Environmental performed a hazardous materials assessment of the White Barn. Samples were taken and sent to laboratories to test for the presence of lead, asbestos, and R-20-27 Page 5 other potentially hazardous materials. The interior and exterior paint was found to contain detectable amounts of lead. The assessment found no materials containing asbestos or other hazardous materials. The lead-based paint on the interior walls and ceiling is intact, well-adhered to the painted material, and can remain in place. Where paint on the exterior siding is loose and peeling, the paint will need to be removed and the material repainted to match. Proper dust control procedures and personal protective equipment shall be used during the removal of any lead- based paint and painted material. Monitoring by a qualified environmental consultant will also be required during any abatement or removal of lead-based paint. Accessibility Improvements The California Building Code requires accessibility improvements for existing buildings that are not fully compliant when alterations or additions are made. As the White Barn is not an ADA compliant building, upgrades for accessibility are required by building code to secure County permits. The upgrades shall be made to the primary accessible “path of travel”, which includes a primary entrance to the building; restrooms, drinking fountains, and public telephones serving the area; and signs. The required accessibility improvements are limited to approximately 20% of the construction costs, depending on the total valuation of the project. The recommended accessibility improvements for the Project include accessible entrances and floor surfaces for the main central area and milk room of the White Barn, and replacing the existing drinking fountain with accessible fountains. Basis of Design Recommendations WJE’s Basis of Design recommendations incorporate the required California Existing Building Code for the design and rehabilitation measures and the recommended Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the treatment of historic properties to maintain the character-defining features of the building (these latter standards are not required, only recommended as noted earlier). The details of the repair treatments can be found in the Basis of Design Report (Attachment 1) and are summarized below, with associated costs (Attachment 3). Roof Repair Recommendations ($74,204): • Remove and replace all sheet metal roof panels to match existing panels. • Remove and replace damaged skip sheathing. • Install sister rafter directly next to damaged rafters. • Remove and replace existing gutters and downspouts. • Install wood blocking. • Replace missing knee brace and install metal straps on all knee braces. Exterior Wall Repair Recommendations ($20,360): • Remove damaged exterior sheathing and replace with wood sheathing to match. • Strengthen sections of the exterior walls on each side of the White Barn to resist wind and seismic forces with diagonal wood braces installed between existing wood posts. Attic Framing Repairs Recommendations ($16,592): • Install new wood framing adjacent to damaged framing. R-20-27 Page 6 • Install new wood columns adjacent to damaged columns. • Install plywood on top of existing wood planking over the entire attic floor. • Remove and replace stairs with a wooden pull-down style attic ladder. Ground Floor and Foundation Repairs Recommendations ($32,076): • Remove and replace floorboards and support framing in the east section. • Replace supports located under posts in the east section of the White Barn. • Install new concrete footings at column locations where seismic bracing is being added. • Attach column bases to columns with steel plates and anchor bolts. • Install new concrete floor slab in main center section of the White Barn. Accessibility Improvements ($23,600): • Install new concrete floor slab in main center section • Install concrete approach and landing, and automatic door opening at south entrance. • Modify door to Milk Room. • Remove and Replace drinking fountain at southeast corner of White Barn. Total Cost Estimate: $166,833 The cost estimate includes escalations and construction contingency. Incorporation of the Secretary of Interior’s Standards are not expected to add significant costs given the low-visibility nature of the recommended repairs. Fire Safety The White Barn does not currently have a fire suppression system in place and such a system is not required by code for barns and other agricultural facilities. The metal roof panels proposed as the preferred option for the roof repair are a non-combustible material and offer protection from airborne embers or other potential sources of ignition. Defensible space is maintained around the White Barn on all sides, and there is a fire hydrant located approximately 50 feet from the northeast corner of the White Barn. Additional consideration for fire prevention and safety will happen during design development and in permit review with the County Fire Marshal. Impact on Deer Hollow Farm Operations The Basis of Design Report recommendations will have minimal impact to the operations of Deer Hollow Farm. None of the added stabilization components, such as new foundations, diagonal braces, knee braces, sister rafters, etc., will significantly encroach upon the usable space. Moreover, some usable space around the stairs will be gained with the installation of an attic ladder. Staff from Deer Hollow Farm and the District should experience reduced maintenance needs related to water intrusion and rodent damage after the work is completed. During construction, the White Barn will not be usable by staff. Temporary facilities will need to be identified or set up on site to house the goats and store materials currently stored in the White Barn. Milking will either need to take place elsewhere or be scheduled to take place outside of active construction hours. Activities in the White Barn during construction will need to be coordinated with the District project manager. Areas immediately adjacent to the White Barn will be used for construction access with safety barriers in place. Some construction staging can occur along the north and south sides of the White Barn, potentially requiring additional staging areas elsewhere in Rancho San Antonio or offsite. Construction staging and access needs will be further evaluated during the development of construction documents. Construction will take R-20-27 Page 7 place during Fall after educational activities at Deer Hollow Farm are completed for the year and is anticipated to take 3 months. Cultural Resources Deer Hollow Farm is known to contain cultural and archaeological resources from the various past uses of the site, however, no known resources have been found within the localized footprint of the White Barn project site. The Project aims to minimize ground disturbance where feasible to reduce the risk of unearthing any resources. The District will work with cultural and archaeological consultants to provide monitoring during all ground-disturbing activities as part of the Project. Schedule impacts are not anticipated unless there is a discovery during construction. Biological Resources In June 2019, Swaim Biological conducted habitat and occupancy surveys for special status mammal species at the White Barn. Though the White Barn provides potentially suitable habitat for day and night roosting bats, no bats were observed during the survey. However, guano was observed in the upper level of the White Barn indicating presence of bats. No dusky-footed woodrat nest structures were observed inside or near the White Barn. In general, the site provides suitable day and night roosting bat habitat and has adjacent foraging and tree roost habitat. Swaim Biological recommends preconstruction surveys prior to the start of construction to confirm the absence of bats and dusky-footed woodrats. A bat roost deterrent plan may need to be developed prior to construction. Biological monitoring would be required during bat deterrence as well as during any ground-disturbing activities. FISCAL IMPACT The FY2019-20 budget includes $143,890 for the Rancho San Antonio – Deer Hollow Farm - White Barn Rehabilitation project (MAA11-002) for the design of the project. The recommended action has no direct fiscal impact at this time as construction is anticipated to begin in Fall 2020. The FY20 budget includes sufficient funds to cover project costs through the end of the fiscal year. Funding for future years budgets will be proposed as part of the annual Budget and Action Plan process. Deer Hollow Farm Partnership Agreements The District entered into the original Agreement for the operation of Deer Hollow Farm facilities and environmental education program in 2001 (R-01-46) for nine years. This agreement was extended in 2010 for an additional five years (R-10-133). In July 2015, the Board authorized the General Manager to execute a new Agreement with the City of Mountain View for the continued operation of Deer Hollow Farm for an additional five years through 2020 (R-15-91). The District is currently in negotiations with the City of Mountain View to extend the Agreement for a further five years through 2025, effectively starting July 2020. In March 2018, the Legislative, Funding, and Public Affairs Committee (LFPAC) reviewed and confirmed a partnership funding agreement with the City of Mountain View for cost-sharing of the design phase and a funding agreement with the FODHF for the construction phase of the Structural Stabilization of the White Barn (R-18-31). In August 2018, the Board approved the LFPAC recommendations to enter into the two partnership funding agreements (R-18-95). The R-20-27 Page 8 funding agreements allow for the transfer of funds from the City of Mountain View and the FODHF to the District for design and construction. The City of Mountain View will contribute $35,000 towards the design phase of the Project. The final funding agreement will be presented to the City Council in March 2020 (Attachment 4) and will be incorporated as an amendment to the existing Deer Hollow Farm agreement between the District and City. FODHF will contribute its portion of the Tindall donation, a sum of $165,000, to the District for the construction phase of the Project, as part of their executed funding agreement with the District. In total, $365,000 in donations and outside contributions is available to this Project ($35,000 from the City of Mountain View, $330,000 from the George Tindall Estate of which $165,000 is being transferred from the FODHF). BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW The draft funding agreements were reviewed and confirmed by the LFPAC on March 27, 2018 (R-18-31). PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. Additional notice was provided to the City of Mountain View and the Friends of Deer Hollow Farm. CEQA COMPLIANCE Approval of the Basis of Design recommendations is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Environmental review will be conducted for the proposed improvements and the findings will be brought to the Board as part of their consideration in awarding a construction contract. NEXT STEPS Following Board approval, District staff will direct WJE to proceed with design development and the production of construction documents. The Project is anticipated to begin construction in Fall 2020. Award of the construction contract will come back to the Board for review and approval at a future date. Attachments 1. Basis of Design Report – Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. – December 2019 2. Historical Resource Evaluation Report – Garcia and Associates – October 2019 3. Conceptual Cost Estimate – Hattin Construction Managements, Inc. – October 2019 4. Amendment to Agreement between City of Mountain View and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District for Operation and Management of Deer Hollow Farm Responsible Department Head: Jason Lin, Engineering and Construction Department Manager Prepared by: Leigh Guggemos, Capital Project Manager III, Engineering and Construction Department DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Cupertino, California Basis of Design December 18, 2019 WJE No. 2018.0646 Prepared for: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022 Prepared by: Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California 94608 510.428.2907 tel | 510.428.0456 fax Attachment 1 DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Cupertino, California Brian E. Kehoe, SE Erin M. Humphrey Basis of Design December 18, 2019 WJE No. 2018.0646 Prepared for: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022 Prepared by: Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California 94608 510.428.2907 tel | 510.428.0456 fax Attachment 1 DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Cupertino, California *2x-click here to insert vertical photo.* Basis of Design December 18, 2019 WJE No. 2018.0646 *Logo (if used)*Prepared for: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022 Prepared by: Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California 94608 510.428.2907 tel | 510.428.0456 fax Attachment 1 DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Cupertino, California Brian E. Kehoe, SE Erin M. Humphrey Basis of Design December 18, 2019 WJE No. 2018.0646 Prepared for: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022 Prepared by: Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California 94608 510.428.2907 tel | 510.428.0456 fax Attachment 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Background ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Building Description ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Condition Assessment ................................................................................................................................... 9 Roof ........................................................................................................................................................... 9 Hazardous Materials ................................................................................................................................ 11 Site and Geotechnical .............................................................................................................................. 12 Structural Evaluation ............................................................................................................................... 14 Gravity Loads ...................................................................................................................................... 14 Wind and Seismic Loads ..................................................................................................................... 17 Interior ..................................................................................................................................................... 18 Basis of Design Recommendations............................................................................................................. 19 Service Impact ......................................................................................................................................... 19 Roof ......................................................................................................................................................... 19 Exterior Walls ......................................................................................................................................... 20 Attic Framing .......................................................................................................................................... 21 Ground Floor and Foundation ................................................................................................................. 21 Fire Safety ............................................................................................................................................... 22 Appendix A - Barn Drawings Appendix B - SCA Environmental Report Appendix C - Langan Geotechnical Report Appendix D - Opinion of Probable Construction Cost by Hattin Attachment 1 DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Cupertino, California BACKGROUND Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. (WJE) has been engaged by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) to perform a structural and waterproofing evaluation of the White Barn at the Deer Hollow Farm. The farm is jointly operated by the District and the City of Mountain View, with additional funding assistance provided by Friends of Deer Hollow Farm, a nonprofit organization. A Historic Structures Report prepared by Page & Turnbull for the District and dated March 2018 was reviewed as a part of this evaluation. This report recommended treatment for the building based on the assumption of it being a qualified historic building since it is within the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve, which appears eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. A subsequent report prepared by Garcia and Associates titled Historical Resource Evaluation Report for the White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm within the Midpeninsula Open Space District, Santa Clara County, California, dated October 2019, concluded that the White Barn is ineligible as an individual structure to be included on the California Register of Historic Resources. For the purposes of this evaluation it has been assumed that the building is not considered a historic structure. The purpose of this assessment is to provide recommendations to structurally stabilize the White Barn as a voluntary measure to allow the barn to comply with applicable permitting requirements for existing facilities. This report provides our preliminary assessment of the building’s present condition and recommendations for remediation of existing deficiencies. BUILDING DESCRIPTION The White Barn is a single-story, wood-framed structure located in the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve. The date of construction of the barn is not known, but it has been estimated by Page & Turnbull that the barn was constructed prior to 1948. The Historical Resource Evaluation Report prepared by Garcia and Associates estimates that the date of construction to be between 1937 and 1948, with a likely range between 1940 and 1948. The barn is currently used for sheltering goats, storage of hay, and miscellaneous storage of other farm supplies. A milk room was added at the southwest corner of the barn in 2017. The barn is approximately 58 feet in length and 30 feet in width. For this report, the long dimension will be referenced as being oriented roughly in the east-west direction with the side facing the creek considered as the north side (Figure 1). The exterior walls are sheathed with wood board siding that is generally oriented vertically. There are a number of doors and other openings in the exterior walls, with only two openings in the milk room that have windows installed. Exterior views of the barn are shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 2 Figure 1. Floor plan of the barn Figure 2. South elevation of the barn. Figure 3. North elevation of the barn. The barn is divided into three sections: the center section, which is used for storage of hay; the east side, which was formerly used as horse stalls and is now used for storage; and the west side, which includes the milk room and goat room. An attic exists over each of the three sections, with slight offsets in elevations, as shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5. The attic is accessed using fixed wood stairs located on the north side of the building. Milk Room Goat Room East Section (Former horse stalls) Center Section (Hay storage) Reference North Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 3 Figure 4. Attic above the west side. Arrow shows the vertical offset at the attic over the center section. Figure 5. Attic over the east side to the right and over the center section to the left. The roof is clad with corrugated, galvanized sheet metal roofing panels. It is not known if the corrugated panels are original, however, it is typical for barns constructed in the early 1900s to have had a wood shake roof. The likelihood of the original roof being wood shake is also evidenced by the presence of wood skip sheathing over the rafters, typical for roof shake installation. The main gable is at the center of the building and the slope is roughly 6 in 12 vertical to horizontal. On each side of the gable are shed-roof extensions that vary from about 3.5 to 3.8 in 12 slope vertical to horizontal (Figure 6). Where the roof transitions between slopes, there is a step in the panels, creating a break in plane. Horizontally-oriented corrugated panels were used as “L” flashing at these transitions (Figure 7). The rakes and eaves overhang roughly 12 inches and the metal panels overhang the wood roof members by several inches. At these overhangs, the wood members are painted. On the west side of the shed roof, at the eave, there is no fascia. The gutter is attached directly to the rafter tails and extends across the entire length of the building, with a downspout located at the southwest corner of the building (Figure 8). There are two rafter tails on the west eave that have been cut down and are half the depth of the other rafter tails (Figure 9). At the east side of the shed roof, at the eave, a fascia board covers the rafter tails and there is a short portion of gutter installed on the fascia directly above an electrical box; an additional 2x is sandwiched between the fascia and gutter. There is no downspout at this short gutter (Figure 10). The underlying wood skip sheathing consists of 1-inch nominal boards with widths ranging from 4 to 12 inches in the center gable roof and 4 to 7 inches in the shed roofs. The spacing between the skip sheathing is consistently between 2 to 4 inches (Figure 11). Visible from the underside of the roof, there are areas where numerous fasteners were used during the installation of the roof panels have penetrated the underlying wood skip sheathing (Figure 12) or are not installed into the sheathing (Figure 13). Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 4 Figure 6. Aerial view of corrugated, galvanized sheet metal roofing panels. Figure 7. Break in roof plane where transitions from gable to shed roof. Figure 8. Gutter on the west side of the barn. Figure 9. Two rafter tails have been cut and are half the depth of other rafter tails. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 5 Figure 10. Short gutter at east side of the barn. Figure 11. View of wood skip sheathing showing the various sizes and spacing typical at the center gable. Figure 12. Numerous fastener penetrations for roof panels. Figure 13. Fasteners not attached to the wood skip sheathing (arrows). The wood rafters for the center gable section of the roof are irregularly spaced, varying from 9 inches to 35 inches, and are supported by wood beams that are supported by wood columns (Figure 14) with diagonal wood knee braces between the beams and columns. Two horizontal steel tie rods connect the tops of the wood columns along the east and west sides of the center section (Figure 15). Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 6 Figure 14. Wood rafters supporting the center section of roof with wood skip sheathing and corrugated metal deck. Figure 15. Horizontal steel tie rod attached to the top of the wood post. At the east and west sides, the shed roofs have a shallower slope than the center section. The framing consists of wood rafters supporting wood skip sheathing overlain with corrugated metal panels. The spacing of the rafters varies from an average of 23 inches on the east to 35 inches on the west side. The rafters are supported by the exterior walls on the east and west ends of the building (Figure 16 and Figure 17) and by wood beams attached to the sides of the wood columns that support the rafters for the center gable roof section (Figure 18 and Figure 19). The beams supporting the rafters for the west side are nominally about 2 inches by 4 inches (Figure 18), whereas the beams supporting the rafters for the east side are nominally about 2 inches by 6 inches (Figure 19). Figure 16. Roof rafters for the west side supported on the exterior wall. Figure 17. Roof rafters for the east side supported on the exterior wall. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 7 Figure 18. Wood beam (arrow) supporting west side shed roof rafters. Figure 19. Wood beam (arrow) supporting east side shed roof rafters. The framing for the attic floor consists of wood planks supported on wood joists. In the center and west sections of the barn, the joists span across the north-south direction of the barn and are supported by east- west interior beams and on the north and south exterior walls (Figure 20). In the east section of the barn, the attic joists span in the east-west direction and are supported by the east exterior wall and north-south wood beams as shown in Figure 21. Figure 20. Wood attic joists (arrows) in the center section supported by a wood beam and the exterior wall. Figure 21. Wood attic rafters in the east section supported on north-south wood beams (arrows). In the center section of the barn, the attic joists are supported by wood beams that are supported by wood columns with diagonal wood knee braces between the beams and the columns. The flooring consists of wood planks. Two openings exist in the attic floor: one near the center of the attic that is covered with wood boards, and one on the east side of the center section that is protected by a wood guardrail (Figure 22 and Figure 23). Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 8 Figure 22. Attic floor opening covered with wood boards (arrow). Figure 23. Attic floor opening surrounded by wood guardrail. The interior and exterior wood columns are supported by brick footings (Figure 24), except around the perimeter of the milk room, where the walls are supported by concrete footings (Figure 25). Throughout most of the barn, the floor is soil except in the east side there is a wood plank floor (Figure 26) and in the milk room there is a concrete slab (Figure 27). A drain exists in the floor of the milk room. Figure 24. Wood post supported on square brick footing. Figure 25. Concrete footing (arrow) supporting wall of the milk room. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 9 Figure 26. Wood floor in the east side of the barn. Figure 27. Concrete floor slab in the milk room. CONDITION ASSESSMENT WJE engineers and architects performed a site visit of the barn on August 29, 2019. During the site visit, the barn and surrounding area was photographed using an unmanned aerial vehicle (drone) and detailed observations were made of the barn framing from the interior. We prepared drawings showing the barn framing. These drawings are presented in Appendix A. Following the site visit, structural calculations were prepared to assess the existing framing for gravity loads, wind loads, and seismic loads using the provisions of the current (2019) California Existing Building Code (CEBC). The results of our observations and analyses are described below. Roof The corrugated metal roof panels are in fair condition. On the east side of the center gable, there appears to be biological growth and soil accumulation on the metal panels themselves as well as at the transition to the shed roof (Figure 28). Fasteners have become dislodged and are protruding from the roof surface (Figure 29). Several small holes were observed in the roof panels and leaking of the roof during rainstorms was reported. The ridge cap flashing is also showing signs of distress and fasteners are beginning to protrude from the roof surface at this location as well (Figure 30). The gutters on the east and west shed-roof eaves appear to be in fair condition when observed from the ground level. However, it is unclear how the gutters are flashed due to limited access. At the short gutter on east side of the barn, because there is no downspout, holes have been punched into the bottom of the gutter at one side and the gutter is beginning to corrode (Figure 33). At the west eave, where the gutter is attached directly to the rafter tails, we observed one rafter tail that was deteriorated (Figure 31). On the east side, where fascia is present, there are roughly six rafter tails that are deteriorated (Figure 32). Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 10 Figure 28. Corrosion, biological growth, and soiling on roofing panels on the west side. Figure 29. Protruding fasteners at roof transition. Figure 30. Distressed ridge flashing. Figure 31. Deteriorated rafter tail on west side. Figure 32. Deteriorated rafter tails on east side. Figure 33. Soiling and corrosion at the underside of the gutter on the east side. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 11 At the interior of the attic, where the roof transitions from the gable to shed roof, the “L” flashings appear to be in good condition; there are no visible signs of water infiltration at these two locations (Figure 34). At areas where numerous fasteners were used, or missed the underlying wood skip sheathing, the panels show signs of corrosion on the underside and the skip sheathing is deteriorated and split (Figure 35 and Figure 36). Additionally, throughout the skip sheathing boards, there is damage from wood-boring insects (Figure 37). Figure 34. “L” flashing from the interior. Figure 35. Corrosion at fastener that did not penetration skip sheathing. Figure 36. Deteriorated skip sheathing. Figure 37. Damage to the skip sheathing from wood-boring insects. Hazardous Materials SCA Environmental performed an assessment of the barn for the presence of potential hazardous materials. Sampling of representative materials was performed on August 29, 2019 and the samples were then sent to laboratories to test for the presence of lead, asbestos, and other potentially hazardous materials. The results of the testing found no materials containing asbestos. The interior and exterior paint was found to contain detectable amounts of lead. No other hazardous materials were found. A copy of the hazardous materials testing is included in Appendix B. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 12 Site and Geotechnical On September 16, 2019, Langan performed a limited geotechnical investigation of the site. A copy of their report is provided in Appendix C. Their investigation found that the existing soil are moderately expansive when subjected to variations in moisture. The allowable bearing pressure is 3,000 pounds per square foot for supporting combined dead loads and live loads. Our preliminary analysis found that at some of the columns, the bearing pressure on the soil due to the design loads exceeds the allowable bearing pressure. This is based on the assumption that the footings are 12-inches square, as measured above the ground surface. If the footings increase in area below grade, most of the footings are adequate for gravity loads; however, footings that are required to resist wind and seismic loads will likely need to be enlarged by approximately 6 inches on each side. The barn is located on a relatively level site. A dirt road passes along the north side of the barn with a seasonal creek to the north of the road. The data from the drone survey was used to develop a rough contour map of the site, which shows a very shallow slope of about 1 foot vertical downward over a horizontal distance of 75 feet (1 percent) from the south of the barn to the creek to the north (Figure 38). Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 13 Figure 38. Site elevation based on data from drone survey showing a 1-foot elevation drop across the section to the east of the barn marked as A-A. BARN Creek Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 14 Structural Evaluation Gravity Loads The CEBC allows damaged elements to be restored to their pre-damage condition. This will apply to the skip sheathing as well as any rafters that are damaged as identified during the replacement of the roofing. If found to be damaged and in need of repair, our analysis indicates that the existing roof rafters and beams are overstressed for current CBC design loads. The roof rafters do not have blocking installed at the supports of the rafters; this blocking is necessary for lateral restraint at the ends of the beams. Due to the lack of blocking, the roof structure in its current condition does not have the required strength to support any of the-code required roof live load. If blocking were installed, the rafters for the center section and the shed roof sections would be capable of supporting less than half of the required roof live load (about 6 to 9 pounds per square foot (psf) compared to the 20 psf required by the CBC). In addition, one set of diagonal knee braces for the beams that support the rafters for the center portion of the roof are missing and should be replaced (Figure 39). There is visible water staining of some of the rafters (Figure 40). Although these structural deficiencies are concerning, they are not an immediate concern for safety of the roof. Figure 39. Locations where diagonal knee braces are missing (arrows) Figure 40. Staining of roof rafters (arrows) likely caused by water leakage. Our analysis of the attic floor indicates that the framing for the attic floor is capable of supporting at least 20 psf of design live loading. However, there are several conditions that should be addressed: One of the joists supporting the attic framing has numerous holes and a notch in the joist, and there are cracks in the joist that have significantly reduced its strength. (Figure 41); along the opening for the stair, two of the joists are supported by a perpendicular beam that is then supported on one end by a joist (Figure 42). This condition causes the joist supporting the beam to be overstressed when supporting the design live load in the attic space. The cracked joist is considered damaged and is required to be repaired or replaced to meet requirements of the CEBC. The framing around the stair opening is an existing, undamaged condition that could remain, but should be voluntarily strengthened if the stairs remain. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 15 Figure 41. Attic joist weakened by holes and notch (arrow). Figure 42. Attic joists supported by beam (red arrow) along the side of the stair opening. Joist (green arrow) supporting beam is overstressed. The beams supporting the attic joists in the center section of the barn have diagonal knee braces connecting the beams to the wood columns. These knee braces were constructed to be inserted into notches in the columns. It appears that there was other framing that was mortised into the columns that was subsequently removed and some additional notching for unknown purposes (Figure 43). Some of the columns have supplemental wood framing added to the side to strengthen them (Figure 44). The mortising has caused the columns to be weaker and overstressed even in some locations where the columns have been strengthened with supplemental framing. The mortising was an original condition and not damage and therefore would not be required to be strengthened. The additional notching of the columns will need to be treated as a repair such that the columns are strengthened to meet the CEBC requirements. Figure 43. Mortising of wood column (red arrow) and notch in column (green arrow). Figure 44. Column mortise (Red arrow) and wood reinforcing plate (green arrow) Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 16 The wood columns are supported by wood shims on top of the brick footings that 12 inches square. The height of the brick footing above the adjacent ground varies from less than 4 inches to about 9 inches (Figure 45). The sizes of the footings below grade are not known. There is no observable structural connection of the column or wood shim to the brick footing (Figure 46). The brick footings appear to be in good condition with no obvious indications of deterioration, such as cracking or deterioration of the mortar. Since there is no damage to the footings, there is no CEBC requirement to upgrade the footings. However, voluntary strengthening of some of the footings may be performed where, based on our analysis, the soil pressures at the footings for design loads exceed the allowable bearing pressure provi ded by the geotechnical engineering report and to address the lack of connection of the columns to the footings. Figure 45. Brick footing extending above the adjacent ground. Figure 46. Wood shim between the column and the brick footing. In the east section of the barn, the attic joists are supported by a wood beam that spans across the width of the building. At the north and south ends, this beam is supported by a wood beam that is an extension of the door header (Figure 47). On the interior, the attic beam is supported by five wood posts that are located between the former horse stalls. These posts are installed with a slope and are supported on the wood floor (Figure 48). The support framing for these inclined columns as well as the wood floor is unknown. Given that the wood flooring in the east section is decayed, we have assumed that the bases of these incl ined columns are also damaged due to decay and that the bases of the posts will need to be strengthened to meet CEBC design requirements. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 17 Figure 47. Door header beam (red arrow) supporting attic support beam (green arrow). Figure 48. Sloped wood column supporting attic beam. Wind and Seismic Loads Lateral loads on the barn due to wind and seismic forces are resisted primarily by the exterior wood sheathing. Since there is no substantial structural damage to the wall framing that resists lateral loads, there is no requirement by the CEBC to evaluate or upgrade the seismic or wind resistance of the building. A voluntary evaluation was performed to assess the existing conditions. For wind and seismic forces acting in the north and south directions (perpendicular to the long sides of the building) the wind forces would govern the design based on the 2019 CBC requirements. The forces in the north and south directions are resisted by the exterior walls on the east and west sides of the building and interior lines of columns between the center section and the east and west sections. Although the east and west walls are sheathed with vertical wood boards, which is not typically used for resisting lateral forces, the required design force on these walls is relatively small and the walls were judged to be adequate; however the connection at the base of the walls to the foundation relies on the wood posts that are not directly attached to the brick foundations except at the milk room. In addition, the building lacks a structural diaphragm to transfer lateral forces to the exterior walls: the roof sheathing is not detailed to act as a diaphragm and the attic floor is interrupted by offsets between the center section and the east and west sections. The interior lines of columns are not designed and constructed to provide adequate resistance to these design lateral demands. Additionally, the lateral forces need to be transferred to these elements by the roof and attic floor which were also not designed and constructed to act as structural framing to transfer these lateral forces. For lateral forces in the east and west directions (parallel to the long direction of the barn), lateral forces are resisted by the exterior wood walls on the north and south sides. Due to the amount of openings in the north side wall and the deterioration of the wood sheathing due to wood decay, the length of wall that can effectively resist lateral forces is minimal (Figure 49 and Figure 50). Similar to the east and west walls, the walls on the north and south sides are not structurally connected to the brick footings that support the wood columns. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 18 Figure 49. Door openings in north side (red boxes) Figure 50. Deteriorated wood sheathing at the base of the north side wall (arrow). The roof rafters are subject to uplift forces from wind blowing over the top of the building. The uplift forces due to the design wind pressures exceed the uplift capacity of the connection of the rafters to the roof beams. Interior Evaluation At the east side, the wood floor is supported on wood framing that is elevated above the ground. The floor boards appear to be in serviceable condition with no holes or extensive areas of decay. The framing supporting the wood floor however, appears severely decayed based on limited observations. The damaged flooring needs to be repaired. Removal of the existing flooring will be needed to assess the scope of the repairs, but full removal of the flooring should be assumed. The soil floor in the center section of the barn is reportedly subjected to rodents burrowing up through the floor. Additionally, it was reported that water in the center section of the barn does not adequately drain. The wood stairs that provide access to the attic are not compliant with current building requirements, but the CEBC allows existing stairs and handrails to remain. The depth of the treads varies and is typically about 7 inches, which is less than the required width of 11 inches (Figure 51) and the height of the risers is typically about 10 inches, which is greater than the required maximum riser height of 7 inches (Figure 52). The width of the stairway is less than the current building code required minimum width of 36 inches. In addition, a handrail exists on only one side of the stair and the handrail does not meet the building code requirements for hand-grasp or extension at the top or bottom. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 19 Figure 51. Horizontal width of attic stair tread. Figure 52. Vertical rise of attic stair. BASIS OF DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Replacement of the roof to mitigate water leakage and repair of other water-related damage would be the motivation for the proposed repairs. There are a number of other conditions at the Deer Hollow White Barn that could also be addressed to maintain the building in a serviceable condition. In developing recommendations, we have used the CEBC requirements for repair of damage. Conditions that are not damaged but would be prudent to strength have been included and the design of that strengthening is intended to meet the requirements of the CEBC. Where the recommendations are affected by the results from the hazardous materials report, the treatment of those materials is discussed below. A preliminary cost estimate for the proposed repairs and strengthening has been prepared by Hattin Construction Management, Inc. (Hattin). A copy of the estimate has been provided in Appendix D. Service Impact We expect that the proposed repairs will impact the use of the barn during construction. This impact will include removal of the material being stored in the barn and relocation of the goats and milking operations. It may be possible to phase the work so that the entire barn is not disrupted for the entire duration of the project; however, due to the expected noise to be generated by the repairs, it will be likely that the goats may need to be out of the barn for the duration of the repairs. Roof We recommend that the sheet metal roof panels be removed and replaced in kind, or with a different material. The in-kind replacement would be to install new corrugated sheet metal panels with new flashings, drip edges, and ridge cap to match the existing. Another option for roof replacement would be to install new fire-retardant wood shakes per the assumed original design, however, there are a number of factors to consider as outlined below. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 20 Four factors to consider in choosing the material for replacement of the roof are: cost, durability, fire resistance, and structural impact. Replacing the roof with new corrugated sheet metal panels will likely be less expensive than wood shakes. The metal panels are also more durable and more fire resistant than the wood shakes. Replacing the roof with new wood shakes would require the new assembly to be fire retardant per California Health and Safety Code. Per HSC 13132.7 (b), “the entire roof covering…shall be a fire- retardant roof covering that is at least class C…”1 Because the barn is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places, it is not exempt from this requirement. If new wood shakes are chosen to replace the existing metal panels, we would recommend the use of a rated assembly, consisting of fire-retardant treated wood shakes, and the appropriate underlayment. However, adding the necessary underlayment would add weight to the building that would cause the rafters to be overstressed. A metal panel roof that weighs the same as the existing roof would not require strengthening of undamaged roof framing. We therefore recommend replacing the existing corrugated metal panels in kind with new metal panels to match. With either approach, we recommend that any damaged skip sheathing be removed and replaced as necessary. The replacement sheathing can matching the existing sheathing per the CEBC. We recommend that a “sister” rafter be installed directly next to any damaged rafters, extending beyond the exterior wall. One option to control water accumulation would be to remove the existing gutters and downspout and install new gutters that extend across the width of the barn with downspouts that would discharge onto splash blocks. Alternately, the water from the roof can be allowed to flow off the roof onto the ground, which was likely the original historic configuration. A French drain filled with gravel could be used to allow the water to discharge without accumulating next to the building or causing surface erosion. Wood blocking should be installed at the ends of the roof rafters. The 2 by 4 inch nominal beam supporting the rafters for the west side shed roof should be strengthened by adding an additional beam to supplement the existing beam. The missing diagonal knee braces should be replaced to match the other knee braces. All of the knee braces should have steel strap connections added at the brace t o column and brace to beam connections. Exterior Walls The exterior wall sheathing is not intended to provide a watertight enclosure for the building. Where it is undamaged, the exterior sheathing can remain. Existing wood sheathing that is deteriorated should be removed and replaced with wood sheathing to match the existing. Wood species that are decay resistant, such as redwood and cedar, can be used to improve the long-term durability; however, it would be preferable to match the species of the original wood siding, which is likely to be either Douglas Fir or Redwood. A sample of the wood can be taken for testing during the design phase to determine the species of wood. We recommend that selected sections of the exterior walls should be voluntarily strengthened to resist wind and seismic forces prescribed by the current CBC. The areas to be strengthened would be one section of east and west walls and two sections on the north and south walls between existing wood posts on each side of the building. The strengthening can consist of diagonal wood braces installed between existing wood posts. New steel brackets will be needed to connect the diagonal braces to new concrete footings installed 1 California Health and Safety Code. “HSC 13132.7”. https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/health-and-safety-code/hsc-sect- 13132-7.html Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 21 at the bases of the diagonal braces. A new horizontal beam should be installed at the base of the wall between footings where the diagonal braces are installed. Attic Framing The attic framing is generally adequate to support light storage loads, as it is currently being used. Heavy storage or public access would require significant strengthening of the framing. The existing joist that has holes and notches should be repaired by replacing the joist or strengthened with the addition of a new joist to the side of the existing. The joists adjacent to the stair opening should be strengthened with the addition of new wood framing attached to the side of the existing joists. Wood columns with notches should be repaired and the mortised wood columns supporting the attic should be strengthened by adding new wood members on the side of the existing columns. The new wood members should extend down to the footings, and connections using steel connectors should be installed at the footings. The existing wood planking at the attic floor should be maintained in its current original appearance as viewed from the ground floor. Strengthening the attic floor to resist lateral forces can be accomplished by installing plywood sheathing on top of the existing floor sheathing. This plywood would also act as structural support to span across areas of the existing floor sheathing that have been deteriorated due to wood decay and provide a more uniform walking surface when accessing the attic. The CEBC allows the existing stair that provides access to the attic to remain in its current condition. If the District desires to improve the use of the stair, the existing stair can be removed and replaced. Due to code requirements for design of stairs, a new stair in its current location would protrude into the large door opening on the north side of the barn. One option for replacement would be to install a pre-fabricated attic ladder that pulls down from the attic in place of the existing stair. This would minimize the potential blockage of the north side door opening. Another option would be to remove the stairs and install a steel ladder at the location of the stairs. The steel ladder would need to be supported on a concrete footing. A prefabricated pull-down ladder would not require installation of a foundation and will not take up room within the barn when it is not in use. The prefabricated attic ladder will also be easier to use than a fixed steel ladder for going up and down, particularly when carrying items to and from the attic. The steel ladder would not require an effort to pull down and push up for use and storage. Ground Floor and Foundation In the east section of the barn, the structural framing for the wood floor is suspected to be deteriorated and should be repaired. Since the condition of the framing cannot be fully known until the framing is exposed by removing the floor boards, we recommend that the floor boards for the entire floor should be removed and assume that new support framing be installed to meet the current CBC designs requirements. In addition, since the supports for the interior sloped wood posts are also unknown, we recommend assuming that new supports under the interior posts will be needed. One option is to install a new concrete grade beam that extends across the width of the barn and is located below the sloped wood columns. New pressure-treated wood framing would be designed to span from the east exterior wall to the new grade beam and from the new grade beam to the interior wall that separates the east side from the center section of the barn. The wood framing would be designed to support the reinstallation of the original wood floor boards. Additional isolated concrete footings may also be needed along these two walls. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 Page 22 Another option would be to install a concrete floor slab throughout the east section of the barn. The concrete slab can be designed to support the sloped wood columns. Wood “sleepers” (wood members that lay on the concrete floor slab) would be installed to support the reinstallation of the original wood floor boards. The first option to install a concrete grade beam will require that a crawl space be provided below the new wood framing. This crawl space may provide a habitat for animals. The second option of a concrete floor slab prevents most animals from accessing the area under the floor. This floor slab would need to be installed with slope and a drain to prevent water accumulation under the floor. The existing footings for the wood columns at the interior and along the perimeter of the building can remain since they are not damaged. For those footings that will need to have additional wind and seismic loads applied, the size of the footings below grade may need to be determined to assess whether the bearing pressures are adequate. If the existing footings are found to be inadequate for the additional loads, supplemental strengthening of the footings will be needed by adding concrete to increase the effective size. Additionally, connections will need to be added to attach the bases of the columns to the footings. This can be accomplished using steel plates attached with screws to the wood posts and with anchor bolts to the brick footings. We also recommend removal of the soil in the center section (See Figure 1) to a depth of about 12 inches and installation of a porous concrete slab. The porous concrete slab would prevent rodents from burrowing up into the barn and would allow water that may get into the barn to drain into the soil below. The porous concrete slab should be overlain with a geotextile fabric that is then covered with 4 to 6 inches of soil to maintain the current appearance of having a dirt floor. Fire Safety As an existing building, there is no requirement for improving the fire safety of the building. There are voluntary improvements that could be made. One recommendation would be that the new roof sheathing be a fire-resistant assembly to protect the roof from air-born embers or other potential sources of ignition. Another recommendation would be to install smoke detectors in each roof and in the attic and provide fire extinguishers within the building. Installation of a fire sprinkler system is not required but would have a benefit to protecting the structure given the remoteness of the site. Installation of a sprinkler system is likely to require local strengthening of the roof rafters that support the sprinklers since the existing roof framing is marginally adequate to support current design loads. Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 APPENDIX A - BARN DRAWINGS Attachment 1 23564 1 A B C D B2 S5.0 1 N S5.0 2 S5.0 3 S5.1 1 S5.1 2 S5.2 1 S5.2 2 S5.2 3 S5.2 4 57'-39 16" 5'-41116"11'-67 8"11'-10"13'-3"15'-3" 9' - 1 0 " 29 ' - 9 7 8" 10 ' - 0 5 8" 9' - 1 1 1 4" 30 ' - 1 7 8" [3 6 1 7 8] (E) CONC. STEM WALL (E) CONC. STEM WALL (E) CONC. SLAB (E) WOOD FLOOR Consultants 1 A 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 B C D E A B C D E Project Client DescriptionMark Date Project No. Date Drawn Checked Scale Sheet Title Sheet No. Headquarters & Laboratories : Northbrook, Illinois Atlanta | Austin | Boston | Chicago | Cleveland | Dallas | Denver | Detroit Honolulu | Houston | Los Angeles | Minneapolis | New Haven | New York Philadelphia | Princeton | San Francisco | Seattle | South Florida | Washington, D.C. © Co p y r i g h t 20 1 9 . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . N o p a r t o f t h i s d o c u m e n t m a y b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m o r b y a n y m e a n s w i t h o u t pe r m i s s i o n f r o m W i s s , J a n n e y , E l s t n e r A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . ( W J E ) . W J E d i s c l a i m s a n y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t s u n a u t h o r i z e d u s e . Pl o t t e d : 1 0 / 2 / 2 0 1 9 6 : 5 1 P M b y G r e g o i r e , Q u e n t i n F i l e N a m e : P : \ 2 0 1 9 \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 x x x \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 6 5 6 . 0 - D E E R H O L L O W F A R M W H I T E B A R N ( b e k ) \ 5 C o n s t r u c t i o n D o c u m e n t s \ 1 Dr a w i n g s \ S h e e t s \ 2 0 1 9 _ 0 6 5 6 _ 0 - S 1 0 . d w g THIS SHEET PLOTS FULL SIZE AT 22x34 (INCHES) 0 1/2" 1"2" Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2915 Premiere Parkway, Suite 100 Duluth, Georgia 30097 770.923.9822 tel | 770.232.9044 fax www.wje.com ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS MATERIALS SCIENTISTS DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN RANCHO SAN ANTONIO PRESERVE 22500 CRISTO REY DR, CUPERTINO, CA 95014 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 330 DISTEL CIRCLE LOS ALTOS, CA 94022 2019.0656.0 Value QAG Checked By As Noted FOUNDATION PLAN S1.01SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" FOUNDATION PLAN Attachment 1 23564 1 A B C D B2 N S5.0 1 S5.0 2 S5.0 3 S5.1 1 S5.1 2 S5.2 1 S5.2 2 S5.2 3 S5.2 4 57'-39 16" 5'-41116"11'-67 8"11'-10"13'-3"15'-3" 9' - 1 0 " 29 ' - 9 7 8" 10 ' - 0 5 8" 9' - 1 1 1 4" 30 ' - 1 7 8" [3 6 1 7 8] 7'-6" TO THIS COLUMN LINE Consultants 1 A 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 B C D E A B C D E Project Client DescriptionMark Date Project No. Date Drawn Checked Scale Sheet Title Sheet No. Headquarters & Laboratories : Northbrook, Illinois Atlanta | Austin | Boston | Chicago | Cleveland | Dallas | Denver | Detroit Honolulu | Houston | Los Angeles | Minneapolis | New Haven | New York Philadelphia | Princeton | San Francisco | Seattle | South Florida | Washington, D.C. © Co p y r i g h t 2 0 1 9 . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . N o p a r t o f t h i s d o c u m e n t m a y b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m o r b y a n y m e a n s w i t h o u t pe r m i s s i o n f r o m W i s s , J a n n e y , E l s t n e r A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . ( W J E ) . W J E d i s c l a i m s a n y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t s u n a u t h o r i z e d u s e . Pl o t t e d : 1 0 / 2 / 2 0 1 9 6 : 5 1 P M b y G r e g o i r e , Q u e n t i n F i l e N a m e : P : \ 2 0 1 9 \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 x x x \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 6 5 6 . 0 - D E E R H O L L O W F A R M W H I T E B A R N ( b e k ) \ 5 C o n s t r u c t i o n D o c u m e n t s \ 1 Dr a w i n g s \ S h e e t s \ 2 0 1 9 _ 0 6 5 6 _ 0 - S 2 0 . d w g THIS SHEET PLOTS FULL SIZE AT 22x34 (INCHES) 0 1/2" 1"2" Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2915 Premiere Parkway, Suite 100 Duluth, Georgia 30097 770.923.9822 tel | 770.232.9044 fax www.wje.com ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS MATERIALS SCIENTISTS DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN RANCHO SAN ANTONIO PRESERVE 22500 CRISTO REY DR, CUPERTINO, CA 95014 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 330 DISTEL CIRCLE LOS ALTOS, CA 94022 2019.0656.0 Value QAG BEK As Noted ATTIC FLOOR PLAN S2.01SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" ATTIC FLOOR PLAN Attachment 1 23564 1 A B C D B2 N S5.0 1 S5.0 2 S5.0 3 S5.1 1 S5.1 2 S5.2 1 S5.2 2 S5.2 3 S5.2 4 57'-39 16" 5'-41116"11'-67 8"11'-10"13'-3"15'-3" 9' - 1 0 " 29 ' - 9 7 8" 10 ' - 0 5 8" 9' - 1 1 1 4" Consultants 1 A 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 B C D E A B C D E Project Client DescriptionMark Date Project No. Date Drawn Checked Scale Sheet Title Sheet No. Headquarters & Laboratories : Northbrook, Illinois Atlanta | Austin | Boston | Chicago | Cleveland | Dallas | Denver | Detroit Honolulu | Houston | Los Angeles | Minneapolis | New Haven | New York Philadelphia | Princeton | San Francisco | Seattle | South Florida | Washington, D.C. © Co p y r i g h t 2 0 1 9 . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . N o p a r t o f t h i s d o c u m e n t m a y b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m o r b y a n y m e a n s w i t h o u t pe r m i s s i o n f r o m W i s s , J a n n e y , E l s t n e r A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . ( W J E ) . W J E d i s c l a i m s a n y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t s u n a u t h o r i z e d u s e . Pl o t t e d : 1 0 / 2 / 2 0 1 9 6 : 5 1 P M b y G r e g o i r e , Q u e n t i n F i l e N a m e : P : \ 2 0 1 9 \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 x x x \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 6 5 6 . 0 - D E E R H O L L O W F A R M W H I T E B A R N ( b e k ) \ 5 C o n s t r u c t i o n D o c u m e n t s \ 1 Dr a w i n g s \ S h e e t s \ 2 0 1 9 _ 0 6 5 6 _ 0 - S 3 0 . d w g THIS SHEET PLOTS FULL SIZE AT 22x34 (INCHES) 0 1/2" 1"2" Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California 94608 510.428.2907 tel | 510.428.0456 fax www.wje.com ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS MATERIALS SCIENTISTS DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN RANCHO SAN ANTONIO PRESERVE 22500 CRISTO REY DR, CUPERTINO, CA 95014 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 330 DISTEL CIRCLE LOS ALTOS, CA 94022 2019.0656.0 Value QAG BEK As Noted ROOF RAFTER PLAN S3.0----SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" ROOF RAFTER PLAN Attachment 1 2 3 5 641 23564 1 Consultants 1 A 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 B C D E A B C D E Project Client DescriptionMark Date Project No. Date Drawn Checked Scale Sheet Title Sheet No. Headquarters & Laboratories : Northbrook, Illinois Atlanta | Austin | Boston | Chicago | Cleveland | Dallas | Denver | Detroit Honolulu | Houston | Los Angeles | Minneapolis | New Haven | New York Philadelphia | Princeton | San Francisco | Seattle | South Florida | Washington, D.C. © Co p y r i g h t 2 0 1 9 . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . N o p a r t o f t h i s d o c u m e n t m a y b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m o r b y a n y m e a n s w i t h o u t pe r m i s s i o n f r o m W i s s , J a n n e y , E l s t n e r A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . ( W J E ) . W J E d i s c l a i m s a n y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t s u n a u t h o r i z e d u s e . Pl o t t e d : 1 0 / 2 / 2 0 1 9 6 : 5 1 P M b y G r e g o i r e , Q u e n t i n F i l e N a m e : P : \ 2 0 1 9 \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 x x x \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 6 5 6 . 0 - D E E R H O L L O W F A R M W H I T E B A R N ( b e k ) \ 5 C o n s t r u c t i o n D o c u m e n t s \ 1 Dr a w i n g s \ S h e e t s \ 2 0 1 9 _ 0 6 5 6 _ 0 - S 4 0 . d w g THIS SHEET PLOTS FULL SIZE AT 22x34 (INCHES) 0 1/2" 1"2" Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California 94608 510.428.2907 tel | 510.428.0456 fax www.wje.com ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS MATERIALS SCIENTISTS DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN RANCHO SAN ANTONIO PRESERVE 22500 CRISTO REY DR, CUPERTINO, CA 95014 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 330 DISTEL CIRCLE LOS ALTOS, CA 94022 2019.0656.0 Value QAG BEK As Noted NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATION S4.0 ----SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" NORTH ELEVATION ----SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SOUTH ELEVATION Attachment 1 A B C D ABCDB2 Consultants 1 A 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 B C D E A B C D E Project Client DescriptionMark Date Project No. Date Drawn Checked Scale Sheet Title Sheet No. Headquarters & Laboratories : Northbrook, Illinois Atlanta | Austin | Boston | Chicago | Cleveland | Dallas | Denver | Detroit Honolulu | Houston | Los Angeles | Minneapolis | New Haven | New York Philadelphia | Princeton | San Francisco | Seattle | South Florida | Washington, D.C. © Co p y r i g h t 2 0 1 9 . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . N o p a r t o f t h i s d o c u m e n t m a y b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m o r b y a n y m e a n s w i t h o u t pe r m i s s i o n f r o m W i s s , J a n n e y , E l s t n e r A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . ( W J E ) . W J E d i s c l a i m s a n y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t s u n a u t h o r i z e d u s e . Pl o t t e d : 1 0 / 2 / 2 0 1 9 6 : 5 1 P M b y G r e g o i r e , Q u e n t i n F i l e N a m e : P : \ 2 0 1 9 \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 x x x \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 6 5 6 . 0 - D E E R H O L L O W F A R M W H I T E B A R N ( b e k ) \ 5 C o n s t r u c t i o n D o c u m e n t s \ 1 Dr a w i n g s \ S h e e t s \ 2 0 1 9 _ 0 6 5 6 _ 0 - S 4 1 . d w g THIS SHEET PLOTS FULL SIZE AT 22x34 (INCHES) 0 1/2" 1"2" Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California 94608 510.428.2907 tel | 510.428.0456 fax www.wje.com ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS MATERIALS SCIENTISTS DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN RANCHO SAN ANTONIO PRESERVE 22500 CRISTO REY DR, CUPERTINO, CA 95014 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 330 DISTEL CIRCLE LOS ALTOS, CA 94022 2019.0656.0 Value QAG BEK As Noted EAST AND WEST ELEVATION S4.1 ----SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" EAST ELEVATION ----SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" WEST ELEVATION Attachment 1 23564 1 WOOD FLOOR 23564 1 WOOD FLOOR 5 6 (E) CONC. STEM WALL (E) DOOR Consultants 1 A 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 B C D E A B C D E Project Client DescriptionMark Date Project No. Date Drawn Checked Scale Sheet Title Sheet No. Headquarters & Laboratories : Northbrook, Illinois Atlanta | Austin | Boston | Chicago | Cleveland | Dallas | Denver | Detroit Honolulu | Houston | Los Angeles | Minneapolis | New Haven | New York Philadelphia | Princeton | San Francisco | Seattle | South Florida | Washington, D.C. © Co p y r i g h t 2 0 1 9 . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . N o p a r t o f t h i s d o c u m e n t m a y b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m o r b y a n y m e a n s w i t h o u t pe r m i s s i o n f r o m W i s s , J a n n e y , E l s t n e r A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . ( W J E ) . W J E d i s c l a i m s a n y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t s u n a u t h o r i z e d u s e . Pl o t t e d : 1 0 / 2 / 2 0 1 9 6 : 5 1 P M b y G r e g o i r e , Q u e n t i n F i l e N a m e : P : \ 2 0 1 9 \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 x x x \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 6 5 6 . 0 - D E E R H O L L O W F A R M W H I T E B A R N ( b e k ) \ 5 C o n s t r u c t i o n D o c u m e n t s \ 1 Dr a w i n g s \ S h e e t s \ 2 0 1 9 _ 0 6 5 6 _ 0 - S 5 0 . d w g THIS SHEET PLOTS FULL SIZE AT 22x34 (INCHES) 0 1/2" 1"2" Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California 94608 510.428.2907 tel | 510.428.0456 fax www.wje.com ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS MATERIALS SCIENTISTS DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN RANCHO SAN ANTONIO PRESERVE 22500 CRISTO REY DR, CUPERTINO, CA 95014 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 330 DISTEL CIRCLE LOS ALTOS, CA 94022 2019.0656.0 Value QAG Checked By As Noted INTERIOR SECTIONS S5.0 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" NORTH FACING INTERIOR SECTION 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" GRID LINE B INTERIOR SECTION 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" GRID LINE B2 INTERIOR SECTION Attachment 1 2 3 5 641 (E) CONC. STEM WALL (E) DOOR 23564 1 WOOD FLOOR Consultants 1 A 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 B C D E A B C D E Project Client DescriptionMark Date Project No. Date Drawn Checked Scale Sheet Title Sheet No. Headquarters & Laboratories : Northbrook, Illinois Atlanta | Austin | Boston | Chicago | Cleveland | Dallas | Denver | Detroit Honolulu | Houston | Los Angeles | Minneapolis | New Haven | New York Philadelphia | Princeton | San Francisco | Seattle | South Florida | Washington, D.C. © Co p y r i g h t 2 0 1 9 . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . N o p a r t o f t h i s d o c u m e n t m a y b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m o r b y a n y m e a n s w i t h o u t pe r m i s s i o n f r o m W i s s , J a n n e y , E l s t n e r A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . ( W J E ) . W J E d i s c l a i m s a n y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t s u n a u t h o r i z e d u s e . Pl o t t e d : 1 0 / 2 / 2 0 1 9 6 : 5 1 P M b y G r e g o i r e , Q u e n t i n F i l e N a m e : P : \ 2 0 1 9 \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 x x x \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 6 5 6 . 0 - D E E R H O L L O W F A R M W H I T E B A R N ( b e k ) \ 5 C o n s t r u c t i o n D o c u m e n t s \ 1 Dr a w i n g s \ S h e e t s \ 2 0 1 9 _ 0 6 5 6 _ 0 - S 5 1 . d w g THIS SHEET PLOTS FULL SIZE AT 22x34 (INCHES) 0 1/2" 1"2" Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2915 Premiere Parkway, Suite 100 Duluth, Georgia 30097 770.923.9822 tel | 770.232.9044 fax www.wje.com ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS MATERIALS SCIENTISTS DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN RANCHO SAN ANTONIO PRESERVE 22500 CRISTO REY DR, CUPERTINO, CA 95014 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 330 DISTEL CIRCLE LOS ALTOS, CA 94022 2019.0656.0 Value QAG Checked By As Noted INTERIOR SECTIONS S5.12SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SOUTH FACING INTERIOR SECTION 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" GRID LINE C INTERIOR SECTION Attachment 1 A B C D T.O. ATTIC FLOOR T.O. UPPER ROOF T.O. LOWER ROOF T.O. OF CONC. FLOOR SLAB A B C D T.O. ATTIC FLOOR T.O. UPPER ROOF T.O. LOWER ROOF B2 (E) CONC. STEM WALL CONC. FLOOR SLAB A B C T.O. OF WOOD FLOOR D T.O. ROOF T.O. ATTIC FLOOR (E) WINDOW (TYP) ABCDB2 T.O. ROOF T.O. ATTIC FLOOR (E) CONC. STEM WALL CONC. FLOOR SLAB (E) WINDOW (TYP) Consultants 1 A 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 B C D E A B C D E Project Client DescriptionMark Date Project No. Date Drawn Checked Scale Sheet Title Sheet No. Headquarters & Laboratories : Northbrook, Illinois Atlanta | Austin | Boston | Chicago | Cleveland | Dallas | Denver | Detroit Honolulu | Houston | Los Angeles | Minneapolis | New Haven | New York Philadelphia | Princeton | San Francisco | Seattle | South Florida | Washington, D.C. © Co p y r i g h t 2 0 1 9 . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . N o p a r t o f t h i s d o c u m e n t m a y b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m o r b y a n y m e a n s w i t h o u t pe r m i s s i o n f r o m W i s s , J a n n e y , E l s t n e r A s s o c i a t e s , I n c . ( W J E ) . W J E d i s c l a i m s a n y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r i t s u n a u t h o r i z e d u s e . Pl o t t e d : 1 0 / 2 / 2 0 1 9 6 : 5 1 P M b y G r e g o i r e , Q u e n t i n F i l e N a m e : P : \ 2 0 1 9 \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 x x x \ 2 0 1 9 . 0 6 5 6 . 0 - D E E R H O L L O W F A R M W H I T E B A R N ( b e k ) \ 5 C o n s t r u c t i o n D o c u m e n t s \ 1 Dr a w i n g s \ S h e e t s \ 2 0 1 9 _ 0 6 5 6 _ 0 - S 5 2 . d w g THIS SHEET PLOTS FULL SIZE AT 22x34 (INCHES) 0 1/2" 1"2" Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California 94608 510.428.2907 tel | 510.428.0456 fax www.wje.com ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS MATERIALS SCIENTISTS DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN RANCHO SAN ANTONIO PRESERVE 22500 CRISTO REY DR, CUPERTINO, CA 95014 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 330 DISTEL CIRCLE LOS ALTOS, CA 94022 2019.0656.0 Value QAG BEK As Noted INTERIOR SECTIONS S5.2 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" GRID LINE 3 INTERIOR SECTION 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" GRID LINE 5 INTERIOR SECTION 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" EAST FACING INTERIOR SECTION 4 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" GRID LINE 6 INTERIOR SECTION Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 APPENDIX B - SCA ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT Attachment 1 2939 Summit Street, Suite 302 • Oakland, CA 94609 • (510) 645-6200 320 Justin Drive • San Francisco, CA 94112 • (415) 882-1675 Oakland • San Francisco September 13, 2019 Mr. Brian Kehoe, SE Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associated, Inc. (WJE) 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, CA 94608 bkehoe@wje.com Re: Non-destructive Pre-renovation Hazardous Materials Survey Deer Hollow Farm White Barn, 22500 Cristo Rey Drive Cupertino, CA 95014 SCA Project No.: B-13058 Dear Mr. Kehoe: As requested, SCA Environmental, Inc. (SCA) completed a non-destructive pre-renovation survey at the above- referenced site in Cupertino, CA on August 29, 2019 as part of the future planned renovations. A picture of the building is shown below: Sampling was limited to materials expected to be impacted by the renovations. Sampling was conducted by Mr. Dan Leung, CIH, CSP, a Cal/OSHA Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC #07-4175) and a California Department of Public Health Certified Lead Inspector/Assessor and Project Monitor (CDPH #7329). EMSL Analytical, Inc. (EMSL), an NVLAP -accredited laboratory in San Leandro, CA, completed bulk asbestos and lead analyses. Prior to any renovations or demolition, the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and locally enforced by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) require that all buildings be inspected for asbestos-containing materials (ACM) and materials subject to damage or which will be made friable, be removed. Attachment 1 Summary Report – Non-destructive Pre-renovation Hazmat Survey Deer Hollow Farm White Barn, 22500 Cristo Rey Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 SCA Project No. B-13058 Page 2 Methodology Asbestos sampling was performed in a fashion designed to minimize exposure of the surveyor or others to airborne asbestos fibers. Samples were typically removed from the substrate utilizing a knife or hollow drill bit bored through a wet sponge; the sample material was then placed into an airtight plastic vial. The vial's exterior was decontaminated with a wet sponge, and a unique sample I.D. written on the vial. The vial was then stored in a plastic bag. Sample substrates were patched with a high-temperature caulking compound, where required. Samples of suspect materials were collected using triplicate sampling procedures, where applicable. Under these procedures, the first sample is analyzed. If it tests positive for asbestos (>1%), the analysis is suspended for further samples of that material. If the first sample tests only trace positive (between 0.1 to 1%), or negative, then the second and third samples are analyzed sequentially, in order to determine the possible presence of asbestos, as applicable. If all three samples test negative, the material is considered as non-asbestos. If one or more samples test "trace" positive (<1%), the material is considered to be trace positive. If one or more samples are positive for asbestos, the material is considered positive. All asbestos samples collected were submitted to EMSL for analysis by polarized light microscopy with dispersion staining (DS/PLM). The Bay Area Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD), the Federal Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA), and California Environmental Protection Agency's (Cal/EPA) regulations all specify the DS/PLM method. Asbestos Standards ACM is defined by EPA regulations as those substances containing greater than 1% asbestos. The BAAQMD and the Cal/EPA provide local enforcement of these regulations. Friable ACM with greater than 1% asbestos needs to be disposed of as asbestos waste. Prior to demolition of a building, the BAAQMD requires abatement of friable ACM, as well as non-friable ACM that may become friable during demolition (practically, this means all non-friable ACM). Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administrations (OSHA) regulations, locally enforced by CAL/OSHA, defines ACM as substances that contain greater than 1% asbestos. Cal/OSHA also mandates special training, medical exams, personal protective equipment and record keeping for employees working with ACM. If a material contains less than 1% asbestos but more than 0.1% asbestos, the material may be disposed of as non-ACM, but the Cal/OSHA requirements would still have to be followed regarding workers' protection and Contractor licensing. "Trace" materials are currently regulated in California and require the following: • Removal using wet methods; • Prohibition of removal using abrasive saws or methods which would aerosolize the material; • Prompt clean-up of the impacted zone, using HEPA-filtered vacuums, as applicable; • Employer registration by Cal/OSHA for removal quantities exceeding 100 sq. ft. per year; and • Cal/OSHA Carcinogen Registration by the Demolition or Abatement Contractor impacting such materials. Lead Standards Since elemental lead is a suspect carcinogen and known teratogen and neurotoxic in high doses, lead-containing materials need to be identified prior to the on-set of demolition activities. Using combinations of engineering controls and personal protective equipment, lead-containing materials can be remediated safely. Several sources of applicable standards are listed as follows: 1. Lead exposures in the workplace are regulated by Cal/OSHA, which has certain regulatory requirements for identifying and controlling potential lead exposures. Currently applicable regulations for the construction industry have been adopted by Cal/OSHA (8 CCR 1532.1) from the Federal OSHA Attachment 1 Summary Report – Non-destructive Pre-renovation Hazmat Survey Deer Hollow Farm White Barn, 22500 Cristo Rey Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 SCA Project No. B-13058 Page 3 regulations. The current OSHA 8-hour Permissible Exposure Level (PEL) for lead is 50 µg/m3. 2. Current EPA and Cal/EPA regulations do not require LBP to be removed prior to demolition, unless loose and peeling. Provided that the paints are securely adhered to the substrates (i.e., non-flaking or non- peeling), disposal of intact demolition debris can generally be handled in California as non-hazardous and non-RCRA waste. The applicable standards for lead are tabulated below: Agent Total Threshold Level Concentration (TTLC) Wet-Weight Standard (mg/kg)1 Soluble Threshold Level Concentration (STLC) Standard (mg/l)1 CalOSHA Standard for Occupational Safety Lead 1000 5 Any detectable levels; spot abatement required from coated metals before torching/welding In California, loose and peeling LCP or other wastes require characterization and testing for leachability. Disposal requirements are outlined as follows: Lead Disposal Standards Standards TTLC Concentations 1000 mg/kg Condition Total Pb (mg/kg) STLC Pb (mg/L) TCLP Pb (mg/L) Non-haz waste CalHaz (Non-RCRA) Fed Haz (RCRA) 1a <50 (a1)NA Yes no no no III 1b <100 (a2)NA Yes no no no III 2a <5 <5 Yes (c)no no no III or II (d) 2b >5 <5 no Yes no no I 2c >5 >5 no Yes Yes Yes I 2d (b)<5 >5 no no Yes Yes I 3a <5 <5 No Yes No no I 3b >5 <5 no Yes no no I 3c >5 >5 no Yes Yes Yes I 3d (b)<5 >5 no no Yes Yes I 4 any any >5 no no Yes Yes I (a1) 50 = 10 x 5 (STLC for Pb). Per WET method, impossible to exceed STLC even if 100% soluble. (a2) 100 = 20 x 5 (TCLP for Pb). Per TCLP method, impossible to exceed STLC even if 100% soluble. (b) Physically impossible due to the stronger acid used in WET than TCLP. (c) Landfills will likely require documentation that TCLP is <5, even though TCLP is almost always less than WET. (d) Landfill dependent, function of permit, landfill liner, or landfill policy Classification and Disposal of Inorganic Lead Wastes in California Classifications Stabilization Required Landfill Class 50 to <1000 >1000 Leachable Lead 5 mg/L Test Methods & Results 3. The major definitions of LCP or lead-coated surfaces are listed as follows: a. California Department of Public Health (CDPH) defines LBP as paint that contains either >0.5% by weight of lead, or >1 mg/cm2. b. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) prohibits the manufacturing of paint that contains more than 90 ppm of lead. Note that adherence to CalOSHA's Construction Lead Standard is required for all paint with any measurable lead content. Attachment 1 Summary Report – Non-destructive Pre-renovation Hazmat Survey Deer Hollow Farm White Barn, 22500 Cristo Rey Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 SCA Project No. B-13058 Page 4 4. Lead is on the "Proposition 65" list, given its toxic potential in causing reproductive hazards. 5. California Department of Public Health (CDPH) requires the use of Certified Lead Workers and Supervisors for lead abatement projects at public buildings with a greater than 20 years expected life or whenever work is completed specifically to abate Lead-Based Paint. The CDPH certification requirements do not apply to this facility; however, dust controls and personnel protection are still required under 17 CCR Sections 35001 through 36100. Mercury-Containing Items and PCBs SCA did not observe any fluorescent light fixtures that may contain PCB-containing ballasts in the building. SCA did not observe any fluorescent lamps, which contain mercury vapors or mercury-containing thermostats during the survey of the building. Results Asbestos analyses by polarized light microscopy (PLM) analytical methods found the following results: Asbestos-Containing: No suspect materials, which may be impacted by the renovation activities, were found to contain asbestos. Assumed Asbestos-Containing: No suspect materials, which may be impacted by the renovation activities, were assumed to contain asbestos. If any concealed materials are discovered during the renovation activities, they will require further destructive testing. Non-Asbestos: Several suspect materials that may be impacted by the renovation activities were tested or visually determined to be negative for asbestos, and are listed below: Material ID Non-asbestos Materials FL-1-1,2 Gray concrete perimeter foundation wall (-) around milk room WL-2-1,2 Gray concrete slab (-) in milk room FOOT-3-1,2 Red brick (-) w/light gray mortar (-) support footings CAULK-4-1,2 Off-white exterior caulking (-) around vinyl windows ASPHALT-5-1,2 Black asphalt (-) ramp FLOORS-NNN1 Dirt or wood floors WALLS-NNN2 Wood walls ROOF-NNN3 Corrugated metal roofing ROOF-NNN4 Wood roofing shingles (No felt paper observed below shingles) NNN=not suspect Lead: Lead sampling results are tabulated below: Sample ID Location Structure Substrate Color FAA Results (ppm) Condition OW-1 Interior Walls and ceilings Wood Off-white <80 Intact OW-2 Exterior Walls Wood Off-white <80 Loose & peeling Dust control procedures are required during demolition/renovation of painted elements. Conventional demolition techniques should be employed for all painted surfaces. Mercury-Containing Items and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB): SCA did not observe any fluorescent light fixtures that may contain PCB-containing ballasts in the building. Attachment 1 Summary Report – Non-destructive Pre-renovation Hazmat Survey Deer Hollow Farm White Barn, 22500 Cristo Rey Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 SCA Project No. B-13058 Page 5 SCA did not observe any fluorescent lamps, which contain mercury vapors or mercury-containing thermostats during the survey of the building. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, SCA ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. Dan Leung, CIH, CSP, CAC, CDPH Vice President (415) 867-9544 dleung@sca-enviro.com Table 1. Materials Matrix Report Figure 1. Sample Location Diagram Attachments: 1. Asbestos Laboratory Report 2. Lead Laboratory Report 3. Photographs Attachment 1 SCA Project No. B-13058 Surveyed August 29, 2019 Sub-sample #First Floor Mezzanine Storage Shed Roof Exterior Material ID Material Description A B C D E F G Asbestos? Positive. Trace. Assumed. Negative UN I T S (L F , S F , EA ) In t e r i o r In t e r i o r No t i n Sc o p e Ro o f Ex t e r i o r TO T A L ( + / - 15 % ) NON-ASBESTOS FL-1 Gray concrete perimeter foundation wall (-) around milk room ND ND SF 225 225 WL-2 Gray concrete slab (-) in milk room ND ND SF 180 180 FOOT-3 Red brick (-) w/light gray mortar (-) support footings ND ND SF 60 60 CAULK-4 Off-white exterior caulking (-) around vinyl windows ND ND SF 40 40 ASPHALT-5 Black asphalt (-) ramp ND ND SF 40 40 FLOORS-NNN1 Dirt or wood floors SF 1175 1925 3100 WALLS-NNN2 Wood walls SF 2720 2000 4720 ROOF-NNN3 Corrugated metal roofing SF 2200 2200 ROOF-NNN4 Wood roofing shingles (No felt paper observed below shingles)SF 20 20 LEAD PPM OW-1 Off-white interior paint on walls and ceilings <80 SF PNQ PNQ OW-2 Off-white exterior paint on walls <80 SF PNQ PNQ Notes: PNQ = Present, not quantified; CH = Chrysotile; ND = Not detected; NA = Not analyzed Table 1: Materials Matrix Report-MPROSD, Deer Hollow Farm, White Barn, 22500 Christo Rey Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 Negative Not Suspect Attachment 1 Title: Project: Project No: Drawn By: Checked By: Date:Scale: NTS Figure 1 Lakeside #215 Oakland, CA 94612 tel: (510) 645-6200 efax: (415) 962-0736 SF OK sketch Attachment 1 Summary Report – Non-destructive Pre-renovation Hazmat Survey Deer Hollow Farm White Barn, 22500 Cristo Rey Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 SCA Project No. B-13058 Page 6 Attachment 1 Asbestos Laboratory Report Attachment 1 EMSL Analytical, Inc. 464 McCormick Street San Leandro, CA 94577 Tel/Fax: (510) 895-3675 / (510) 895-3680 http://www.EMSL.com / sanleandrolab@emsl.com 091920603EMSL Order: Customer ID:SCAE50 Customer PO:B13058 Project ID: Attention:Phone:Dan Leung (415) 867-9544 Fax:SCA Environmental, Inc.(415) 962-0736 Received Date:320 Justin Drive 08/29/2019 10:45 AM Analysis Date:San Francisco, CA 94112 09/01/2019 Collected Date: Project:WJE MPROSD DEER HOLLOW FARM - B13058 - DL - DEER HOLLOW BARN, WHITE FARM - 8/29 Test Report: Asbestos Analysis of Bulk Materials via EPA 600/R-93/116 Method using Polarized Light Microscopy Sample Description Appearance % Fibrous % Non-Fibrous Non-Asbestos Asbestos % Type FL-1-1 091920603-0001 None DetectedQuartz Ca Carbonate Gypsum Non-fibrous (Other) 20% 50% 15% 13% Cellulose2%Brown/Gray Non-Fibrous Homogeneous FL-1-2 091920603-0002 None DetectedQuartz Ca Carbonate Gypsum Non-fibrous (Other) 20% 50% 10% 20% Gray Non-Fibrous Homogeneous WL-2-1 091920603-0003 None DetectedQuartz Ca Carbonate Gypsum Non-fibrous (Other) 15% 60% 10% 15% Gray Non-Fibrous Homogeneous WL-2-2 091920603-0004 None DetectedQuartz Ca Carbonate Gypsum Non-fibrous (Other) 15% 60% 10% 15% Gray Non-Fibrous Homogeneous FOOT-3-1-Concrete 091920603-0005 None DetectedQuartz Ca Carbonate Gypsum Non-fibrous (Other) 20% 50% 10% 20% Tan Non-Fibrous Homogeneous FOOT-3-1-Brick 091920603-0005A None DetectedQuartz Ca Carbonate Gypsum Non-fibrous (Other) 10% 30% 40% 20% Red Non-Fibrous Homogeneous FOOT-3-2-Concrete 091920603-0006 None DetectedQuartz Ca Carbonate Gypsum Non-fibrous (Other) 20% 50% 15% 13% Cellulose2%Tan Non-Fibrous Homogeneous FOOT-3-2-Brick 091920603-0006A None DetectedQuartz Ca Carbonate Gypsum Non-fibrous (Other) 10% 30% 40% 20% Red Non-Fibrous Homogeneous CAULK-4-1 091920603-0007 None DetectedCa Carbonate Matrix Non-fibrous (Other) 20% 70% 10% White Non-Fibrous Homogeneous CAULK-4-2 091920603-0008 None DetectedCa Carbonate Matrix Non-fibrous (Other) 20% 70% 10% White Non-Fibrous Homogeneous ASPHALT-5-1 091920603-0009 None DetectedQuartz Matrix Non-fibrous (Other) 40% 40% 20% Black Non-Fibrous Homogeneous ASPHALT-5-2 091920603-0010 None DetectedQuartz Matrix Non-fibrous (Other) 40% 40% 20% Black Non-Fibrous Homogeneous Initial report from: 09/01/2019 08:40:46 Page 1 of 2ASB_PLM_0008_0001 - 1.78 Printed: 9/1/2019 8:40 AM Attachment 1 EMSL Analytical, Inc. 464 McCormick Street San Leandro, CA 94577 Tel/Fax: (510) 895-3675 / (510) 895-3680 http://www.EMSL.com / sanleandrolab@emsl.com 091920603EMSL Order: Customer ID:SCAE50 Customer PO:B13058 Project ID: Analyst(s) Shane Heisser (12)Matthew Batongbacal or Other Approved Signatory EMSL maintains liability limited to cost of analysis. The above analyses were performed in general compliance with Appendix E to Subpart E of 40 CFR (previously EPA 600/M4-82-020 "Interim Method"), but augmented with procedures outlined in the 1993 ("final") version of the method. This report relates only to the samples reported above, and may not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval by EMSL. EMSL bears no responsibility for sample collection activities or analytical method limitations . Interpretation and use of test results are the responsibility of the client. All samples received in acceptable condition unless otherwise noted. This report must not be used by the client to claim product certification, approval, or endorsement by NVLAP, NIST or any agency of the federal government. EMSL recommends gravimetric reduction for all non-friable organically bound materials prior to analysis. Estimation of uncertainty is available on request. Samples analyzed by EMSL Analytical, Inc San Leandro, CA NVLAP Lab Code 101048-3, WA C884 Initial report from: 09/01/2019 08:40:46 Page 2 of 2ASB_PLM_0008_0001 - 1.78 Printed: 9/1/2019 8:40 AM Attachment 1 OrderID: 091920603 Page 1 Of 1 Attachment 1 Summary Report – Non-destructive Pre-renovation Hazmat Survey Deer Hollow Farm White Barn, 22500 Cristo Rey Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 SCA Project No. B-13058 Page 7 Attachment 2 Lead Laboratory Report Attachment 1 Client Sample Description ConcentrationLab ID Analyzed Weight Lead Collected EMSL Analytical, Inc 464 McCormick Street, San Leandro, CA 94577 Phone/Fax:(510) 895-3675 / (510) 895-3680 http://www.EMSL.com sanleandrolab@emsl.com Attn:Dan Leung SCA Environmental, Inc. 320 Justin Drive San Francisco, CA 94112 Received: 08/29/19 10:45 AM WJE MPROSD DEER HOLLOW FARM - B13058 - DL - DEER HOLLOW FARM, WHITE BARN - 8/29 Fax:(415) 962-0736 Phone: (415) 882-1675 Project: Collected: Test Report: Lead in Paint Chips by Flame AAS (SW 846 3050B/7000B)* 091920529 CustomerID:SCAE50 CustomerPO:B13058 ProjectID: EMSL Order: 0.2732091920529-0001OW-1 <80ppm08/30/2019 g 0.2613091920529-0002OW-2 <80ppm08/30/2019 g Page 1 of 1 Julian Neagu, Lead Laboratory Manager or other approved signatory Test Report ChmSnglePrm/nQC-7.32.3 Printed: 08/30/2019 6:48:03 PM *Analysis following Lead in Paint by EMSL SOP/Determination of Environmental Lead by FLAA. Reporting limit is 0.010 % wt based on the minimum sample weight per our SOP. Unless noted, results in this report are not blank corrected. This report relates only to the samples reported above and may not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval by EMSL. EMSL bears no responsibility for sample collection activities. Samples received in good condition unless otherwise noted. "<" (less than) result signifies that the analyte was not detected at or above the reporting limit. Measurement of uncertainty is available upon request. The QC data associated with the sample results included in this report meet the recovery and precision requirements unless specifically indicated otherwise. Definitions of modifications are available upon request. Samples analyzed by EMSL Analytical, Inc San Leandro, CA A2LA Accredited Environmental Testing Cert #2845.09 Initial report from 08/30/2019 18:48:03 Attachment 1 OrderID: 091920529 Page 1 Of 1 Attachment 1 Summary Report – Non-destructive Pre-renovation Hazmat Survey Deer Hollow Farm White Barn, 22500 Cristo Rey Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 SCA Project No. B-13058 Page 8 Attachment 3 Photographs Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 APPENDIX C - LANGAN GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Attachment 1 GEOTECHNICAL SITE ASSESSMENT Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Santa Clara County, California Prepared For: Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California Prepared By: Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. 1 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 590 San Jose, California 95113 Wilson Wong, GE #3103 Senior Project Engineer Serena T. Jang, GE #2702 Senior Associate/Vice President 11 October 2019 770659901 Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES .................................................................................................... 1 3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ............................................... 2 3.1 Hand-Auger Sampling ....................................................................................... 2 3.2 Dynamic Penetrometer Tests (DPTs) ................................................................ 2 3.3 Laboratory Testing ............................................................................................ 3 4.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ....................................................................... 3 4.1 Site Conditions................................................................................................... 3 4.2 Subsurface Conditions ...................................................................................... 4 4.3 Site Geology ....................................................................................................... 5 5.0 REGIONAL SEISMICITY ................................................................................................. 5 6.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS ....................................................................................................... 7 7.0 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................. 8 7.1 Foundations and Settlement ............................................................................ 8 7.2 Expansive Soil Considerations .......................................................................... 9 7.3 Construction Considerations ............................................................................ 9 8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................. 10 8.1 Earthwork ......................................................................................................... 10 8.2 Spread Footings ............................................................................................... 11 8.3 Floor Slabs ........................................................................................................ 12 8.4 Exterior Concrete Slabs ................................................................................... 12 8.5 Site Drainage .................................................................................................... 12 8.6 Seismic Design ................................................................................................. 13 9.0 SERVICES DURING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ................................................. 13 10.0 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................... 13 REFERENCES FIGURES DISTRIBUTION 770659901.02 ZW_Geotechnical Site Assessment Report_Deer Hollow Farm White Barn_Santa Clara County.docx Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page ii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Site Plan Figure 3 Dynamic Penetrometer Test Results Figure 4 Plasticity Chart Figure 5 Soil Classification Chart Figure 6 Map of Major Faults and Earthquake Epicenters in the San Francisco Bay Area. Figure 7 Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 1 GEOTECHNICAL SITE ASSESSMENT Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Santa Clara County, California 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the geotechnical site assessment performed by Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. (Langan) for the proposed seismic retrofit of the White Barn structure within the Deer Hollow Farm located in the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve. The Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve is a 3,988-acre open space preserve located west of Highway 280 in Santa Clara County. Deer Hollow Farm is a historic 10-acre farm located within the preserve at a location approximately one mile east of the main County parking lot, as shown on Figure 1. There are several structures within Deer Hollow Farm, including several barns, sheds and enclosures, as shown on Figure 2. The existing White Barn is a 30-foot wide, 58-foot long and 25-foot tall two-story wood frame structure near the center of the farm, as shown on Figure 2. We understand the proposed improvements include the structural retrofit of the existing White Barn. According to the discussion with the project team, the barn will be designed as a Risk Category Level I structure (2016 California Building Code (CBC) Table 1604.5) that will be used for housing animals and hay storage. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES We performed our services in accordance with our scope of services outlined in our proposal dated 18 February 2019. Our services included reviewing available subsurface information from available geologic maps and utility infrastructure plan, performing a limited field investigation, evaluating the findings of our current field exploration at the project site and performing engineering analyses to develop conclusions and recommendations regarding: subsurface conditions including estimates of groundwater levels; 2016 California Building Code (CBC) site classification, mapped values SS and S1, modification factors Fa and Fv and SMS and SM1; site seismicity and potential for seismic hazards including liquefaction, lateral spreading, and fault rupture; Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 2 potential foundation type(s) for the proposed building including estimates of vertical and lateral capacities and associated estimated settlements; expansion potential of the near surface soil; subgrade preparation for slab-on-grade floors and exterior slabs and flatwork, including sidewalks; site preparation, grading and excavation, including engineered fill criteria; construction considerations. Our study was performed for the retrofit and improvements to the White Barn only. This study does not include an evaluation of the other structures within the Deer Hollow Farm. 3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING To evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site, we performed two hand auger (HA) borings and performed two dynamic penetrometer tests (DPTs) at the approximate locations shown on Figure 2. Prior to performing our field exploration, we notified Underground Service Alert (USA). Details of the field investigation activities and laboratory testing are described in the remainder of this section. 3.1 Hand-Auger Sampling The two hand-auger borings, designated HA-1 and HA-2, were performed on 16 September 2019 by our field engineers to depths of about 5 feet below the existing ground surface (bgs). Samples were obtained between depths of ½ to 5 feet bgs. Three samples was collected from each hand auger boring at varying depths using a driven sampler. The hand driven sampler consisted of a 3.0-inch outside diameter and 2.5-inch inside diameter sampler lined with a steel tube with an inside diameter of 2.43-inches; the sampler was driven six inches. Upon completion, the boreholes were backfilled with soil cuttings. 3.2 Dynamic Penetrometer Tests (DPTs) We performed DPTs near each of the hand-auger locations to depths of about 11½ to 14½ feet bgs to quantitatively evaluate the strength of the soil. Each DPT was performed using equipment that consists of a series of rods with a removable 60-degree apex angle cone end-piece. The end-piece has a projected area of 10-square centimeters. The rods and cone were driven into the soil using a 35-pound safety hammer with a 15-inch drop. The number of blows required to drive the rods and cone into the soil were recorded during the test. The blows used to drive Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 3 the probe were converted to equivalent Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-values for use in estimating the strength of the soil. The DPT results for DPT-1 and DPT-2 are presented on Figure 3. 3.3 Laboratory Testing The soil samples collected from the field exploration program were reexamined in the office for soil classification, and selected samples were submitted for laboratory testing. The laboratory testing program was designed to evaluate the expansion potential of the near surface soil at the site. Samples were tested to determine moisture content and plasticity (Atterberg Limits). The results of the laboratory testing are summarized below in Section 4.0 and on Figure 4. 4.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The following is a description of the site and subsurface conditions. 4.1 Site Conditions Based on our review of the historic structure report (Page & Turnbull, 2017), the White Barn dates back to the late 1800s. The existing structure is a wood structure that occupies 3,500 square feet and has two levels, including the ground floor and a hay loft which can be accessed by a steep, narrow stair. On the southeast side of the barn, there is wood flooring on the ground level and this area is used for storage and includes a goat pen. The main center bay of the barn is used for hay and alfalfa storage over a dirt floor. On northwest side of the barn, there is a new milking room that has fully enclosed walls and a concrete floor. Based on our preliminary structural findings report (Page & Turnball, 2017), the existing foundations of the barn are isolated brick pier foundations. According to the report, the brick pier foundations only exist under the interior and exterior vertical posts and appear to have performed “marginally well over the life of the building.” The report recommends replacing the existing brick pier foundations. The ground surface that surrounds the exterior of the barn is covered by gravel. The gravel appears to be underlain by 3 to 4 inches of cement treated soil; however, records of when and how the ground was cement treated were not available. A topographic survey of the site is currently not available to evaluate site drainage. Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 4 4.2 Subsurface Conditions A summary of the near surface subsurface conditions encountered during our limited field investigation is presented in Table 1. TABLE 1 Summary of Near Surface Subsurface Conditions Location Depth Below Ground Surface (feet) Moisture Content (percent) Plasticity Index1 Soil Description2 HA-1 0 to 0.3 18.6 -- CLAYEY SAND (SC), Gray-brown, hard, dry, with cement, fine gravel 0.3 to 2 18.6 22 CLAYEY SAND (SC) Gray-brown, loose, dry, trace fine gravel 2 to 3 14.3 -- CLAYEY SAND (SC) Red-brown, loose, moist 3 to 5 20.1 -- SANDY CLAY (CL) Red-brown, medium stiff to stiff, moist HA-2 0 to 0.3 12.7 -- CLAYEY SAND (SC), Gray-brown, hard, dry, with cement, fine gravel 0.3 to 2 12.7 -- CLAYEY SAND (SC) Red-brown, medium dense to very dense, moist, fine gravel 2 to 5 11.7 19 CLAYEY SAND (SC) Red-brown, medium dense to very dense, moist, with organics Note: 1. The results of the Atterberg Limits test are also presented on Figure 4. 2. The soil was logged in accordance with the soil classification system described in Figure 5. Based on the results of the hand augers and DPTs, the site appears to be underlain by loose to very dense clayey sand and medium stiff to stiff sandy clay to the maximum explored depth of 14½ feet bgs. Laboratory test results indicate the near surface soil has moderate expansion potential1 with a plasticity index (PI) of 19 to 22. Groundwater was not encountered within the depth of DPT investigation. However, the presence of creek near the project site may indicate historical shallow groundwater up to the creek water elevation. In addition, seasonal fluctuation in rainfall influence groundwater levels and may cause several feet of variation. 1 Moderately expansive soil undergoes volume changes with changes in moisture content. Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 5 4.3 Site Geology Permanente Creek meanders along the north side of the Deer Hollow Farm, approximately 60 to 100 feet west and north of the White Barn structure. During our site visit, we observed undercutting of the hillside to the north has undermined the slope along the northern edge of the creek causing several small landslides, however, the failing slopes do not appear to threaten the White Barn structure. Both banks of Permanente Creek appear to be heavily vegetated. Outcrops of greywacke sandstone were observed along the northern bank of Permanente Creek. Colluvium appear to overlay the outcrops. The slope to the south of the White Barn structure shows signs of historic landslides with hummocky terrain, bent trees, and a potential headscarp, however, this area is heavily vegetated and covered in poison oak. During our site visit, our geologist was only able to view these features from a distance of approximately 100 feet. In addition, no active seeps or other hydrologic features were observed upslope of the White Barn structure. 5.0 REGIONAL SEISMICITY The major active faults in the area include the San Andreas, Monte Vista-Shannon/Berrocal, San Gregorio, Hayward, and Calaveras faults. These and other active faults in the region are shown on Figure 6. For each of the active faults within 50 kilometers of the site, the distance from the site and estimated mean characteristic Moment magnitude2 are summarized in Table 2 [2007 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) (2008) and Cao et al. (2003)]. 2 Moment magnitude is an energy-based scale and provides a physically meaningful measure of the size of a faulting event. Moment magnitude is directly related to average slip and fault rupture area. Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 6 TABLE 2 Regional Faults and Seismicity Fault Segment Approximate Distance from Site (km) Direction from Site Mean Characteristic Moment Magnitude Monte Vista-Shannon/Berrocal 0.2 Southwest 6.50 N. San Andreas - Peninsula 5 Southwest 7.23 N. San Andreas (1906 event) 5 Southwest 8.05 N. San Andreas - Santa Cruz 19 Southwest 7.12 Total Hayward 26 Northeast 7.00 Total Hayward-Rodgers Creek 26 Northeast 7.33 San Gregorio Connected 26 West 7.50 Total Calaveras 29 East 7.03 Zayante-Vergeles 29 Southeast 7.00 Monterey Bay-Tularcitos 46 South 7.30 Figure 6 also shows the earthquake epicenters for events with magnitude greater than 5.0 from January 1800 through August 2014. Since 1800, four major earthquakes have been recorded on the San Andreas Fault. In 1836 an earthquake with an estimated maximum intensity of VII on the Modified Mercalli (MM) scale (Figure 7) occurred east of Monterey Bay on the San Andreas Fault (Toppozada and Borchardt 1998). The estimated Moment magnitude, Mw, for this earthquake is about 6.25. In 1838, an earthquake occurred with an estimated intensity of about VIII-IX (MM), corresponding to an Mw of about 7.5. The San Francisco Earthquake of 1906 caused the most significant damage in the history of the Bay Area in terms of loss of lives and property damage. This earthquake created a surface rupture along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Bautista approximately 470 kilometers in length. It had a maximum intensity of XI (MM), an Mw of about 7.9, and was felt 560 kilometers away in Oregon, Nevada, and Los Angeles. The Loma Prieta Earthquake occurred on 17 October 1989, in the Santa Cruz Mountains with an Mw of 6.9, approximately 35 kilometers from the site. In 1868 an earthquake with an estimated maximum intensity of X on the MM scale occurred on the southern segment (between San Leandro and Fremont) of the Hayward Fault. The estimated Mw for the earthquake is 7.0. In 1861, an earthquake of unknown magnitude (probably an Mw of about 6.5) was reported on the Calaveras Fault. The most recent significant earthquake on this fault was the 1984 Morgan Hill earthquake (Mw = 6.2). The most recent earthquake to be felt in the Bay Area occurred on 24 August 2014 south of Napa, with an Mw of 6.0; the fault responsible Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 7 for this quake is still being determined, but is believed to have occurred within the Napa fault system, with the epicenter located approximately 103 km from the site. The 2014 WGCEP (2015 report) at the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) predicted a 72 percent chance of a magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake occurring in the San Francisco Bay Area in 30 years. More specific estimates of the probabilities for different faults in the Bay Area are presented in Table 3. TABLE 3 WGCEP (2015) Estimates of 30-Year Probability of a Magnitude 6.7 or Greater Earthquake Fault Probability (percent) Hayward-Rodgers Creek 32 N. San Andreas 33 Calaveras 25 Green Valley 7 San Gregorio 6 Mount Diablo Thrust 4 6.0 SEISMIC HAZARDS During a major earthquake, strong to violent ground shaking is expected to occur at the project site. Strong ground shaking during an earthquake can result in ground failure such as that associated with soil liquefaction3, lateral spreading4, cyclic densification5, and fault rupture. Based on our review of seismic hazard maps (California Geologic Survey, 2002), the site is within a zone designated with the potential for liquefaction and seismically-induced slope instability. In addition, the White Barn structure is located approximately 60 feet west of Permanente Creek. 3 Liquefaction is a transformation of soil from a solid to a liquefied state during which saturated soil temporarily loses strength resulting from the buildup of excess pore water pressure, especially during earthquake-induced cyclic loading. Soil susceptible to liquefaction includes loose to medium dense sand and gravel, low-plasticity silt, and some low-plasticity clay deposits. 4 Lateral spreading is a phenomenon in which surficial soil displaces along a shear zone that has formed within an underlying liquefied layer. Upon reaching mobilization, the surficial blocks are transported downslope or in the direction of a free face by earthquake and gravitational forces. 5 Cyclic densification is a phenomenon in which non-saturated, cohesionless soil is densified by earthquake vibrations, causing ground-surface settlement. Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 8 Therefore, we judge the potential of liquefaction, lateral spreading and seismically-induced slope instability may be high. Historically, ground surface displacements closely follow the traces of geologically young faults. The site is not within an Earthquake Fault Zone, as defined by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. However, potentially active Monte Vista-Shannon and Berrocal fault zone are at close proximity of the site. According to County of Santa Clara (Santa Clara County, California, Planning Office, 2015), the project site is located within Santa Clara County Fault Rupture Zone. We have not performed site-specific evaluations, however, we judge the risk of surface faulting at the site and consequent secondary ground failure is high. Since the structure is designated as a Risk Category I, the structure represents a low hazard to human life. If the Risk Category of the structure is raised to Category II, III or IV in the future, a more in depth seismic hazard study, including test borings, Cone Penetration Tests (CPTs), slope stability and fault trench studies should be performed for the site. 7.0 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS On the basis of our subsurface investigation, we conclude the project is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the project plans and specifications and implemented during construction. The primary geotechnical issues for this project include: foundation support of the proposed improvements; potentially expansive near surface soils; potential foundation settlement. Our conclusions regarding these and other geotechnical issues are discussed in the remainder of this section. 7.1 Foundations and Settlement Based on the preliminary structural findings report (Page & Turnball, 2017), we understand the recommendation is to replace the existing brick pier foundations. We conclude that new foundations for the retrofit elements of the White Barn structure can be shallow footings. Localized soft soil, if encountered under footing locations, should be excavated and replaced with engineered fill or lean concrete. Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 9 Design recommendations for the structure’s footings are presented in Section 8.2. Footings designed in accordance with these recommendations should not settle more than ½ inch; differential settlement between adjacent footings 50 feet apart, should not exceed ¼ inch. The footings may be subject to large seismic induced settlements during a major earthquake. If in the future the structure is upgraded to Risk Category II, III and IV, seismic induced settlements should be evaluated. 7.2 Expansive Soil Considerations The existing near-surface soil has moderate expansion potential. Moisture fluctuations in near-surface expansive soil could cause the soil to expand or contract resulting in movement and potential damage to improvements that overlie them. Potential causes of moisture fluctuations include drying during construction, and subsequent wetting from rain, capillary rise, landscape irrigation, and type of plant selection. For improvements at-grade, the volume changes from expansive soil can cause cracking of foundations, floor slabs and exterior flatwork. Therefore, foundations, slabs, and concrete flatwork should be designed and constructed to resist the effects of expansive soil. These effects can be mitigated by moisture conditioning the expansive soil and providing select, non-expansive fill below exterior slabs and supporting foundations below the zone of seasonal moisture change. 7.3 Construction Considerations The soil to be excavated from the site consists of materials that can be excavated with conventional earthmoving equipment such as loaders and backhoes, except where foundations and slabs of existing buildings are encountered. Removal of these may require the use of jackhammers or hoe-rams. Excavations resulting from the removal of foundations, slabs and underground utilities that extend below the bottom of the proposed foundation should be cleaned of any loose soil/debris and backfilled with lean concrete or properly compacted fill. The surficial soil is clayey sand with moderate expansive potential. If earthwork is performed in wet weather conditions, it may be difficult to compact the soil; it may need to be aerated during dry weather. Light grading equipment may be needed to avoid damaging the subgrade. Attachment 1 I Not felt by people, except under especially favorable circumstances. However, dizziness or nausea may be experienced. Sometimes birds and animals are uneasy or disturbed. Trees, structures, liquids, bodies of water may sway gently, and doors may swing very slowly. II Felt indoors by a few people, especially on upper floors of multi-story buildings, and by sensitive or nervous persons. As in Grade I, birds and animals are disturbed, and trees, structures, liquids and bodies of water may sway. Hanging objects swing, especially if they are delicately suspended. III Felt indoors by several people, usually as a rapid vibration that may not be recognized as an earthquake at first. Vibration is similar to that of a light, or lightly loaded trucks, or heavy trucks some distance away. Duration may be estimated in some cases. Movements may be appreciable on upper levels of tall structures. Standing motor cars may rock slightly. IV Felt indoors by many, outdoors by a few. Awakens a few individuals, particularly light sleepers, but frightens no one except those apprehensive from previous experience. Vibration like that due to passing of heavy, or heavily loaded trucks. Sensation like a heavy body striking building, or the falling of heavy objects inside. Dishes, windows and doors rattle; glassware and crockery clink and clash. Walls and house frames creak, especially if intensity is in the upper range of this grade. Hanging objects often swing. Liquids in open vessels are disturbed slightly. Stationary automobiles rock noticeably. V Felt indoors by practically everyone, outdoors by most people. Direction can often be estimated by those outdoors. Awakens many, or most sleepers. Frightens a few people, with slight excitement; some persons run outdoors. Buildings tremble throughout. Dishes and glassware break to some extent. Windows crack in some cases, but not generally. Vases and small or unstable objects overturn in many instances, and a few fall. Hanging objects and doors swing generally or considerably. Pictures knock against walls, or swing out of place. Doors and shutters open or close abruptly. Pendulum clocks stop, or run fast or slow. Small objects move, and furnishings may shift to a slight extent. Small amounts of liquids spill from well-filled open containers. Trees and bushes shake slightly. VI Felt by everyone, indoors and outdoors. Awakens all sleepers. Frightens many people; general excitement, and some persons run outdoors. Persons move unsteadily. Trees and bushes shake slightly to moderately. Liquids are set in strong motion. Small bells in churches and schools ring. Poorly built buildings may be damaged. Plaster falls in small amounts. Other plaster cracks somewhat. Many dishes and glasses, and a few windows break. Knickknacks, books and pictures fall. Furniture overturns in many instances. Heavy furnishings move. VII Frightens everyone. General alarm, and everyone runs outdoors. People find it difficult to stand. Persons driving cars notice shaking. Trees and bushes shake moderately to strongly. Waves form on ponds, lakes and streams. Water is muddied. Gravel or sand stream banks cave in. Large church bells ring. Suspended objects quiver. Damage is negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary buildings; considerable in poorly built or badly designed buildings, adobe houses, old walls (especially where laid up without mortar), spires, etc. Plaster and some stucco fall. Many windows and some furniture break. Loosened brickwork and tiles shake down. Weak chimneys break at the roofline. Cornices fall from towers and high buildings. Bricks and stones are dislodged. Heavy furniture overturns. Concrete irrigation ditches are considerably damaged. VIII General fright, and alarm approaches panic. Persons driving cars are disturbed. Trees shake strongly, and branches and trunks break off (especially palm trees). Sand and mud erupts in small amounts. Flow of springs and wells is temporarily and sometimes permanently changed. Dry wells renew flow. Temperatures of spring and well waters varies. Damage slight in brick structures built especially to withstand earthquakes; considerable in ordinary substantial buildings, with some partial collapse; heavy in some wooden houses, with some tumbling down. Panel walls break away in frame structures. Decayed pilings break off. Walls fall. Solid stone walls crack and break seriously. Wet grounds and steep slopes crack to some extent. Chimneys, columns, monuments and factory stacks and towers twist and fall. Very heavy furniture moves conspicuously or overturns. IX Panic is general. Ground cracks conspicuously. Damage is considerable in masonry structures built especially to withstand earthquakes; great in other masonry buildings - some collapse in large part. Some wood frame houses built especially to withstand earthquakes are thrown out of plumb, others are shifted wholly off foundations. Reservoirs are seriously damaged and underground pipes sometimes break. X Panic is general. Ground, especially when loose and wet, cracks up to widths of several inches; fissures up to a yard in width run parallel to canal and stream banks. Landsliding is considerable from river banks and steep coasts. Sand and mud shifts horizontally on beaches and flat land. Water level changes in wells. Water is thrown on banks of canals, lakes, rivers, etc. Dams, dikes, embankments are seriously damaged. Well-built wooden structures and bridges are severely damaged, and some collapse. Dangerous cracks develop in excellent brick walls. Most masonry and frame structures, and their foundations are destroyed. Railroad rails bend slightly. Pipe lines buried in earth tear apart or are crushed endwise. Open cracks and broad wavy folds open in cement pavements and asphalt road surfaces. XI Panic is general. Disturbances in ground are many and widespread, varying with the ground material. Broad fissures, earth slumps, and land slips develop in soft, wet ground. Water charged with sand and mud is ejected in large amounts. Sea waves of significant magnitude may develop. Damage is severe to wood frame structures, especially near shock centers, great to dams, dikes and embankments, even at long distances. Few if any masonry structures remain standing. Supporting piers or pillars of large, well-built bridges are wrecked. Wooden bridges that "give" are less affected. Railroad rails bend greatly and some thrust endwise. Pipe lines buried in earth are put completely out of service. XII Panic is general. Damage is total, and practically all works of construction are damaged greatly or destroyed. Disturbances in the ground are great and varied, and numerous shearing cracks develop. Landslides, rock falls, and slumps in river banks are numerous and extensive. Large rock masses are wrenched loose and torn off. Fault slips develop in firm rock, and horizontal and vertical offset displacements are notable. Water channels, both surface and underground, are disturbed and modified greatly. Lakes are dammed, new waterfalls are produced, rivers are deflected, etc. Surface waves are seen on ground surfaces. Lines of sight and level are distorted. Objects are thrown upward into the air. Project Drawing Title SANTA CLARA COUNTY CALIFORNIA DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE Path: \\langan.com\data\SJO\data9\770659901\Project Data\_Discipline\Geotechnical\Reports\770659901 Figure 7 Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale.mxd Project No. Date Figure770659901 10/9/2019 71 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 590 San Jose, CA 95113 T: 408.283.3600 F: 408.283.3601 www.langan.com Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying and Landscape Architecture, D.P.C. Langan International, LLC Collectively known as Langan © 2 0 1 9 L a n g a n Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 10 8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations for site preparation, shallow foundations, seismic design, and other geotechnical issues are presented in the following sections of this report. 8.1 Earthwork Grading operations should commence after demolition and removal of existing foundations and underground utilities within the development area. Following demolition, all areas to receive improvements should be stripped of vegetation and organic topsoil. The stripped organic soil can be stockpiled for later use in landscaped areas, if approved by the architect; organic topsoil should not be used as compacted fill. Prior to placing fill, the subgrade exposed after stripping and site clearing, as well as other portions of the site that will receive new fill or site improvements, should be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, moisture-conditioned to at least three percent above optimum moisture content, and recompacted to between 88 and 93 percent relative compaction6. Any select fill placed during grading should meet the following criteria: be free of organic matter contain no rocks or lumps larger than three inches in greatest dimension have a low expansion potential (defined by a liquid limit of less than 40 and plasticity index lower than 12) have a low corrosion potential7 be approved by the geotechnical engineer. All fill placed beneath improvements should meet the criteria for select fill discussed in this section. All select fill should be moisture-conditioned to near optimum moisture content, placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness, and be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. Where used, sand containing less than 10 percent fines (particles passing the No. 200 sieve) should also be compacted to at least 95 percent relative 6 Relative compaction refers to the in-place dry density of soil expressed as a percentage of the maximum dry density of the same material, as determined by the ASTM D1557 laboratory compaction procedure. 7 Low corrosion potential is defined as a minimum resistivity of 2,000 ohms-cm and maximum sulfate and chloride concentrations of 250 parts per million. Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 11 compaction. Samples of on-site and proposed import fill materials should be submitted to the geotechnical engineer for approval at least three business days prior to use at the site. The existing soil does not meet the requirements for select fill. The existing soil may be used as general site fill below the select fill, provided the soil is moisture-conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and recompacted to between 88 and 93 percent relative compaction. 8.2 Spread Footings The new foundations for the retrofit of the White Barn structure should consist of shallow, spread footings bearing on firm, native soil. The bottom of the footings be embedded at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent soil subgrade and should be at least 18 inches wide for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated spread footings. Footings adjacent to utility trenches (or other footings) should bear below an imaginary 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) plane projected upward from the bottom edge of the utility trench (or adjacent footings). For the recommended minimum embedment, footings bearing on firm native soil may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for dead plus live loads, with one-third increase for total loads, including wind and/or seismic loads. Lateral loads on footings can be resisted by a combination of passive resistance acting against the vertical faces of the footings and friction along the bases of the footings. Passive resistance may be calculated using lateral pressures corresponding to an equivalent fluid weight of 250 pounds per cubic foot (pcf); the upper foot of soil should be ignored unless confined by a concrete slab or pavement. Frictional resistance should be computed using a base friction coefficient of 0.30. The passive resistance and base friction values include a factor of safety of about 1.5 and may be used in combination without reduction. Uplift loads may be resisted by the weight of the footing and any overlying soil. If footings are inadequate to provide the necessary uplift resistance, tiedowns may be used. If tiedowns are required, we should present design recommendations. Weak soil or loose fill encountered in the bottom of footing excavations should be excavated and replaced with engineered fill or lean concrete. The bottoms and sides of the footing excavations should be wetted following excavation and maintained in a moist condition until concrete is placed. Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 12 We should check footing excavations prior to placement of reinforcing steel. Footing excavations should be free of standing water, debris, and disturbed materials prior to placing concrete. 8.3 Floor Slabs If new floor slab is needed, the White Barn floor slab may be supported on grade. Due to the presence of the moderately expansive near surface soils, we recommend at least six inches of imported (select) material be placed beneath the floor slabs. Prior to placement of select fill in the building, the onsite soil exposed should be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, moisture-conditioned to at least three percent above optimum moisture content, and compacted to between 88 and 93 percent relative compaction. The soil subgrade should be kept moist until it is covered by select fill. If the subgrade is disturbed during excavation for footings and utilities, it should be re-rolled. Loose, disturbed materials should be excavated, removed, and replaced with engineered fill during final subgrade preparation. 8.4 Exterior Concrete Slabs Exterior concrete slabs should be underlain by at least six inches of select fill consists of Class 2 aggregate base. Even with six inches of select fill, these slabs may experience some cracking due to shrinking and swelling of the underlying expansive soil. Thickening the slabs and adding additional reinforcement will control this cracking to some degree. In addition, where slabs provide access to buildings, it would be prudent to dowel the entrance to the building to permit rotation of the slab as the exterior ground shrinks and swells and to prevent a vertical offset at the entries. Class 2 AB should conform to the current Caltrans Standard Specifications. The upper six inches of the soil subgrade of the exterior concrete slabs should be moisture-conditioned to above optimum and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction and rolled to provide a smooth non-yielding surface. Aggregate base should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. 8.5 Site Drainage Positive surface drainage should be maintained around any improvements to direct surface water away from the existing foundations. To reduce the potential for water ponding adjacent to the existing improvements, we recommend the ground surface within a horizontal distance of Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 13 five feet from the existing improvements be designed to slope down and away from the buildings with a surface gradient of at least two percent in unpaved areas and one percent in paved areas. Cutoffs and drainage should be installed between site improvement subgrades and landscape to prevent water intrusion of the site improvement subgrades. 8.6 Seismic Design For seismic design in accordance with the provisions of 2016 California Building Code (CBC) we recommend the following: Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Ss and S1 of 2.538g and 0.989g, respectively; Site Class D; Site Coefficients Fa and Fv of 1.0 and 1.5; MCER spectral response acceleration parameters at short periods, SMS, and at one-second period, SM1, of 2.538g and 1.483g, respectively; Design Earthquake (DE) spectral response acceleration parameters at short period, SDS, and at one-second period, SD1, of 1.692g and 0.989g, respectively; PGAM of 0.964g. 9.0 SERVICES DURING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION We should review the final project plans and specifications to check that they are in general conformance with the intent of our recommendations. During construction, our field engineer should provide on-site observation and testing during site preparation, grading, placement and compaction of fill, and installation of foundations. These observations will allow us to compare actual with anticipated soil conditions and to check that the contractor's work conforms to the geotechnical aspects of the plans and specifications. 10.0 LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations provided in this report result from our interpretation of the geotechnical conditions existing at the site inferred from a limited number of hand auger borings and DPTs. Actual subsurface conditions could vary. Recommendations provided are dependent upon one another and no recommendation should be followed independent of the others. Any proposed changes in structures, depths of excavation, or their locations should be Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 14 brought to Langan’s attention as soon as possible so that we can determine whether such changes affect our recommendations. Information on subsurface strata shown in Table 1 represent conditions encountered only at the locations indicated and at the time of investigation. If different conditions are encountered during construction, they should immediately be brought to Langan’s attention for evaluation, as they may affect our recommendations. This report has been prepared to assist the Owner, landscape architect, and civil engineer in the design process and is only applicable to the design of the specific project identified. The information in this report cannot be utilized or depended on by engineers or contractors who are involved in evaluations or designs of facilities on adjacent properties which are beyond the limits of that which is the specific subject of this report. Attachment 1 Geotechnical Site Assessment 11 October 2019 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn 770659901 Santa Clara County, California Page 15 REFERENCES 2014 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 2015, “UCERF3: A new earthquake forecast for California’s complex fault system,” U.S. Geological Survey 2015–3009, 6 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/fs20153009. California Building Standards Commission (CBSC), 2016 California Building Code. California Division of Mines and Geology (1997). “Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California,” California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 117. California Department of Transportation (2018). “2018 Standard Plans and Specifications,” last updated 19 April 2019. California Geological Survey (2002). “Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Cupertino 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Santa Clara County, California”, Seismic Hazards Zone Report 068. California Geological Survey (2016). “Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation Cupertino Quadrangle.” Page & Turnbull (2017). “Memorandum Regarding to Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Historic Structure Report Preliminary Recommendations & Pricing” dated 8 December. Santa Clara County, California, Planning Office (2015), "Fault Rupture Hazard Zones: Santa Clara County, California, 2015”Toppozada, T. R. and Borchardt G. (1998). “Re-Evaluation of the 1836 “Hayward Fault” and the 1838 San Andreas Fault earthquakes,” Bulletin of Seismological Society of America, 88(1), 140-159. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) (2003). “Summary of Earthquake Probabilities in the San Francisco Bay Region: 2002 to 2031.” Open File Report 03-214. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) (2008). “The Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 2.” Open File Report 2007-1437. Attachment 1 FIGURES Attachment 1 NOTES: World street basemap is provided through Langan’s Esri ArcGIS software licensing and ArcGIS online. Credits: Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, USGS, Intermap, iPC, NRCAN.. 0 2,0001,000 Feet SITE eltiT gniwarDtcejorP SANTA CLARA COUNTY CALIFORNIA DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN SITE LOCATION MAP Project No. Date Figure770659901 10/7/2019 11 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 590 San Jose, CA 95113 T: 408.283.3600 F: 408.283.3601 www.langan.com Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying andLandscape Architecture, D.P.C. Langan International, LLC Collectively known as Langan 2,000 0 2,000 SCALE IN FEET County Parking Lot Attachment 1 DPT-1 HA-1 T H E W H I T E B A R N DPT-2 HA-2 Filename: \\langan.com\data\SJO\data9\770659901\Project Data\CAD\01\2D-DesignFiles\Geotechnical\FG02-770659901-B-GI0101.dwg Date: 10/10/2019 Time: 15:05 User: zwu Style Table: Langan.stb Layout: ANSIB-BL DPT-1 HA-1 Approximate location of Dynamic Penetrometer Test (DPT) and Hand Auger Boring (HA) by Langan, September 2019 EXPLANATION: Approximate scale 0 80 Feet Reference: Basemap based on plan titled "Deer Hollow Farm Water and Electric Utilities" by Midpeninsula Open Space District dated August 2018. Aerial by nearmaps 2019. 1 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 590 San Jose, CA 95113 T: 408.283.3600 F: 408.283.3601 www.langan.com © 2 0 1 9 L a n g a n Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying, Landscape Architecture and Geology, D.P.C.The white barn Attachment 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 De p t h B e l o w G r o u n d S u r f a c e ( F e e t ) Converted Equivalent SPT blow count (N )60 DPT -1 DPT -2 eltiT gniwarDtcejorP SANTA CLARA COUNTY CALIFORNIA DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN DYNAMIC PENETROMETER TEST RESULTS Project No. Date Figure770659901 10/7/2019 31 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 590 San Jose, CA 95113 T: 408.283.3600 F: 408.283.3601 www.langan.com Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying andLandscape Architecture, D.P.C. Langan International, LLC Collectively known as Langan Attachment 1 MH or OH CL - ML 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 LIQUID LIMIT (LL) PL A S T I C I T Y I N D E X ( P I ) ML or OL CL o r O L Symbol Natural M.C. (%) Liquid Limit (%)Description and Classification % Passing #200 Sieve Plasticity Index (%) NP = Non Plastic HA-1 at 1.5 feet HA-2 at 1.5 feet B-2 at 3 feet CLAYEY SAND (SC), dark brown CLAYEY SAND (SC), dark brown 19 --43 22 12 --41 19 eltiT gniwarDtcejorP SANTA CLARA COUNTY CALIFORNIA DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN PLASTICITY CHART Project No. Date Figure770659901 10/7/2019 41 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 590 San Jose, CA 95113 T: 408.283.3600 F: 408.283.3601 www.langan.com Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying andLandscape Architecture, D.P.C. Langan International, LLC Collectively known as Langan Source Attachment 1 SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART eltiT gniwarDtcejorP SANTA CLARA COUNTY CALIFORNIA DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN Project No. Date Figure770659901 10/7/2019 51 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 590 San Jose, CA 95113 T: 408.283.3600 F: 408.283.3601 www.langan.com Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying andLandscape Architecture, D.P.C. Langan International, LLC Collectively known as Langan semaN lacipyTslobmySsnoisiviD rojaM GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH PTHighly Organic Soils UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Well-graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines Poorly-graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures Well-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines Poorly-graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures Inorganic silts and clayey silts of low plasticity, sandy silts, gravelly silts Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, lean clays Organic silts and organic silt-clays of low plasticity Inorganic silts of high plasticity Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays Organic silts and clays of high plasticity Peat and other highly organic soils Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures Range of Grain Sizes Grain Size in Millimeters U.S. Standard Sieve Size Above 12" 12" to 3" Classification Boulders Cobbles Above 305 305 to 76.2 Silt and Clay Below No. 200 Below 0.075 GRAIN SIZE CHART SAMPLER TYPE Co a r s e - G r a i n e d S o i l s (m o r e t h a n h a l f o f s o i l > n o . 2 0 0 si e v e s i z e Fi n e - G r a i n e d S o i l s (m o r e t h a n h a l f o f s o i l < n o . 2 0 0 s i e v e s i z e ) Gravels (More than half of coarse fraction > no. 4 sieve size) Sands (More than half of coarse fraction < no. 4 sieve size) Silts and Clays LL = < 50 Silts and Clays LL = > 50 Gravel coarse fine 3" to No. 4 3" to 3/4" 3/4" to No. 4 No. 4 to No. 200 No. 4 to No. 10 No. 10 to No. 40 No. 40 to No. 200 76.2 to 4.76 76.2 to 19.1 19.1 to 4.76 4.76 to 0.075 4.76 to 2.00 2.00 to 0.420 0.420 to 0.075 Sand coarse medium fine C Core barrel CA California split-barrel sampler with 2.5-inch outside diameter and a 1.93-inch inside diameter D&M Dames & Moore piston sampler using 2.5-inch outside diameter, thin-walled tube O Osterberg piston sampler using 3.0-inch outside diameter, thin-walled Shelby tube PT Pitcher tube sampler using 3.0-inch outside diameter, thin-walled Shelby tube S&H Sprague & Henwood split-barrel sampler with a 3.0-inch outside diameter and a 2.43-inch inside diameter SPT Standard Penetration Test (SPT) split-barrel sampler with a 2.0-inch outside diameter and a 1.5-inch inside diameter ST Shelby Tube (3.0-inch outside diameter, thin-walled tube) advanced with hydraulic pressure SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS/SYMBOLS Sample taken with Sprague & Henwood split-barrel sampler with a 3.0-inch outside diameter and a 2.43-inch inside diameter. Darkened area indicates soil recovered Classification sample taken with Standard Penetration Test sampler Undisturbed sample taken with thin-walled tube Disturbed sample Sampling attempted with no recovery Core sample Analytical laboratory sample Sample taken with Direct Push or Drive sampler Unstabilized groundwater level Stabilized groundwater level Attachment 1 Project Drawing Title SANTA CLARA COUNTY CALIFORNIA DEER HOLLOW FARM WHITE BARN MAP OF MAJOR FAULTS AND EARTHQUAKE EPICENTERS INTHE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA Path: \\langan.com\data\SJO\data9\770659901\Project Data\ArcGIS\MXD\Geotech_Figures\Fault Map_20191009.mxd Date: 10/9/2019 User: jfrank Time: 1:44:00 PM © 2 0 19 L a n ga n Project No. Date Scale Drawn By Figure770659901 10/9/2019 JFrank San Benito Santa Cruz Santa Clara San Mateo Stanislaus Alameda San Francisco Contra Costa San Joaquin Marin Solano PACIFICPACIFIC OCEANOCEAN Monterey San Benito Fresno Merced Santa Cruz Santa Clara San Mateo Stanislaus Alameda San Joaquin Contra Costa Marin Calaveras Solano SacramentoSonoma Napa Amador Yolo Grea t Va l ley 9 G r e a t Va l l e y 8 Q u i e n S a b e M ount D i abl o T h ru s t W e s t N a p a G r e a t V a l l e y 5 Ri nc o na d a R o d g e r s C r e e k Grea t Valley 7 M o nte Vista-S hannon/Berrocal P o i n t R e y e s G r e e n v ill e C o n n e c t e d G r e e n V a l l e y Zayante- V e r g ele s S a n A n d r e a s M o n t e r e y B a y - T u l a r cito s O rti g a lit a T o t a l C a l a v e r a sS a n G r e g o r i o C o n n e c t e d H a y w a r d . 6 0 2010 Miles 1 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 590 San Jose, CA 95113 T: 408.283.3600 F: 408.283.3601 www.langan.com Langan Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying and Landscape Architecture, D.P.C. Langan International LLC Collectively known as Langan 1 '' = 20 miles Notes: 1. Quaternary fault data displayed are based on a generalized version of USGS Quaternary Fault and fold database, 2010. For cartographic purposes only. 2. The Earthquake Epicenter (Magnitude) data is provided by the U.S Geological Survey (USGS) and is current through 08/26/2014. 3. Basemap hillshade and County boundaries provided by USGS and California Department of Transportation. 4. Map displayed in California State Coordinate System, California (Teale) Albers, North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83), Meters. SITE Legend County Boundary Fault Earthquake Epicenter Magnitude Magnitude 5 to 5.9 Magnitude 6 to 6.9 Magnitude 7 to 7.4 Magnitude 7.5 to 8 Attachment 1 DISTRIBUTION Electronic copies: Mr. Brian Kehoe Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1650 Emeryville, California 94608 QUALITY CONTROL REVIEWER Richard D. Rodgers, GE #732 Senior Consultant Attachment 1 Deer Hollow White Barn Deer Hollow Farm White Barn December 18, 2019 APPENDIX D - OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST BY HATTIN Attachment 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Cupertino, CA Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared for : Wiss Janney Elstner Associates, Inc. October 22, 2019 by: HATTIN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, INC. 300 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 239 Oakland, CA 94102 Telephone: (510) 832-5800 Fax: (510) 832-5900 www.hattincm.com Attachment 1 MROSD Deer Hollow White Barn Rehab Page 1 of 2 10/23/19 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rancho San Antonio Open Space Rrserve Cupertino, CA ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Conceptual Design Cost Estimate represents the probable construction cost of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District – Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rehabilitation in Cupertino, CA. Considering that the drawings are preliminary design submittal, certain components, which may be required as part of this project may not be shown or mentioned in this estimate. Allowances have been made when detail description of equipment, work definition, or quantities are not available. Material pricing and labor costs are obtained from historical cost data and similar projects. Mechanical and electrical costs are based similar projects. The unit costs include material, labor, and subcontractor's markup, and are based on the design level of documents received. Project Descriptions: Deer Hollow White Barn Rehabilitation, Cupertino CA. Scope includes repair of roof rafter, exterior walls, attic framing, ground floor and foundation. Documents Received as a Basis of Cost Estimate: The following documentation was used in preparation of this estimate:  Preliminary Drawings S1.0, S2.0, S3.0, S4.0, S4.1, S5.0, S5.1 & S5.2.  Basis of Design dated October 10, 2019 Exclusions: The following items are excluded:  Change Order Contingency  Hazardous materials abatement & disposal  Land Cost  Cost of money  Offsite Utilities & Connection Fees  Professional Consultants’ and Construction Management fees  Administrative costs  Fees for testing construction materials  Plan checks and inspection  Permits  Legal and financing costs  Furnishings, furniture, and equipment (FFE)  Relocation costs, if required  Contractor off-hours and compressed time work schedule, if required  Escalation beyond that stated.  LEED Possible Additional Cost Items: Attachment 1 MROSD Deer Hollow White Barn Rehab Page 2 of 2 10/23/19 Items that may change the Estimate of Probable Construction Cost include, but are not limited to, the following:  Modifications to the scope of work, drawings, specifications included in this estimate  Unforeseen conditions  Construction phasing requirements  Excessive contract and general conditions, and restrictive technical specifications  Equipment, material, systems or product that cannot be obtained from at least three different sources  Delays beyond the projected schedule  Any other non-competitive bid situations  Any addenda, changes not included in the basis of estimates. Escalation: Escalation of 4% up to midpoint of construction is included in the estimate, assumed at 12 months from October 01, 2019 at the rate of 4% per annum. ESTIMATING ASSUMPTIONS AND COMMENTS General: a. Material prices are at 4th Quarter 2019 level; include taxes and contractor’s markups. b. Labor cost is based on prevailing wages. c. Work to be done during normal business hours. d. This estimate can vary due to change in scope. e. Quantities were obtained as shown on the drawings. f. Allowances are provided for items not shown in the drawings and are anticipated to be part of the estimate. g. Installation cost, supervision, and coordination for material and equipment are included in the estimate. h. General conditions assumed at 20% include mobilization, insurance, office personnel costs, dust control, and other items not mentioned in General requirements. i. Design Contingency/Estimating Contingency is assumed at 25% due to the level of drawings used in the estimate. ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST The estimated Probable Construction Costs reflects the anticipated cost of the MROSD Deer Hollow White Barn Rehabilitation in Cupertino, CA. This estimate is based on a competitive open bid process with a recommended five or more bids from reputable general contractors, and a minimum of three bids for all subcontracted items. Cost of materials, labor, equipment or services furnished by others, and the contractors' or vendors' methods of determining prices are determined by market and/or economic conditions. Hence, the Estimator cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual project costs will not vary from this Estimate of Probable Construction Cost. This Estimate of Probable Construction Cost is exclusive of all costs associated with changes, modifications or addenda to the drawings and/or specifications subsequent to the preparation of this estimate. Attachment 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Gross Area (SF)1,740 DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Lead Estimator:EEV Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Date:10/22/2019 Cupertino, CA Revised: Type of Estimate: CONCEPTUAL ESTIMATE ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL AREA (SF)1,740 SUMMARY OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST % Hattin Construction Management , Inc. Project and Construction Management Services 300 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 239 Oakland, CA 94102 Telephone: (510)832-5800 -Fax: (510)832-5900 1 ROOF RAFTER REPAIR - BASE 37,710$ OPTION 1 - INSTALL NEW CORRUGATED SHEET METAL SHEATHING 36,495$ OPTION 2 - INSTALL BUILDING PAPER & WOOD SHINGLES 24,330$ 2 EXTERIOR WALLS REPAIR - BASE 23,378$ 3 ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - BASE 14,671$ OPTION 1 - INSTALL PRE-FABRICATED ATTIC LADDER 1,921$ OPTION 2 - INSTALL A STEEL LADDER WITH CONCRETE FOOTING 6,037$ 4 GROUND FLOOR & FOUNDATION REPAIR - BASE 15,530$ OPTION 1 - INSTALL PERVIOUS CONCRETE SLAB 16,546$ OPTION 2 - INSTALL NEW GRADE BEAM 23,186$ 91,289$ 54,961$ 53,553$ TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - OPTION 2 REPAIR TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - BASE REPAIR TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - OPTION 1 REPAIR Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22,19 V2 Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 1 of 9 Attachment 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB ROOF RAFTER REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: ROOF REPAIR - BASE 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 6 ROOF RAFTER 1,900 SF 2.00$ 3,800$ 950 SF 1.50$ 1,425$ Install skipsheathing to match, 50%950 SF 3.00$ 2,850$ Install wood blocking between joists throughout 1,740 SF 2.50$ 4,350$ 10 LOC 175.00$ 1,750$ 10 LOC 50.00$ 500$ 60 LF 30.00$ 1,800$ 3 LOC 300.00$ 900$ 1,740 SF 1.00$ 1,740$ Disposal of demolished materials 1 LS 1,500.00$ 1,500$ Total - General RequirementsROOF RAFTER 20,615$ TOTAL DIRECT COST 20,615$ General Conditions/General Requirements 20.0%$4,123 SUBTOTAL 24,738$ General Contractor's Overhead & Profit 10.0%$2,474 SUBTOTAL 27,212$ Historic Preservation Factor 5.0%$1,361 Design Contingency/Estimating Contingency 25.0%$6,803 SUBTOTAL 35,375$ 4.0%$1,415 SUBTOTAL 36,790$ Bonds 2.5%$920 1.8293 37,710$ Roof Repair Remove existing corrugated metal steel Remove damaged or deteriorated 1-by skipsheathing, 50% TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ROOF RAFTER REPAIR - BASE Escalation up to midpoint of construction (12 months from October 1, 2019 @ 4%/year) Sister a new 2x6 wood joist to each existing joist and extent the end of of the joist to the edge of eave - between Line 5- 6 Sister a 3-foot long rafter tail where existing rafter tail is deteriorated, along line 1 Install new sheet metal gutter & downspout @ Line 1 & 6 Install french drain filled with gravel Replace missing diagonal knee braces Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22,19 V2 Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 2 of 9 Attachment 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB ROOF RAFTER REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: Roof Repair ROOF REPAIR - OPTION 1 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 7 ROOFING 1,900 SF 9.00$ 17,100$ 1,900 SF 1.50$ 2,850$ Total - General RequirementsROOFING 19,950.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 16,544.54$ 36,495$ ROOF REPAIR - OPTION 2 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 7 ROOFING 1,900 SF 0.50$ 950$ 1,900 SF 5.00$ 9,500$ 1,900 SF 1.50$ 2,850$ Total - General RequirementsROOFING 13,300.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 11,029.69$ 24,330$ Install new corrugated sheet metal sheathing Miscellaneous roof accessories TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ROOF RAFTER REPAIR - OPTION 1 Install building paper Install wood shingles TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ROOF RAFTER REPAIR - OPTION 2 Miscellaneous roof accessories Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22,19 V2 Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 3 of 9 Attachment 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:6/14/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator EEV/ARB EXTERIOR WALLS REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: EXTERIOR WALLS REPAIR - BASE 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 6 EXTERIOR WALLS 340 SF $ 5.00 1,700.00$ 340 SF $ 2.50 850.00$ Remove existing diagonal brace 2 LOC $ 75.00 150.00$ Install new diagonal wood brace, 6 x 6 2 LOC $ 150.00 300.00$ Install new PT beam, 4x6 2 LOC $ 100.00 200.00$ Add 6"x12" concrete encasement around brick footing 2 LOC $ 1,000.00 2,000.00$ 16 LOC $ 50.00 800.00$ Remove existing diagonal brace 0 LOC $ 75.00 -$ Install new diagonal wood brace, 6 x 6 1 LOC $ 210.00 210.00$ Install new PT beam, 4x6 1 LOC $ 150.00 150.00$ Add 6"x12" concrete encasement around brick footing 1 LOC $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ 12 LOC $ 50.00 600.00$ Install new diagonal wood brace, 6 x 6 1 LOC $ 210.00 210.00$ Install new PT beam, 4x6 1 LOC $ 150.00 150.00$ Add 6"x12" concrete encasement around brick footing 1 LOC $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ 12 LOC $ 50.00 600.00$ Install new brace to match existing 2 LOC $ 50.00 100.00$ Install 4x6 under the existing beam and anchor to column 1 LOC $ 400.00 400.00$ Remove existing diagonal brace 0 LOC $ 75.00 -$ Install new diagonal wood brace, 6 x 6 1 LOC $ 210.00 210.00$ Install new PT beam, 4x6 1 LOC $ 150.00 150.00$ Add 6"x12" concrete encasement around brick footing 1 LOC $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ Add 6"x12" concrete encasement around brick footing 1 LOC $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ Total - General RequirementsEXTERIOR WALLS 12,780$ TOTAL DIRECT COST 12,780$ General Conditions/General Requirements 20.0%$2,556 SUBTOTAL 15,336$ General Contractor's Overhead & Profit 10.0%$1,534 SUBTOTAL 16,870$ Historic Preservation Factor 5.0%$843 Design Contingency/Estimating Contingency 25.0%$4,217 GRID LINE 6 INTERIOR SECTION Exterior Wall Repair Remove & replace deteriorated exterior wood sheathing to match existing species of original wood siding, Allow 10% Paint the replacement siding to match existing GRID LINE B & C INTERIOR SECTION NORTH & SOUTH FACING INTERIOR SECTION Install sheet metal straps to connect brace to column & beam EAST FACING INTERIOR SECTION GRID LINE 3 INTERIOR SECTIONInstall sheet metal straps to connect brace to column & beam GRID LINE 5 INTERIOR SECTIONInstall sheet metal straps to connect brace to column & beam Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22,19 V2 Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 4 of 9 Attachment 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:6/14/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator EEV/ARB EXTERIOR WALLS REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: Exterior Wall Repair SUBTOTAL 21,930$ 4.0%$877 SUBTOTAL 22,808$ Bonds 2.5%$570 23,378$ Escalation up to midpoint of construction (12 months from October 1, 2019 @ 4%/year) TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - EXTERIOR WALLS REPAIR - BASE Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22,19 V2 Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 5 of 9 Attachment 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - BASE 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 6 ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR 1 LOC 200.00$ 200$ 1 LOC 400.00$ 400$ Install sheet metal strap to connect beams to walls 4 LOC 50.00$ 200$ Strengthen the mortised wood columns supporting attic 4 LOC 500.00$ 2,000$ Install 1/2" plywood sheathing over the (e) wood sheathing 1,740 SF 3.00$ 5,220$ Total - General RequirementsATTIC FRAMING REPAIR 8,020$ TOTAL DIRECT COST 8,020$ General Conditions/General Requirements 20.0%$1,604 SUBTOTAL 9,624$ General Contractor's Overhead & Profit 10.0%$962 SUBTOTAL 10,586$ Historic Preservation Factor 5.0%$529 Design Contingency/Estimating Contingency 25.0%$2,647 SUBTOTAL 13,762$ 4.0%$550 SUBTOTAL 14,313$ Bonds 2.5%$358 1.8293 14,671$ Roof Repair Sister a new 2-joist to the side of existing joist along Line 5 Sister a new 2-joist to the side of existing joist along Line 4 Escalation up to midpoint of construction (12 months from October 1, 2019 @ 4%/year) TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ROOF RAFTER REPAIR - BASE Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22,19 V2 Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 6 of 9 Attachment 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: Roof Repair ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - OPTION 1 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 6 ATTIC FRAMING 1 LOC 300.00$ 300$ 1 LOC 750.00$ 750$ Total - General RequirementsATTIC FRAMING 1,050.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 870.77$ 1,740 SF 1,921$ ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - OPTION 2 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 6 ATTIC FRAMING 1 LOC 300.00$ 300$ 1 LOC 2,250.00$ 2,250$ 1 LOC 750.00$ 750$ Total - General RequirementsATTIC FRAMING 1 3,300.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 2,736.69$ 1,740 SF 6,037$ TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - OPTION 1 Remove existing stair Install new steel ladder New consrete footing TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - OPTION 2 Remove existing stair Install new pre-fab wooden stair Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22,19 V2 Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 7 of 9 Attachment 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB GROUND FLOOR & FOUNDATION REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: GROUND FLOOR & FOUNDATION REPAIR - BASE 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 3 GROUND FLOOR REPAIR - CENTER SECTION 720 SF 1.50$ 1,080$ 18 CY 75.00$ 1,350$ New pervious concrete slab, 4"720 SF 6.50$ 4,680$ Install new geotextile fiber 720 SF 1.50$ 1,080$ Install pre-engineered compacted soil fill, 4"10 CY 30.00$ 300$ Total - General RequirementsGROUND FLOOR REPAIR - CENTER SECTION 8,490$ TOTAL DIRECT COST 8,490$ General Conditions/General Requirements 20.0%$1,698 SUBTOTAL 10,188$ General Contractor's Overhead & Profit 10.0%$1,019 SUBTOTAL 11,207$ Historic Preservation Factor 5.0%$560 Design Contingency/Estimating Contingency 25.0%$2,802 SUBTOTAL 14,569$ 4.0%$583 SUBTOTAL 15,152$ Bonds 2.5%$379 1.8293 15,530$ Roof Repair Remove existing soil to a depth of 8", compact Dispose removed soil Escalation up to midpoint of construction (12 months from October 1, 2019 @ 4%/year) TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - FOUNDATION REPAIR - BASE Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22,19 V2 Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 8 of 9 Attachment 1 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB GROUND FLOOR & FOUNDATION REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: Roof Repair FOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 1 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 3 GROUND FLOOR REPAIR - EAST SECTION 510 SF 1.00$ 510$ 510 SF 1.50$ 765$ 10 CY 75.00$ 750$ New pervious concrete slab, 6"510 SF 7.50$ 3,825$ Attach posts to the new slab 18 LOC 50.00$ 900$ Install PT sleeper over concrete 510 SF 2.50$ 1,275$ 510 SF 2.00$ 1,020$ Total - General RequirementsFOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 1 9,045.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 7,501.02$ 1,740 SF 16,546$ FOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 2 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 3 GROUND FLOOR REPAIR - EAST SECTION 510 SF 1.00$ 510$ 30 LF 150.00$ 4,500$ 510 SF 1.50$ 765$ 7 CY 75.00$ 525$ New pervious concrete slab, 4"510 SF 6.50$ 3,315$ Install new geotextile fiber 510 SF 1.50$ 765$ Install PT sleeper over concrete 510 SF 2.50$ 1,275$ 510 SF 2.00$ 1,020$ Total - General RequirementsFOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 2 12,675.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 10,511.38$ 1,740 SF 23,186$ Reinstall wood flooring Remove existing soil to a depth of 6", compact Dispose removed soil Remove existing wood flooring TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - FOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 1 TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - FOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 2 Install new concrete grade beam Remove existing soil to a depth of 4", compact Dispose removed soil Reinstall wood flooring Remove existing wood flooring Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22,19 V2 Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 9 of 9 Attachment 1 HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALUATION REPORT FOR THE WHITE BARN SURVEY AT DEER HOLLOW FARM WITHIN THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Midpeninsula Open Space District October 2019 Attachment 2 Historical Resource Evaluation Report for the White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm within the Midpeninsula Open Space District Santa Clara County, California PREPARED FOR: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, California 94022 PREPARED BY: Kelly Higelmire, M.A. Rachel Gordon, B.A. Garcia and Associates (GANDA) 813 D Street San Rafael, California 94901 October 2019 Attachment 2 This page intentionally left blank. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report i Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California SUMMARY OF FINDINGS This report presents the results of an identification and California Register of Historical Resources evaluation of the White Barn located within Deer Hollow Farm. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District proposes to perform maintenance and repair of the White Barn structure. The scope and scale of the Project area is still under review by the Midpeninsula Board of Directors, but the Project is anticipated to stabilize portions of the structure and conduct interior modifications and repairs, including the installation of shallow dug concrete floors, the stabilization of brick support piers and wooden columns, and maintenance of the staircase and hay loft flooring, the repair of rodent and insect damage, the installation of concrete flooring within the interior of the barn, the repair of brick piers and column supports, and the repair of wooden features throughout the structure. A Historic Structure Report was completed by Page and Turnbull in 2018. The report summarized the needed structural repairs and treatment and work recommendations, with respect to the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. In response to Page and Turnbull’s (2018) recommendation of a historic eligibility study, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District commissioned an Historical Resources Evaluation of the White Barn. Garcia and Associates performed the assessment and evaluation on September 12, 2018. Evaluation of the White Barn was completed using the California Register of Historical Resources Criteria for Designation as defined under California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15064.5. As a result of this investigation, the White Barn was found to be more than 45 years of age and it retains its historical integrity (as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act). However, the White Barn is recommended ineligible for listing on the California Register of Historic Places. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report ii Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California This page intentionally left blank. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report iii Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION ............................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.4 AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS ............................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................. 4 3.1 STATE REGULATIONS AND CRITERIA ...................................................................................................................... 4 3.0 RESEARCH METHODS ....................................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 RECORDS SEARCH .................................................................................................................................................. 6 3.2 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH ............................................................................................................................................ 6 3.3 HISTORICAL MAP REVIEW ...................................................................................................................................... 6 4.0 FIELD METHODS ................................................................................................................................................ 7 4.1 BUILT ENVIRONMENT SURVEY ............................................................................................................................... 7 5.0 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................. 9 5.1 WHITE BARN HISTORY .......................................................................................................................................... 9 6.0 DESCRIPTION OF CULTURAL RESOURCES................................................................................................. 11 6.1 EVALUATION OF SIGNIFICANCE ........................................................................................................................... 11 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 20 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................................. 21 FIGURES Figure 1. Project Location ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Project Area and Survey Coverage ........................................................................................................................ 3 PHOTOS Photo 1. White Barn Front Facade, View W ..................................................................................................................... 12 Photo 2. White Barn Rear Elevation, View, N/NW ........................................................................................................ 12 Photo 3. White Barn South Eastern Elevation, View W .................................................................................................. 13 Photo 4. White Barn Northwest Elevation, View SE ....................................................................................................... 13 Photo 5. Detail of Main Gable Exposed Eaves, View S .................................................................................................. 14 Photo 6. Detail of Shed Eaves, View W ............................................................................................................................. 15 Photo 7. White Barn Main Gable Detail with "Ghost" Entryways, View S ................................................................. 16 Photo 8. Detail of Boarded "Ghost" Entryway, View S .................................................................................................. 17 Photo 9. Detail of Vinyl Window Installed During Milk Room Renovation, View SE .............................................. 18 APPENDIX Appendix A. Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 Forms Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 1 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 OVERVIEW This Historical Resources Evaluation Report (HRER) presents the results of a built-environment resource investigation for the White Barn located within Deer Hollow Farm for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (Project; MIDPEN) (Figures 1 and 2). The Project is subject to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and MIDPEN is the Lead Agency under CEQA. Consistent with CEQA policy and recommendation by Page and Turnbull (2018) to assess the White Barn for inclusion on the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR), Garcia and Associates (GANDA) conducted a historic resource evaluation of the proposed affected building. This assessment included review of the physical structure of the White Barn, historic research and analysis, and the review of public records. The Historical Resources Evaluation Report (HRER) describes those efforts and evaluates the White Barn for inclusion on the HRER. The results and recommendations of the architectural survey, evaluation, and recommendations are below. 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION The Project area is in the eastern portion of Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve and on the property of Deer Hollow Farm in the northwest portion of the City of Cupertino in the unincorporated area of Santa Clara County. The City of Loyola is located to the immediate east of Deer Hollow Farm and extends to the north, with the Permanente Quarry located to the south, and Monte Bello Preserve to the west. Deer Hollow Farm is a fully operational historic livestock ranch and provides environmental education programs to the public. The Project area measures approximately 443 square feet, with an existing 183-square-foot two- story mixed-use building (White Barn) in the northeastern portion that dominates the Project area. The Project area is bound to the north by public-use land and trails operated by MIDPEN, and to the northeast by a dirt graded limited vehicle access road, Rancho San Antonio Service Road, and is situated on the southern bank and the North Fork of the seasonal Permanente Creek. A gravel and graded dirt entrance driveway and the Ranger Office are located to the immediate east. Adjacent to the Project area are fenced sheep and goat pens to the west, a gravel and dirt entrance and driveway to the southwest, and a machine shop to the south. 1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project proposes to design and implement the structural stabilization of the White Barn, including the interior of the Hay Room and Storage Room. No portions of the existing structure are expected to be removed, however repairs related to structural support construction are anticipated. New building materials will be used for repairs and installation of support components. The Project will include the installation of a new shallow concrete pad foundation under the White Barn. The new foundation will require ground-disturbing activities by excavating the existing packed earthen floor to a depth of approximately 3 to 4 feet below ground surface, with an additional 1 foot of disturbance to level the excavated area. The maximum depth of excavation for this portion of the Project area will therefore extend to a depth of approximately 5 feet. Other ground-disturbing activities required for the Project will include minor surface grading of a segment of Rancho San Antonio Service Road and the entrance and driveway located to the south and southwest of the White Barn. Grading work is not expected to extend further than 20 feet from the perimeter of the White Barn. At the time of this review, the Project is in the planning and development phase, therefore other detailed aspects of the Project are unknown. This includes the type of equipment that will be used, requirements for staging area(s), the exact construction schedule, and the depth of grading. 1.4 AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS The Area of Potential Effects (APE) includes the White Barn and immediate surrounding area. The APE was established by MIDPEN during the planning phase of this project. The APE includes the area of planned ground disturbance, laydown areas, and the White Barn. The APE map (Figure 2) encompasses the maximum extent of construction disturbances and includes staging areas. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 2 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Figure 1. Project Location Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 3 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Figure 2. Project Area and Survey Coverage Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 4 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California 2.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT Cultural resources may be determined to be significant if they meet national, state, or local criteria, either individually or in combination. Resource evaluation criteria are determined by the compliance requirements of each specific project. Applicable state and local government policies and significance criteria are briefly presented below. 3.1 STATE REGULATIONS AND CRITERIA California Environmental Quality Act CEQA requires the lead agency to consider the effects of a project on historical resources (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[b]). Historical resources are those meeting the requirements listed below:  Resources listed in or determined eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[a][1]).  Resources included in a local register as defined in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5020.1(k), “unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates” that the resource “is not historically or culturally significant” (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[a][2]).  Resources that are identified as significant in surveys that meet the standards provided in PRC Section 5024.1[g] (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[a][3]).  Resources that the lead agency determines are significant, based on substantial evidence (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[a][3]). The process for identifying historical resources is typically accomplished by applying the criteria for listing in the CRHR (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 4852), which states that a historical resource must be significant at the local, state, or national level under one or more of the following four criteria:  Criterion A. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage, or the United States (CCR, Title 14, Section 4852[b][1]),  Criterion B. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past (14 CCR 4852[b][2]),  Criterion C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values (14 CCR 4852[b][3]), or;  Criterion D. Yields, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history (14 CCR 4852[b][4]). To be considered a historical resource for CEQA, the resource must also have integrity, which is the authenticity of a resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Resources, therefore, must retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. It must also be judged with reference to the particular criteria under which an eligible for listing in the CRHR (14 CCR 14 Section 4852[c]).  Location: where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred.  Design: the combination of elements that create the historic form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. This includes organization of space, proportion, scale, technology, ornamentation, and materials. This is applicable to larger properties for the historic way in which the buildings, sites, and structures are related. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 5 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California  Setting : the physical environment of a historic property. It refers to the historic character of the property. It includes the historical relationship of the property to surrounding features and open space. These include topographic features, vegetation, simple manmade paths or fencing and the relationships between buildings, structures or open space.  Materials : the physical elements that were combined during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form the historic property.  Workmanship: the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during a given period in history. It may be expressed in vernacular methods of construction and plain finishes or in highly sophisticated configuration and ornamental detailing.  Feeling : the property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property’s historic character.  Association: the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. A property retains association if it is the place where the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a property’s historic character. Resources that meet the significance criteria and integrity considerations must be considered. Note: if a resource is not listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR, not included in a local register of historical resources, or identified in an historical resource survey, it does not preclude a lead agency under CEQA from determining that the resource may be an historical resource as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(j) or 5024.1 (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[a][4]). Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 6 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California 3.0 RESEARCH METHODS GANDA completed background research consisting of a record search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), archival research at relevant local and regional repositories, a review of historic maps, and consultation with local historical societies. The results were evaluated by GANDA. The methods and results of the background research are presented below. 3.1 RECORDS SEARCH On September 10, 2019, a records search was conducted at NWIC/CHRIS at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park by GANDA Archaeologist Robin Fies (File No. 19-0446). The NWIC is a repository of all site records, previously conducted archaeological resources investigations, and historic information concerning resources for 18 counties, including Santa Clara County. The records search area consisted of 0.25 mile around the Project site, and the purpose of this records search was to compile information pertaining to the locations of previously recorded archaeological resources, built-environment resources and prior studies in proximity to the Project area that inform the archaeological sensitivity. The following sources were consulted during the records search:  NWIC base map: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute series topographic quadrangles of Cupertino, California (1991).  Survey reports from previous archaeological resources investigations and site records to identify recorded archaeological sites and built environmental resources (i.e., buildings, structures, and objects) located within the Project area.  California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) sources, including the California Inventory of Historic Resources (1976), California Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility (2012a), and the Historic Properties Directory (2012b), which combines resources listed as California Points of Historical Interest and California Historical Landmarks and those that are listed in or determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the CRHR. 3.2 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH GANDA Architectural Historian Kelly Higelmire and Archaeologist Rachel Gordon conducted archival research at local and county repositories to obtain information on the history and development of the properties located within the APE. These repositories included the Santa Clara County Public Library, Los Altos History Museum, Cupertino Historic Society and Museum, University of California Berkeley, California Historical Society, Fremont Historical Society, Santa Clara University, and digital collections such as the Online Archive of California, Newspapers.com, and Ancestry.com. GANDA staff reviewed a wide array of primary and secondary documents, building permit records, city directories, historical maps and photographs, newspaper articles, and published books. Additional archival research included local cancelled tax maps, deed records, and tax records held by Santa Clara County, which were used to locate information about parcel development for Deer Hollow Farm and, more specifically, the White Barn. 3.3 HISTORICAL MAP REVIEW GANDA Architectural Historian Kelly Higelmire and Staff Archaeologist Rachel Gordon reviewed historical maps and aerial photographs illustrating features such as buildings, roads, railways, and o provide additional information to assess the sensitivity for the presence of built environment resources within the APE. Historical maps are available at numerous repositories, including the USGS historic topographic map collection, the University of California, Berkeley, Earth Sciences and Map Library, and the David Rumsey Historical Map Collection. The following sources were consulted during the historic map review: • General Land Office (GLO) Plat Map, Township 7 South, Range 2 West Mt. Diablo Meridian (1864) • David Rumsey Map Collection • Library of Congress 1890 Atlas map of Santa Clara County (Hermann Bros. 1890). • Historical aerials (Historic Aerials 1946, 1958, 1959, 1968) • USGS 1991 1:24000 Cupertino Quadrangle Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 7 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California 4.0 FIELD METHODS On September 12, 2019, Mr. Higelmire conducted an initial site visit to perform a reconnaissance-level architectural survey of the APE to document and assess the White Barn and verify historical research. The field survey was recorded in field notes and digital photographs and resulted in the documentation of the historic rural structure and its surroundings. The White Barn is described in detail below in Section and recorded on Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms presented in Appendix B. 4.1 BUILT ENVIRONMENT SURVEY GANDA Architectural Historian, Kelly Higelmire, M.A., conducted an architectural history pedestrian survey of the APE. Mr. Higelmire walked the extent of the Architectural APE. Photos were taken of the White Barn and Deer Hollow Farm, previously identified as a possible built-environment resource by Page and Turnbull (2018). Mr. Higelmire recorded the structure, materials, and landscape of the structure and its surroundings. Locational data, architectural styles, modifications, and current use were recorded for the built environment resource on GANDA standard field forms. Locational data for known built-environment resources were drawn from aerial photographs of the APE (Figure 2). The White Barn is an active building within the Deer Hollow Farm environmental education center and was accessible during the field survey. The resource was recorded and all elevations were photographed. Additional architectural information was taken from Google Earth imagery and current aerial photographs. Furthermore, Mr. Higelmire traveled to the nearby Planning Department to investigate public records for Deer Hollow Farm. All records, photographs, and field forms were taken back to the GANDA San Rafael office for analysis. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 8 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California This page intentionally left blank. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 9 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California 5.0 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW The history of the project APE and Deer Hollow Farm has been previously described in both the Page and Turnbull (2018) Historical Resource Evaluation (HRE) and the Cultural Resources Survey conducted by GANDA (Gordon and Higelmire 2018). Construction of the White Barn was completed sometime between 1937 and 1948 and is associated with George Sheldon Perham. Perham was the second owner of the property and owned the ranch from 1937 to 1975. These dates also correspond to the White Barn’s Period of Significance as it relates to ranch expansion during Perham’s ownership. This section offers a brief history of ownership and development prior to 1937 but focuses on the White Barn and its association with Perham during the Period of Significance. Prior to the purchase of what is now called Deer Hollow Farm, the ranch was associated with the original homesteading of Santa Clara County. Homesteaders populated Santa Clara County in the mid-late 1800s, settling on former Spanish land grants for farming and ranching operations. Formerly known as Sleepy Hollow, the ranch property was first purchased by George Henry and Theodore Franklin (Frank) Grant (the Grant brothers) in 1853 The Grant brothers bought 150 acres of former Rancho San Antonio and added additional acreage to the property in subsequent years, accumulating to its current size of 360 acres (Bureau of Land Management 1868). During the Grant brothers’ ownership, the property consisted of the foreman’s cabin, the T. F. Grant residence, and two barns (interviews with Louis Grant and Virginia Grant Murphy, Deer Hollow Farm. May 1995 in Page and Turnbull 2018). After the deaths of both Grant Brothers in the late 1800s, the property was held by the descendants of Theodore Frank Grant until its sale to George Sheldon Perham, in 1937 (Friends of Deer Hollow Farm 2017; Lewis 2017; The Times 1955). George Sheldon Perham was the son of prominent San Francisco homesteader and rancher George Lawrence Perham, who founded and operated Boston Ranch in the City of San Francisco. George Sheldon Perham began his dairy and ranching career working in his father’s company as a driver with the Dairy Delivery Company, a subsidiary of the ranch. His contribution to dairy farming came only after his father sold his partnership of the Dairy Delivery Company to the Borden Company. George Sheldon Perham stayed on with the Dairy Delivery Company (later known as the Borden Dairy Delivery Company) as the vice president of the Oakland division. By 1936, George Sheldon Perham was promoted to president, heading up the company’s Western Division. He held this post until his retirement in 1955 (Lewis 2017; The Times 1955). In 1937, one year after his promotion, George Sheldon Perham purchased the ranch land (Deer Hollow Farm) from the descendants of the Frank Grant. Perham started a small ranching and dairy operation, separate from his company, that continued until the property’s eventual sale in 1975 to MIDPEN, and eventually renamed the ranch Deer Hollow Farm (Deer Hollow Farm Friends 2017). During the time of Perham’s ownership, the ranch was expanded to include several outbuildings and working sheds, two residences, a garage, and several associated ranching features, such as corrals, fences, roads, and water features. Perham also constructed two barns, located on the original Grant-built barn sites (interviews with Louis Grant and Virginia Grant Murphy, Deer Hollow Farm, May 1995 in Page and Turnbull 2018). The actual date of construction for the White Barn is unclear, though from interviews from his descendants and aerial photography, the date of construction can be narrowed between 1937 and 1948. 5.1 WHITE BARN HISTORY Two barns were constructed by the Grant Brothers during their residence of the property. However, when Perham purchased the ranch, the original barns may not have existed, or were demolished by Perham. According to later accounts by the Grant family descendants, the current White Barn was built on top of the original barn location (interviews with Louis Grant and Virginia Grant Murphy, Deer Hollow Farm, May 1995 in Page and Turnbull 2018). Aerial photography shows the existing footprint of the barn as early as 1948 (Google Earth 2019). While the date of construction is uncertain, an interview with George Perham Jr., conducted by the Los Altos History Show, further narrows the date of construction for this building. According to George Perham Jr., son of George Sheldon Perham, while unloading hay in his youth, Perham Jr. failed to disconnect a rope between the hay truck and barn. As the truck drove away, the barn roof collapsed and many of the “supports were bent” (Los Altos Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 10 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California History Show. Episode #61 “Deer Hollow Farm” Guest George Perham Jr, Johnny Jonigan, January 2000). The White Barn was reconstructed in the same area after the accident. No exact date for the construction or rebuilding of the barn could be accurately ascertained, but it is estimated that this event occurred between the 1940s and 1950s, during Perham Jr.’s adolescence. The only evidence of construction or repair in the Santa Clara County records is a permit for the 2017–2018 renovation of the milk room, located within the northwest portion of the building, which was enclosed with solid walls over a newly installed concrete floor. Vinyl windows were cut into the exterior for ventilation (Page and Turnbull 2018). Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 11 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California 6.0 DESCRIPTION OF CULTURAL RESOURCES One historic building was present within the APE. The following section presents a description of the White Barn, located within the active Deer Hollow Farm. A Historic Structure Report (HRE) was previously compiled by Page and Turnbull (2018) to assess the condition of the building and recommend treatment and work recommendations for the repair and stabilization of the structure. The HRE recommended a formal evaluation of the White Barn for inclusion on the CRHR as an individual property. The White Barn was recorded on DPR 523a and 523b forms, including Primary and Building, Structure, and Object Record (BSO) forms. The results of the CRHR evaluation of these resources can be found below 6.1 EVALUATION OF SIGNIFICANCE The White Barn is a substantial barn structure within Deer Hollow Farm. The building was assessed on September 12, 2019 as an individual historic resource under CEQA. GANDA applied the criteria for listing in the CRHR, evaluating the barn under Criteria A-D. The Period of Significance for this evaluation was determined to be 1937 to 1975. The period is associated with the owning and operation of the ranch, now known as Deer Hollow Farm, by George Sheldon Perham. Although Deer Hollow Farm can be dated back further to the original homestead of George Henry and Theodore Franklin Grant, the White Barn was constructed during the Perham family’s residence. While no records of construction exist, aerial photographs show the barn was constructed prior to 1948. An interview with descendants of the Grant Brothers (interviews with Louis Grant and Virginia Grant Murphy, Deer Hollow Farm, May 1995, in Page and Turnbull 2018) revealed that the existing barn is located on the foundation of another barn built by the Grant brothers, but was built after Perham purchased the property, and after an accident left an earlier building in disrepair (Los Altos History Show, Episode #61 “Deer Hollow Farm” Guest George Perham Jr, Johnny Jonigan, January 2000). No exact date for building or rebuilding of the barn could be ascertained so the Period of Significance remains tied to the ownership of the farm by the Perham family between 1937 and 1975. The White Barn was evaluated in this report under CRHR under Criterion 1-4. The property was not evaluated for inclusion on NRHP as part of this report. However, evaluation under the NRHP Criteria was completed within the White Barn DPR Form 523. During the evaluation, the White Barn was considered ineligible for listing on the NRHP under Criteria A-D (DPR 523). Evaluation under CEQA follows below. White Barn Physical Description The White Barn is a Broken Gable structure (Photos 1–4) with gable roof and flanking lean-to sheds on northwest and southeastern sides of the central barn, forming a broken slope. The wood frame building is approximately 30 feet wide by 58 feet long and is 25 feet tall at its highest point. The roof is clad with corrugated, galvanized zinc sheet metal roofing panels. The structure is supported with low brick piers (east) and a new concrete slab foundation (west). The exterior is clad in vertical circular saw cut uniform lumber boards. The interior of the building is divided into several sections with lumber framing. The northwest shed-roofed extension includes a milk room, to the south side of the shed, and a goat pen, to the north. The center section is dedicated to hay storage, with a hay loft in the gable above, accessed by a steep wood built-in staircase (Page and Turnbull 2018). In the southeast shed-roofed extension, there are horse stalls, which are currently used for storage. The horse stalls and goat pen have openings that are connected to the center hay storage section. There are also openings in the hay loft’s floor which provide access to various parts of the ground floor. The construction date, architect, and builder are all unknown for this resource; however, the hay barn (middle section) was most-likely built earlier than the flanking lean-to shed additions, suggesting expansion of the barn with growth of the farm operation. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 12 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Photo 1. White Barn front facade, view west. Photo 2. White Barn rear elevation, view north-northwest. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 13 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Photo 3. White Barn southeastern elevation, view west. Photo 4. White Barn northwest elevation, view southeast. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 14 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Evidence for the barn expansion can be seen in the differing roofline pitches and joining of roof materials, closed “ghost” entryways, and differences in hardware and construction methods used between the main gable. The main structure is two stories with exposed eaves of horizontal boards cut to varying sizes and spaced unequally to support the roof. The front gable roofline consists of corrugated and galvanized overlapping metal sheeting. The metal sheeting terminates with a 90-degree bend on the eastern and western pitches before meeting with the soft slope of the flanking sheds. Each shed also utilizes exposed eaves (Photo 5); however, the sheds feature uniform rafter tails (Photo 6), evenly spaced and supporting wood beams underneath the metal roof. Within the interior ceilings, both the main gable structure and sheds differ between horizontal planks used in the former and standardized timber construction utilized in the latter. Photo 5. Detail of main gable exposed eaves, view south. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 15 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Photo 6. Detail of shed eaves, view west. The main gabled structure also contains three “ghost” entryways on the front façade (Photos 7 and 8). Flanking the main solid hinged double door entry are two adjacent entries that have been boarded up with irregular cut lumber boards but show gaps where doors were previously utilized. A third “hay loft” door is also located under the steep eave. The eastern and western flanking sheds utilize a rolling, single-wide barn door and hinged outwardly swing door, respectively, replacing the need for the main gable entries. Another difference between the construction methods includes the likely use of recycled square cut nails and spikes in the interior of the main gabled structure, hammered standardized cut nails in the clad board surrounding the structure, and post and beam supports within the gable structure. This is in stark contrast to the more uniformed hammered and pneumatically driven standardized nails and squared bolts throughout the framing and clad board found on both shed extensions. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 16 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Photo 7. White Barn main gable detail with "ghost" entryways, view south. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 17 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Photo 8. Detail of boarded "ghost" entryway, view south. Since the time of completion, the barn has undergone alterations within the interior and to the floor and exterior of the Milk Room. Within the interior, horse stalls and hay compartments were installed. The barn was also retrofitted with electricity to accommodate overhead lighting in all three sections. The Milk Room is the most dramatically changed. Per the 2016–2017 building permit, the Milk Room was renovated to include installation of a shallow dug concrete drainage floor and solid walls. The walls on the southern and western sides included framing and installation of vinyl sliding windows (Photo 9), in compliance with the 2016 California Building Code. Wood cladding was cut to provide concrete stem walls. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 18 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Photo 9. Detail of vinyl window installed during milk room renovation, view southeast. Integrity GANDA assessed the integrity of the White Barn under the seven aspects detailed under CEQA. The White Barn has retained its integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association in relation to the structure and its agricultural and rural setting. The White Barn does not appear to have been moved since its construction. The only changes since its completion includes the renovation of the milk room, in 2017–2018, with installation of concrete stem walls and floors, solid walls, and vinyl windows. These renovations do not diminish from the characteristics of the building and enhance its use as a functional rural structure for the surrounding farm. Criterion 1 (Events) Deer Hollow Farm is associated with the original homesteading of Santa Clara County in the mid to late 1800s. Ranchers utilized former Spanish land grants for farming and ranching operations. Deer Hollow Farm was first established in 1853 by George Henry and Theodore Franklin Grant. The Grant Brothers purchased the first 150 acres during this time and added additional acreage to the property in subsequent years accumulating to its current size of 357 acres. During the Grant brother’s ownership, the property consisted of the foreman’s cabin, the T.F. Grant residence, and two barns (interviews with Louis Grant and Virginia Grant Murphy, Deer Hollow Farm. May 1995 In Page and Turnbull 2018). After the Grant brothers’ deaths, the property was sold to the George Sheldon Perham in 1937, who began a small family ranching operation. Though Deer Hollow Farm is associated with early homesteading in Santa Clara County, the Perham family did not establish the homestead or utilize the original buildings on the Grant property. Furthermore, the White Barn, was built after the original homesteading of the ranch during the Perham family farm operation and does not have association with the early homestead development. As evidenced in two separate interviews, the White Barn was built by Perham after a farming accident in the 1940s and its association is with the Perham family solely. As a barn within the family farm, the White Barn was not utilized for commercial operation and had no association with the establishment or growth of ranching and dairy operations in Santa Clara County. Thus, the White Barn is not eligible for listing on the CRHR under Criterion A as no events occurred on the property between 1937 and 1975 that contributed to broad patterns of California or local history. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 19 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Criterion 2 (Persons) The White Barn is associated with George Sheldon “Shel” Perham, who purchased the property from the Grant family in 1937. Perham was the son of a San Francisco homesteader (George Lawrence Perham) known for his association with the Boston Ranch (later Borden Company) in the City of San Francisco. Though Shel Perham began his dairy career under his father, his contribution to dairy farming came only after his father sold his partnership to the Borden Company. Shel Perham stayed on with the Dairy Delivery Company as the vice president of this division. Later, Shel Perham became president of the Borden Company Dairy Delivery Company in 1936 and was head of Western (Oakland) Division until retirement in 1955. Though George Sheldon Perham was important to his company and a descendant of a prominent homesteader/rancher, he himself does not rise to the level of prominence defined as defined under Criterion B. George Sheldon Perham did not establish, direct, or influence dairy farming, commercial delivery, or local/state markets in a highly meaningful way to rise to the level of importance under this criteria. Thus, the White Barn is not eligible under Criterion 2 under the CRHR. Criterion 3 (Architecture) The White Barn is not eligible for listing on the CRHR under Criterion C. While the barn was constructed prior to 1948 and meets eligibility for being at least 50 years old, the building does not contain distinctive characteristics of type, period, region, or represent the work of a master or possess high artistic value. The building itself is vernacular in construction that is ubiquitous in California and the rest of the United States. Broken Gable Barns have been recorded for hay and livestock use in several eastern and western states. Author Earl Thollander produced illustrations of other examples of the style within California (Thollander 1974). The style is not unique to Santa Clara County or California. The building is built for functionality and was not designed or constructed by a master or possess high artistic value. The barn as does not “represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction.” Criterion 4 (Information Potential) This criterion is generally applied to sites that may provide archaeological resources. The White Barn is a built resource and is not likely to yield or have yielded information important to prehistory or history. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 20 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The White Barn was determined ineligible for inclusion on the CRHR as an individual property. Though the White Barn retains its integrity, the barn is not eligible for listing on the CRHR as an individual resource because it does not meet the criteria for listing on the CRHR under Criterion A–D. The building is part of a working ranch established in 1849 and utilized until 1975. The White Barn is not associated with the original Grant Homestead and the period of significance for the structure was determined to occur after homesteading in Santa Clara County. This White Barn is associated with the purchase and operation of a family ranch by George Sheldon Perham between 1937 and 1975. The construction of the barn occurred sometime between 1937 and 1948, with evidence pointing to a narrower date range between 1940 and 1948. The White Barn is not associated with events, persons, or architectural trends that influence California or the local Santa Clara region. Though the White Barn is not eligible for inclusion on the CRHR as an individual resource, the White Barn may be a contributing element of a larger historic district pertaining to the Perham ranch. GANDA recommends that Deer Hollow Farm be evaluated as a historic district under the Perham Period of Significance, 1937–1975, barn may be eligible for the CRHR as a contributing historic element to a larger historic district pertaining to the Perham Family Farm (Deer Hollow Farm) and its development between 1937 and 1975. GANDA recommends evaluation of Deer Hollow Farm as a historic district under Criterion A, B, and C. Deer Hollow farm is likely significant under Criterion A as part of the homesteading and continuous operation of cattle ranching within Santa Clara County and association with dairy farming within the Bay Area. Furthermore, the establishment and continuous use of the farm would include its association with both the Grant and Perham families between 1853 and 1975, under Criterion B. Construction and expansion of the ranch, including the corrals, buildings, pens, and landscape may be significant for the homestead period and regional ranching methods between 1937 and 1975. Contributing elements under Criterion C should also be evaluated for their vernacular architectural styles. GANDA further recommends that all stabilization and repairs of the White Barn, associated with this Project, be conducted as specified by Page and Turnbull (2018) to retain the integrity of the structure. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report 21 Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California 8.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY Birkholz, P. 2018 Historic Structure Report: White Barn, Deer Hollow Farm, APN 351-08-009 [17286]. Prepared by Page & Turnbull, San Francisco, CA. Prepared for Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Los Altos, CA. Bivens, Karin. n.d “Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve.” Bureau of Land Management 1868 Grant, Theodore F. [patentee], Santa Clara County, California, patent # CACAAA 137619; “Land Patent Search,” [digital images].Retrieved from General Land Office Records https://glorecords.blm.gov. Accessed September 24, 2019. Deer Hollow Farm Friends 2019 The Grant Family at Deer Hollow [electronic web page]. Retrieved from Deer Hollow Farm Friends http://deerhollowfarmfriends.org/about/history-deer-hollow-farm/. Accessed September 17, 2019. Google Earth 2019 Deer Hollow Farm latitude 37.332829°, longitude -122.100126°, elevation 384 feet. Aerial satellite layer. Accessed September 17, 2019. Gordon and Higelmire 2018 Archaeological Letter Report for Cultural Resources Survey and Subsurface Auger Testing for the Deer Hollow Farm, White Barn Project. Garcia and Associates Lewis, Joan 2017 Mid 20th Century at the Farm: The Perham Family. In Friends News (Winter 2017):6. Retrieved from Friends of Deer Hollow Farm http://deerhollowfarmfriends.org/newsletters. Accessed September 30 2019. Los Altos History Show 2000 Episode #61 “Deer Hollow Farm” Guest George Perham Jr, Johnny Jonigan, January. Surveyor General’s Office 1866 Original Survey Plat: Mount Diablo Meridian, Township No. 7 South, Range No. 2 West [Map]. 1:24,000. Washington, D.C.: Surveyor General’s Office. Retrieved from Bureau of Land Management General Land Office Records https://glorecords.blm.gov. Accessed September 26 2019. The Times (San Mateo, California) 1955 Seldon Perham, S.M. Civic Leader, Dies. Tuesday December 20 1955, pg. 5. Retrieved from newspapers.com, accessed September 30, 2019. United States Geological Survey 1991 7.5’ Quadrangle series: Cupertino [Map]. 1:24,000. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California This page intentionally left blank. Attachment 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report Garcia and Associates White Barn Survey at Deer Hollow Farm October 2019 Santa Clara County, California Appendix A: Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 Forms Attachment 2 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Cupertino, CA Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Conceptual Cost Estimate Prepared for : Wiss Janney Elstner Associates, Inc. October 22, 2019 by: HATTIN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, INC. 300 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 239 Oakland, CA 94102 Telephone: (510) 832-5800 Fax: (510) 832-5900 www.hattincm.com Attachment 3 MROSD Deer Hollow White Barn Rehab Page 1 of 2 10/23/19 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rancho San Antonio Open Space Rrserve Cupertino, CA ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Conceptual Design Cost Estimate represents the probable construction cost of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District – Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Rehabilitation in Cupertino, CA. Considering that the drawings are preliminary design submittal, certain components, which may be required as part of this project may not be shown or mentioned in this estimate. Allowances have been made when detail description of equipment, work definition, or quantities are not available. Material pricing and labor costs are obtained from historical cost data and similar projects. Mechanical and electrical costs are based similar projects. The unit costs include material, labor, and subcontractor's markup, and are based on the design level of documents received. Project Descriptions: Deer Hollow White Barn Rehabilitation, Cupertino CA. Scope includes repair of roof rafter, exterior walls, attic framing, ground floor and foundation. Documents Received as a Basis of Cost Estimate: The following documentation was used in preparation of this estimate:  Preliminary Drawings S1.0, S2.0, S3.0, S4.0, S4.1, S5.0, S5.1 & S5.2.  Basis of Design dated October 10, 2019 Exclusions: The following items are excluded:  Change Order Contingency  Hazardous materials abatement & disposal  Land Cost  Cost of money  Offsite Utilities & Connection Fees  Professional Consultants’ and Construction Management fees  Administrative costs  Fees for testing construction materials  Plan checks and inspection  Permits  Legal and financing costs  Furnishings, furniture, and equipment (FFE)  Relocation costs, if required  Contractor off-hours and compressed time work schedule, if required  Escalation beyond that stated.  LEED Possible Additional Cost Items: Attachment 3 MROSD Deer Hollow White Barn Rehab Page 2 of 2 10/23/19 Items that may change the Estimate of Probable Construction Cost include, but are not limited to, the following:  Modifications to the scope of work, drawings, specifications included in this estimate  Unforeseen conditions  Construction phasing requirements  Excessive contract and general conditions, and restrictive technical specifications  Equipment, material, systems or product that cannot be obtained from at least three different sources  Delays beyond the projected schedule  Any other non-competitive bid situations  Any addenda, changes not included in the basis of estimates. Escalation: Escalation of 4% up to midpoint of construction is included in the estimate, assumed at 12 months from October 01, 2019 at the rate of 4% per annum. ESTIMATING ASSUMPTIONS AND COMMENTS General: a. Material prices are at 4th Quarter 2019 level; include taxes and contractor’s markups. b. Labor cost is based on prevailing wages. c. Work to be done during normal business hours. d. This estimate can vary due to change in scope. e. Quantities were obtained as shown on the drawings. f. Allowances are provided for items not shown in the drawings and are anticipated to be part of the estimate. g. Installation cost, supervision, and coordination for material and equipment are included in the estimate. h. General conditions assumed at 20% include mobilization, insurance, office personnel costs, dust control, and other items not mentioned in General requirements. i. Design Contingency/Estimating Contingency is assumed at 25% due to the level of drawings used in the estimate. ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST The estimated Probable Construction Costs reflects the anticipated cost of the MROSD Deer Hollow White Barn Rehabilitation in Cupertino, CA. This estimate is based on a competitive open bid process with a recommended five or more bids from reputable general contractors, and a minimum of three bids for all subcontracted items. Cost of materials, labor, equipment or services furnished by others, and the contractors' or vendors' methods of determining prices are determined by market and/or economic conditions. Hence, the Estimator cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual project costs will not vary from this Estimate of Probable Construction Cost. This Estimate of Probable Construction Cost is exclusive of all costs associated with changes, modifications or addenda to the drawings and/or specifications subsequent to the preparation of this estimate. Attachment 3 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Gross Area (SF)1,740 DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Lead Estimator:EEV Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Date:10/22/2019 Cupertino, CA Revised: Type of Estimate: CONCEPTUAL ESTIMATE ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL AREA (SF)1,740 SUMMARY OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST % Hattin Construction Management , Inc. Project and Construction Management Services 300 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 239 Oakland, CA 94102 Telephone: (510)832-5800 -Fax: (510)832-5900 1 ROOF RAFTER REPAIR - BASE 37,710$ OPTION 1 - INSTALL NEW CORRUGATED SHEET METAL SHEATHING 36,495$ OPTION 2 - INSTALL BUILDING PAPER & WOOD SHINGLES 24,330$ 2 EXTERIOR WALLS REPAIR - BASE 20,360$ 3 ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - BASE 14,671$ OPTION 1 - INSTALL PRE-FABRICATED ATTIC LADDER 1,921$ OPTION 2 - INSTALL A STEEL LADDER WITH CONCRETE FOOTING 6,037$ 4 GROUND FLOOR & FOUNDATION REPAIR - BASE 15,530$ OPTION 1 - INSTALL CONCRETE SLAB 16,546$ OPTION 2 - INSTALL NEW GRADE BEAM 22,253$ 88,271$ 54,961$ 52,620$ TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - OPTION 2 REPAIR TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - BASE REPAIR TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - OPTION 1 REPAIR Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22 (version 1) Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 1 of 9 Attachment 3 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB ROOF RAFTER REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: ROOF REPAIR - BASE 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 6 ROOF RAFTER 1,900 SF 2.00$ 3,800$ 950 SF 1.50$ 1,425$ Install skipsheathing to match, 50%950 SF 3.00$ 2,850$ Install wood blocking between joists throughout 1,740 SF 2.50$ 4,350$ 10 LOC 175.00$ 1,750$ 10 LOC 50.00$ 500$ 60 LF 30.00$ 1,800$ 3 LOC 300.00$ 900$ 1,740 SF 1.00$ 1,740$ Disposal of demolished materials 1 LS 1,500.00$ 1,500$ Total - General RequirementsROOF RAFTER 20,615$ TOTAL DIRECT COST 20,615$ General Conditions/General Requirements 20.0%$4,123 SUBTOTAL 24,738$ General Contractor's Overhead & Profit 10.0%$2,474 SUBTOTAL 27,212$ Historic Preservation Factor 5.0%$1,361 Design Contingency/Estimating Contingency 25.0%$6,803 SUBTOTAL 35,375$ 4.0%$1,415 SUBTOTAL 36,790$ Bonds 2.5%$920 1.8293 37,710$ Roof Repair Remove existing corrugated metal steel Remove damaged or deteriorated 1-by skipsheathing, 50% TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ROOF RAFTER REPAIR - BASE Escalation up to midpoint of construction (12 months from October 1, 2019 @ 4%/year) Sister a new 2x6 wood joist to each existing joist and extent the end of of the joist to the edge of eave - between Line 5- 6 Sister a 3-foot long rafter tail where existing rafter tail is deteriorated, along line 1 Install new sheet metal gutter & downspout @ Line 1 & 6 Install french drain filled with gravel Replace missing diagonal knee braces Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22 (version 1) Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 2 of 9 Attachment 3 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB ROOF RAFTER REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: Roof Repair ROOF REPAIR - OPTION 1 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 7 ROOFING 1,900 SF 9.00$ 17,100$ 1,900 SF 1.50$ 2,850$ Total - General RequirementsROOFING 19,950.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 16,544.54$ 36,495$ ROOF REPAIR - OPTION 2 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 7 ROOFING 1,900 SF 0.50$ 950$ 1,900 SF 5.00$ 9,500$ 1,900 SF 1.50$ 2,850$ Total - General RequirementsROOFING 13,300.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 11,029.69$ 24,330$ Install new corrugated sheet metal sheathing Miscellaneous roof accessories TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ROOF RAFTER REPAIR - OPTION 1 Install building paper Install wood shingles TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ROOF RAFTER REPAIR - OPTION 2 Miscellaneous roof accessories Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22 (version 1) Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 3 of 9 Attachment 3 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:6/14/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator EEV/ARB EXTERIOR WALLS REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: EXTERIOR WALLS REPAIR - BASE 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 6 EXTERIOR WALLS 340 SF $ 5.00 1,700.00$ Remove existing diagonal brace 2 LOC $ 75.00 150.00$ Install new diagonal wood brace, 6 x 6 2 LOC $ 150.00 300.00$ Install new PT beam, 4x6 2 LOC $ 100.00 200.00$ Add 6"x12" concrete encasement around brick footing 2 LOC $ 600.00 1,200.00$ 16 LOC $ 50.00 800.00$ Remove existing diagonal brace 0 LOC $ 75.00 -$ Install new diagonal wood brace, 6 x 6 1 LOC $ 210.00 210.00$ Install new PT beam, 4x6 1 LOC $ 150.00 150.00$ Add 6"x12" concrete encasement around brick footing 1 LOC $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ 12 LOC $ 50.00 600.00$ Install new diagonal wood brace, 6 x 6 1 LOC $ 210.00 210.00$ Install new PT beam, 4x6 1 LOC $ 150.00 150.00$ Add 6"x12" concrete encasement around brick footing 1 LOC $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ 12 LOC $ 50.00 600.00$ Install new brace to match existing 2 LOC $ 50.00 100.00$ Install 4x6 under the existing beam and anchor to column 1 LOC $ 400.00 400.00$ Remove existing diagonal brace 0 LOC $ 75.00 -$ Install new diagonal wood brace, 6 x 6 1 LOC $ 210.00 210.00$ Install new PT beam, 4x6 1 LOC $ 150.00 150.00$ Add 6"x12" concrete encasement around brick footing 1 LOC $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ Add 6"x12" concrete encasement around brick footing 1 LOC $ 1,000.00 1,000.00$ Total - General RequirementsEXTERIOR WALLS 11,130$ Install sheet metal straps to connect brace to column & beam GRID LINE 5 INTERIOR SECTIONInstall sheet metal straps to connect brace to column & beam GRID LINE 6 INTERIOR SECTION Exterior Wall Repair Remove & replace deteriorated exterior wood sheathing to match existing species of original wood siding, Allow 10% GRID LINE B & C INTERIOR SECTION NORTH & SOUTH FACING INTERIOR SECTION Install sheet metal straps to connect brace to column & beam EAST FACING INTERIOR SECTION GRID LINE 3 INTERIOR SECTION Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22 (version 1) Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 4 of 9 Attachment 3 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:6/14/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator EEV/ARB EXTERIOR WALLS REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: Exterior Wall Repair TOTAL DIRECT COST 11,130$ General Conditions/General Requirements 20.0%$2,226 SUBTOTAL 13,356$ General Contractor's Overhead & Profit 10.0%$1,336 SUBTOTAL 14,692$ Historic Preservation Factor 5.0%$735 Design Contingency/Estimating Contingency 25.0%$3,673 SUBTOTAL 19,099$ 4.0%$764 SUBTOTAL 19,863$ Bonds 2.5%$497 20,360$ Escalation up to midpoint of construction (12 months from October 1, 2019 @ 4%/year) TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - EXTERIOR WALLS REPAIR - BASE Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22 (version 1) Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 5 of 9 Attachment 3 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - BASE 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 6 ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR 1 LOC 200.00$ 200$ 1 LOC 400.00$ 400$ Install sheet metal strap to connect beams to walls 4 LOC 50.00$ 200$ Strengthen the mortised wood columns supporting attic 4 LOC 500.00$ 2,000$ Install 1/2" plywood sheathing over the (e) wood sheathing 1,740 SF 3.00$ 5,220$ Total - General RequirementsATTIC FRAMING REPAIR 8,020$ TOTAL DIRECT COST 8,020$ General Conditions/General Requirements 20.0%$1,604 SUBTOTAL 9,624$ General Contractor's Overhead & Profit 10.0%$962 SUBTOTAL 10,586$ Historic Preservation Factor 5.0%$529 Design Contingency/Estimating Contingency 25.0%$2,647 SUBTOTAL 13,762$ 4.0%$550 SUBTOTAL 14,313$ Bonds 2.5%$358 1.8293 14,671$ Roof Repair Sister a new 2-joist to the side of existing joist along Line 5 Sister a new 2-joist to the side of existing joist along Line 4 Escalation up to midpoint of construction (12 months from October 1, 2019 @ 4%/year) TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ROOF RAFTER REPAIR - BASE Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22 (version 1) Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 6 of 9 Attachment 3 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: Roof Repair ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - OPTION 1 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 6 ATTIC FRAMING 1 LOC 300.00$ 300$ 1 LOC 750.00$ 750$ Total - General RequirementsATTIC FRAMING 1,050.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 870.77$ 1,740 SF 1,921$ ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - OPTION 2 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 6 ATTIC FRAMING 1 LOC 300.00$ 300$ 1 LOC 2,250.00$ 2,250$ 1 LOC 750.00$ 750$ Total - General RequirementsATTIC FRAMING 1 3,300.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 2,736.69$ 1,740 SF 6,037$ TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - OPTION 1 Remove existing stair Install new stell ladder New consrete footing TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - ATTIC FRAMING REPAIR - OPTION 2 Remove existing stair Install new pre-fab wooden stair Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22 (version 1) Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 7 of 9 Attachment 3 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB GROUND FLOOR & FOUNDATION REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: GROUND FLOOR & FOUNDATION REPAIR - BASE 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 3 GROUND FLOOR REPAIR 720 SF 1.50$ 1,080$ 18 CY 75.00$ 1,350$ New pervious concrete slab, 4"720 SF 6.50$ 4,680$ Install new geotextile fiber 720 SF 1.50$ 1,080$ Install pre-engineered compacted soil fill, 4"10 CY 30.00$ 300$ Total - General RequirementsGROUND FLOOR REPAIR 8,490$ TOTAL DIRECT COST 8,490$ General Conditions/General Requirements 20.0%$1,698 SUBTOTAL 10,188$ General Contractor's Overhead & Profit 10.0%$1,019 SUBTOTAL 11,207$ Historic Preservation Factor 5.0%$560 Design Contingency/Estimating Contingency 25.0%$2,802 SUBTOTAL 14,569$ 4.0%$583 SUBTOTAL 15,152$ Bonds 2.5%$379 1.8293 15,530$ Roof Repair Remove existing soil to a depth of 8", compact Dispose removed soil Escalation up to midpoint of construction (12 months from October 1, 2019 @ 4%/year) TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - FOUNDATION REPAIR - BASE Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22 (version 1) Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 8 of 9 Attachment 3 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Estimate:Conceptual DEER HOLLOW WHITE BARN REHABILITATION HCM Job Number:2019-052 Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Date:10/22/2019 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Revised: Cupertino, CA Estimator:EEV/ARB GROUND FLOOR & FOUNDATION REPAIR Hattin Construction Management, Inc.AREA :SF 1,740 Div.Description Qty Unit Cost Extension Total Description: Roof Repair FOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 1 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 3 GROUND FLOOR REPAIR 510 SF 1.00$ 510$ 510 SF 1.50$ 765$ 10 CY 75.00$ 750$ New concrete slab, 6"510 SF 7.50$ 3,825$ Attach posts to the new slab 18 LOC 50.00$ 900$ Install PT sleeper over concrete 510 SF 2.50$ 1,275$ 510 SF 2.00$ 1,020$ Total - General RequirementsFOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 1 9,045.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 7,501.02$ 1,740 SF 16,546$ FOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 2 1 General Requirements Included in the General Conditions below. General Requirements -$ 3 GROUND FLOOR REPAIR 30 LF 150.00$ 4,500$ 510 SF 1.50$ 765$ 7 CY 75.00$ 525$ New concrete slab, 4"510 SF 6.50$ 3,315$ Install new geotextile fiber 510 SF 1.50$ 765$ Install PT sleeper over concrete 510 SF 2.50$ 1,275$ 510 SF 2.00$ 1,020$ Total - General Requirements#1 12,165.00$ MARK-UPS 0.8293 10,088.43$ 1,740 SF 22,253$ Reinstall wood flooring Remove existing soil to a depth of 6", compact Dispose removed soil Remove existing wood flooring TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - FOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 1 TOTAL PROBABLE BID DAY CONSTRUCTION COST - FOUNDATION REPAIR - OPTION 2 Install new concrete grade beam Remove existing soil to a depth of 4", compact Dispose removed soil Reinstall wood flooring Deer Hollow White Barn Concept Estimate_10.22 (version 1) Printed: 10/24/2019 HATTIN CM Page 9 of 9 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW AND MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT FOR OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT OF DEER HOLLOW FARM This AMENDMENT NO. 1 to the Agreement is dated this ____ day of __________ 2020, by and between the CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, a California Charter City and municipal corporation, whose address is P.O. Box 7540, Mountain View, California, 94039 (hereinafter “CITY”), and MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a pubic district under the laws of California, whose address is 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, California, 94022-1404 (hereinafter “DISTRICT”), (CITY and DISTRICT, hereinafter collectively “Parties” or individually “Party”). RECITALS A. WHEREAS, on November 12, 1981, CITY and DISTRICT entered into an Agreement allowing CITY to provide activities for its citizens at Deer Hollow Farm within DISTRICT's Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve ("the 1981 Agreement") and thereafter amended said Agreement on June 12, 1986, November 19, 1991, July 1, 1994 and July 1, 1995 (the "1986 Amendment," the "1991 Amendment," the "1994 Amendment" and the "1995 Amendment," respectively); and B. WHEREAS, on June 1, 1996, CITY, DISTRICT and the County of Santa Clara (hereinafter “COUNTY”) entered into a new Agreement for the joint operation of Deer Hollow Farm and thereafter amended said Agreement on August 1, 1999; and entered into a further Agreement in July 2000 and June 2001; and C. WHEREAS, on July 1, 2010, July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2013, CITY and DISTRICT amended said Agreement (the "2010 Amendment", the “2011 Amendment” and the “2013 Amendment,” respectively); and D. WHEREAS, effective July 1, 2015, CITY and DISTRICT entered into a new Agreement for the operation and management of Deer Hollow Farm (the “Agreement”); and E. WHEREAS, the Agreement provides that CITY and DISTRICT may mutually agree upon cost sharing for repairs or replacements of structures or facilities at Deer Hollow Farm in excess of Two Thousand Dollars ($2000); and F. WHEREAS, one of the primary structures on the Deer Hollow Farm, as shown on Exhibit A to the Agreement, is the “White Barn,” which is in need of renovation work, including the replacement of its foundation (“Renovation Work”), the costs of which shall exceed two thousand dollars ($2000). Attachment 4 -2- G. WHEREAS, CITY and DISTRICT, and the non-profit organization “Friends of Deer Hollow Farm” (“Friends”) intend to contribute to the costs of the Renovation Work using funds donated to each respective organization by the Tindall Family estate; and H. WHEREAS, CITY and DISTRICT desire to amend said Agreement dated July 1, 2015 for identification, and all amendments thereto, to reflect said modifications. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals and mutual promises of the parties contained herein, CITY and DISTRICT agree to the below-referenced amendments to said Agreement dated July 1, 2015 for identification, and all amendments thereto, as follows: The language to follow shall be added to the end of Section 4, “Description of Repair and Maintenance Services”: “g Cost-Sharing for Deer Hollow Farm White Barn Renovation Work. Relating to the need for renovation work at the White Barn, including the replacement of its foundation (“Renovation Work”), and notwithstanding anything else included herein, the parties agree as follows: i. DISTRICT shall perform and/or manage the contracts, as appropriate, for the planning, historic and structural evaluation, CEQA review, permitting, engineering, design, and construction of the Renovation Work. ii. CITY shall contribute up to Thirty-Five Thousand Dollars ($35,000) toward the design-phase costs of the Renovation Work, as incurred by DISTRICT. CITY shall reimburse DISTRICT within thirty (30) days of receipt and approval of an invoice. The invoice shall include a copy of the vendor’s invoice and proof of payment by DISTRICT. iii. DISTRICT shall be responsible for the remaining costs necessary to complete the design phase of the Renovation Work, in addition to the contribution of staff time in planning and managing the contracts for the design work. iv. DISTRICT shall contribute the Tindall Family estate donation funds in the amount of Three Hundred Thirty Thousand Dollars ($330,000) to the construction phase of the project, and shall secure Attachment 4 -3- any necessary supplemental funding to complete the Renovation Work. Such contribution will be in addition to, and separate from, all other DISTRICT contributions or funding provided for herein. The CITY shall have no responsibility for any such construction or supplemental funding.” In addition, the Agreement shall be amended to include Section 25, Counterparts. 25. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which in the aggregate shall constitute one and the same instrument, and the parties hereto agree that signatures on this Agreement shall be sufficient to bind the parties.” All other terms and conditions in that certain Agreement dated July 1, 2015 for identification, above referenced, shall remain in full force and effect. Attachment 4 -4- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment No.1, between the City of Mountain View and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District for the operation and management of Deer Hollow Farm, is executed by CITY and DISTRICT. “CITY”: CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, a California Charter City and municipal corporation By: Max Bosel Interim City Manager Attest: Lisa Natusch City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Community Services Director FINANCIAL APPROVAL: Finance and Administrative Services Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney “DISTRICT”: MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a public district under the laws of California By: Ana Maria Ruiz, AICP General Manager Attest: By: ________________________________ Jennifer Woodworth District Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Hilary Stevenson General Counsel R-20-26 Meeting No. 20-06 March 11, 2020 AGENDA ITEM 7 AGENDA ITEM Legislative Action Recommendations GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS: Approve the recommended list of legislative actions for the 2020 state legislative session. SUMMARY Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) staff have reviewed active state legislation for the 2020 session and submit a list of recommended priority bills for consideration to the Board of Directors (Board) (Attachment 1). Important Note: Most bills will change over the course of the legislative session. The legislative process is fluid and often fast moving. Based upon its guiding documents – Board Policy 1.11 (Attachment 2) and the Board-adopted Legislative Program (Attachment 3) – the General Manager and staff will pursue an appropriate position for each bill and ensure that District interests are promoted and protected. DISCUSSION The 2020 Legislative Program, which the Board approved at its February 12, 2020 meeting, reflects Board policy positions on issues affecting the District, its mission, and annual strategic goals. Staff and the District’s legislative consultants actively use the Legislative Program to address newly introduced or amended bills and communicate District positions on bills, budget recommendations, and other legislative items to the respective authors and/or legislative committees. Throughout the session, staff fields time-sensitive requests from partners and monitors evolving pieces of legislation based on Board Policy 1.11. The process for reviewing and responding to legislation as it develops is described in Attachment 4, Legislative Bill Disposition Process. Legislation deemed a priority by the Board, pursuant to Board Policy 1.11 and described in Attachment 5 - Legislation Position and Priorities Definitions, are tracked and, when appropriate, either supported or opposed. The General Manager keeps the Board notified of actions taken via separate memos (Attachment 6, Example Memo). Please refer to Attachment 1 for an overview of the initial list of bills that the District is tracking during the 2020 legislative session. February 21, 2020 was the submittal deadline for new bills by State Assemblymembers and Senators (See Attachment 7, Legislative Calendar). District legislative consultants Public Policy Advocates (PPA) and Environmental and Energy Consulting (EEC) reviewed every bill R-20-26 Page 2 submitted to determine whether it has the potential to affect District interests, recommending a position and priority. Department managers assisted with a review of all the potential bills of interest and provided a recommended position and priority for each bill of interest. Approximately 150 bills are currently tracked, though only bills that may initiate action by the District at this time – Priorities 1 and 2 – are presented. At this time, 2 bills are deemed Priority 1 and 13 bills are Priority 2. As the legislative session progresses, each bill may change (sometimes substantially), which warrants further consideration concurrent with Board Policy 1.11. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this briefing. BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW No prior Board committee review has occurred. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE This item is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. NEXT STEPS Based on both the Legislative Program legislative priorities adopted by the Board on February 12, 2020 and the bills identified as “priority 1” by the Board at this meeting, staff, the Board President and Vice-President are scheduled to travel to Sacramento on Tuesday, March 24 to communicate District interests to our legislative delegation. Staff will also bring legislative updates and proposals to LFPAC throughout the state legislative session. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – District Legislative Tracking Matrix Attachment 2 – Board Policy 1.11 - Positions on Ballot Measures and Legislative Advocacy Attachment 3 – District Legislative Program for 2020 – Adopted Attachment 4 – District Bill Disposition Process Attachment 5 – District Legislation Position and Priorities Definitions Attachment 6 – Example of GM Legislative Memo to the Board Attachment 7 - State Legislative Calendar – 2020 Responsible Department Head: Korrine Skinner, Public Affairs Manager Prepared by: Joshua Hugg, Governmental Affairs Specialist MROSD Legislative Tracking Matrix 3/5/2020 Measure Author Focus Area Goal Topic Brief Summary Position Priority AB 2482 Stone, Mark D Climate Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands Agriculture: environmental farming programs and grants. Would require the Department of Food and Agriculture, upon appropriation by the Legislature of additional funds, to administer the State Water Efficiency and Enhancement Program (grant program) to provide grants to agricultural operations to implement irrigation systems that reduce greenhouse gases and energy use and increase water use efficiency, as prescribed. The bill would also require the department to fund culturally competent training on irrigation and nutrient management, authorize the department to contract with qualified third parties to measure grant program outcomes, and require the department to adopt guidelines for the grant program. Support 2 AB 2619 Stone, Mark D Climate Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands Coastal resources: Program for Coastal Resilience, Adaptation, and Access. Would establish the Program for Coastal Resilience, Adaptation, and Access for the purpose of funding specified activities intended to help the state prepare, plan, and implement actions to address and adapt to sea level rise and coastal climate change. The bill would create the Coastal Resilience, Adaptation, and Access Fund in the State Treasury, and would authorize the California Coastal Commission and specified state agencies to expend moneys in the fund, upon appropriation in the annual Budget Act, to take actions, based upon the best scientific information, that are designed to address and adapt to sea level rise and coastal climate change, as prescribed. Support 2 AB 2954 Rivas, Robert D Climate Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: climate goal: natural and working lands. Would require the State Air Resources Board, in collaboration with the California Environmental Protection Agency, the Natural Resources Agency, the Office of Planning and Research, and other relevant departments, to identify by July 1, 2021, an overall climate goal for the state’s natural and working lands, as defined, to sequester carbon and reduce atmospheric greenhouse gas emissions. As part of this process, the bill would require the state board, in collaboration with the same agencies and departments, to among other things, identify practices, policy incentives, and potential reductions in barriers that would help achieve the climate goal for integration into the next update to the scoping plan that immediately follows the identification of the climate goal and, on or before January 1, 2022, report to the Legislature recommended policy incentives that the state could enact to help reach the climate goal. Support 2 SB 1296 Durazo D Climate Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands Natural resources: the Nature and Parks Career Pathway and Community Resiliency Act of 2020. Current law establishes various environmental and economic policies and programs.This bill would establish the Nature and Parks Career Pathway and Community Resiliency Act of 2020, which would require state conservancies, the Wildlife Conservation Board, and the Natural Resources Agency to establish independent grant programs to support climate-beneficial and climate resiliency projects that incorporate partnerships with nonprofit organizations that provide certifications and placement services for jobs and careers in the natural resources field, as specified. Support 2 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Legislative Positions Recommendations 1 Attachment 1 MROSD Legislative Tracking Matrix 3/5/2020 SB 1323 Skinner D Climate Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands Carbon sequestration: state goals: natural and working lands: registry of projects. Would require, no later than July 1, 2021, that the Natural Resources Agency, in coordination with the California Environmental Protection Agency, the State Air Resources Board, and the department establish carbon sequestration goals for natural and working lands, as defined. The bill would require the board to include specified carbon dioxide removal targets as part of its scoping plan. Support 2 AB 1922 Rivas, Luz D Education Connect people to open space and a regional environmental protection vision Pupil instruction: science requirements: climate change. Current law requires the adopted course of study for grades 1 to 6, inclusive, and the adopted course of study for grades 7 to 12, inclusive, to include certain areas of study, including, among others, English, mathematics, social sciences, science, and visual and performing arts, as specified. This bill, with respect to both of the above-referenced adopted courses of study, would require the science area of study to include an emphasis on the causes and effects of climate change. The bill would require that appropriate coursework including this material be offered to pupils as soon as possible, commencing no later than the 2021–22 school year. Support 2 AB 3256 Garcia, Eduardo D Funding Strengthen organizational capacity and long- term financial sustainability to fulfill the mission Climate risks: bond measure. The California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2018, approved by the voters as Proposition 68 at the June 5, 2018, statewide direct primary election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $4,000,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a drought, water, parks, climate, coastal protection, and outdoor access for all program.This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact a bond measure that would address climate risks to the State of California. Support 1 ACR 179 Voepel R Governance Strengthen organizational capacity and long- term financial sustainability to fulfill the mission Special Districts Week This measure proclaims the week of May 17, 2020, to May 23, 2020, to be Special Districts Week. Support 2 SB 1372 Monning D Habitat Connectivity Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands Wildlife corridors and connectivity: Wildlife and Biodiversity Protection and Movement Act of 2020. Current law requires the Department of Fish and Wildlife, contingent upon funding being provided by the Wildlife Conservation Board or from other appropriate bond funds, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to investigate, study, and identify those areas in the state that are most essential as wildlife corridors and habitat linkages, as well as the impacts to those wildlife corridors from climate change, and requires the department to prioritize vegetative data development in these areas. This bill would additionally require the department to investigate, study, and identify impacts to those wildlife corridors from state infrastructure projects, including transportation and water projects, large-scale development projects not covered by an existing natural community conservation plan or habitat conservation plan, and planned or potential land conversions. Support 1 2 Attachment 1 MROSD Legislative Tracking Matrix 3/5/2020 AB 2987 Flora R Planning and Permitting Strengthen organizational capacity and long- term financial sustainability to fulfill the mission Local agency public contracts: bidding procedures. The Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act authorizes a public agency to elect to become subject to uniform construction cost accounting procedures. The act authorizes bidding procedures for public projects, as specified. Those bidding procedures include procedures for the publication or posting and electronic transmission of notice inviting formal bids. This bill would authorize a public agency, as an alternative to the publication or posting requirement, to meet the notice inviting formal bids requirement by transmitting notice electronically, as specified, and publishing the notice electronically in a prescribed manner on the public agency’s internet website at least 14 calendar days before the date of opening the bids. Support 2 AB 3005 Rivas, Robert D Planning and Permitting Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands Leroy Anderson Dam and Reservoir: environmental review, permitting, and public contracting. Would require the Department of Fish and Wildlife, within 15 days of receipt of the notification from the Santa Clara Valley Water District, to inform the department whether the Anderson Dam project, as defined, will not substantially adversely affect an existing fish and wildlife resource. If the department determines that the project will substantially adversely affect an existing fish and wildlife resource, the bill would specify the process by which the department is to issue a final agreement to the district that includes reasonable measures necessary to protect the affected resource. Support 2 AB 2373 Rubio, Blanca D Stewardship Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands Structural pest control: second generation anticoagulant rodenticides. Current law provides for the licensure and regulation of structural pest control by the Structural Pest Control Board in the Department of Consumer Affairs. This bill would require a licensee, beginning July 1, 2021, to complete a training course of at least one hour on the ecological impact of second generation anti coagulant rodenticides, as defined, on wildlife with respect to primary and secondary poisoning. The bill would require the training course to be developed by the board or a provider approved by the board, and to meet and apply to the continuing education requirements for licensees established by the board. Support 2 AB 2502 Quirk D Water Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands Groundwater sustainability plans: impacts on managed wetlands. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act requires all groundwater basins designated as high- or medium-priority basins by the Department of Water Resources that are designated as basins subject to critical conditions of overdraft to be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated groundwater sustainability plans by January 31, 2020. The act prescribes that plans contain certain required contents and requires that plans contain, where appropriate and in collaboration with the appropriate local agencies, additional analyses or components, including, among others, control of saline water intrusion, wellhead protection areas and recharge areas, a well abandonment and well destruction program, well construction policies, and impacts on groundwater dependent ecosystems. This bill would add impacts to managed wetlands, as specified, to the additional analyses or components that a plan is required to contain when appropriate. Support 2 3 Attachment 1 MROSD Legislative Tracking Matrix 3/5/2020 AB 2518 Wood D Water Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands Voluntary stream restoration landowner liability. Would exempt a landowner who voluntarily allows land to be used for such a project to restore fish and wildlife habitat from civil liability for property damage or personal injury resulting from the project if the project is funded, at least in part, by a state or federal agency that promotes or encourages riparian habitat restoration, unless the property damage or personal injury is caused by willful, intentional, or reckless conduct of the landowner or by a design, construction, operation, or maintenance activity performed by the landowner. Support 2 4 Attachment 1 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Board Policy Manual Positions on Ballot Measures and Legislative Advocacy Policy 1.11 Chapter 1 – Administration and Government Effective Date: 4/13/16 Revised Date: N/A Prior Versions: N/A Board Policy 1.11 Page 1 of 3 Purpose To establish a policy governing positions on local and state ballot measures/propositions and state and federal legislative advocacy. It is intended to cover all matters before the Legislature and the voters. Definitions For the purposes of the Positions on Ballot Measures and Legislative Advocacy policy, the following terms and definitions shall be used: Measure – may be included on a municipal, county, or district ballot and includes ordinances, initiatives, referenda, advisory measures, issuance or refunding of bonds, city or county charter amendments, or any other measure or proposition a legislative body may submit to the voters within the body’s jurisdiction. Ballot Proposition – can be a referendum or an initiative measure that is submitted to the electorate for a direct decision or direct vote. Propositions may be placed on the ballot by the California State Legislature or by a qualifying petition signed by registered voters. Initiative – power of the electors to propose legislation, and to adopt or reject them. Any proposed ordinance may be submitted to the legislative body by means of a petition. Referendum – applies to the process for repealing newly enacted legislation. Within specified time limits, the electors may file a petition protesting the adoption of that legislation. Local Legislation – typically ordinances, which are the laws of a city, charter, or district, often having the force of law, but only within the local jurisdiction. State or Federal Legislation – bills or proposed legislation under consideration by the legislature at the state or federal level. Attachment 2 Board Policy 1.11 Page 2 of 3 Policy 1.Positions on Matters Before the Voters a.From time to time the Board of Directors may be asked or may desire to take a position on local or state measures. The Board may consider taking a position on the measure/proposition if the measure/proposition: i.Would directly impact the District’s finances, responsibilities, legal authority, or operations; AND ii.Is in line with or inconsistent with the District’s mission and/or commitment to preserve open space within its boundaries and sphere of influence. The Board, by majority vote, may direct the General Manager to research the measure/proposition and return to the Board at a future meeting with information and a General Manager recommendation. At that time, the Board may vote to take a position on a measure/proposition. b.Measures/propositions determined to not impact District business may nonetheless be analyzed by the General Manager when directed by a majority vote of the Board, of which the analysis report would include possible alternatives for Board action, but no position recommendation. 2.Local, State, and Federal Legislative Advocacy a.The Legislative, Funding, and Public Affairs Committee (LFPAC) receives periodic updates regarding the District’s legislative program. When LFPAC determines that proposed legislation may affect District business, it may direct the General Manager to prepare a recommendation for consideration by the full Board or where there is not adequate time to convene the full Board, may direct the General Manager to take action to support or oppose the legislation without full Board approval. In such cases, the General Manager or designee shall report to the Board any actions taken to support or oppose legislation at or before the next Board meeting. b.When time is so short that neither the full Board nor LFPAC can be convened to consider positions to support or oppose local, state or federal legislation, the General Manager is authorized to take a position on behalf of the District if the legislation: i.Is related to the District’s mission; AND ii.Would directly impact the District’s business, such as project delivery, operations, finances, legal authority, or other District responsibilities; AND iii.The position being taken is consistent/inconsistent with existing District policy, past action, or District Strategic Plan; OR iv.The legislation carries other considerations that make it contrary to the District’s interests. In such instances, the General Manager or designee shall report to the Board any actions taken to support or oppose the legislation at or before the next Board meeting. c.Full Board action is required regarding legislation that is not clearly within the criteria listed above under Section 2.b. or guided by direction previously given by LFPAC. Attachment 2 Board Policy 1.11 Page 3 of 3 3.Full Board action is required to support or oppose any type of grassroots advocacy action, such as social, political, or economic movements, that are not legislation. 4.Board members representing the District in their official capacity on regional or other bodies may, at his or her discretion, take actions based on the principles above consistent with previously approved Board positions and policies. 5.This policy is not intended to limit the prerogative of individual Board members from expressing their individual support for or opposition to any local ballot measure, State proposition, State or Federal legislation, or grassroots advocacy actions. However, in doing so, the member should clearly state they are speaking for themselves, and not in an official capacity on behalf of the Board or the District. Individual Board Members who take a position in support or opposition to ballot measure or legislation for which the Board has not previously taken a position are encouraged as a professional courtesy to include the language for identification purposes only parenthetically following their signature referencing their position on the Board. Attachment 2 1 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Legislative Program 2020 Adopted February 12, 2020 Attachment 3 2 Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 4 Advocacy of the District’s Interests ..................................................................................................... 4 District Legislative Priorities .................................................................................................................... 6 Goal 1: Promote, establish, and implement a common environmental protection vision with partners .................................................................................................................................................... 6 Goal 2: Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands ....................................... 6 Goal 3: Connect people to open space and a regional environmental protection vision............ 6 Goal 4: Strengthen organizational capacity and long-term financial sustainability to fulfill the mission ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 District Legislative Policy Positions ........................................................................................................ 7 Goal 1: Promote, establish, and implement a common environmental protection vision with partners .................................................................................................................................................... 7 Goal 2: Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands ........................................ 7 Goal 3: Connect people to open space and a regional environmental protection vision............. 9 Goal 4: Strengthen organizational capacity and long-term financial sustainability to fulfill the mission ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 2020 Regional/Local Priorities ................................................................................................................ 11 Plan Bay Area 2050 .............................................................................................................................. 11 San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Measure AA Implementation .................................... 11 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Measure B Implementation ................................. 11 San Mateo County Transit District Measure W Implementation .................................................. 11 Regional Collaboration ........................................................................................................................ 11 2020 Federal Legislative Priorities ......................................................................................................... 12 Land and Water Conservation Fund ................................................................................................. 12 Infrastructure Investment ................................................................................................................... 12 National Monument Preservation ..................................................................................................... 12 Wildlife Corridors ................................................................................................................................ 12 Appendix A: .............................................................................................................................................. 13 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Strategic Plan for FY2020-21 ............................................... 13 Goal 1 – Promote, establish, and implement a regional environmental protection vision with partners ..................................................................................................................................... 13 Attachment 3 3 Goal 2 – Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands ................................ 13 Goal 3 – Connect people to open space and a regional environmental protection vision ..... 13 Goal 4 – Strengthen organizational capacity and long-term financial sustainability to fulfill the mission ........................................................................................................................................ 13 Attachment 3 4 Introduction Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District’s Mission: To acquire and preserve a regional greenbelt of open space land in perpetuity, protect and restore the natural environment, and provide opportunities for ecologically sensitive public enjoyment and education. As part of the Coastside Protection Area Service Plan, a Coastside mission was adopted: To acquire and preserve in perpetuity open space land and agricultural land of regional significance, protect and restore the natural environment, preserve rural character, encourage viable agricultural use of land resources, and provide opportunities for ecologically sensitive public enjoyment and education. To further these missions, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) annually reviews opportunities and challenges and establishes legislative program priorities and policy statements to guide its advocacy activities at the regional, state and federal levels. Advocacy of the District’s Interests While this document attempts to cover a wide variety of legislative issues that may impact the District, it is not comprehensive, complete or final. Throughout the state and federal legislative sessions, the District will review and take positions on various proposed policies and state or federal budget items. Per Section 2.0 of Board Policy 1.11, legislative advocacy is considered in the following manner: Section 2.0: Local, State, and Federal Legislative Advocacy a.The Legislative, Funding, and Public Affairs Committee (LFPAC) receives periodic updates throughout the year regarding the District’s legislative program. When LFPAC determines that proposed legislation may affect District business, it may direct the General Manager to prepare a recommendation for consideration by the full Board or may direct the General Manager to take action to support or oppose the legislation without full Board approval when there is not adequate time to convene the full Board. In such cases, the General Manager or designee shall report to the Board any actions taken to support or oppose legislation at or before the next Board meeting. b.When time is so short that neither the full Board nor LFPAC can be convened to consider positions to support or oppose local, state or federal legislation, the General Manager is authorized to take a position on behalf of the District if the legislation: i.Is related to the District’s mission; AND ii.Would directly impact the District’s business, such as project delivery, operations, finances, legal authority, or other District responsibilities; AND iii.The position being taken is consistent/inconsistent with existing District policy, past action, or the District’s annual Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives; OR Attachment 3 5 iv. The legislation carries other considerations that make it contrary to the District’s interests. In such instances, the General Manager or designee shall report to the Board any actions taken to support or oppose the legislation at or before the next Board meeting. c. Full Board action is required regarding legislation that is not clearly within the criteria listed above under Section 2.b. or guided by direction previously given by LFPAC. All legislation on which the District takes a position will be closely tracked by the General Manager’s Office (GMO) and reported to the Board of Directors. Public Affairs staff will be responsible for reporting similar information to key departments. Contracted state advocacy teams will represent District interests based upon the policies contained in the Legislative Session Program. In addition to District position letters, Board members and District staff may be asked to testify before or meet with relevant legislators or members of the executive branch to discuss issues requiring heightened advocacy. If this is the case, District staff must first notify and/or confirm approval of the GMO to ensure that positions taken are consistent with the Board-approved Legislative Session Program. Attachment 3 6 District Legislative Priorities The following are the legislative priorities for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District during the 2020 State Legislative Session. Annual priority-setting considers a combination of issues that relate directly to important District-led projects or initiatives, opportunities to support or oppose state legislative initiatives sponsored by others that affect the District’s mission, and any issues that are identified by the Board as particularly significant. Funding measures are the most common of these priorities and are generally tied to the creation of new funding sources or the processes that prescribe the allocation of existing funding sources. The 2020 legislative priorities are listed and grouped below consistent with the Board’s annual Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives (See Appendix A) to provide a clear connection to agency priorities: Goal 1: Promote, establish, and implement a common environmental protection vision with partners 1. Wildlife Corridors: Greater funding opportunities and permit streamlining to preserve and enhance wildlife corridors; promote wildlife permeability in the built environment. 2. Anticoagulant Rodenticides: Eliminate the use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides to protect raptors, large mammals and other nontarget native wildlife. Goal 2: Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands 1. Responsible Wildland Fire Vegetation Management: Effective guidelines for wildland fire fuel reduction efforts that minimize potential impacts to rare and endangered species and the risk of exacerbating the spread of invasive species. Goal 3: Connect people to open space and a regional environmental protection vision 1. Equitable Access: Expanded access to and enhanced funding eligibility for new and improved greenspace opportunities for underserved communities. 2. Trail Corridors: Linking of preserve trails to regional trails and ultimately to the places where people live and work. Goal 4: Strengthen organizational capacity and long-term financial sustainability to fulfill the mission 1. Climate Change Bond: Climate change funding that benefits a wide range of open space priorities and promotes landscape climate resilience, particularly in the Bay Area. 2. Proposition 68 Implementation: Efforts to ensure that parks bond funds are allocated in a timely, equitable, and responsible manner, and that the resulting grant programs support District opens space and public access projects. 3. Cap and Trade/Climate-Related Funding: Funding that supports the climate resiliency Attachment 3 7 benefits of open space and working lands, including carbon sequestration. 4. Green Bonds: Efforts to allow the California Natural Resources Agency to work with the State Treasurer’s Office to develop standards for green bond projects, in which California can invest. 5. Public Safety Power Shutoffs: State efforts to ease the burden of PG&E Public Safety Power Shutoffs on local agency operations. District Legislative Policy Positions The ability of the District to deliver its mission and remain a sustainable organization can be impacted by legislation proposed on the local, state or federal level. To this end, proactive, Board-approved policy positions taken by the District on a variety of relevant issue areas help to ensure consistency in advocacy. District policy positions are then grouped by strategic plan goals. Goal 1: Promote, establish, and implement a common environmental protection vision with partners 1. Enhances the purchase or acquisition of regional and strategic open space lands and connects District lands to federal, state, county, city and other protected open space, parklands, bay lands, watershed lands, wildlife corridors and agricultural lands. 2. Protects public open space, property rights, interests and easements. 3. Enhances and funds regional collaboration and coordination of conservation efforts. 4. Promotes the use of urban infill and urban growth boundaries to avoid sprawl and prevent pressure on developing open spaces and further encroachment into the wildland-urban interface and open space buffer areas. 5. Expands and restores protected open space lands to enhance biodiversity, climate change resilience, and scenic, rural character. 6. Ensures that the zoning of permanently protected lands supports activities that further the District’s mission (preservation, natural resource protection, public access and education, agriculture). 7. Enhances the District’s ability to create and pursue opportunities to acquire an integrated greenbelt of protected open space, trails and habitat corridors. 8. Protects natural and working lands from future development threats. Goal 2: Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands 1. Ensures reasonable setback requirements that allow minimum defensible space clearances to be met by private property owners to prevent catastrophic fires that damage habitats and pose a high public safety hazard. Attachment 3 8 2. Furthers implementation of Senate Bill 32 (2016), the Global Warming Solutions Act that establishes a greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction target for the state of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. 3. Recognizes and incentivizes the use of natural and working lands for the purpose of carbon sequestration. 4. Supports effective and comprehensive Districtwide, regional and statewide measures that respond to sea level rise and other effects of climate change and enhance ecological and community resilience. 5. Enhances or streamlines the integration of wildlife corridors into transportation infrastructure and promotes its ongoing maintenance within District lands and adjacent entities, which may extend to statewide and international linkages. 6. Promotes advance mitigation programs to enhance wildlife corridor networks. 7. Connects habitats that support a diverse array of native plants and animals. 8. Encourages public road management agencies to control invasive plant populations and incorporate safe pedestrian and wildlife crossings across roadways and highways. 9. Eliminates the use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides. 10. Supports increased knowledge, management and ultimately the eradication of Sudden Oak Death disease. 11. Provides permit exemptions for natural resources protection and restoration projects from regulations aimed to protect the natural environment from typical development projects. 12. Supports maintaining state and federal lists of endangered species justified through conclusive biological evidence. 13. Helps efforts to protect, conserve, restore and enhance the natural resources of the District, its coast, and adjacent waters for environmentally sustainable and prudent use by current and future generations. 14. Enables Native American communities’ involvement in cultural and land management practices to restore and protect natural resources and enhance landscape resilience. 15. Protects and restores watersheds, water quality, natural water courses, wetlands and hydrologic processes consistent with the District’s Resource Management Plan. 16. Promotes expedited removal of select trees and brush by public agencies for fire protection, public safety and enhanced climate resilience, while minimizing potential impacts to rare and endangered species and the risk of exacerbating the spread of invasive species. 17. Supports wildland fire management to become a more natural component of the ecosystem and minimizes its negative effects on the community and environment. 18. Supports working farms and ranches on public open space land that further conservation and climate resilience goals. 19. Supports the creation of and repairs to farm labor housing to foster farm operation sustainability that ultimately furthers conservation and climate resilience goals. Attachment 3 9 20. Incentivizes agricultural operations to invest in energy-efficient and water-efficient irrigation technologies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and water use. 21. Aids enforcement of marijuana laws related to the implementation of Prop 64 (2016) to protect natural lands from the destruction caused by illegal marijuana grows. 22. Protects natural lands from the destruction caused by illegal marijuana grows, prohibits marijuana grows on public lands, and restores damaged habitats. Goal 3: Connect people to open space and a regional environmental protection vision 1. Helps expand educational opportunities for underserved and non-English speaking communities about natural resources and the benefits of open space. 2. Promotes volunteer involvement and engagement of diverse communities in ongoing conservation, restoration, enhancement and interpretation of the District’s natural resources. 3. Engages children and parents in the enjoyment and appreciation of outdoor open spaces to inspire the next generation of conservation champions. 4. Funds and enables programs that hire youth to work in parks and open space and encourages them to consider careers in conservation. 5. Keeps preserves safe, clean, accessible and inviting for healthy exercise and enjoyment. 6. Promotes awareness and access to programs and activities that increase outdoor physical activity. 7. Protects and helps fund the protection and public interpretation of cultural and historic resources located on natural open space and working lands. 8. Helps fund and streamline emergency repairs to District infrastructure, including trails and public access amenities. 9. Increases public access to preserved land regionwide. 10. Helps link preserve trails to other regional trails and ultimately to the places where people live and work. 11. Improves local transportation to enable better connectivity between communities and open space preserves. 12. Limits public use of drones (unmanned aerial vehicles) consistent with Board policies to preserve the tranquility of outdoor experiences, natural activities, and minimize risk of wildfire. Goal 4: Strengthen organizational capacity and long-term financial sustainability to fulfill the mission 1. Preserves existing tax revenues and tax authority. 2. Lowers the vote threshold for locally imposed special taxes from two-thirds to 55 percent. Attachment 3 10 3. Preserves tax-exempt status for municipal bonds on a state and federal level. 4. Expands state and federal incentives that promote the issuance of green bonds. 5. Preserves and promotes managerial discretion in effective and productive recruiting, hiring, firing and day-to-day oversight of staff at all levels. 6. Preserves and promotes open, transparent, accountable government administrative practices that promote the efficient and timely delivery of public services, facilitate public involvement, and support effective and timely decision-making. 7. Maintains prevailing wage exemptions for volunteers. 8. Enables statewide efforts to increase broadband connectivity to public agency infrastructure in remote areas. 9. Preserves and promotes cost-effective, fair, and efficient contracting practices that give taxpayers the best value for their dollar. 10. Enables streamlining of contracting and bidding processes and attracts greater contractor and vendor competition. 11. Provides funding and funding flexibility to achieve mission-related goals including, but not limited to: a. District operations and infrastructure b. Integrated Pest Management c. Programs that hire youth to work in parks and open space and encourages them to consider careers in conservation d. Partnership approaches to environmental education and public outreach efforts at local and state levels. e. Implementation of improvements that meet the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) and other accessibility standards in District preserves. f. The protection of prime and sustainable agricultural lands, including investments in agricultural-support infrastructure. g. Funding for local partners to receive technical support for agriculture and natural resources enhancement. 12. Promotes closer collaboration and coordination between regulatory agencies to enhance permit processing efficiency and reduces overall project costs. 13. Improves and streamlines permitting, CEQA review and compliance processes for emergency repairs, routine maintenance, habitat restoration, and public access projects. 14. Provides open space districts the authority to utilize a variety of contracting methods to construct projects, including design-build methodologies. 15. Promotes implementation of and education about sustainable design and construction, including but not limited to LEED buildings, stormwater treatment and runoff reduction, local (within 150-mile radius of project) contractor/consultant hiring, construction material reuse/recycling, and use of green/energy efficient materials and equipment. Attachment 3 11 2020 Regional/Local Priorities Though there is a growing recognition of the importance of regional planning and coordination, local land use authority dominates California planning processes in both the built and natural environments. In 2020, the District supports: Plan Bay Area 2050 Ratification of the final preferred scenario of the Plan Bay Area 2050 that curbs urban boundary expansion, more tightly integrates open space preservation and stewardship, and funds District priorities in adopted Priority Conservation Areas (PCA). San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority Measure AA Implementation Grant program guidelines for SFBRA's Measure AA funds that enable implementation of District priority projects. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Measure B Implementation Advance mitigation allocation guidelines for VTA's recently passed Measure B funds that enable implementation of District priority projects. San Mateo County Transit District Measure W Implementation Allocation guidelines that enable regional bicycle/pedestrian network connectivity with District projects and regional trail plans. Regional Collaboration Efforts to enhance and fund regional collaboration and coordination of conservation plans. Attachment 3 12 2020 Federal Legislative Priorities Given the outcomes of the 2016 federal elections, active advocacy at the federal level may be most effectively directed toward protecting existing environmental priorities and regulations. In 2020, the District will focus on the following: Land and Water Conservation Fund Fully funding the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund. Infrastructure Investment Inclusion of active transportation and parks-related projects in federal funding allocations for infrastructure. National Monument Preservation Policies that protect and designate national monuments within our region that are important to fulfilling the District’s mission. Wildlife Corridors Policies that enhance habitat connectivity on nonfederal lands through wildlife crossings and other habitat connectivity projects. Attachment 3 13 Appendix A: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Strategic Plan for FY2020-21 Online at: https://www.openspace.org/sites/default/files/StrategicPlan_2021.pdf Goal 1 – Promote, establish, and implement a regional environmental protection vision with partners • Objective 1 – Continue implementation of the District’s Vision Plan and communicate progress on projects through reporting results and building partner relationships • Objective 2 –Build and strengthen diverse partnerships to implement a collaborative and science-based approach to regional environmental protection • Objective 3 – Build and strengthen relationships with legislators to advocate environmental protection goals • Objective 4 – Preserve open space lands of local and regional significance Goal 2 – Protect the positive environmental values of open space lands • Objective 1 – Take a regional leadership role in promoting the benefits of open space • Objective 2 – Protect and restore the natural environment in a manner that expands regional resiliency and climate change adaptation to preserve healthy natural systems • Objective 3 – Work with fire agencies and surrounding communities to strengthen the prevention of, preparation for and response to wildland fires for enhanced ecosystem resiliency and public safety • Objective 4 – Support the viability of sustainable agriculture and character of rural communities Goal 3 – Connect people to open space and a regional environmental protection vision • Objective 1 – Communicate the benefits of a regional environmental protection vision • Objective 2 – Refine and implement a comprehensive public engagement strategy, including the outreach to diverse communities and enhanced public education programs • Objective 3 – Expand opportunities to connect people to their public open space preserves consistent with an environmental protection vision • Objective 4 – Reflect the diverse communities we serve in the District’s, staff, volunteers, and partners Goal 4 – Strengthen organizational capacity and long-term financial sustainability to fulfill the mission • Objective 1 – Provide the necessary resources, tools, training, and infrastructure, including technology upgrades and capacity building Attachment 3 14 • Objective 2 – Continuously evaluate and improve processes and business model to effectively and efficiently deliver Vision Plan projects and the District’s ongoing functions • Objective 3 - Build state of readiness for potential disruptions by completing a risk assessment and creating a business continuity plan • Objective 4 – Continue to engage constituents for bond sales and via the work of the Bond Oversight Committee – “Promises made, promises kept.” • Objective 5 – Remain financially sustainable by pursuing and ensuring discretionary funding opportunities and partnerships to augment operating, capital, and bond funding sources, and ensure that large capital expenses and land acquisitions, including associated public access and land management costs, are evaluated within the long-term financial model and remain financially sustainable • Objective 6 – Continue to recruit, develop and retain talented staff to implement the District's mission and strengthen our organizational capacity Attachment 3 Incoming bill •Lobbyist •Partner •News •Etc. GAS Bill Assessment •Does it apply? •Legislative Program compliance? •Which department? •Lobbyist recommendation? DM Bill Assessment •Does it apply? •Legislative Program compliance? •Recommended Position o Support (concept) o Oppose (concept) o Watch (concept) Time Sensitive? GM Disposition •Summary •L/P compliance •Pros/Cons •Recommendation LFPAC Disposition •Summary •L/P compliance •Pros/Cons •Recommendation Board Disposition •Summary •L/P compliance •Pros/Cons •Recommendation Position Letter •Sample letter •Original letter Position Letter •Sample letter •Original letter •Send draft to GM •Revise based on edits Board Notification •Position letter •GM Notification Memo Send Letter •MROSD Position letter •Join coalition Time Sensitive? Accumulated Bill List •Review weekly •Break down by department Y N N Y MROSD Legislative Bill Disposition Process Board Policy 1.11 Additional Advocacy Based On: •Bill Position •Bill Priority See priority definitions Key of Acronyms: •GM: General Manager •DM: Department Manager •GAS: Governmental Affairs Specialist •L/P: Legislative Program Attachment 4 Attachment 5 MROSD Bill Positions and Priorities Support: • Support – A position given to bills and propositions that would be a benefit to Midpen’s ability to serve its communities. • Support if Amended – A position given to bills that may be a benefit to the Districts’ ability to serve its communities, so long as specific amendments are taken to the bill. If the requested amendments are taken by the author, public affairs department staff may recommend changing Midpen’s position to support. • Recommend Support– Position recommended by legislative consultant, along with a potential priority number, prior to staff review. Oppose: • Oppose – A position given to bills and propositions that would be a detriment to Midpen’s ability to serve its communities. • Oppose unless Amended – A position given to bills that may impede the District’s ability to serve its communities, so long as specific amendments are taken to the bill. If the requested amendments are taken by the author, public affairs department staff may recommend changing Midpen’s position to support. • Concerns – A position given to bills that could be a detriment to the District, but political, policy or other reasons do not warrant or lend themselves to a full oppose position. • Recommend Oppose – Position recommended by legislative consultant, along with a potential priority number, prior to staff review. Watch: • Watch – A position given to bills that may directly affect Midpen but does not provide a significant benefit or impose a significant detriment to the District. Also includes bills that are in spot bill form on a subject area that concerns special districts and bills that are of notable interest to special districts, but do not warrant an active position or expenditure of Midpen resources. No position is taken; however, the progress and outcome of the bill is tracked. A position may be considered later. • Recommend Watch – Position recommended by legislative consultant. Attachment 5 Priority: Priority 1: Bills given a “1” priority have a major importance and directly affects the District, and/or may set a critical precedent. These bills will receive active attention by staff in public affairs and other impacted department(s). This may include extensive testimony in committee, meetings with the legislature, discussions with partner organizations, and public/media education, as appropriate. Priority 2: Bills given a “2” priority have a significant impact on the District and/or set a critical, relevant precedent. The General Manager/Board sends a position letter or signs on to a coalition letter, and staff may discuss the item with the legislature and/or provide testimony in committee, as time permits. Priority 3: Bills given a “3” priority may have a notable effect on the District, and/or set a meaningful precedent, but are determined to be a lower priority for staff resources. Public affairs staff, in collaboration with the impacted department(s), may sign on to a coalition letter with General Manager/Board approval. Committee testimony or discussions with the legislature may be conducted. DATE: March 12, 2019 MEMO TO: Legislative, Finance, and Public Affairs Committee Members FROM: Ana M. Ruiz, General Manager SUBJECT: Legislative Actions Update _____________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND Board Policy 1.11 titled “Positions on Ballot Measures and Legislative Advocacy,” Section 2.0b, provides the General Manager the ability to take position on pending legislation in time-sensitive situations. More specifically: b. When time is so short that neither the full Board nor LFPAC can be convened to consider positions to support or oppose local, state or federal legislation, the General Manager is authorized to take a position on behalf of the District if the legislation: i. Is related to the District’s mission; AND ii. Would directly impact the District’s business, such as project delivery, operations, finances, legal authority, or other District responsibilities; AND iii. The position being taken is consistent/inconsistent with existing District policy, past action, or District Strategic Plan; OR iv. The legislation carries other considerations that make it contrary to the District’s interests. In such instances, the General Manager or designee shall report to the Board any actions taken to support or oppose the legislation at or before the next Board meeting. DISCUSSION On behalf of the District, the General Manager has taken the following time-sensitive action: • SB 45 (Allen): Wildfire, Drought, and Flood Protection Bond Act of 2020. Action: At the behest of the statewide Wildlife Corridors Working Group and open space legislative consultants, Midpen has taken a SUPPORT position and signed onto a group letter addressed to the Chair of the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee on March 6, 2019, ahead of their March 12 hearing. Bill Summary: Would enact the Wildfire, Drought, and Flood Protection Bond Act of 2020, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in an amount of $4,300,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance projects to restore fire damaged areas, reduce wildfire risk, create healthy forest and watersheds, reduce climate impacts on urban areas and vulnerable populations, protect water supply and water quality, protect rivers, lakes, and streams, reduce flood risk, protect fish and wildlife from climate impacts, improve climate resilience of agricultural lands, and protect coastal lands and resources. Attachment 6 Consistency with Legislative Program: • LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES – Cap and Trade/Climate-related Funding: The District supports efforts to emphasize and increase the recognition for the use of natural and working land (NWL) for the purposes of carbon sequestration and subsequent allocations of Cap and Trade funding. With the passage of SB 32 (Pavely, 2016) there is increased pressure to not only eliminate sources of greenhouse gas generation, but also find ways to capture emissions as well. This further promotes the recognition of the region's greenbelt as its "life support system." • LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES – Watershed Protection: The District supports legislative or regulatory efforts that enhance the ability to protect watershed land, as well as restore and maintain associated habitats. • LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES – Wildlife Corridors: The District supports efforts to bring greater funding opportunities and permit streamlining to conservation related to wildlife corridors. • LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES – Regional Benefits: The District supports efforts to work with regional and statewide partners to ensure that relevant statewide funding sources are optimized and made available for Bay Area needs, and to ensure that underserved communities in the region benefit from these state resources. • Natural Resources Protection and Restoration #8 – Supports wildfire management to become a more natural component of the ecosystem, and minimize negative effects on the community and environment. • Natural Resources Protection and Restoration #14b – Forest health programs that reduce GHG emissions through fuel reduction. • Natural Resources Protection and Restoration #14c – Expands funding for wildlife corridor projects that improve wildlife habitat connectivity. AB 209 (Limón): Parks: environmental education: grant program. Action: At the behest of the California State Parks Foundation, Midpen has taken a SUPPORT position and signed onto a group letter to the Chair of the Assembly Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee on March 5, 2019, ahead of their March 12 hearing. Bill Summary: Would require the Director of Parks and Recreation to establish the Outdoor Equity Grants Program, to increase the ability of underserved and at-risk populations to participate in outdoor environmental educational experiences at state parks and other public lands where outdoor environmental education programs take place. The bill would require the director to, among other things, give priority for funding to outdoor environmental education programs that primarily provide outreach to and serve students who are eligible for free or reduced-price meals, foster youth, or pupils of limited English proficiency, as provided. Consistency with Legislative Program: • District Priority: Every Kid in a Park Initiative: The District supports national and state efforts to mobilize children and parents to visit and enjoy America’s outdoor spaces to encourage the next generation to discover America’s public lands and waters. Attachment 6 Prepared by: Joshua Hugg, Governmental Affairs Specialist Attachment 6 JANUARY S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 . 2020 TENTATIVE LEGISLATIVE CALENDAR COMPILED BY THE OFFICES OF THE SECRETARY OF THE SENATE AND THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF CLERK October 18, 2019 (Final) DEADLINES FEBRUARY S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Jan. 1 Statutes take effect (Art. IV, Sec. 8(c)). Jan. 6 Legislature Reconvenes (J.R. 51(a)(4)). Jan. 10 Budget must be submitted by Governor (Art. IV, Sec. 12(a)). Jan. 17 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to fiscal committees fiscal bills introduced in their house in the odd-numbered year (J.R. 61(b)(1)). Jan. 20 Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. Jan. 24 Last day for any committee to hear and report to the floor bills introduced in that house in the odd-numbered year (J.R. 61(b)(2)). Last day to submit bill requests to the Office of Legislative Counsel. Jan. 31 Last day for each house to pass bills introduced in that house in the odd-numbered year (Art. IV, Sec. 10(c)), (J.R. 61(b)(3)). Feb. 17 Presidents’ Day. Feb. 21 Last day for bills to be introduced (J.R. 61(b)(4)), (J.R. 54(a)). MARCH S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Mar. 27 Cesar Chavez Day observed APRIL S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Apr. 2 Spring Recess begins upon adjournment of this day’s session (J.R. 51(b)(1)). Apr. 13 Legislature reconvenes from Spring Recess (J.R. 51(b)(1)). Apr. 24 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to fiscal committees fiscal bills introduced in their house (J.R. 61(b)(5)). MAY S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 May 1 Last day for policy committees to hear and report to the floor nonfiscal bills introduced in their house (J.R. 61(b)(6)). May 8 Last day for policy committees to meet prior to June 1 (J.R. 61(b)(7)). May 15 Last day for fiscal committees to hear and report to the floor bills introduced in their house (J.R. 61(b)(8)). Last day for fiscal committees to meet prior to June 1 (J.R. 61 (b)(9)). May 25 Memorial Day May 26 -29 Floor Session Only. No committees, other than conference or Rules Committees, may meet for any purpose (J.R. 61(b)(10)). May 29 Last day for each house to pass bills introduced in that house (J.R. 61(b)(11)). *Holiday schedule subject to Senate Rules committee approval. Page 1 of 2 Attachment 7 2020 TENTATIVE LEGISLATIVE CALENDAR COMPILED BY THE OFFICES OF THE SECRETARY OF THE SENATE AND THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF CLERK October 18, 2019 (Final) JUNE S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 June 1 Committee meetings may resume (J.R. 61(b)(12)). June 15 Budget Bill must be passed by midnight (Art. IV, Sec. 12(c)(3)). June 25 Last day for a legislative measure to qualify for the November 3 General Election ballot (Election code Sec. 9040). June 26 Last day for policy committees to hear and report fiscal bills to fiscal committees (J.R. 61(b)(13)). JULY S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 July 2 Last day for policy committees to meet and report bills (J.R. 61(b)(14)). Summer Recess begins upon adjournment provided Budget Bill has been passed (J.R. 51(b)(2)). July 3 Independence Day observed. AUGUST S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Aug. 3 Legislature reconvenes from Summer Recess (J.R. 51(b)(2)). Aug. 14 Last day for fiscal committees to meet and report bills (J.R. 61(b)(15)). Aug. 17 – 31 Floor Session only. No committees, other than conference and Rules committees, may meet for any purpose (J.R. 61(b)(16)). Aug. 21 Last day to amend bills on the Floor (J.R. 61(b)(17)). Aug. 31 Last day for each house to pass bills (Art. IV, Sec. 10(c), (J.R. 61(b)(18)). Final recess begins upon adjournment (J.R. 51(b)(3)). *Holiday schedule subject to Senate Rules committee approval. IMPORTANT DATES OCCURRING DURING FINAL RECESS 2020 Sept. 30 Last day for Governor to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature before Sept. 1 and in the Governor’s possession on or after Sept. 1 (Art. IV, Sec. 10(b)(2)). Nov. 3 General Election Nov. 30 Adjournment Sine Die at midnight (Art. IV, Sec. 3(a)). Dec. 7 12 m. convening of 2021-22 Regular Session (Art. IV, Sec. 3(a)). 2021 Jan. 1 Statutes take effect (Art. IV, Sec. 8(c)). Page 2 of 2 Attachment 7 DATE: March 11, 2020 MEMO TO: MROSD Board of Directors THROUGH: Ana Ruiz, General Manager FROM: Stefan Jaskulak, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Interest on Measure AA Bond Proceeds _____________________________________________________________________________ Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) voters approved Measure AA in 2014, enabling the District to issue $300 million in bonds over the next 30 years to fund 25 priority portfolios of capital projects and land acquisitions. The $300 million of bonds are issued in tranches as projects and acquisitions are identified over a three-year period for each tranche. The first tranche of $45 million was issued in 2015 and the second tranche of $50 million was issued in 2018. Future tranches will be issued as the current proceeds are spent down and new projects and acquisitions are identified. Once a tranche is issued, the bond proceeds are deposited with a trustee, who holds the proceeds while the District works through its capital program and executes on acquisitions. Periodically, the District requests reimbursement from the trustee and effectively draws the bond proceeds down as work progresses and expenditures incurred. During the time the trustee holds the bond proceeds, awaiting gradual drawdown, the proceeds are invested based on the Controller’s direction and in accordance with Board Policy 3.08 – Statement of Investment. The interest earned to date is as follows: FY2016 $481,822 FY2017 $549,424 FY2018 $486,723 FY2019 $929,330 Total $2,447,300 These interest earnings must be expended on Measure AA projects and are ideally suited to supplement funding for those portfolios or projects where Measure AA funds may not be fully sufficient. The General Manager will work with staff to identify eligible projects that may need this additional funding to accomplish the voter-approved Measure AA Expenditure Plan priorities. DATE: March 11, 2020 MEMO TO: Board of Directors THROUGH: Ana Ruiz, General Manager FROM: Leialani Hufana, Planner II SUBJECT: Implementation Update Rancho San Antonio Multimodal Access Study & Short-Term Measures _____________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND On June 26, 2019, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District’s (District) Board of Directors (Board) approved the scope of work for the Rancho San Antonio Multimodal Access Study (Study) and a table of short-, medium-, and long-term measures to address parking and congestion issues at Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve (Preserve) and Rancho San Antonio County Park (Park)(R-19-86). On September 25, 2019, The Board awarded a contract to IBI Group to provide transportation consulting services for the Study (R-19-25). IBI Group’s parking and transportation demand analysis is further evaluating and refining medium- and long- term solutions for the Board to consider and potentially add to future annual Action Plans. In the meantime, staff has initiated short-term, immediate, and low-cost measures concurrently with the Study to encourage visitors to use other modes of transportation besides vehicles. This memo provides an update on the Study, short-term measures, and next steps (see also Attachment 1). WORK TO DATE Staff has initiated work with IBI Group on the following tasks for the Study: • Collected traffic data at the main entrance on Cristo Rey Drive from October through November 2019. This data is being used to evaluate current parking behaviors, specifically peak parking per lot, time of day, day of week, and holiday parking demand. • Developed an intercept survey that was posted online from October 1, 2019 to January 3, 2020. After closing the survey, IBI Group received 1,000 responses, 106 via intercept surveys and 894 via online surveys. • Completed the draft Existing Conditions report and draft Parking Analysis report, which staff is reviewing. In conjunction with the traffic study and survey data collection, staff initiated many Board- approved short-term measures. To date, staff has made significant progress in each of the short- term measure categories listed in Attachment 1. NEXT STEPS The tentative project schedule for the Multimodal Access Study is shown below, including presentation of the report findings to the Planning and Natural Resources Committee (PNR) and presentation of the final report to the Board. Milestones Tentative Schedule Implementation of Board-approved short-term measures Fall 2019 – ongoing Stakeholder and public outreach and coordination Early 2020 – ongoing Sign Installation at St. Joseph Ave. and Foothills Expressway March – April 2020 Final Parking and Multimodal Access Study Report May 2020 SVBC Bicycle Tour and Park Clean-up with Supervisor Simitian May 30, 2020 Presentation of Multimodal Access Study Report to PNR Committee July 2020 Presentation of Multimodal Access Study Report to Board Late Summer 2020 District staff will continue to implement the approved short-term measures and provide another update in late summer. Attachment 1: Status Update of Board-approved Measures Attachment 1: Status Update of Board-approved Measures Category Short Term Actions Status/Milestones Education Campaign Host weekend events with Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition (SVBC), Cupertino Bike and Walk, and other relevant community groups to promote biking to the Preserve - Staff is currently working with the SVBC to host a community bicycle ride, plan the ride route and provide potential bike valet services. - Bike ride event is tentatively scheduled for May 30, 2020. - Docent-led tour will also be planned for bike ride participants at Deer Hollow Farm. Provide website information and related links of existing bicycle maps, routes, plans, and other bicycle affiliate websites (i.e. SVBC) to promote alternatives ways to get to the Preserve - Staff has updated the Rancho San Antonio Preserve webpage with information on how to access the Preserve via transit and bicycle routes. (https://www.openspace.org/preserves/rancho-san-antonio) Provide onsite information about other preserve locations and alternative modes of transportation - Staff is developing a “Preserve Highlight” campaign to highlight 2-3 preserves as alternatives to Rancho with similar or different amenities. Staff is coordinating with field staff to select appropriate preserves to highlight. This campaign will be promoted via social media and onsite. - Staff will continue to provide onsite information on alternative modes of transportation. Conduct table sessions with docents or volunteers to promote awareness of multi- modal access options and other preserves - District docents or volunteers are anticipated to staff a tabling session during the May SVBC bicycle ride to Rancho San Antonio. Ridesharing Designate a rideshare drop-off/pick-up area (e.g. Uber, Lyft) - Staff designated a curbside area near the restroom and installed a Rideapp sign to direct rideshare drop-off/pick-up. Establish a pinpoint with rideshare companies for the drop-off/pick-up area - Staff has initiated outreach to Lyft - Staff will continue to reach out to rideshare companies to update drop-off/pick-up locations. Community Shuttle Service Partner with the City of Cupertino on their community shuttle service pilot project to add a stop at the Preserve - City of Cupertino has added a stop at the Preserve as part of City’s pilot shuttle service area. - Staff coordinated with City of Cupertino to include the Preserve on the community shuttle service maps. - Staff promoted the shuttle on all social media outlets and will post additional promotional material from the City on signboards to promote shuttle service. - Staff will continue to collaborate with the City for usage data to gauge level of shuttle use to Rancho. Information & Marketing Improve access information in maps, brochures and website to highlight non-motorized access - Staff has highlighted both transit and bicycle access to the Preserve by including links to transit routes and bicycle routes on the Preserve webpage. - Staff has also highlighted both transit and bicycle access on social media platforms. Bicycle Enhancements Install additional secure bike parking/racks - Three bicycle racks were installed. Two near the restroom and one near the PG&E trailhead. All new bicycle racks have been advertised on social media platforms. Trail Enhancements Initiate discussions with surrounding cities to identify gaps in trail connections to nearby open space - Staff has met with Cupertino Unified School District, and the County of Santa Clara Parks and Recreation Department. - Staff will continue to meet with other surrounding cities to identify gaps in trail connections to nearby open spaces. Wayfinding Initiate discussions with City of Los Altos to install/update city signs that promote pedestrian and bicycle access routes to the Preserve, including the St. Joseph Avenue entrance - Staff has met with City of Los Altos staff to update wayfinding signage on St. Joseph Avenue. The Complete Streets Commission approved the wayfinding signage on February 26, 2020. Staff is now coordinating installation with City of Los Altos. - Staff met with Cupertino Union School District representatives and Los Altos Public Works staff to discuss proposed signage for St. Joseph Avenue. - Staff is also working with County Roads and Airports to identify areas for potential new wayfinding signage on Foothills Expressway. Update interior Preserve signs to promote bicycle and pedestrian entrances - Staff identified two interior signs at the St. Joseph Ave. entrance, one at the St. Joseph Ave. and Stonehaven Dr. juncture and one at the Deer Meadow Trail to post signs indicating that bicycle and pedestrian access is allowed on St. Joseph Ave. - Staff will continue to identify other interior signs that could be updated to promote bicycle and pedestrian access. Improvements to Existing Parking Lots Conduct a desktop assessment of the current parking lot and identify opportunities for re- striping with the intent to yield additional parking within the current layout - Staff has conducted a desktop assessment of the current parking lot and concluded that re-striping would not yield additional parking. - Staff has initiated a medium term action (see below) to analyze potential parking area reconfigurations. Improved Transportation Options Pending resumption of construction activities on SCVWD (Valley Water) Permanente Creek Flood Protection Project, monitor construction of pedestrian connection from Preserve entrance to the Steve Abbors Trail - Staff has reached out to Valley Water staff and construction is set to complete by the end of this year. Remaining work includes finished grading and excavation of the North Basin, installation of the North Basin outlet, relocation of an existing irrigation well, construction of the pedestrian path around the North basin, revegetation, and other minor finishing work. Monitor and participate in Caltrans District 4’s Pedestrian Plan to promote safe crossings under I-280 to the Preserve - Staff has reached out to Caltrans District 4 on agency input process for their Pedestrian Plan to request discussions about opportunities for safe crossings under I-280 to the Preserve. - Staff has reached out to City of Cupertino to discuss opportunities for safe pedestrian crossings under I-280, as recommended in the Four Cities Stevens Creek Trail Feasibility Study. Valet Services Initiate discussions with the City of Mountain View to gather information regarding potential valet services at Rancho. - Staff has reached out to City of Mountain View staff to discuss the valet services they use. - Staff has also reached out to the County of Santa Clara who also uses a valet service. Staff will meet with the valet company to do an on-site visit at Rancho to determine opportunities and constraints of a valet service program at Rancho. Improvements to Existing Parking Lots If restriping the parking lots yield additional parking spaces, coordinate with County Parks to add the restriping to their Paving Management Program - Staff determined that re-striping will not yield more parking spaces. Reconfigure parking lots if additional parking spaces are possible - Staff is now evaluating potential parking area design modifications that may provide additional parking spaces largely within their current footprint. Staff will meet with the County to discuss potential parking area reconfigurations.