HomeMy Public PortalAbout20160309 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 16-06
REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
La Honda Elementary School
450 Sears Ranch Rd.
La Honda, CA 94020
Wednesday, March 9, 2016
7:00 PM
A G E N D A
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 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
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
• Staff Introductions
o Leslie Chan, Planner II, Planning Department
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 Board Meeting Minutes:
February 24, 2016
2. Approve Claims Report
3. Certification for the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects in Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).(R-16-
24)
Meeting 16-06
Staff Contact: Bryan Apple, Planner II, Planning Department
General Manager’s Recommendation
: Adopt a Resolution approving the Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Monte Bello Open Space
Preserve Bridge Projects, in accordance with CEQA.
4. Contract Amendment for Consultant Services to Finalize the Bear Creek Redwoods Open
Space Preserve Plan (includes the Bear Creek Stables Site Plan and Alma College Site
Rehabilitation Plan) and Environmental Impact Report (R-16-25)
Staff Contact: Lisa Bankosh, Planner III, Planning Department
General Manager’s Recommendation
: Approve a contract amendment with Populous, Inc., for an
amount not-to-exceed $122,545, increasing the total contract amount to $392,425, to finalize the
Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve Plan and Environmental Impact Report.
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.
5. Proposed Purchase of the Cunha Trust property as an addition to La Honda Creek Open
Space Preserve, located at 4150 Sears Ranch Road in unincorporated San Mateo County
(Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 083-361-080, 083-361-110, and 078-290-050) (R-16-27)
Staff Contact: Elish Ryan, Real Property Planner III and Michael Williams, Real Property
Manager
General Manager’s Recommendation
1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set out in the staff report.
:
2. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the purchase of the Cunha Trust property.
3. Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan as described in Attachment 4 to the staff
report.
4. Authorize the General Manager to amend the existing Grazing Lease with Wilson Cattle
Company and/or AGCO Hay Company to include pasture lands associated with this property.
5. Adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the General Manager to file, upon close of escrow, a
notice of Williamson Act nonrenewal with San Mateo County for Assessor’s Parcel Number
078-290-050.
6. Indicate the intention to withhold dedication of the Cunha Trust property as public open space
at this time.
6. Final Design Approval of the Weather Shelters and Summit Stair for the Mount Umunhum
Summit Project (R-16-26)
Staff Contact: Damon Adlao, Capital Project Manager
General Manager’s Recommendation
1. Direct the General Manager to make any desired final adjustments to the final draft design of
the summit and trailhead weather shelters, summit stair, and associated updated cost estimate
for the Mount Umunhum Summit Project.
:
2. Confirm the removal of a third weather shelter at the east summit.
3. Direct the General Manager to proceed with the production of construction documents, which
will form the basis for permit submittals and a Request for Bids package.
7. Ten-year Status Report and Recommended Continuation of a Slender False Brome
Integrated Pest Management Program (R-16-21)
Staff Contact: Coty Sifuentes-Winter, IPM Coordinator, Natural Resources
General Manager’s Recommendation
: Continue the Slender False Brome Program on District
preserves and nearby private parcels for an approximate program cost of $1,250,000 over the next
ten years.
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 factual information; request staff to report back 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.
A. Committee Reports
B. Staff Reports
C. Director Reports
ADJOURNMENT
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 regular meeting of the MROSD Board of Directors was posted and available for
review on March 4, 2016, 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.
Jennifer Woodworth, MMC
District Clerk
February 24, 2016
Board Meeting 16-04
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Administrative Office
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
February 24, 2016
DRAFT MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
CALL TO ORDER
President Kishimoto called the special meeting of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District to order at 5:02 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Nonette Hanko, Cecily Harris, Yoriko Kishimoto, Curt Riffle,
and Pete Siemens
Members Absent: Larry Hassett
Staff Present: General Manager Steve Abbors, Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz,
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse, General Counsel Sheryl
Schaffner, Planning Manager Jane Mark, Planner III Gretchen Laustsen,
Planner III Lisa Bankosh, and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
1. Bear Creek Stables Site Plan (R-16-20)
Planning Manager Jane Mark summarized the previous public meetings held by the Board and its
Committees, including neighborhood outreach meetings and California Environmental Quality
Act scoping meetings.
Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz explained that the Board is not being asked at this meeting
to choose one of the three alternatives being presented or one of the previously two alternatives
presented to the Board of Directors.
Planner III Gretchen Laustsen presented the staff report outlining three potential new alternatives
for site design for the Bear Creek Stables: (1) Phased implementation Plan for Site Design
Alternatives A; (2) Phased Implementation Plan for Sign Design Alternatives B; and (3) New
Minimal Site Design Alternative C. The Board may direct staff to develop the three new
Meeting 16-04 Page 2
alternatives in additional to the previously developed Alternatives A and B. Ms. Laustsen
described the stakeholder feedback received through previously held public meetings, including
maintaining the current character of the stables and the current number of horses being boarded
at the site.
Ms. Laustsen described the main differences between Phased Implementation of Alternatives A
and B, including number of horses boarded, order of magnitudes costs, and administrative
facilities. Ms. Laustsen outlined the public/private cost allocation for improvements to the site
based on whether the site tenant would pay costs and costs to be paid by the District, and a
potential business model for the site tenant. Ms. Laustsen described a new Alternative C,
specifically the inclusion of top priority safety improvements and resource protection measures
for the site to allow for continued operation of the stables and minimal public access.
Public comments opened at 6:12 p.m.
Lyndall Erb, member of Friends of Bear Creek Stables and Bay Area Barns and Trails, spoke in
favor of Alternative C and stated some public programs are already run from the barn on site and
can continue without a lot of infrastructure. Ms. Erb also spoke in favor of moving the project
forward quickly.
Frank Bakonyi spoke in favor Alternatives A and B and creating a vision for the site. Mr.
Bakonyi spoke in favor of selecting a tenant that will seek out alternative funding. Mr. Bakonyi
spoke in favor of having two onsite residences for caretakers and stated that the stables have
been a functioning operation for 105 years.
Allison Docker resident of Los Gatos requested a breakdown of costs for the projects and spoke
in favor of making improvements to the site because this will help reduce the turnover. Ms.
Docker also stated that additional funds could be secured for the improvements.
Anika Nelson spoke of the beautiful nature of the site and spoke in favor of making upgrades to
the site, which would help bring more people there.
Public comments closed at 6:23 p.m.
Director Siemens inquired regarding the detailed breakdown of the business model for the site
for Alternatives A and B, including how rent would be paid to the District.
Ms. Laustsen explained that those details would be worked out as part of a long term lease for
the site.
Director Harris inquired regarding interested tenants for Alternatives A and B.
Ms. Laustsen stated staff and the consultant are aware of potential tenants that would be
interested in Alternatives A and B.
Director Kishimoto inquired regarding the costs of analyzing the three new alternatives.
Ms. Lausten stated that due to many similarities among the options, staff recommends analyzing
all three new alternatives.
Meeting 16-04 Page 3
Director Riffle spoke in favor of keeping horses on the site, providing public access and access
to the boarders, and speaking with potential tenants to further analyze the business model.
Finally, Director Riffle spoke in favor of creating a vision for the site but continue to seek
alternative revenue sources to move that vision forward.
Director Siemens spoke in favor of pursuing Phased Alternative B because it allows for
necessary improvements and environmental restoration to be completed through a phased
approach.
Director Hanko spoke in favor of pursuing Alternative C, which will preserve the stables’ current
character and make necessary improvements. A future Board of Directors may pursue heavy use
of the site in the future.
Director Kishimoto spoke in favor of Alternative B due to its greater emphasis on public access.
Senior Real Property Agent Elaina Cuzick stated the Board may at a later time determine
whether the District desires to dictate the exact business model or if the Board prefers to allow a
future tenant to design their own business model in order to be profitable and meet District
requirements, such as providing public access, etc.
Motion: Director Siemens moved, and Director Cyr seconded a motion to direct the General
Manager to develop the following additional three alternatives for Board consideration at a
subsequent public meeting:
i. Phased Implementation Plan for Site Design Alternatives A
ii.
that phases in the
improvements based on level of priority and available funding. Phase I improvements
would focus on necessary safety and environmental protection improvements to provide a
safe environment for boarders, their horses and the public, and protect the site’s natural
resources. Remaining improvements would be programmed into future annual District
and tenant work plans pending funding, available capacity, and other priority needs,
resulting in phased budgeting and phased expenditures.
Phased Implementation Plan for Site Design Alternatives B
iii.
that phases in the
improvements based on level of priority and available funding. Phase I improvements
would focus on necessary safety and environmental protection improvements to provide a
safe environment for boarders, their horses and the public, and protect the site’s natural
resources. Remaining improvements would be programmed into future annual District
and tenant work plans pending funding, available capacity, and other priority needs,
resulting in phased budgeting and phased expenditures.
New Minimal Site Design Alternative C
that only identifies the necessary safety and
environmental protection improvements to provide a safe environment for boarders, their
horses, and the public, and protect the site’s natural resources, therefore limiting the total
cost of implementation.
Friendly Amendment: Director Riffle offered a friendly amendment to direct staff to further
evaluate the revenue potential for the various alternatives.
Director Siemens and Director Cyr accepted the friendly amendment.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Hassett absent.)
President Kishimoto adjourned the special meeting at 6:54 p.m.
Meeting 16-04 Page 4
REGULAR MEETING – BOARD MEETING
President Kishimoto called the regular meeting of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District to order at 7:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Nonette Hanko, Cecily Harris, Larry Hassett, Yoriko Kishimoto,
and Curt Riffle
Members Absent: Pete Siemens
Staff Present: General Manager Steve Abbors, Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz,
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse, Chief Financial
Officer/Administrative Services Director Stefan Jaskulak, General
Counsel Sheryl Schaffner, Natural Resources Manager Kirk Lenington,
Resource Management Specialist I Matt Chaney, Resource Management
Specialist I Amanda Mills, Public Affairs Manager Shelly Lewis, and
District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
No speakers present.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director Harris seconded the motion to adopt the agenda.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Hassett absent.)
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
• Matt Chaney, Resources Management Specialist I, Natural Resources Department
• Amanda Mills, Resources Management Specialist I, Natural Resources Department
CONSENT CALENDAR
Director Harris pulled Item 1 from the Consent Calendar.
1. Approve Board Meeting Minutes:
February 10, 2016
Item 1 was heard after the consent calendar.
Director Harris expressed her desire that more defined requests for Board consensus be included
for the format for future Board retreats.
Meeting 16-04 Page 5
Motion: Director Harris moved, and Director Cyr seconded the motion to approve the minutes
of February 10, 2016.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Hassett absent.)
2. Approve Claims Report
3. Appointment of District Auditor for FY2015-16 (R-16-13)
Controller’s Recommendation
: Appoint Chavan & Associates as the District’s auditor for
FY2015-16 and authorize the General Manager to execute an engagement letter agreement in the
amount of $16,500.
4. Special Legal Services Contract relating to Real Property Issues (R-16-19)
General Manager’s Recommendation
: Approve Amendment 1 to the contract with Price, Postel
& Parma, LLP, for Special Legal Services relating to Real Property for a revised total not-to-
exceed amount of $150,000.
5. Award of Contract for Research on Sudden Oak Death Preventative Methods and
Root Diseases (R-16-17)
General Manager’s Recommendation
: Authorize the General Manager to enter into a contract
with Phytosphere Research for a not to exceed amount of $76,500 for monitoring of treatment
methods to suppress the spread of Sudden Oak Death in Open Space Preserves, assisting native
plant nurseries in developing clean propagation practices, and inspecting prior planting sites in
Open Space Preserves.
Motion: Director Siemens moved, and Director Cyr seconded the motion to approve the
Consent Calendar, with the exception of Item 1.
Public comment opened at 7:11 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public comment closed at 7:11 p.m.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Hassett absent.)
BOARD BUSINESS
6. Award of Contract for Highway 17 Wildlife Passage Structures and Bay Area Ridge
Trail Crossing: Conceptual Design and Feasibility Study (R-16-18)
Resource Management Specialist III Julie Andersen provided the staff report stating that wildlife
in the Santa Cruz Mountains are unable to safely pass through the mountains due to development
in the area. Ms. Andersen described research done as part of the District’s Resource Management
Grants Program, which determined that wildlife crossings in the Santa Cruz Mountains have led
to numerous mountain lion, deer, and other wildlife deaths due to vehicular collisions. Ms.
Meeting 16-04 Page 6
Andersen also described an existing gap in the Bay Area Ridge Trail that could be closed
through the creation of a new crossing and potential trail alignment.
Public comment opened at 7:41 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public comment closed at 7:41 p.m.
Director Siemens
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Harris seconded the motion to authorize the
General Manager to enter into a contract with TrailPeople located in Benicia, California for a not
to exceed amount of $120,000. This is for the conceptual design and feasibility study for the
wildlife and Bay Area Ridge Trail crossings at Highway 17 in Los Gatos near Bear Creek
Redwoods, Sierra Azul, St. Joseph’s Hill, Felton Station and El Sereno Open Space Preserves.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Hassett absent.)
INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
A. Committee Reports
Director Harris reported on the February 16, 2016 Real Property Committee meeting.
Director Harris additionally provided comments regarding electric bikes and dogs being allowed
on the Bay Trail due to differing regulations for the involved agencies.
Director Riffle reported on the February 23, 2016 Real Property Committee meeting.
B. Staff Reports
District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth reported on the interview and selection process for the
members of the Bond Oversight Committee. The interviews are scheduled for March 2, 2016,
and appointment of the Committee members is currently scheduled to occur at the April 13, 2016
Board meeting.
Assistant General Manager Ms. Ruiz reported the Santa Clara County Historical Heritage
Commission met on February 18th to discuss the potential listing of Mt. Umunhum Radar Tower
on the historical listing. The Commission voted to recommend historical listing of the Radar
Tower to the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. Ms. Ruiz provided an update on the
recruitment of the Engineering and Construction Manager. Finally, Ms. Ruiz reported that the
City of East Palo Alto will be installing and maintaining a trash bin at the Cooley Landing
Education Center parking lot to address trash being left at the site.
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse provided an update on partnerships for the
Stevens Creek fish passage, which now include the Friends of Stevens Creek Trail, Santa Clara
Valley Water District, and City of Sunnyvale. Mr. Woodhouse reported a meeting with Mt.
Umunhum neighbors will occur tomorrow night to receive input regarding patrol and safety
concerns for the area. Mr. Woodhouse provided an update on the Santa Cruz Mountain
Meeting 16-04 Page 7
Stewardship Network, including recruitment for a Network Director. Finally, Mr. Woodhouse
provided an update on implementation of the Financial and Operational Sustainability Model.
Chief Financial Officer Stefan Jaskulak reported on information technology upgrades to
software, infrastructure, and hardware as well as updating the GIS program. Mr. Jaskulak
reported that the FY2016-17 budget is being developed, and an internal team has been created to
issue and review four RFPs related to the District’s bond program.
General Counsel Sheryl Schaffner reported on an upcoming litigation mediation session that will
be before in the Board in closed session following the Measure AA Bond Oversight Committee
interviews. Also staff will be bringing forward a minor modification to Improvements on District
Lands policy to delegate to the General Manager to administer the District’s eviction process
rather than requiring the Board to weigh in on a case by case basis.
General Manager Steve Abbors reported he has asked staff to meet with potential Bear Creek
Stables tenants before the item comes to the Board again to work on cost effective business
models for the site. Mr. Abbors provided an update regarding the Historical Heritage
Commission’s meeting related to the Mt. Umunhum Radar Tower.
C. Director Reports
The Board members submitted their compensatory reports.
Director Siemens reported that he presented at the Saratoga City Council to provide an update on
Measure AA projects.
Director Harris reported that she continues to see increased visitation when she visits Pulgas
Ridge in addition to seeing numerous dogs off leash and dog waste on the trail. She suggested
increased patrol of the area and potential installation of a trash can there.
Director Kishimoto reported that she will be attending the Salmonid Conference in May in
Fortuna, CA.
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDA
• Summary of Plan for Grand Opening of Mt. Umunhum Summit
Public Affairs Manager Shelly Lewis provided a brief overview of the events planned for the
Grand Opening of the Mt. Umunhum Summit.
ADJOURNMENT
President Kishimoto adjourned the regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 8:33 p.m.
Public comments opened at 8:33 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public comments closed at 8:33 p.m.
Meeting 16-04 Page 8
The Board of Directors convened into closed session at 8:33 p.m.
1. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Government Code
Section 54956.8)
Property: 4150 Sears Ranch Road, La Honda, CA, San Mateo County Assessor’s Parcel
Numbers 083-361-080, 083-361-110, and 078-290-050
Agency Negotiator: Michael Williams, Real Property Manager
Negotiating Party: Ara Croce, Representative for Cunha Trust
Under Negotiation: Terms of real property transaction
2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to 54956.9(b): (one potential case)
ADJOURNMENT
President Kishimoto reported the Board met in closed session, and no reportable action was
taken. President Kishimoto adjourned the special meeting at 9:35 p.m.
________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, MMC
District Clerk
page 1 of 3
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 16-05
DATE 03-09-2016
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check Date Payment
Amount
71597 *10215 - CALPERS-FISCAL SERVICES DIVISION Employee Monthly Health Insurance 03/01/2016 157,251.67
71567 10094 - RESTORATION DESIGN GROUP, INC.Mt Um Summit Design Consulting - SAU 02/24/2016 36,568.00
71542 11509 - ASHRON CONSTRUCTION Mt Um Radar Tower Interim Repairs Project - SAU 02/24/2016 29,592.50
71586 *11152 - WELLINGTON PARK INVESTORS AO2, AO3, AO4 Rent - March 02/24/2016 24,754.00
71649 10487 - TKO GENERAL ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION Roth Waterline Replacement 03/02/2016 24,654.00
71578 10307 - THE SIGN SHOP Deposit for Preserve Entrance Signs Contract 2016 02/24/2016 22,500.00
71637 11519 - PRICE, POSTEL & PARMA LLP Mt.Um Road and Trail Property Rights Legal Consulting - SAU 03/02/2016 17,043.91
71573 *11230 - SANTA CLARA COUNTY-C/O UNITED ADMINISTRATIVE SERVI Dental Insurance - Group #1766-0006 02/24/2016 12,902.34
71624 11609 - GOVERNMENT TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, INC.Firewall Equipment for Internet Security 03/02/2016 12,809.98
71616 *10218 - EDD Unemployment - quarter ending 12/31/15 03/02/2016 11,893.00
71601 *10419 - THE LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY Employee Monthly AD&D, Disability & Life Insurance 03/01/2016 8,381.78
71563 *10180 - PG & E Monthly Electricity/gas 02/16 - AO, AO2 + 7 other locations 02/24/2016 6,653.44
71614 10544 - CORELOGIC INFORMATION SOLUTION Real Estate Information Database Subscription 2016-17 03/02/2016 5,250.00
71615 10540 - CRAFTSMEN PRINTING Postage for Spring VIEWS newsletter 03/02/2016 5,032.98
71610 10723 - CALLANDER ASSOCIATES Ravenswood Bay trail link study plan - RW 03/02/2016 4,308.85
71562 10076 - OFFICE TEAM Temporary Admin Assistant and Receptionist 02/24/2016 4,121.00
71585 11611 - WALSCHON FIRE PROTECTION, INC.Fire Sprinkler Modifications - AO Remodel 02/24/2016 3,974.00
71654 10123 - HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Field supplies/DHR supplies/FFO Laundry facility supplies 03/02/2016 3,691.32
71623 10509 - GEOCON CONSULTANTS INC Mt Um Summit Hydrogeology Study - SAU 03/02/2016 3,627.50
71618 11354 - ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Stevens Creek Trail Bridges Engineering - MB 03/02/2016 3,417.50
71580 10112 - TIMOTHY C. BEST Sears Ranch Road Repairs Geology Consulting - LHC 02/24/2016 3,340.00
71633 10076 - OFFICE TEAM Temporary Admin Assistant and Receptionist 03/02/2016 2,826.00
71626 10642 - HMS INC Hazmat Evaluation for Driscoll Ranch - LHC 03/02/2016 2,815.00
71605 10010 - ARRANGED4COMFORT Sit and Stand Desk Conversion 03/02/2016 2,750.84
71584 11388 - WAGNER & BONSIGNORE Water Rights Consulting Jan 2016 02/24/2016 2,698.70
71631 10774 - MICHAEL DEMPSEY, PATRICK DEMPSEY Septic tank lid replacement at rental residence - SR 03/02/2016 2,500.00
71599 10211 - PUBLIC POLICY ADVOCATES Legislative Advocacy Services 03/01/2016 2,333.34
71571 11432 - SAN MATEO COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT Slender False Brome Treatment - January 2016 02/24/2016 2,309.56
71564 10265 - PRIORITY 1 Public Safety Equipment Installation onto vehicles 02/24/2016 2,230.66
71575 *10583 - TELEPACIFIC COMMUNICATIONS District Telephone Service + SAO Internet (02/16)02/24/2016 2,036.38
71604 11538 - APPLIED MATERIALS AND ENGINEERING Mt Um Radar Tower Interim Repairs Testing and Inspection - SAU 03/02/2016 1,935.00
71613 11318 - CONFLUENCE RESTORATION Native Vegetation Maintenance at Bald Mtn - SAU 03/02/2016 1,875.00
71548 10524 - ERGO WORKS Ergonomic Chairs 02/24/2016 1,835.63
71591 *10032 - DEL REY BUILDING MAINTENANCE February Maintenance Services 02/29/2016 1,815.00
71644 *10580 - SHARP BUSINESS SYSTEMS Copier Printing Usage (01/2016)03/02/2016 1,721.02
71598 *10212 - PINNACLE TOWERS INC Monthly Tower rental - Crown site 03/01/2016 1,680.21
71572 11125 - SAN MATEO COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR, SANDIE ARNOTT Property taxes - PCR, RR, MR 02/24/2016 1,618.70
71547 10463 - DELL BUSINESS CREDIT Notebook + MS Project 02/24/2016 1,612.56
71630 10190 - METROMOBILE COMMUNICATIONS Base Station Radio for AO4 03/02/2016 1,556.35
71558 11616 - MAUREEN KANE & ASSOCIATES Municipal Clerks Training and Conference - Soria 02/24/2016 1,550.00
71576 10969 - THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST CO NA Administration Fee - 2012 Refunding Notes 02/24/2016 1,500.00
71612 10352 - CMK AUTOMOTIVE INC Vehicle Repair 03/02/2016 1,471.74
71619 10567 - EXAMINETICS INC Hearing tests for Field Staff 03/02/2016 1,395.00
71622 11619 - GARZAC PLUMBING Sewer Line Service - FO 03/02/2016 1,375.00
71568 11479 - ROOTID Website Maintenance 02/24/2016 1,329.75
71638 10265 - PRIORITY 1 Radio Installation M208, M210, M214 03/02/2016 1,282.62
71579 10069 - THE WILFRED JARVIS INSTITUTE Professional Consulting Services 02/24/2016 1,200.00
page 2 of 3
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 16-05
DATE 03-09-2016
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check Date Payment
Amount
71602 *10213 - VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA Monthly Employee Vision Insurance 03/01/2016 1,169.38
71647 10152 - TADCO SUPPLY Janitorial Supplies (RSA & CP)03/02/2016 1,108.25
71544 10352 - CMK AUTOMOTIVE INC Vehicle Service/Repair M35, P78, P108 02/24/2016 1,105.27
71543 10488 - CLEAN HARBORS ENVIRONMENTAL SE Paint Disposal (SA)02/24/2016 961.31
71541 10001 - AARON'S SEPTIC TANK SERVICE Septic Tank Service (RSA)02/24/2016 900.00
71561 10073 - NORMAL DATA Incidents Database Update Work 02/24/2016 900.00
71646 10143 - SUMMIT UNIFORMS Uniform Body ARmor 03/02/2016 814.54
71632 10718 - OAKCOINS District Ranger Tokens 03/02/2016 808.00
71566 10176 - RE BORRMANN'S STEEL CO Welding Table and Shop Supplies (FFO)02/24/2016 798.99
71641 11108 - SAN MATEO COUNTY Refund Overpaid Rent - Communications site 03/02/2016 797.86
71650 10403 - UNITED SITE SERVICES INC Sanitation Service (FOOSP), (SA)03/02/2016 745.52
71550 10169 - FOSTER BROTHERS SECURITY SYSTEMS Keys & Locks 02/24/2016 707.45
71655 10160 - OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Office Supplies 03/02/2016 684.52
71554 10626 - KOFF & ASSOCIATES INC Legislative Affairs & IST Consulting Work 02/24/2016 600.00
71551 10423 - HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS WATER FILTERS 02/24/2016 531.86
71607 11620 - BURLINGAME HEATING & VENTILATION INC.Heater repair at rental residence - LHC 03/02/2016 500.00
71559 10774 - MICHAEL DEMPSEY, PATRICK DEMPSEY SFO - Rock for trails and roads 02/24/2016 444.26
71590 *10029 - CURT RIFFLE February Director meetings 02/29/2016 400.00
71594 *10072 - NONETTE HANKO February Director meetings 02/29/2016 400.00
71596 *10118 - YORIKO KISHIMOTO February Director meetings 02/29/2016 400.00
71587 10796 - WEMORPH INC Print Shift Change Forms 02/24/2016 382.54
71556 11099 - LAW ENFORCEMENT PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES INC Peace Officer Applicant Evaluation 02/24/2016 375.00
71609 *10454 - CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO-949 Water Service (FFO)03/02/2016 367.55
71603 11170 - ALEXANDER ATKINS DESIGN, INC.Design of General Brochure 03/02/2016 365.00
71552 10529 - HEIMER, DENNIS Natural & Cultural Interpretation Tuition Reimbursement 02/24/2016 356.00
71645 10585 - SOL'S MOBILE AUTO & TRUCK REPAIR, INC.Vehicle Service M24 03/02/2016 334.39
71600 *10093 - RENE HARDOY 02/16 Gardening services 03/01/2016 325.00
71569 10151 - SAFETY KLEEN SYSTEMS INC PARTS WASHER SERVICE 02/24/2016 306.15
71611 10496 - CHUNG, JEAN Mileage Reimbursement - Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct 2015 03/02/2016 300.73
71555 11376 - LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Data collection for Highway 17 - South Bay Foothills 02/24/2016 300.00
71592 *10050 - JED CYR February Director meetings 02/29/2016 300.00
71606 11441 - BEN FRANKLIN PLUMBING COMPANY NORTH BAY Clear sewer line in rental residence - FO 03/02/2016 299.00
71546 10540 - CRAFTSMEN PRINTING Printing of Business Cards 02/24/2016 293.63
71648 10338 - THE ED JONES CO INC 2 retirement badges 03/02/2016 275.14
71634 10271 - ORLANDI TRAILER INC Ball Hitches 03/02/2016 241.10
71643 10993 - SCHAFFNER, SHERYL Cell Phone Reimbursement for 2015 (annual)03/02/2016 240.00
71581 11601 - TODD ROTHBARD - ATTORNEY AT LAW Legal services for rental residence eviction - ECM 02/24/2016 230.00
71549 11151 - FASTENAL COMPANY Miscellaneous Hardware 02/24/2016 205.48
71588 11176 - ZORO TOOLS WINTER GLOVES 02/24/2016 203.72
71589 *10018 - CECILY HARRIS February Director meetings 02/29/2016 200.00
71574 10143 - SUMMIT UNIFORMS District uniform ball caps 02/24/2016 174.00
71608 *10172 - CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO-3525 Water service for rental residence 03/02/2016 161.67
71621 10168 - G & K SERVICES INC Shop Towel Service (FFO & SFO)03/02/2016 157.11
71617 11596 - ELECTRO IMAGING SYSTEMS INC.Plotter Printing Supplies 03/02/2016 152.66
71620 10186 - FEDERAL EXPRESS Shipping charges 03/02/2016 149.59
71628 10119 - KWIK KEY LOCK & SAFE CO INC Duplication of Vehicle keys 03/02/2016 147.90
71557 10331 - LE'S ALTERATIONS Uniform vests Sewing alterations 02/24/2016 144.00
71625 11177 - HARRIS CONSTRUCTION Restroom repair at rental residence - LHC 03/02/2016 143.75
page 3 of 3
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 16-05
DATE 03-09-2016
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check Date Payment
Amount
71627 10043 - HOWARD ROME MARTIN & RIDLEY LLP Legal services - Gullicksen - SG, Mahronich - BCR 03/02/2016 142.55
71583 11037 - US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GROUP PC Medical Exam - HR 02/24/2016 139.00
71560 *10664 - MISSION TRAIL WASTE SYSTEMS Monthly Garbage - AO 02/24/2016 123.59
71577 10338 - THE ED JONES CO INC Recondition badges 02/24/2016 120.75
71652 11176 - ZORO TOOLS DUST MASK AND DISPENSER 03/02/2016 113.47
71545 11530 - COASTSIDE.NET Monthly Internet Service - SFO 02/24/2016 109.00
71593 *10057 - LARRY HASSETT February Director meetings 02/29/2016 100.00
71595 *10084 - PETE SIEMENS February Director meetings 02/29/2016 100.00
71653 *10018 - CECILY HARRIS February Director meetings 03/02/2016 100.00
71640 *10136 - SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY Water services for rental residence - ES 03/02/2016 73.54
71651 10165 - UPS Shipping charges 03/02/2016 69.48
71642 11429 - SAN MATEO COUNTY PARKS DEPARTMENT Magnetic Map Printing for Signboards 03/02/2016 63.25
71629 10058 - LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE HR Consulting Services 03/02/2016 59.00
71635 10925 - PAPE` MACHINERY Tractor Parts 03/02/2016 52.67
71570 10099 - SAN FRANCISCO BAY BIRD OBSERVATORY Mt Um Summit Area Plant Restoration Plan 02/24/2016 50.00
71639 *11426 - RIDGE WIRELESS INC.FFO Monthly Internet Access 03/02/2016 50.00
71565 *10134 - RAYNE OF SAN JOSE Monthly Water Service (FOOSP)02/24/2016 26.25
71582 10165 - UPS Shipping charges 02/24/2016 24.13
71553 10421 - ID PLUS INC Uniform Name Tags 02/24/2016 19.50
71636 **10180 - PG & E Monthly Electricity charges for Hawthorn residence 03/02/2016 10.50
GRAND TOTAL 474,476.83$
*Annual Claims
**Hawthorn Expenses
BCR = Bear Creek Redwoods LH = La Honda Creek PR = Pulgas Ridge SG = Saratoga Gap TC = Tunitas Creek
CC = Coal Creek LR = Long Ridge PC = Purisima Creek SA(U) = Sierra Azul (Mt Um) WH = Windy Hill
ECM = El Corte de Madera LT = Los Trancos RSA = Rancho San Antonio SR= Skyline Ridge AO2, 3, 4 = Administrative Office lease space
ES = El Sereno MR = Miramontes Ridge RV = Ravenswood SCS = Stevens Creek Shoreline Nature FFO = Foothills Field Office
FH = Foothills MB = Monte Bello RR = Russian Ridge TH = Teague Hill SFO = Skyline Field Office
FO = Fremont Older PIC= Picchetti Ranch SJH = St Joseph's Hill TW = Thornewood SAO = South Area Outpost
RR/MIN = Russian Ridge - Mindego Hill PR = Pulgas Ridge DHF = Dear Hollow Farm OSP = Open Space Preserve P## or M## = Patrol or Maintenance Vehicle
R-16-24
Meeting 16-06
March 9, 2016
AGENDA ITEM 3
AGENDA ITEM
Certification for the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects in Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring Program for the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects, in accordance
with CEQA.
SUMMARY
The proposed Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects (“Project”) involves the
replacement of an existing 24-foot trail bridge that is in poor condition with a 48-foot trail bridge
and the construction of a new 48 to 50-foot trail bridge over an existing hiking-only wet ford
stream crossing along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail at Monte Bello Open Space Preserve. An
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (collectively, MND) was prepared and
circulated for 30 days pursuant to CEQA. No comments were received during the public
comment period. The MND concluded that the proposed project, with mitigations, would not
result in significant impacts on the environment.
MEASURE AA
A 5-year Measure AA Project List was approved by the Board at their October 29, 2014 meeting
and includes Project #17-4 (Stevens Creek Nature Trail – Existing Bridge Replacement & New
Bridge).
DISCUSSION
The project site is located within Monte Bello Open Space Preserve (the Preserve). The Preserve
is at the head of the Stevens Creek watershed above the City of Palo Alto. Within the Preserve,
the project area includes two trail bridge crossing locations in need of retrofitting along the
Stevens Creek Nature Trail. One location (Site #1) has a 24-foot long wooden beam bridge
crossing over an unnamed tributary that flows slightly upstream of its confluence with the main
stem of Stevens Creek. Channel incision and bank erosion underneath the bridge threaten its
integrity, making it vulnerable to damage and/or failure during large storm events. This trail
bridge would be replaced with a new 45 to 50-foot long steel bridge located away from the
actively eroding creek banks. The second trail bridge location (Site #2) is upstream of the first
crossing at an existing at-grade wet ford across the main stem of Stevens Creek and would be
upgraded with a new 45 to 50-foot long steel bridge to improve safety and avoid sensitive creek
R-16-24 Page 2
and riparian habitats. Approximately 100 feet of the Stevens Creek Nature Trail would be
rerouted to accommodate the new bridges.
This project was last reviewed by the Board of Directors on December 17, 2014, at which time
the Board approved a contract with Environmental Science Associates for an amount not-to-
exceed $125,631 to provide design and environmental analysis (CEQA services) for the project.
Since that time, the environmental analysis, bridge conceptual design, and 90% construction
documents have been developed. Permit applications with the City of Palo Alto (City limits
extend up Page Mill and over much on Monte Bello OSP) and the California Department of Fish
Wildlife (CDFW) are ready for submittal pending Board CEQA Certification. The project is
scheduled for construction by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) staff in
the fall of 2016. Temporary trail closures are anticipated during construction for an estimated
six-week period.
The potential environmental impacts of the Project were analyzed in an Initial Study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). Conclusions of the MND, including mitigation
measures, are discussed in the CEQA Compliance section of this report.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed FY2016-17 budget proposes $102,800 for the purchase of bridge materials,
construction oversight, and biological monitoring for the project. Total project costs are
estimated at $218,000, not including staff project management or labor. These costs are capital
expenses and eligible for Measure AA reimbursement.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
This project and the consultant contract were reviewed by the Planning and Natural Resources
(PNR) Committee on December 2, 2014, where the PNR recommended forwarding the
consultant contract for Board approval.
PUBLIC NOTICE
A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted to the State
Clearinghouse of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research on January 27, 2016, stating
that the public review period would start on January 27, 2016, and end on February 27, 2016.
On January 27, 2016, the Notice of Intent was submitted to the County of Santa Clara, County
Clerk for posting as well as mailed to interested parties and property owners of land located
adjacent to or within 300 feet of the Preserve boundary closest to the project. The Notice of
Intent, Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Initial Study were made available for public review
at the District’s Administrative Office and on the District’s website. Notices were also posted at
the proposed project site, and the primary preserve parking lot. All legal notice requirements of
CEQA have been met.
Public notice of this Agenda Item was provided per the Brown Act, which included a mailing to
property owners of land located adjacent to or within 300 feet of the Preserve and interested
parties.
R-16-24 Page 3
CEQA COMPLIANCE
Project Description
The proposed project includes bridge construction activities at two different, but nearby sites.
Work at Site #1 would replace the existing 24-foot long wooden beam bridge across a tributary
to Stevens Creek with a new 45 to 50-foot long steel bridge that is located away from the
actively eroding creek banks. Work at Site #2 would replace an existing at-grade wet ford
crossing of the Stevens Creek main stem with a new 45 to 50-foot long steel bridge to improve
safety and avoid sensitive creek and riparian habitats.
The proposed project includes a re-route of the Stevens Creek Nature Trail, signage encouraging
visitors to use the new trail alignment, site clean-up, and restoration actions. The MND contains
a more detailed Project Description in Chapter 1, Section 1.3.
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Preparation
In 2014, the District retained the independent consulting firm of Environmental Science
Associates to prepare an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (collectively, MND) for
the Project, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA,
Public Resources Code sections 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code
Regulations sections 15000 et seq.). The MND, dated January 2016 (Attachment 2), identified
potentially significant adverse effects on the environment from the proposed Project, and found
that mitigation measures for the proposed Project would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects
to below a level of significance.
A Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt the MND (Attachment 3) was released by the District on
January 27, 2016, notifying the public that the MND would be circulated for public review for a
period of 30 days, beginning on January 27, 2016 and ending on February 27, 2016.
The District concludes that the Project, with mitigation measures, will not have a significant
effect on the environment. All potentially significant impacts and mitigation measures are
summarized in the Notice of Intent (Attachment 3). Mitigation measures incorporated into the
proposed project reduce potential effects to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources,
geology, soils and seismicity, hazards and hazardous materials and hydrology and water
resources to less-than-significant levels.
CEQA Determination
The District did not receive any comments on the environmental effects of the proposed project.
Comments Received
In accordance with CEQA, the District has prepared a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP),
which describes project-specific mitigation measures and the monitoring process (Attachment 4).
The MMP ensures that all adopted measures intended to mitigate potentially significant
environmental impacts will be implemented during construction and monitored afterwards
(erosion control and replanting specifically). The proposed Project incorporates all of these
mitigation measures.
Mitigation Monitoring Program
R-16-24 Page 4
The Board Findings required by CEQA to adopt the MND and the MMP are set out in the
attached Resolution (Attachment 4). The General Manager recommends that the Board find that
the environmental review for the Stevens Creek Natural Trail Bridges Project is adequate.
CEQA Findings
NEXT STEPS
If the Board approves the General Manager’s recommendations, staff will file a Notice of
Determination with the County of Santa Clara, County Clerk. Permits from the City of Palo Alto
and CDFW are required prior to construction. Implementation of bridge projects would begin in
the late summer/fall of Fiscal Year 2016-17.
Attachments
1. Project Map
2. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3. Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration
4. Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Mitigation Monitoring
Program, and the Findings in Connection with the Proposed Monte Bello Open Space
Preserve Bridges Project
Responsible Department Head:
Jane Mark, Planning Manager, AICP
Prepared by:
Bryan Apple, Planner II, Planning
Lori'sother pondLori'sPond
AlpinePond
S t e vensCreek
Adobe Creek
B ay Creek
Los
Trancos
Creek
Indian C r e e k
W
est
F
or
k
A
d
o
b
e
Creek
Midpen in s ula Reg i ona lOpen Sp ac e Di st r ic t
At t a c h m e n t 1 : M o n t e B el l o B ri d g e P r o j e c t s L o c a t i o n
February, 2016
Path: G:\Projects\Monte_Bello\StevensCanyonTribBridge\BoardMapISMND.mxd
Created By: bapple
0 0.30.15MilesI
(MROSD)MR O S D Prese rve s
Priva te Pr o per t y
While th e District strives t o use the b est available d igital data, t his d at a d oe s not repr esen t a le gal survey and is mer ely a graphic illustr at ion of geographic fe at ures.
Wat er shed L an d
Stev ens C ree k Na t ure Tra i l
Ã9
Ã280
Ã84
Ã35
Area ofDetail
Ot her Pr o t ect ed O p en Sp a ceor Pa rk La nd s
La nd Tru st
à
à
Site #2Construct New Brid ge Site #1Replace Existing Brid gewith L onger Brid ge
Monte BelloOpen Space Preserve
Los Trancos
Page M i l l R d
Skyline B l v d £¤35
MonteBelloOSP
Stevens Creek N a t u r e T r a il
à Propo se d B ri d ge
MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE
PROJECTS
Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared for January 2016
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE
PROJECTS
Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared for January 2016
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
550 Kearny Street
Suite 800
San Francisco, CA 94108
415.896.5900
www.esassoc.com
Los Angeles
Oakland
Orlando
Palm Springs
Petaluma
Portland
Sacramento
San Diego
Santa Cruz
Seattle
Tampa
Woodland Hills
130573.02
Attachment 2
OUR COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY | ESA helps a variety of
public and private sector clients plan and prepare for climate change and
emerging regulations that limit GHG emissions. ESA is a registered
assessor with the California Climate Action Registry, a Climate Leader,
and founding reporter for the Climate Registry. ESA is also a corporate
member of the U.S. Green Building Council and the Business Council on
Climate Change (BC3). Internally, ESA has adopted a Sustainability Vision
and Policy Statement and a plan to reduce waste and energy within our
operations. This document was produced using recycled paper.
Attachment 2
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects i ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration
Page
1. Project Description 1-1
1.1 Introduction 1-1
1.2 Project Background and Need 1-1
1.3 Proposed Project 1-5
1.4 Approvals or Permits for the Project 1-15
1.5 Report Organization 1-15
1.6 Agency Use of this Document 1-15
2. Environmental Checklist 2-1
2.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 2-2
2.2 Environmental Checklist 2-3
Aesthetics 2-3
Agricultural and Forest Resources 2-9
Air Quality 2-11
Biological Resources 2-16
Cultural Resources 2-44
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity 2-49
Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2-60
Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2-62
Hydrology and Water Quality 2-67
Land Use and Land Use Planning 2-73
Mineral Resources 2-75
Noise 2-76
Population and Housing 2-80
Public Services 2-81
Recreation 2-83
Transportation and Traffic 2-84
Utilities and Service Systems 2-87
Mandatory Findings of Significance 2-89
Appendices
A. Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations A-1
B. Biological Resources – Species List B-1
Attachment 2
Table of Contents
Page
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects ii ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
List of Figures
1-1 Project Location 1-3
1-2 Site #1 Staging and Access 1-4
1-3 Site #1 Design Map 1-7
1-4 Site #2 Design Map 1-11
1-5 Sitte #2 Staging and Access 1-13
AES-1 Site #1 Photographs 2-4
AES-2 Site #2 Photographs 2-5
AES-3 Existing Bridge at Site 1 2-7
AES-4 Example of Bridge to be Constructed 2-8
GEO-1 Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones 2-51
GEO-2A Regional Geology 2-53
GEO-2B Regional Geology – Legend 2-54
GEO-3 Landslide Hazard Zones 2-55
GEO-4A Regional Soils 2-57
GEO-4B Regional Soils - Legend 2-58
HYD-1 Site Watersheds 2-68
List of Tables
2-1 Unmitigated Maximum Emissions from Construction 2-13
2-2 Construction-Related BMPs To Protect Soil, Surface Water, and
Groundwater Quality 2-64
2-3 Typical Noise Levels from Construction Activities and Construction
Equipment 2-78
Attachment 2
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-1 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
CHAPTER 1
Project Description
1.1 Introduction
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD, or “District”) proposes to implement
the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects (the proposed project). This document is
an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) that analyzes the potential
environmental impacts from implementation of the proposed project.
This IS/MND is prepared in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.,
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 (as amended), and Title 14, Chapter 3 of
the California Administrative Code. In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of
Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15070, a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be
prepared if the following criteria are met:
There is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect; or
Where there may be a potentially significant effect, revisions to the project would avoid or
mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur.
In accordance with Section 15073 of the CEQA Guidelines, this document is being circulated to
local, state and federal agencies and to interested organizations and individuals who may wish to
review and comment on the document. Written comments may be mailed to:
Bryan Apple
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022-1404
Comments may also be electronically mailed to: bapple@openspace.org
1.2 Project Background and Need
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District preserves nearly 62,000 acres of open space
within 550 square miles of San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz Counties. This open space
forms a regional greenbelt that traverses the spine of the San Francisco peninsula south from Half
Moon Bay to the Santa Cruz Mountains east of Silicon Valley. The District operates 26 open
space preserves, 24 of which are open to the public. Monte Bello Open Space Preserve (Monte
Bello OSP or “the Preserve”) is one of the District’s larger holdings, and protects 3,346 acres of
Attachment 2
1. Project Description
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-2 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
rolling grasslands and riparian forests at the head of the Stevens Creek watershed above Palo Alto
(Figure 1-1).
The Stevens Creek Nature Trail in Monte Bello OSP is a popular trail that connects the main
parking area/trailhead off of Page Mill Road with Canyon Trail and Skid Road Trail (Figure 1-2).
The trail closely follows the riparian canyon of upper Stevens Creek, and features interpretive
signage for visitors. The portion of the trail between Canyon and Skid Road Trails is open to
pedestrians, cyclists, and equestrians, while the portion between the trailhead and Skid Road Trail
is only open to pedestrians.
The District has identified two creek crossing locations along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail
alignment in need of retrofitting. Site #1 is the location of an existing 24-ft-long wooden beam
bridge over an unnamed tributary (for purposes of this document, “Tributary Creek”) to Stevens
Creek, slightly upstream of its confluence with the mainstem of Stevens Creek. The trail in this area
is multi-use, but can be closed to cyclists and equestrians in the winter during muddy conditions.
Channel incision and bank erosion underneath the bridge threaten its integrity, making it vulnerable to
damage and/or failure during large storm events. The District therefore plans to replace the
existing bridge with a longer, higher bridge that is farther upstream from the actively eroding
creek banks.
Site #2 is an existing at-grade wet ford across the mainstem of Stevens Creek, upstream of the
general vicinity of Site #1. Stevens Creek Nature Trail in this location is currently open only to
pedestrians. The crossing is immediately downstream of where the creek makes a roughly
270-degree horseshoe turn, near an apparent bedrock constriction. The District plans to construct
a new bridge in this location to improve safety and avoid sensitive creek and riparian habitats.
Like most locations within the upper Santa Cruz Mountains, the project sites are generally
characterized by geologically unstable conditions with steep slopes and abundant landslides. Most
of the watershed is in various stages of recovery from historic logging operations that further
destabilized local soils. The orientation of the Santa Cruz Mountains can drive the development
of major winter storm events that are capable of dropping over half a foot of rain (and frequently
more) in less than a day; as a result, flows through the project sites can vary dramatically in
response to rainfall. The creek at both sites can go completely dry during the summer-fall dry
season under drought conditions, as observed in early fall 2014. The flashy nature of site
hydrology and unstable nature of the watershed can lead to channel erosion and incision, as well
as the development of flood events that can carry significant quantities of sediment, fallen trees
and limbs, and related debris through the creek corridor. As a result of this dynamic environment,
infrastructure elements such as trail (non-vehicular) bridges in the area are generally developed to
withstand less than 50-yr storm events, though this can vary depending on the project setting.
When coupled with the sensitive nature of local riparian habitats and the difficult nature of site
accessibility, bridge design and construction at both sites must balance minimal environmental
disturbance with the practical persistence of the element being designed. In other words, the
overarching design goal for the bridges is to provide safe access with limited impacts to Upper
Stevens Creek.
Attachment 2
SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle
0 0.3 0.6
Miles
CupertinoMindego Hill
Palo Alto Mountain View
Santa ClaraCounty
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure 1-1Project Location
Site #2: New Bridge
Site #1:Replacement Bridge
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
Note: Only portions ofMonte Bello OSP opento the public are shown.
Attachment 2
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!!
!!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!!!
!
!!
!
!!
!!!!!
!!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!!!!
!
!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!!!!
!
!!!!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!!!!
!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!!!!
!
!
!
SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle
0 0.15 0.3
Miles
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure 1-2Site #1 Staging and Access
Site #1: Bridge Replacement
Site #2: New Bridge
Creeks
Access Routes
Temporary Trail Closure
Other Public Trails
Hiking & Biking
Hiking & Equestrian
! ! ! ! !Hiking Only
Hiking, Biking, Equestrian
SkylineBlvd.
Page M ill Rd.
NOSTAGING
NOSTAGING STA
G
I
N
G
see staging inset
C
anyonTrail
SC N a ture Trail
S
k
i
d
Road T r a i l
SC
N
at
u
r
e
Tr
ail
Monte Bello OSPparking lot
Attachment 2
1. Project Description
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-5 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
1.3 Proposed Project
Site #1
Site Setting
The existing bridge at Site #1 is a 24-foot-long wooden beam bridge constructed in the 1980s
prior to the Loma Prieta earthquake. The bridge abutments appear to be sited on older debris flow
deposits from the Tributary Creek canyon. The creek underneath the bridge is deeply incised
more than 10 feet through these deposits resulting in steep, near vertical and unstable channel
banks. Active stream bank erosion is undermining the existing bridge abutments. There is a small,
2-foot high retaining wall below the left channel bank, presumably installed to minimize stream
bank erosion below the bridge abutment. This wall is degraded and only marginally effective.
Stevens Creek Nature Trail in this location is open to pedestrians, cyclists, and equestrians. The
east approach (“near side” from Canyon Trail) descends at a steep (20%) gradient into the
crossing making a sharp turn around a large tree before reaching the bridge. A portion of the trail
at this location is supported on 3 feet of fill retained by a 3 foot high retaining wall. The tight turn
likely acts to constrain access onto the bridge, particularly for equestrians. To the west of the
bridge (the “far side” approach), the trail descends at a steep 15% to 20% grade into a low spot on
a fluvial terrace along Stevens Creek.
Proposed Project
The proposed project at Site #1 would replace the existing 24-ft-long wooden beam bridge with a
45 to 50-foot-long, over five feet wide bridge built of Corten steel beams (Figure 1-3). The
bridge surface would be constructed of redwood decking similar to other District trail bridges, with
54 inch high handrails for safety. Bridge abutments would be poured-in-place spread footings or
piers. A roughly 120 foot long segment of existing trail would be rerouted upslope to reduce trail
grade. Existing bridge, footings and low retaining walls will be removed offsite. Disturbed soils
will be stabilized as judged necessary at time of construction.
Construction Staging & Access
During construction at Site #1, Stevens Creek Nature Trail would be closed between Canyon
Trail and the junction with Skid Road Trail. Construction materials for Site #1 would be staged at
the junction of Canyon Trail and Stevens Creek Nature Trail, slightly less than a mile from the
District gate at the head of Canyon Trail off Page Mill Road (Figure 1-2). Only flat areas to the
east of Canyon Trail at the intersection would be used for materials staging, avoiding grassland
habitats to the north and south of Stevens Creek Nature Trail. Vehicles would access this staging
area from Page Mill Road via Canyon Trail. Construction personnel and materials such as bridge
components, lumber, bags of concrete, tools, and water barrels would be transported from the
staging area to Site #1 along Stevens Creek Nature Trail using ATVs, small Bobcat-sized tractors,
motorized wheelbarrows, and similarly-sized equipment capable of navigating the narrow trail
bench. In order for equipment to safely access Site #1, a small portion (approximately 60 feet) of
Attachment 2
1. Project Description
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-6 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Stevens Creek Nature Trail east of Site #1 would be widened by approximately 2-3 feet to gain a
maximum 5-foot wide trail width. The bench cut would be widened through excavation upslope
into the hillside; excavated soils would be re-used and stabilized locally.
Work will require two truck trips per day from the field office to the staging areas and two ATV
trips per day to the site (approximately 20 to 30 days). Additionally, two truckloads of concrete,
two truckloads of beams, and two truckloads of decking and railing will be required for Site #1.
The bridge would be assembled adjacent to the existing trail on the west side of the existing
bridge. The bridge assembly area would be approximately 800 square feet and is shown on the
inset diagram Figure 1-3. No vegetation removal is anticipated in this area. Coir mat, or other
similar material, will be placed temporarily on the ground in the assembly area and the bridge
components will be assembled on top of this material.
Construction Phasing
Replacement of the bridge at Site 1 is anticipated to take 20 to 30 days to complete with three
workers at the site each day. Construction equipment that will be used on-site includes a small
excavator, small Bobcat-sized tractors, generators, concrete mixers, chainsaws, and impact drivers.
The proposed project would be constructed in the following phases:
1. Biological surveys, education, and monitoring. Pre-construction surveys for rare plants,
reptiles & amphibians, nesting birds, and special-status species would be implemented, and
construction workers would be educated on proper procedures to protect sensitive habitats
and wildlife.
2. Signage of temporary trail closures. Stevens Creek Nature Trail in between Canyon Trail
and Skid Road Trail would be closed to all users for the duration of construction and signed
appropriately. Signage describing the closures would also be placed at the Monte Bello
OSP parking lot off of Page Mill Road, and other major local trailheads.
3. Project site mobilization: Equipment and materials would be transported to the site via the
methods described under “Construction Staging & Access”, above.
4. Widening of Stevens Creek Nature Trail to accommodate equipment. Approximately
60 ft of failing sections of Stevens Creek Nature Trail east of Site #1 would be widened to
meet District trail standards and safely accommodate equipment such as ATVs, motorized
wheelbarrows, SWECOs, and similar small construction vehicles. This would result in the
excavation of approximately 9 cubic yd of soil. This soil would be stabilized on site and/or
re-used where appropriate to re-route Stevens Creek Nature Trail near Site #1.
Additionally, minor trail widening would occur along the Stevens Creek Natural Trail
between Site #1 and Site #2.
5. Site preparation: Site preparation would include removal of vegetative debris and clearing
of the bridge abutment areas and alignment. This would include removal of one 15 inch
diameter at breast height (dbh) tree within the proposed bridge alignment. Invasive species
in seed have the potential to spread due to construction and would be treated in compliance
with the District’s Integrated Pest Management plan (IPM) and IPM Environmental Impact
Report
Attachment 2
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02
Figure 1-3
Site #1 Design Map
SOURCE: Tim Best, CEG
Attachment 2
1. Project Description
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-8 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
This page intentionally left blank
Attachment 2
1. Project Description
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-9 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
6. Bridge removal and fill excavation. The existing wooden footbridge would be
disassembled in pieces and removed from the site. Where feasible, bridge materials in
acceptable condition could be re-used to improve other areas of Stevens Creek Nature
Trail, or as construction materials for the trail re-route west of the bridge. Removal of the
existing bridge may occur after construction of the new bridge, to facilitate access during
construction.
7. Bridge foundation construction. The bridge foundations would be excavated by hand or
using a small excavator. Concrete would be mixed on site. Forming materials would be
removed following construction.
8. Assemble and install bridge. The new bridge would be installed per the manufacturer’s
guidelines. Temporary scaffolding may be required to support bridge elements during
construction. District crew may also “highline” bridge pieces into place using rope rigging
temporarily attached to nearby trees.
9. Construct trail reroutes. Approximately 120 ft of Stevens Creek Nature Trail on the far
(west) side of the bridge would be rerouted upslope to match grade with the new bridge. As
part of this work, the former trail bed immediately west and downslope of the bridge would
be decommissioned through the placement of fill obtained from excavation of the bridge
footings and the construction of the upslope trail. Dead branches, logs, and other local
forest materials would be placed on the old alignment to prevent access while the site is
restored.
10. Install erosion control and native plants. All areas of disturbed soil would be stabilized
with erosion control measures approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). See “Site Restoration”
below for more details.
11. Site cleanup and demobilization. Equipment and materials would be removed from the
site via Stevens Creek Nature Trail to the staging area near the intersection with Canyon
Trail, and subsequently transported off the Monte Bello OSP property via Canyon Trail
through the gate at Page Mill Road.
12. Trail re-opening. Stevens Creek Nature Trail between Canyon Trail and Skid Road Trail
would be re-opened to multi-use trail uses.
Site #2
Site Setting
Site #2 is an existing wet ford crossing with limited infrastructure (old steps and portions of
retaining walls along the creek banks) associated with Stevens Creek Nature Trail. None of the
existing features are proposed to be removed from the site; rather, construction activities would
focus on the installation of a new bridge.
Proposed Project
The proposed project at Site #2 would replace the existing wet ford crossing with a 45- to
50-foot-long, over five-ft-wide bridge built of Corten steel beams (Figure 1-4). The bridge
surface would be constructed of redwood decking similar to other District trail bridges, with
48-inch-high handrails for safety. Bridge abutments would be poured in place spread footings.
Attachment 2
1. Project Description
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-10 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Approximately 20 feet of existing trail on the east side of the bridge and 60 feet of existing trail
on the west side of the bridge would be slightly re-routed to match the grade of the new bridge.
Construction Staging & Access
During construction at Site #2, Stevens Creek Nature Trail would be closed between its northern
fork near the Monte Bello OSP parking lot and Skid Road Trail (Figure 1-5). Construction
materials for Site #2 would be staged along the Skid Road Trail near the trail’s intersection with
Skyline Blvd. Additionally, a small parking and staging area will be located near the intersection
of the Stevens Creek Nature Trail and the Skid Road Trail. Some deep ruts along the Skid Road
Trail between the staging area near Skyline Blvd. and the trail’s intersection with the Stevens
Creek Nature Trail will be graded for vehicle access. Construction personnel and materials such
as bridge components, bags of concrete, tools, and water barrels would be transported to Site #2
along the Skid Road Trail and Stevens Creek Natural Trail from the staging area near Skyline
Blvd. using trucks, ATVs, small Bobcat-sized tractors, motorized wheelbarrows, and similarly-
sized equipment capable of navigating the narrow trail bench. Signage would be placed at the
Skid Road Trail trailhead to warn users of the potential to encounter construction equipment and
materials along the portion of the trail in between Skyline Blvd. and Stevens Creek Nature Trail.
The bridge would be assembled adjacent to the existing trail on the east side of the proposed
bridge, south of the trail. The bridge assembly area would be approximately 800 square feet and
is shown in Figure 1-4. No vegetation removal is anticipated in this area. Coir mat, or other
similar material, will be placed temporarily on the ground in the assembly area and the bridge
components will be assembled on top of this material.
Work will require two truck trips per day from the field office to the staging areas and two ATV
trips per day to the site (approximately 20 to 30 days). Additionally, two truckloads of concrete,
two truckloads of beams, and two truckloads of decking and railing will be required for Site #2.
Construction Phasing
Construction of the bridge at Site 2 is expected to take 20 to 30 days to complete with three workers
at the site each day. Construction equipment that will be used on-site includes a small excavator,
small Bobcat-sized tractors, generators, concrete mixers, chainsaws, and impact drivers.
The proposed project would be constructed in the following phases:
1. Biological surveys, education, and monitoring. Pre-construction surveys for rare plants,
invasive species, reptiles & amphibians, nesting birds, and special-status species would be
implemented, and construction workers would be educated on proper procedures to protect
sensitive habitats and wildlife.
2. Signage of temporary trail closures. Stevens Creek Nature Trail in between the northern
fork near the Monte Bello OSP parking lot and Skid Road Trail would be closed to all users
for the duration of construction and signed appropriately. Signage describing the closures
would also be placed at the Monte Bello OSP parking lot off of Page Mill Road, and other
major local trailheads.
Attachment 2
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02
Figure 1-4
Site #2 Design Map
SOURCE: Tim Best, CEG
Attachment 2
1. Project Description
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-12 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
This page intentionally left blank
Attachment 2
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!!
!
!
!!!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!!!!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!!!!!
!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!
!
!!!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle
0 0.1 0.2
Miles
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure 1-5Site #2 Staging and Access
Site #1: Bridge Replacement
Site #2: New Bridge
Creeks
Access Routes
Temporary Trail Closure
Other Public Trails
Hiking & Biking
Hiking & Equestrian
! ! ! ! !Hiking Only
Hiking, Biking, Equestrian
Staging Area
SkylineBlvd.
Page M ill Rd.
Ca
nyonTrail
S C N a ture Trail
S
k
i
d
Road T r a i l
SC
N
at
u
r
e
T
r
ail
Skyline Ridge OSPparking lot
Monte Bello OSPparking lot
Staging Area
Attachment 2
1. Project Description
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-14 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
3. Project site mobilization: Equipment and materials would be transported to the site via the
methods described under “Construction Staging & Access”, above.
4. Site preparation: Site preparation would include removal of vegetative debris and clearing
of the bridge abutment areas and alignment. This would include removal of seven trees
(one tree is six inches diameter at breast height [dbh], while the remaining six trees are less
than six inches dbh) within the proposed bridge alignment. Invasive species in seed have
the potential to spread due to construction and would be treated in compliance with the
District’s IPM and IPM Environmental Impact Report.
5. Bridge foundation construction. The bridge foundations would be excavated by hand or
using a small excavator. Concrete would be mixed on site. Forming materials would be
removed following construction.
6. Assemble and install bridge. The new bridge would be installed per the manufacturer’s
guidelines. Temporary scaffolding may be required to support bridge elements during
construction. District crew may also “highline” bridge pieces into place using rope rigging
temporarily attached to nearby trees.
7. Construct trail reroutes. Approximately 20 feet of the Stevens Nature Trail on the east
side of the bridge and 60 feet of trail on the west side of the bridge would be slightly
re-routed to match grade with the new bridge. As part of this work, the former trail bed on
both sides of the wet ford crossing would be passively decommissioned through the
placement of dead branches, logs, and other local forest materials, as well as signage
encouraging visitors to utilize the new trail alignment.
8. Install erosion control and native plants. All areas of disturbed soil would be stabilized
with erosion control measures approved by CDFW and the RWQCB. See “Site
Restoration” below for more details.
9. Site cleanup and demobilization. Equipment and materials would be removed from the
site via Stevens Creek Nature Trail and Skid Road Trail to the staging area near the
intersection of Skid Road Trail and Skyline Blvd. All equipment will be inspected for
invasive species and cleaned when leaving the site.
10. Trail re-opening. Stevens Creek Nature Trail between the northern fork near the parking
lot and Skid Road Trail would be re-opened to pedestrian traffic.
Site Restoration
Grading and other earth-disturbing activities associated with the proposed project would be
limited to the dry season (generally between April 15 and October 15). Assembly and installation
of the bridges may occur after October 15. Construction would be supervised by experienced
District staff and engineering consultants, and would incorporate erosion control techniques from
the District’s Details and Specifications Guidelines. Best Management Practices (BMPs)
approved by CDFW and RWQCB (and currently in use by the District) for the proper design and
use of silt fencing would be implemented during project construction to minimize erosion at the
project sites as necessary. Approaches that integrate completely biodegradable products such as
fiber blankets, bio-blocks, and coir products would be used to stabilize disturbed soils as
necessary, but most erosion control work will use native materials available at the site, such as
slash from site preparation. The biodegradable products would provide temporary erosion
protection during the 3 to 5 years it would take for passively recruited vegetative cover to
Attachment 2
1. Project Description
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-15 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
establish. The District may elect to supplement active recruitment of vegetation with direct
seeding of native plants, particularly if volunteer assistance is available.
1.4 Approvals or Permits for the Project
The anticipated approvals or permits for the proposed project are:
MROSD Board approval (for construction and related contracts);
Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement by California Department of Fish
and Wildlife;
City of Palo Alto Design Review permit; and
Report of Waste Discharge from the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control
Board (potentially required).
1.5 Report Organization
This report is organized as follows:
Chapter 1, Project Description, provides an introduction to the project with project
background, needs and objectives, and discusses the proposed facilities.
Chapter 2, Environmental Checklist Form, presents the CEQA Initial Study
Environmental Checklist, analyzes environmental impacts resulting from the project, and
describes the mitigation measures that would be incorporated into the project to avoid or
reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels.
1.6 Agency Use of this Document
MROSD, as the lead agency, will use this IS/MND along with the responsible agencies to
evaluate environmental impacts of the proposed project and make a decision of adopting the
IS/MND and approving the proposed project. Upon adoption of the IS/MND and the mitigation
measures described herein, MROSD will use this document to make written findings, consider
project approval, file a Notice of Determination (NOD), and use the completed CEQA
documentation for securing environmental permits prior to project implementation.
Attachment 2
1. Project Description
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 1-16 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
This page intentionally left blank
Attachment 2
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-1 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
CHAPTER 2
Environmental Checklist
1. Project Title: Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge
Projects
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022-1404
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Bryan Apple
650-691-1200
4. Project Location: Upper Stevens Creek watershed, City of Palo
Alto, Santa Clara County
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Same as Lead Agency
6. General Plan Designation(s): Other Public Open Lands
7. Zoning Designation(s): Publicly Owned Conservation Land
8. Description of Project: The proposed project includes bridge construction activities at two
creek crossings along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail. Work at Site #1 will replace an existing
24-ft-long wooden beam bridge across an unnamed tributary of Stevens Creek with a new 45-
to 50-ft-long steel bridge. Work at Site #2 will replace an existing at-grade wet ford crossing
of the Stevens Creek mainstem with a new 45- to 50-ft-long steel bridge. Refer to Chapter 1,
Project Description, for further details.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting. The project sites are located within the Upper
Stevens Creek watershed on lands managed by MROSD within the Monte Bello Open Space
Preserve. Both sites are located within riparian corridors surrounded by mixed hardwood-
conifer forests. Stevens Creek Nature Trail at Site #1 is open to pedestrians, cyclists, and
equestrians; the trail at Site #2 is open only to pedestrians.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: California Department of Fish and
Wildlife, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (potentially required),
and the City of Palo Alto.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-2 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
2.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The proposed project could potentially affect the environmental factor(s) checked below. The
following pages present a more detailed checklist and discussion of each environmental factor.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology, Soils and Seismicity
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Land Use Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population and Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation and Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial study:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or
“potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect
1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis
as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,
but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and
(b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, no further environmental documentation is required.
Signature Date
Jane Mark Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Printed Name For
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-3 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
2.2 Environmental Checklist
Aesthetics
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
1. AESTHETICS — Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect daytime or nighttime
views in the area?
Discussion
a) Less than Significant Impact. The project sites are along the Stevens Creek Nature
Trail, a popular trail that includes scenic views of the Stevens Creek riparian corridor (see
Figures 1-2and 1-5 in Chapter 1, Project Description). Along its length the trail offers
users views of mixed hardwood-conifer forest and Stevens Creek, with occasional views
of forested hillslopes and grassy ridgetops. The dense canopy cover largely limits the growth
of densely-growing riparian trees such as willow and alder, allowing relatively
unobstructed views of the creek. See Figure AES-1 and Figure AES-2 for photographs
of the project site.
The project would have short-term effects on scenic vistas during construction activities.
Project construction activities along with construction vehicles and equipment would be
visible during construction; however, because the trail would remain closed to recreational
users during construction, there would be no recreational users who experience these
temporary effects. Construction would be short-term and temporary (over approximately
20-30 days at each site) and would occur in areas not readily visible to distant users. As
described in Chapter 1, Project Description, the project would involve the removal of seven
trees at site #2 (one tree is 6 inches diameter at breast height [dbh] and the remaining six
trees are less than 6 inches dbh), and one 15 inch dbh tree at Site #1 and other vegetation
for bridge installation. Following construction, erosion control measures at the project sites
(see Mitigation Measure HYD-1) would include the stabilization of exposed soils). In the
long term, there are no new operational activities proposed under the project and therefore,
there would be no long-term effect on a scenic vista. The project impact would be less than
significant.
b) No Impact. The proposed project is not located within a state scenic highway (Caltrans,
2013). There would be no impact of this kind.
Attachment 2
PHOTO 1. Photo facing east from the western end of the existing bridge at Site 1.
PHOTO 2. Photo facing east showing the existing Stevens Creek Nature Trail located on the
downslope (“far-side”) approach of the bridge at Site 1.
Photo1:PhotofacingeastfromthewesternendoftheexistingbridgeatSite1.
Photo2:PhotofacingeastshowingtheexistingStevensCreekNatureTraillocatedonthedownslope
(“farͲside”)approachofthebridgeatSite1.
FigureAESͲ1:Site#1Photographs
Photo1:PhotofacingeastfromthewesternendoftheexistingbridgeatSite1.
Photo2:PhotofacingeastshowingtheexistingStevensCreekNatureTraillocatedonthedownslope
(“farͲside”)approachofthebridgeatSite1.
FigureAESͲ1:Site#1Photographs
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573Figure AES-1Site #1 Photographs
SOURCE: ESA, 2015
Attachment 2
PHOTO 3. Photo facing east from the western end of the proposed bridge site at Site 2.
PHOTO 4. Photo facing west from the eastern end of the proposed bridge site at Site 2.
Photo3:PhotofacingeastfromthewesternendoftheproposedbridgesiteatSite2.
Photo4:PhotofacingwestfromtheeasternendoftheproposedbridgesiteatSite2.
FigureAESͲ2:Site#2Photographs
Photo3:PhotofacingeastfromthewesternendoftheproposedbridgesiteatSite2.
Photo4:PhotofacingwestfromtheeasternendoftheproposedbridgesiteatSite2.
FigureAESͲ2:Site#2Photographs
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573Figure AES-2Site #2 Photographs
SOURCE: ESA, 2015
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-6 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
c) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed new bridges would alter the scenic
character of the two sites. The existing Site #1 bridge is a wooden beam bridge, about
24 feet long (Figure AES-3). Currently there is no bridge at Site #2. The new bridges
would be substantially larger than the existing Site #1 bridge, and would be constructed
of Corten steel beams with redwood wooden decking. An example of an installation of a
similar bridge, of the same type and from the same manufacturer as the proposed new
bridges, is shown in Figure AES-4. While the new bridges would introduce a new,
man-made visual element to Site #2, and an altered visual character to Site #1, the new
bridges would be in keeping with the open space, undeveloped, park character and use of
the area. Therefore, while the new bridges would alter the visual character of the project
sites, they would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the sites.
Following construction, construction crews will install erosion control structures, if
necessary revegetate disturbed areas, and generally clean-up the construction sites.
However, it is likely that staging and assembly areas, new trail sections, and abandoned
trail sections will have a disturbed, “raw” look immediately following completion of
construction. This will be a temporary condition, and the project sites should naturalize
after short time, as vegetation reestablishes and duff accumulates on the forest floor and
covers bare ground. Thus, while disturbance from project construction will degrade the
visual character of the project sites, this effect will be of short duration and limited
extent, and is therefore not considered substantial. The impact is therefore less than
significant.
d) No Impact. The proposed project would not involve any new structures or sources of
illumination that would contribute any new source of light or glare. Since project
construction activities would occur during the daytime, there would be no new temporary
source of substantial light or glare during nighttime hours. No new lighting would be
installed as part of the proposed project. There would be no impact.
References
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Officially Designated State Scenic
Highways, available online: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic/schwy.htm,
accessed on April 8, 2015.
Attachment 2
FigureAESͲ3:ExistingBridgeatSite#1
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573 Figure AES-3
Existing Bridge at Site #1
SOURCE: ESA, 2015
Attachment 2
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects. 130573 Figure AES-4
Example of Bridge to be Constructed
SOURCE: MROSD
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-9 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Agricultural and Forest Resources
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
2. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES —
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer
to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department
of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether
impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to
information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of
forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest
carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning
of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Discussion
a, b) No Impact. The California Department of Conservation’s Important Farmland Maps for
Santa Clara County indicate that the project site lies in an area identified as Other Lands
not included in any other mapping category (CDC, 2015a). The project site is not located
on land zoned for agricultural uses or on land covered by a Williamson Act contract
(CDC, 2015b). The project site lies within the Monte Bello OSP and is used for nature
preservation and recreational activities. The proposed project would replace an existing
bridge at Site #1, and construct a new bridge over an existing wet ford at Site #2.
Neither activity would encourage or influence the conversion of agricultural lands to
non-agricultural. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the conversion of
Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to
non-agricultural use, nor would it conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, an
existing Open Space Easement, or a Williamson Act contract. There would be no impact.
c, d, e) No Impact. See a) and b) above. The project site is located in an area zoned by the
County of Santa Clara for Other Public Open Lands (Santa Clara County 1994), and is
designated as Publicly Owned Conservation Lands in the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan
(City of Palo Alto 2011). The project site does not lie immediately adjacent to lands that
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-10 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
are zoned for forest land as defined by Public Resources Code Section 12220(g), for
timberland as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526, or for timberland
production as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g). The proposed project
would not conflict with existing zoning or cause rezoning of forest land, or result in the
loss of forest land to non-forest use. There would be no change in the existing
environment that would result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. There
would be no impact.
References
California Department of Conservation (CDC), Division of Land Resource Protection, 2015a.
California Important Farmland Finder, available online:
http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/ciff/ciff.html. Accessed on March 20, 2015.
California Department of Conservation (CDC), Division of Land Resource Protection, 2015b.
Santa Clara County Williamson Act Lands 2013/2014, available online:
ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/WA/SantaClara_13_14_WA.pdf. Accessed on March 20,
2015.
City of Palo Alto, 2011. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation Map. Available online:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/8188
Santa Clara County General Plan, 1995-2010. Adopted December 20, 1994. Available online:
http://www.sccgov.org/sites/planning/PlansPrograms/GeneralPlan/Pages/GP.aspx
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-11 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Air Quality
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
3. AIR QUALITY —
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
Discussion
a) Less than Significant Impact. Regulation of air pollution is achieved through both
national and State ambient air quality standards and emission limits for individual sources of
air pollutants. As required by the federal Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) has identified criteria pollutants and has established the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to protect public health and welfare.
NAAQS have been established for the following pollutants: ozone (O3); carbon
monoxide (CO); nitrogen dioxide (NO2); sulfur dioxide (SO2); particulate matter less than
10 microns in diameter (PM10); particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM2.5);
and lead (Pb). These pollutants are called “criteria” air pollutants because standards have
been established for each of them to meet specific public health and welfare criteria. The
State of California has also established its own more stringent set of air quality standards
commonly referred to as the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). In
addition to the criteria pollutants identified above, CAAQS have been established for
sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride.
The project site is located within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin, which is
designated as a nonattainment area for state and national ozone standards and for the state
particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) standards. The Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD)’s Final Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan outlines control strategies to
reduce emissions of ozone and ozone precursors to help the Bay Area achieve attainment
for the State 1-hour ozone standard.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-12 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Since air pollutant emissions are a function of population and human activity, emission
reduction strategies set forth in the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan were developed based
on regional population, employment, and housing projections. The proposed project
would not increase population in the air basin nor would it generate housing or
employment opportunities leading to increased population or vehicle miles travelled. As
such, the proposed project would be consistent with the assumptions contained within the
Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan and would result in a less than significant impact.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation. Based on the following analysis, construction
and operation of the proposed project would not result in a violation of an air quality
standard or contribute significantly to an existing or projected air quality violation.
Construction
Construction of the proposed project would consist of replacing an existing bridge located at
Site #1 and assemble/install a new bridge at Site #2. The locations of Sites #1 and #2 can be
found in Figures 1-2 and 1-5. Construction activities at Site #1 would include project site
mobilization, widening of failing sections of Stevens Creek Natural Trail to meet District trail
standards, existing bridge removal and fill excavation, bridge foundation construction, bridge
assembly and placement, and construct trail reroutes. The construction activities at Site #2
would be similar to Site #1, but there is currently no bridge at Site #2, so construction at this
site would not include bridge removal. Off-road construction equipment used during
construction at both sites would include all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), small bobcat tractors,
motorized wheelbarrows, graders, and excavators. Construction materials and equipment
would be transported by motorized wheelbarrow to the sites from the staging area shown in
Figure 1-5. Replacement of the bridge at Site #1 and construction of the new bridge at Site #2
is anticipated to take 20 to 30 days to complete, respectively. Bridge components for each
bridge would be transported by ATV’s to each of the sites. These activities would have the
potential to affect air quality through the use of construction equipment and vehicles used
by workers to travel to and from the construction sites. In addition to exhaust emissions
caused by the use of mobile equipment, trenching and earthmoving activities would result
in emissions of fugitive dust including PM10 and PM2.5, which could be potentially
significant.
BAAQMD’s approach to CEQA analysis of construction emissions, especially for
fugitive dust, emphasizes the implementation of control measures rather than emissions
quantification. BAAQMD recommends a set of feasible fugitive PM10 control measures
for construction projects of all sizes. According to BAAQMD, fugitive dust impacts from
construction would be considered less than significant if all applicable recommended
measures are applied (BAAQMD, 2012). Inclusion of these measures as part of
Mitigation Measure AIR-1 (below) would reduce construction impacts from fugitive
dust emissions to less-than-significant levels.
Project construction would involve use of equipment exhaust that would generate ozone
precursor emissions (ROG and NOx), PM10, and PM2.5. Construction activities would also
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-13 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
emit criteria pollutants from worker vehicle trips. Emission levels for construction activities
would vary depending on the number and type of equipment, duration of use, operation
schedules, and the number of construction workers. Emissions of ROG and NOx from these
sources would incrementally add to the regional atmospheric loading of ozone precursors
during project construction. There would be no change in the operations at the sites; hence
the project would result in no operational emissions.
The BAAQMD’ Revised Draft Justification Report on CEQA Thresholds of Significance
identifies significance thresholds for criteria pollutant emissions: a threshold of
54 pounds per day for ROG, oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and PM2.5 and 82 pounds per day
for PM10 (construction equipment emissions only, exclusive of fugitive dust). These
thresholds are based on the trigger levels for the federal New Source Review Program
and BAAQMD’s Regulation 2, Rule 2 for new or modified sources. Exceeding the
thresholds represents a significant project specific impact and a cumulatively
considerable contribution to air quality.
Project emissions were analyzed for the proposed construction activities using California
Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2013.2.2. As summarized in Table 2-1, the
results of the analysis indicate that maximum daily construction emissions would remain
below the significance thresholds, and therefore the impact would be less than significant.
TABLE 2-1
UNMITIGATED MAXIMUM EMISSIONS FROM CONSTRUCTION (lbs per day)a
Project Component ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
2015
Off-Road Emissions 5.8 41.2 3.2 3.0
Thresholds of Significance 54 54 82 54
Significant (Yes or No)? No No No No
a Project construction emissions estimates were made using CalEEMod, version 2013.2.2. See Appendix A.
SOURCE: ESA, 2015
Mitigation Measure AIR-1: During construction activities, the Applicant shall
require staff and/or the construction contractor(s) to implement a dust abatement
program that includes, but is not necessarily limited to, the following BAAQMD-
recommended measures as needed, to control dust:
All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded
areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be
covered.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-14 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed
using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of
dry power sweeping shall be prohibited.
All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour.
Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in
use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the
California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of
California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for
construction workers at all access points.
All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in
accordance with manufacturer’s specifications.
c) Less than Significant Impact. According to the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, for a
project to have a less-than-significant cumulative impact on air quality it must not have
an individually significant operational air quality impact and it must be consistent with
the local general plan as well as the regional air quality plan (BAAQMD, 2012). As
demonstrated in a) and b) above, the proposed project would be consistent with the adopted
Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan and would not result in a significant construction-related
air quality impact. The proposed project would be consistent with the air quality policies
in the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (City of Palo Alto, 2007) and the Santa Clara
County General Plan (County of Santa Clara, 1994). Emissions from the proposed
construction activities would be below the levels considered by BAAQMD to represent
a cumulatively considerable increase. As such, the proposed project would not conflict
with an applicable local or regional air quality plan, and the cumulative impacts would be
less than significant.
d) Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities associated with the proposed
project would result in short-term emissions of diesel PM, which is a toxic air
contaminant (TAC). Diesel PM poses a carcinogenic health risk that is measured using an
exposure period of 30 years. The exhaust of off-road heavy-duty diesel equipment would
emit diesel PM during construction.
The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health
risk (i.e., the potential exposure to be compared to applicable standards). Dose is a
function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the
duration of exposure to the substance. Dose is positively correlated with time, meaning
that a longer exposure period would result in a higher exposure level for the maximally
exposed individual. Thus, the risks estimated for a maximally exposed individual are
higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a longer period of time. According to the Office of
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHH, 2015), carcinogenic health risk
assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC emissions,
should be based on a 30-year exposure period; however, such assessments should be
limited to the period or duration of activities associated with proposed site construction.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-15 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
The approximately 10 to 12 week construction period for the proposed project would be
much less than the 30-year period used for risk determination. Because off-road diesel
equipment would be used only for short time periods, and because there are no sensitive
receptors, such as residents, in close proximity to the construction sites, construction
activities would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial emissions of TACs. This
impact would be less than significant.
e) Less than Significant Impact. Diesel equipment used during project construction may
emit objectionable odors associated with combustion of diesel fuel. However, these
emissions would be temporary and intermittent in nature. Furthermore, there are no
sensitive receptors, such as residents, in close proximity to the construction sites. The
closest residential receptor is located 0.3 mile from the project site. Therefore, odor
impacts associated with diesel combustion during construction activities would be less
than significant.
References
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), 2010. Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan,
September 2010.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), 2012. BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines,
May 2012.
City of Palo Alto, 2007. Comprehensive Plan. Available online at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/
gov/topics/projects/landuse/compplan.asp.
Office of Environmental Health Hazards Assessment (OEHHA), 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots
Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, February 2015.
Santa Clara County General Plan, 1995-2005. Adopted December 20, 1994. Available online:
http://www.sccgov.org/sites/planning/PlansPrograms/GeneralPlan/Pages/GP.aspx.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-16 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Biological Resources
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES — Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
Discussion
Reconnaissance Survey
Biological resources within the project site were verified by ESA biologists during a field
reconnaissance conducted on March 18, 2015. Prior to the reconnaissance survey, databases were
reviewed for the project sites and regional vicinity (CDFW, 2015c; CNPS, 2015; USFWS, 2015;
i.e., the Mindego Hill, Cupertino, La Honda, Franklin Point, Big Basin, Castle Rock Ridge,
Woodside, Palo Alto, and Mountain View U.S. Geographical Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute
topographic quadrangles). The field reconnaissance consisted of a pedestrian survey within each
project site boundary (Site 1 and Site 2), associated staging areas and access roads, and observations
of the adjacent environments. The field surveys were focused on identifying habitat for special-
status1 plant and animal species. General habitat conditions were noted and incidental species
1 The term “special-status” species includes those species that are listed and receive specific protection defined in
federal or state endangered species legislation, as well as species not formally listed as Threatened or Endangered,
but designated as “Rare” or “Sensitive” on the basis of adopted policies and expertise of state resource agencies or
organizations, or local agencies such as counties, cities, and special districts. A principle source for this designation
is the California “Special Animals List” (CDFW, 2015a).
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-17 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
observations were recorded. The findings of the reconnaissance survey, the literature review, and
the database queries were used to compile the list of special-status species that may occur at the
project study area, defined as relevant areas of similar habitat composition surrounding the project
sites, and to characterize the local project setting, described below. The list of special-status plant
and animal species that may occur in the project study area is included in Table 1 in Appendix B.
Vegetation Communities and Wildlife Habitat
Mixed woodland
Mixed woodland occurs at both Sites 1 and 2 and along the access trails leading to these sites.
Within the study area, mixed woodland is dominated by a relatively dense overstory comprised of
Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), tanoak
(Notholithocarpus densiflorus), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), California bay (Umbellularia
californica), madrone (Arbutus menziesii), and interior live oak (Quercus wislizeni). The
understory, although less dense than the tree canopy, contains many native shrubs and vines such as
red flowering currant (Ribes sanguineum), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), canyon
gooseberry (Ribes menziesii), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), California blackberry (Rubus
ursinus), and twinberry (Lonicera involucrata) and forbs such as pacific pea (Lathyrus vestitus),
trail plant (Adenocaulon bicolor), and milkmaids (Cardamine californica). Ferns such as western
sword fern (Polystichum munitum), western chain fern (Woodwardia fimbriata), California
maidenhair (Adiantum jordanii) and five-finger fern (Adiantum aleuticum) were concentrated in the
creek corridors and cooler portions of the woodland.
Black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), Steller’s jay (Cyanocitta
stelleri), warbling vireo (Vireo gilvus), Bewick’s wren (Thryomanes bewickii), Pacific-slope
flycatcher (Empidonax difficilis), olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus cooperi), oat titmouse
(Baeolophus inornatus), Acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), northern flicker (Colaptes
auratus), orange-crowned warbler (Oreothlypis celata), western screech owl (Megascops
kennicottii), and northern saw-whet owl (Aegolius acadicus) are common to such a woodland
community with streams. Common and special-status bats may also roost in tree cavities or beneath
the bark of the mature trees and terrestrial mammals, such as deer mouse (Peromyscus sp.) and
San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens), will forage and create nests
in the woodland understory. Amphibians that use the many creek corridors of the study area
include California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), California newt (Taricha torosa), rough-
skinned newt (Taricha granulosa), and red-bellied newt (Taricha rivularis).
Non-Native Grassland
The non-native grassland community is located at the intersection of Canyon Trail and Stevens
Creek Nature Trail where a staging area for Site 1 is proposed. It is also located at the proposed
Site 2 staging area, near the Skid Road Trailhead off Skyline Boulevard, in an open, flat area
surrounded by coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis) immediately north of the trailhead and parallel to
the trail as it heads west. Vegetation typical of this community is dominated by non-native grasses
such as soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum), velvet grass (Holcus
lanatus), and slender wild oat (Avena barbata) with non-native filarees. Native species observed at
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-18 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
the proposed Site 1 staging area included soap plant (Chlorogalum pomeridianum), white
nemophila (Nemophila heterophylla), sedge (Carex sp.), and buttercup (Ranunculus sp.).
This vegetation community can provide cover, foraging, and nesting habitat for a variety of bird
species as well as reptiles and small mammals. Reptiles inhabiting this community may include
western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), California alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata
multicarinata) and Pacific gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer catenifer). Birds commonly found in
such areas include American robin (Turdus migratorius), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus),
and western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica). Mammals common to annual grasslands include
California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi), black-tailed jack rabbit (Lepus
californicus), and Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) though no mammal burrows were
observed at the proposed Site 1 staging area.
Ruderal/Developed
Both access points for Site 1 and Site 2 are located in existing informal parking areas at the
respective trailheads that will be used for site access and crew vehicle parking. The Site 1 access
point is off Page Mill Road at Canyon Trail (GPS coordinates: 37°19'30.54"N, 122°10'31.64"W)
and consists of a paved apron transitioning into gravel and compacted soil where the Canyon Trail
begins. The Site 2 access point is located at a paved pull-out on the Skyline Boulevard shoulder
(GPS coordinates: 37°18'46.11"N, 122°10'32.53"W) with a short gravel connection to the beginning
of Skid Road Trail. Non-native grassland boarders each of these access points with a similar
composition of non-native and native species already described as well as coyote bush. Canyon
Trail, Skid Road Trail, and the Stevens Creek Nature Trail that will be used for project access
consist of compacted soil paths between two and four feet in width with non-native grassland along
trail fringes and an over story of mixed woodland. At few points along these trail segments,
seasonal drainages cross these existing paths. Similar wildlife using non-native grassland habitat
would be expected along the fringes of this community.
Wetlands and Other Waters
Wetlands are ecologically complex habitats that support a variety of both plant and animal life. The
federal government defines and regulates other waters, including wetlands, in Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA). Wetlands are “areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or
groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support (and do support, under normal
circumstances) a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33
CFR 328.3[b] and 40 CFR 230.3). The Corps has primary federal responsibility for administering
regulations that concern waters of the U.S. and requires a permit under CWA Section 404 if a
project proposes the discharge of fill and/or the placement of structures within waters of the U.S.
Under normal circumstances, the federal definition of wetlands requires the presence of three
identification parameters: wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and hydrophytic vegetation. Examples
of wetlands include freshwater marsh, seasonal wetlands, and vernal pool complexes that have a
hydrologic link to Traditional Navigable Waters (TNWs). Other waters of the U.S. include
unvegetated waters of streams, lakes, and ponds that are connected to TNWs.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-19 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
The RWQCB also regulates waters of the State under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control
Act (Porter-Cologne Act; Section 13260 of the California Water Code). The Porter-Cologne Act
requires “any person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, in any region that could
affect the waters of the state to file a report of discharge (an application for waste discharge
requirements).” Under the Porter-Cologne Act definition, the term “waters of the state” is defined
as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state.”
Although all waters of the United States that are within the borders of California are also waters
of the state, the converse is not true—in California, waters of the United States represent a subset
of waters of the state. Additionally, under CWA Section 401, the RWQCB must certify that
actions receiving authorization by the Corps under CWA Section 404 also meet State water quality
standards.
Intermittent stream (Stevens Creek and Tributary Creek)
Tributary Creek at Site 1 is a relatively steep and incised channel with a substrate consisting of
cobbles and large rocks and little to no active floodplain. A variety of ferns with gooseberry and
poison oak lined the channel banks and low-flow water was present in the channel during ESA’s
reconnaissance survey. A large, rock-lined pool with a water depth of approximately three feet at
the deepest part is located downstream of the project segment of Tributary Creek. Numerous
California newts and rough-skinned newts were seen traversing the pool floor. Stevens Creek at
Site 2 is a low-flowing at-grade ford just downstream of a bend, with substrate consisting of
cobbles, large rocks, and silty mud. The stream segment here can go completely dry during the
summer-fall dry season under drought conditions. The stream channel is largely unvegetated
except for a few isolated individual leaves of Colt’s Foot (Petasites frigidus var. palmatus).
California newts were also seen at Site 2 in the stream bend where water collected in a shallow,
narrow pool. Some woody debris was observed at low-flow points at each site, though in-stream
and bank vegetation was minimal.
Tributary Creek and Stevens Creek ultimately flow into San Francisco Bay, a TNW under the
jurisdiction of the Corps and would be considered waters of the United States. The creeks would
also be considered waters of the State as regulated by the RWQCB. In addition, the bed, bank, and
extent of the riparian corridor of these waterways are under the jurisdiction of the CDFW. ESA
biologists conducted the formal delineation of waters of the U.S. within the project study area on
March 18, 2015, concurrently with the reconnaissance survey, and documented the characteristics
and extent of all potentially jurisdictional wetlands and other waters of the U.S. No jurisdictional
wetlands occur within the study area. The preliminary delineation revealed a total of 0.071 acre
(170 linear feet) of potentially jurisdictional stream “other waters of the U.S.” occurs within the
project study area (ESA, 2015). For the purposes of this analysis, we assume that the extent of
waters of the State is equal to the extent of waters of the U.S. However, these findings are
preliminary and the extent of waters of the U.S. and waters of the State are determined by the Corps
and RWQCB, respectively, and the RWQCB may assume jurisdiction beyond waters of the
U.S. New bridges, staging areas, and access for Site 1 and Site 2 under the project is designed to
avoid impacts to waters of the U.S. Should the RWQCB determine the extent of waters of the state
exceed waters of the U.S., some of the project components may occur within waters of the State.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-20 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Special-Status Species
Special-status species lists were derived from the California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB) (CDFW, 2015c), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (USFWS, 2015), and
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) (CNPS, 2015) for the regional project vicinity (i.e., the
Mindego Hill, Cupertino, La Honda, Franklin Point, Big Basin, Castle Rock Ridge, Woodside,
Palo Alto, and Mountain View USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles). The potential for the
project site to support special-status plant or wildlife species was assessed using database results,
previous studies of biological resources in the regional vicinity, and the March 18, 2015
reconnaissance survey. Table 1 in Appendix B identifies regionally-occurring special-status plant
and animals, their preferred habitats and plant blooming periods, and their potential to occur in
the study area. The project study area is defined as relevant areas of similar habitat composition
surrounding the project site. It was then determined whether there is a low, moderate, or high
potential for species occurrence in the study area of project site based on previous special-status
species record locations, known range, and current site conditions. Only species with a moderate
or high potential for occurrence are discussed further in this section. Several of these species
which require specialized habitat not found within the project site but in the larger regional
vicinity, including large areas of annual grassland or coastal scrubland, coastal salt marsh, tidal
flats or tidal wetlands, beaches, or species associated with the San Francisco Bay, were
eliminated from further discussion.
Special-Status Plants
The following special-status plants were determined to have at least a moderate potential to occur
within or adjacent to the project site:
San Mateo woolly sunflower
Anderson’s manzanita
Santa Clara red-ribbons
Western leatherwood
Minute pocket moss
Arcuate bush-mallow
Woodland woolythreads
Dudley’s lousewort
White-flowered rein orchid
Choris’ popcornflower
San Mateo woolly sunflower (Eriophyllum latilobum). San Mateo woolly sunflower is a federal
and State-listed endangered perennial herb that occurs in foothill woodlands, often found in
serpentine soils and on road cuts. The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) considers the plant
of California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1B.1 rarity. The California endemic has an extremely
limited known distribution where it is presumed extant in suitable habitat; one of these locations
is the San Mateo USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle that contains the project study area. The mixed
woodlands and riparian areas of the Monte Bello Open Space Reserve are relatively undisturbed
and provides suitable habitat for this plant. The nearest occurrence of San Mateo woolly
sunflower is located within three miles northwest of the project along Highway 35 (CDFW,
2014c). San Mateo woolly sunflower flowers between May and June.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-21 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Anderson’s manzanita (Arctostaphylos andersonii). Anderson’s manzanita is a CRPR 1B.1
shrub that occurs in openings and along edges of chaparral communities, mixed evergreen forest,
and redwood forests. Suitable habitat for Anderson’s manzanita is present within the project study
area and this species has been documented several times in open space preserves of the region
and within 10 miles of the project. The nearest occurrence of Anderson’s manzanita is located
seven miles south of the project in the San Lorenzo River watershed (CDFW, 2015c). Anderson’s
manzanita flowers between November and March.
Santa Clara red-ribbons (Clarkia concinna ssp. automixa). Santa Clara red-ribbons is a CRPR
4.3 annual herb that occurs on slopes and near drainages in cismontane woodlands and chaparral
communities. Suitable habitat for Santa Clara red-ribbons is present within the project study area
and this species has been documented within a mile of the project sites at the headwaters of
Stevens Creek growing along an ephemeral stream (CDFW, 2015c) and is presumed extant in the
area. Santa Clara red-ribbons flowers between May and June.
Western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis). Western leatherwood is a CRPR 1B.2 perennial
deciduous shrub that occurs in chaparral, foothill woodland, mixed evergreen forest, broadleaved
upland forest, closed-cone pine forest, north coastal coniferous forest, and wetland-riparian areas.
Suitable habitat for western leatherwood is present in the project study area and this species has
been documented numerous times within one mile of the study area and nearest occurrences are
within Los Trancos Open Space and Coal Creek Open Space, both within the MROSD lands
(CDFW, 2015c). Western leatherwood flowers between January and April.
Minute pocket moss (Fissidens pauperculus). Minute pocket moss is a CRPR 1B.2 moss that
occurs on in damp coastal soil in North Coast coniferous forest. Suitable habitat for minute
pocket moss is present in the project study area and this species has been documented around
Portola Redwoods State Park in hard moist earth under redwoods (CDFW, 2015c).
Woodland woolythreads (Monolopia gracilens). Woodland woolythreads is a CRPR 1B.2
annual herb that occurs in mixed evergreen forest, broadleaved upland forest, redwood forest, and
chaparral, and valley and foothill grasslands, often in serpentine soils. Suitable habitat for
woodland woolythreads is present in the project study area and this species has been documented
within one mile of the project sites at Black Mountain on the Monte Bellow Ridge; numerous
other occurrences are documented within five miles of the study area (CDFW, 2015c). Woodland
woolythreads flower between February and July.
Dudley’s lousewort (Pedicularis dudleyi). Dudley’s lousewort is a CRPR 1B.1 perennial herb
that occurs in maritime chaparral, cismontane woodland, North Coast coniferous forests, redwood
forests, and valley and foothill grasslands. Suitable habitat for Dudley’s lousewort is present in
the project study area and this species has been documented within six miles of the project sites in
Portola Redwoods State Park along Peters Creek where 13 colonies were documented in 1994
(CDFW, 2015c). Dudley’s lousewort flowers between April and June.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-22 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
White-flowered rein orchid (Piperia candida). White-flowered rein orchid is a CRPR 1B.2
perennial herb that occurs in Yellow pine forest, North Coast coniferous forest, and broadleaved
upland forest, often in serpentine soils. Suitable habitat for white-flowered rein orchid is present
in the project study area and this species has been documented within one and a half miles of the
project sites along Lost Creek Trail in the Los Trancos Open Space Preserve (CDFW, 2015c). It
is difficult to determine rarity as populations are generally small and rarely flower. White-
flowered rein orchid flowers between March and September.
Choris’ popcornflower (Plagiobothrys chorisianus var. chorisianus). Choris’ popcornflower is a
CRPR 1B.2 annual herb that occurs in mesic sites in chaparral, coastal prairie, and coastal scrub
communities. Suitable habitat for Choris’ popcorn flower is present in the project study area and
this species has been documented within half a mile of the Page Mill Road helicopter staging area
near El Corte Madera Creek (historical occurrence), more recently within one mile of the project
sites on Russian Ridge in Russian Ridge Open Space, and is presumed extant in the area (CDFW,
2015c). Choris’ popcornflower flowers between March and June.
Arcuate bush-mallow (Malacothamnus arcuatus). Arcuate bush-mallow is a CRPR 1B.2
perennial evergreen shrub that occurs in gravelly alluvium soils in chaparral and cismontane
woodland. Suitable habitat for arcuate bush-mallow is present in the project study area and this
species has been documented within a mile of the project sites on Borel Hill of Russian Ridge.
Several other occurrences are documented within the regional project study area (CDFW, 2015c).
Arcuate bush-mallow flowers between April and September.
Special-Status Fish
No special-status fish species are expected to occur within the project site. Under existing
conditions, Central California coastal steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and other common
species such as Pacific lamprey (Entosphenus tridentatus) that hatch and spawn in freshwater
creeks but live as adults in the Pacific Ocean, cannot reach Stevens Creek upstream of the
Stevens Creek Dam and Reservoir. Only freshwater resident species such as resident rainbow
trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), California roach (Hesperoleucus symmetricus), three-spined
stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) that do not migrate to the ocean as part of their lifecycle
would be expected to occur within the creeks of the project sites (SCVURPPP, 2015). None of
these species are identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status in local or regional plans or
regulations by the CDFW, USFWS, or NMFS.
Special-Status Animals
The following special-status animals were determined to have at least a moderate potential to
occur within or adjacent to the project site:
California red-legged frog
San Francisco garter snake
Foothill yellow-legged frog
Special-status and Migratory Birds
Special-status bats
San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-23 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii). The California red-legged frog (CRLF) is federally
listed as a threatened species throughout its range in California and is a CDFW Species of Special
Concern (SSC). This frog historically occurred over much of the state from the Sierra Nevada
foothills to the coast and from Mendocino County to the Mexican border. CRLF typically inhabit
ponds, slow-moving creeks, and streams with deep pools that are lined with dense emergent
marsh or shrubby riparian vegetation. Submerged root masses and undercut banks are important
habitat features for this species. However, this species is capable of inhabiting a wide variety of
perennial aquatic habitats as long as there is sufficient cover and bullfrogs or non-native
predatory fish are not present. CRLF is known to survive in ephemeral streams, although only if
deep pools with vegetative cover persist through the dry season. Factors that have contributed to
the decline of CRLF include destruction of riparian habitat from development, agriculture, flood
control practices, or the introduction of exotic predators such as American bullfrog (Rana
catesbeiana), crayfish, and a variety of non-native fish. Between 1997 and 2010, CRLF have
been documented repeatedly within Stevens Creek and tributaries near the project sites where
suitable dispersal and refugia habitat is present (MROSD, 2015). The closest CRLF observation
is from Stevens Creek, approximately 600 feet upstream of Site 2. Deeper ponds with marginally
suitable habitat for breeding occur within the larger study area (that would not be directly affected
by the proposed project) though emergent vegetation is generally sparse. The project area is
located within a half mile of USFWS Critical Habitat Unit SNM-2 of this species.
San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia). The San Francisco garter snake
(SFGS) is federally and State-listed as an endangered species and is a CDFW “fully protected”
species. This snake historically occurred in wetland areas on the San Francisco Peninsula from
approximately the San Francisco County line south along the eastern and western bases of the
Santa Cruz Mountains at least to the Upper Crystal Springs Reservoir, and along the coast south
to Año Nuevo Point, San Mateo County, and Waddell Creek, Santa Cruz County, California
(Barry, 1994; USFWS, 1985). Currently, the species has been reduced to only six significant
populations in San Mateo County and northern Santa Cruz County, which were described in the
USFWS San Francisco Garter Snake 5-year Review Summary and Evaluation (USFWS, 2006).
The preferred habitat for San Francisco garter snake is a densely vegetated pond that hosts their
prey base of CRLF, American bullfrog, and Sierran treefrog (Pseudacris sierra) near an open
hillside with access to sun and rodent burrows for cover. Temporary ponds and other seasonal
freshwater bodies are also used. Emergent bankside vegetation such as cattails (Typha spp.),
bulrushes (Schoenoplectus spp.), and spike rushes (Juncus spp.) are preferred and used for cover.
Adult garter snakes sometimes aestivate in rodent burrows during summer months when the
ponds are dry. On the coast, the snakes hibernate during the winter, but further inland, if the
weather is suitable, garter snakes may be active year-round (McGinnis et al., 1987; McGinnis
1989; USFWS, 2006). Exact locations of SFGS occurrences are considered sensitive by CDFW.
Documented occurrences in the regional project vicinity (Mindego Hill USGS quadrangle) as
recently as 2012 presumes this species is extant within their understood range where suitable
habitat is present (CDFW, 2015c). The project study area lacks dense bankside vegetation and
emergent vegetation in creek runs and deeper ponds that is preferred by San Francisco garter
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-24 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
snake. Prey species are present in the creeks and SFGS may occur in the project study area on a
transient basis though ideal habitat conditions are not found at the project sites.
Foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii). The foothill yellow-legged frog is considered a SSC
by CDFW. It is found in or near rocky streams in a variety of habitats, including valley-foothill
hardwood, valley-foothill hardwood-conifer, valley-foothill riparian, ponderosa pine, mixed
conifer, coastal scrub, mixed chaparral, and wet meadow types. Unlike most other ranid, or
“true”, frogs in California, this species is rarely encountered (even on rainy nights) far from
permanent water (CDFG, 2000). Foothill yellow-legged frogs hunt aquatic, terrestrial, and flying
invertebrates, spiders, snails, and grasshoppers, and seek refuge in between rocks or leaf litter at
the bottom of stream or creek bed when threatened (Nafis, 2015). Breeding and egg laying
usually await the end of spring flooding and may commence any time from mid-March to May,
depending on local water conditions (CDFG, 2000). Female frogs use the downstream side of
rocks as protection for egg masses that are attached to pebbles, rocks, or submerged vegetation
(Nafis, 2015). The foothill yellow-legged frog’s historic range is in the Coast Ranges from the
Oregon border south to the Transverse Mountains in Los Angeles County, in most of northern
California west of the Cascade crest, and along the western flank of the Sierra south to Kern
County. It is no longer found on the coast south of Monterey County (Nafis, 2015). The nearest
foothill yellow-legged frog occurrence is located 7.8 miles southwest of the project sites in
Pescadero Creek though presumed extant where suitable habitat occurs. Suitable habitat for this
species occurs in both Stevens Creek and Tributary Creek while water is flowing and breeding
may occur before the low or no-flow periods within the project sites.
Red-bellied newt (Taricha rivularis). The red-bellied newt is considered locally significant
within the Stevens Creek watershed as the population represents a significant southerly range
extension by approximately 81 miles from the formerly understood boundary of Sonoma County.
The Stevens Creek watershed population is not genetically divergent from northern populations
and it is undetermined if the population is naturally occurring or introduced. This population is
considered to be of conservation significance and warrant management protection due to the
overall limited geographic range of the species, lack of genetic diversity, and high levels of
habitat disturbance, until more is understood about the origin of the Stevens Creek population
(Reilly, et al., 2014). The red-bellied newt is a stream or river-dwelling newt of coastal
woodlands that breed from late February to May in flowing water of rocky rivers and creeks
(Stebbins, 2003). Eggs are laid in donut-like clusters on the underside of rocks or branches in the
fast-moving sections of streams. Once eggs are laid, newts retreat from the water to the banks and
upland areas (Roessler, 2015). Several successful surveys for red-bellied newt have been
conducted in the Stevens Creek watershed and egg masses were found in both Stevens Creek and
smaller tributaries concentrated along the Grizzly Flat Trail that connects to Canyon Trail, south
of the project sites. Suitable upland and in-stream breeding habitat is present at the both Stevens
Creek and Tributary Creek project work areas, staging areas, and bordering project access roads.
Special-status birds. Several special-status birds are likely to nest within the mixed woodland
forest or along the fringes of the non-native grassland of the study area. Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter
cooperii) and sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus) are considered a “watch list” species by
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-25 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
CDFW that could nest and forage within the bridge project sites. White-tailed kite (Elanus
leucurus) is also considered a “watch list” species by CDFW that could nest in edge habitat along
access trails and parking areas. Grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum) is considered a
SSC by CDFW that could nest in annual grasslands bordering access trails and staging areas.
Long-eared owl (Asio otus) is considered a SSC by CDFW, and has successfully nested in the
Stevens Creek Canyon at the creek headwaters (CDFW, 2015c). Olive-sided flycatcher
(Contopus cooperii) is considered a SSC and a “Bird of Conservation Concern” by the USFWS.
Oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii), and Allen’s
hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin) are each considered a Bird of Conservation Concern and a
Special Animal by CDFW. Suitable nesting habitat is present within the project sites and
surrounding vicinity for each of these species.
Special-status bats. Western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii) is considered a SSC by CDFW and
hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis) are considered Special
Animals by CDFW. Western red bat occurs from mid-state in California southward, roosts in
dense foliage, and feeds primarily on moths. Hoary bat is the most widespread North American
bat and may be found throughout the state in California where dense conifers offer roosting
habitat. The medium to large trees in the creek corridors and within the project sites provide
suitable roost habitat for this species that may forage over the low-flowing water or areas of
annual grassland within the study area. Yuma myotis is a crevice dweller found throughout the
state in California and feeds on aerial insects over water. This species could roost under tree bark
or the existing bridge structure and forage within the study area. Bats and other non-game
mammals are protected under the California Fish and Game Code.
San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens). The San Francisco dusky-
footed woodrat is a CDFW SSC. Woodrats often occupy habitats with both woodland and scrub
components that provide cover and food sources, such as live oak, coffeeberry (Frangula
(=Rhamnus) californica), blackberry (Rubus spp.), gooseberry (Ribes spp.), poison oak, and
honeysuckle (Lonicera spp.) (Linsdale, 1951). Nests or “middens” are typically over 3 feet in
diameter and are constructed out of piled sticks, leaves and grasses. Middens were not observed
in the study area during the reconnaissance survey but this species is fairly common in the region
and suitable habitat exists in the trees, shrubs, and rock crevices within woodland community and
stream corridors of the project sites.
Other Breeding and Migratory birds. The mixed woodland community and stream corridors of
the project sites provide nesting and foraging habitat for a variety of resident and migratory birds
in mature trees, dense shrubs or foliage. Raptor species which may nest in the project site could
include red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), western screech
owl (Megascops kennicottii), great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), northern pygmy owl
(Glaucidium gnoma) and northern saw-whet owl (Aegolius acadicus). Passerine species which
could nest in the area include but are not limited to Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), Bewick’s
wren, American robin (Turdus migratorius), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), California
towhee (Melozone crissalis) among many others. The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-26 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
and California Fish and Game Code protect raptors, most native migratory birds, and breeding birds
that would occur at the project site and/or nest in the surrounding vicinity.
Special-Status Natural Communities
The CDFW’s Natural Heritage Division identifies special-status natural communities, which are
those that are naturally rare and those whose extent has been greatly diminished through changes
in land use. The CNDDB tracks 135 such natural communities in the same way that it tracks
occurrences of special-status species: Information is maintained on each site for the natural
community’s location, extent, habitat quality, level of disturbance, and current protection
measures. The CDFW is mandated to seek the long-term perpetuation of the areas in which these
communities occur. While there is no statewide law that requires protection of all special-status
natural communities, CEQA requires consideration of the potential impacts of a project on
biological resources of statewide or regional significance. Several special-status natural
communities occur within the regional project vicinity; however none occur within the immediate
project study area or at either project sites.
Critical Habitat
The USFWS can designate critical habitat for species that have listed as threatened or endangered.
“Critical habitat” is defined in Section 3(5)(A) of the federal Endangered Species Act as those lands
(or waters) within a listed species’ current range that contain the physical or biological features that
are considered essential to its conservation. The project is located north of critical habitat for
California red-legged frog (within a half mile) and marbled murrelet (within 4.5 miles).
a) Less than Significant with Mitigation.
Special Status Plants
The proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect either directly or indirectly
through habitat modifications, on special-status plants that are known to occur or have a
moderate or high potential to occur in the project study area. Vegetation communities
within or nearby the two project sites, staging areas, and access roads, contain suitable
habitat that may support special-status plants including San Mateo woolly sunflower,
Anderson’s manzanita, Santa Clara red-ribbons, western leatherwood, minute pocket
moss, arcuate bush-mallow, woodland woolythreads, Dudley’s lousewort, white-flowered
rein orchid, and Choris’ popcornflower. Project implementation could have an adverse
effect on these special-status species and supportive vegetation communities during
project construction primarily through direct effects such as vegetation removal, ground
disturbance, or trampling. Construction activities that could cause direct impacts on
special-status plants include grading or ground disturbance to establish project staging or
work areas, vegetation removal, tree trimming, tree removal, grading in support of trail
relocation, removal of the existing bridge at Site 1, transportation or staging of materials
and equipment between staging areas and work sites, and new bridge installation.
Implementing Mitigation Measure BIO-1a, Avoidance and Minimization for Impacts
to Special-Status Plants, would reduce potential impacts on special-status plants to a
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-27 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
less-than-significant level by requiring pre-construction protocol-level surveys,
implementing avoidance measures, and relocating extant populations.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1a: Avoidance and Minimization for Impacts to
Special-Status Plants. A qualified botanist shall conduct appropriately timed
surveys for special-status plant species with a moderate or high potential to occur in
the study area in all suitable habitat that would be potentially disturbed by the project.
Surveys shall be conducted following the current CDFW protocol (CDFG, 2009). If
no special-status plants are found during focused surveys, the botanist shall document
the findings of found species in a letter to CDFW, and no further mitigation will be
required.
If special-status plants are found during focused surveys, the following measures
shall be implemented:
1. Information regarding the special-status plant populations shall be reported to
the CNDDB, mapped, and documented in a technical memorandum provided
to MROSD.
2. If federally or state listed species are present, MRSOD shall comply with the
federal and State Endangered Species Acts through consultation with
USFWS and CDFW, respectively.
3. If any population can be avoided during project implementation, it shall be
clearly marked in the field by a qualified botanist and avoided during
construction activities. Before ground clearing or ground disturbance, all
on-site construction personnel shall be instructed as to the species’ presence
and the importance of avoiding impacts to this species and its habitat though
the Worker Environmental Awareness Program training (see Mitigation
Measure BIO-1b).
4. If special-status plant populations cannot be avoided, MROSD shall consult
with CDFW to coordinate relocation of special-status plants. To the extent
feasible, special-status plants that would be impacted by the project shall be
relocated within local suitable habitat. This can be done either through
salvage and transplanting or by collection and propagation of seeds or other
vegetative material. Any plant relocation would be done under the
supervision of a qualified biologist.
5. If more than two years elapses between the focused floristic surveys and
commencement of ground disturbance activities, or if project construction
spans multiple years, a final set of appropriately timed focused botanical
surveys shall be conducted and populations mapped. The results of these final
surveys shall be combined with previous survey results to produce habitat
maps showing habitat where the special-status plants have been observed
during either of the focused floristic surveys conducted for the project.
Special Status Wildlife
The proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect either directly or indirectly
through habitat modifications on special-status wildlife that are known to occur or have a
moderate or high potential to occur in the project study area. Areas within or nearby the
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-28 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
two project sites, staging areas, and access roads, contain suitable habitat that may support
special-status animals including California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake,
foothill yellow-legged frog, red-bellied newt, special-status and migratory birds, special-
status bats, and San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat. Project implementation could have an
adverse effect on these special-status species during project construction. The effects could
be direct (e.g., harassment or take of an individual) or indirect (e.g., modifying existing
habitat, disrupting foraging and nesting efforts, or interfering with movement).
Construction activities that could cause direct impacts on special-status animals include
grading or ground disturbance to establish project staging or work areas and relocate trail
connections, vegetation removal, tree trimming or removal, removal of the existing
bridge at Site 1, site restoration and re-vegetation, transportation of materials and
equipment along trails to work sites, staging of materials and equipment at work sites,
and installation of the new bridges.
Ground disturbing activities and installation of bridge abutments would occur during the
dry season (April 15 – October 15) when stream flow at the project sites are low and
potential impacts would be minimized through the implementation of the mitigation
measures described below. Bridge installation may occur outside of the dry season once
bridge abutments are installed. Potential indirect effects on these special-status animals
would be limited to the duration of project construction as disturbed areas would be
restored following construction, and the new bridges would not substantially alter
existing habitat conditions or result in long-term adverse effects on special-status
wildlife. Installation of the new bridge at Site 2 is likely to improve habitat conditions at
this location by relocating pedestrian foot traffic from the creek bed to the bridge.
Potential indirect impacts on special-status wildlife during construction would be
minimized as discussed in mitigation measures presented below.
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce construction impacts
on special-status animal species to a less‐than‐significant level by avoiding and reducing
habitat disturbance where feasible, excluding wildlife from entering project areas during
construction, conducting surveys for listed or sensitive species prior to construction,
avoiding disturbance to nesting birds and roosting bats through seasonal work limits or
buffers around active nests or roosts, and requiring monitoring of construction activities
by a qualified biologist. Mitigation Measure BIO-1b, Worker Environmental
Awareness Program Training and BIO-1c, General Mitigation Measures during
Construction provide broad protection measures for sensitive resources within and
nearby the project sites and the following subsections provide more detailed information
on potential project impacts on special‐status wildlife and their associated habitats.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1b: Worker Environmental Awareness Program
Training. A project-specific Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP)
training shall be developed and implemented by a qualified biologist for the project
and attended by all construction personnel prior to beginning work onsite. The
training could consist of a recorded presentation that could be reused for new
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-29 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
personnel. The WEAP training shall generally include but not be limited to the
following:
1. Applicable State and federal laws, environmental regulations, project permit
conditions, and penalties for non-compliance;
2. Special-status plant and animal species with potential to occur at or in the
vicinity of the project site (i.e. California red-legged frog, San Francisco
garter snake, foothill yellow-legged frog, red-bellied newt, special-status and
migratory birds, special-status bats, and San Francisco dusky-footed
woodrat), their habitat, the importance of these species and their habitat, the
general measures that are being implemented to conserve these species as
they relate to the project, and the boundaries within which the project
construction shall occur, avoidance measures, and a protocol for
encountering such species including a communication chain;
3. Pre-construction surveys and biological monitoring requirements associated
with each phase of work and at each project site;
4. Known sensitive resource areas in the project vicinity that are to be avoided
and/or protected as well as approved project work areas; and
5. Best management practices (BMPs) and their location on the project site for
erosion control and/or species exclusion.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1c: General Mitigation Measures during Construction.
MROSD shall ensure that the following general measures are implemented by the
contractor while working in the project site during construction to prevent and
minimize impacts on special-status species and sensitive biological resources:
1. Project-related vehicles shall observe a 15 mile-per-hour speed limit on
unpaved roads in the project site.
2. No firearms or pets shall be allowed in the project site.
3. The contractor shall provide closed garbage containers for the disposal of
all food-related trash items. All garbage shall be collected daily from the
project site and placed in a closed container from which garbage shall be
removed weekly. Construction personnel shall not feed or otherwise attract
fish or wildlife to the project site.
4. As necessary, erosion control measures shall be implemented to prevent
any soil or other materials from entering any nearby aquatic habitat.
Erosion control measures shall be installed adjacent to aquatic habitat to
prevent soil from eroding or falling into the area.
5. Erosion control measures shall be implemented as described in Mitigation
Measure HYD-1. Sediment control measures shall be furnished,
constructed, maintained, and later removed. Plastic monofilament of any
kind (including those labeled as biodegradable, photodegradable, or UV-
degradable) shall not be used. Only natural burlap, coir, or jute wrapped
fiber rolls shall be used.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-30 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
6. If vehicle or equipment maintenance is necessary, it shall be performed in
designated upland staging areas (not at either creek work site), and spill
kits containing cleanup materials shall be available onsite. Maintenance
activity and fueling must occur away at least 100 feet from waters of the
United States.
7. No equipment used in support of project implementation (e.g. small bobcat
or motorized wheelbarrow) shall enter or cross creeks while water is
flowing.
8. Project personnel shall be required to report immediately any harm, injury,
or mortality of a listed species (federal or State) during construction,
including entrapment, to the construction foreman, qualified biologist, or
MROSD staff. MROSD staff or their consultant shall provide verbal
notification to the USFWS Endangered Species Office in Sacramento,
California, and/or to the local CDFW warden or biologist (as applicable)
within 1 working day of the incident. MROSD or their consultant shall
follow up with written notification to the appropriate agencies within 5
working days of the incident. All special-status species observations shall
be recorded on California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) field
sheets and sent to the CDFW by the MROSD staff or their consultant.
9. The spread of invasive non-native plant species and plant pathogens shall
be avoided or minimized by implementing the following measures:
a. Construction equipment shall arrive at the project clean and free of
soil, seed, and plant parts to reduce the likelihood of introducing new
weed species.
b. Any imported fill material, soil amendments, gravel, or other
materials required for construction and/or restoration activities that
will be placed within the upper 12 inches of the ground surface shall
be free of vegetation and plant material.
c. Certified weed-free imported erosion control materials (or rice straw
in upland areas) shall be used exclusively, if possible.
d. To reduce the movement of invasive weeds into uninfested areas, the
contractor shall stockpile topsoil removed during excavation (e.g.,
during excavation of bridge supports) and shall subsequently reuse
the stockpiled soil for re-establishment of disturbed project areas.
Amphibians and Reptiles. Suitable aquatic habitat and foraging habitat for California
red-legged frog, foothill yellow-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake, and red-bellied
newt occurs within the project site. No work would occur within aquatic habitat under the
proposed project. However, proposed construction activities, described above,
implemented in upland areas, particularly ground disturbance at the project sites, while
temporary and limited in their areal extent, could have a substantial adverse effect on
these species directly or through habitat modification.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1b, BIO-1c, and Mitigation Measure
BIO-1d, Avoidance, Minimization, Protection Measures and Habitat Restoration for
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-31 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Sensitive Amphibians and Reptiles, would avoid take of listed species and minimize
impacts on each of these sensitive species to a less-than-significant level through a
mandatory training of construction crews to identify sensitive environmental resources in
the project vicinity (e.g., special-status wildlife with potential to occur onsite and
adjacent sensitive habitat areas and vegetation communities), along with implementation
of specific protection and avoidance measures such as erecting exclusionary fencing
around work areas, conducting pre-construction surveys and biological monitoring during
construction, and requiring additional protection measures during project implementation.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1d: Avoidance, Minimization, Protection Measures
and Habitat Restoration for Sensitive Amphibians and Reptiles. The following
conservation measures shall be implemented to minimize or eliminate potential
adverse impacts on California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake, foothill
yellow-legged frog, and red-bellied newt during project-related activities:
1. MROSD staff or their consultant shall submit the name and credentials of
biologists qualified to act as the biological monitor to CDFW for approval at
least 15 days before construction work begins. General minimum
qualifications are a 4-year degree in biological sciences or other appropriate
training and/or experience in surveying, identifying, and handling California
red-legged frogs (CRLF), San Francisco garter snake (SFGS), and foothill
yellow-legged frog (FYLF).
A “take” permit from USFWS will not be pursued for the project, therefore
CRLF and SFGS would not be relocated if encountered in project areas but
allowed to disperse of their own volition while all work is halted within 50
feet of individuals. If a CRLF is not dispersing on its own volition, the on-
site biologist shall monitor the frog while work continues, as long as the on-
site biologist can ensure the safety of the frog. A take permit is not required
for foothill yellow-legged frog as the species is not federally-listed
threatened or endangered; however, CDFW may condition qualified
biologists to relocate FYLF under the project’s 1602 lake and streambed
alteration agreement.
2. A CDFW-approved biologist shall survey the work sites 2 weeks before the
onset of construction for CRLF, SFGS, FYLF, and red-bellied newt to
determine presence (and life stage) of these species within the project sites.
Additionally, a CDFW-approved biologist shall conduct a pre-construction
survey of the project work areas for CRLF, SFGS, FYLF, and red-bellied
newt immediately prior to the start of construction activities. The surveys
will consist of walking the project limits and within the project sites to
ascertain presence of these species.
If CRLF or SFGS are found, individuals shall not be disturbed but allowed to
disperse on their own volition. Should CRLF egg masses, metamorphs, or
tadpoles be found, a 100-foot no-disturbance buffer shall be established
around the location(s) until juveniles disperse from the breeding sites. If a
CRLF is not dispersing on its own volition, the on-site biologist shall monitor
the frog while work continues, as long as the on-site biologist can ensure the
safety of the frog. The CDFW-approved biologist shall immediately inform
the construction manager that work should be halted or modified (in the case
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-32 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
of a buffer or non-dispersing individual), if necessary, to avert avoidable take
of listed species.
If adult FYLF or red-bellied newts are found during surveys, they will be
relocated outside of the work area by a CDFW-approved biologist. Should
egg masses, metamorphs, or tadpoles of these species be found, a 100-foot
no-disturbance buffer shall be established around the location(s) until
juveniles disperse from the breeding site, as determined by a qualified
biologist, or in coordination with CDFW.
The specific methods for handling amphibians and decontamination shall
follow USFWS (2005) and USGS (2015) protocols, respectively. These
protocols describe field equipment maintenance, disinfection, and field
hygiene procedures designed to minimize potential spread of pathogens when
handling amphibians.
3. Project work areas will be monitored by a CDFW-approved biologist
(qualified biological monitor) during fence installation and ground disturbing
activities to identify, capture, and relocate non-listed sensitive amphibians
(FYLF and red-bellied newt) if found, and halt or observe work in the
vicinity of CRLF and SFGS if encountered onsite. The biologist shall have
the authority to stop construction activities and develop alternative work
practices, in consultation with construction personnel and resource agencies
(as appropriate), if construction activities are likely to affect special‐status
species or other sensitive biological resources.
4. To the extent feasible, MROSD and its contractors shall initiate work within
Stevens Creek and Tributary Creek banks between May 1 and November 1
(i.e., generally identified as the nonbreeding season). Installation of the
bridge components that would not disturb the creek channels or banks (i.e.
placement of the wooden platform and railings) is not restricted to this time
period.
5. MROSD or its contractors shall install temporary exclusion fencing around
key project boundaries, including all project staging areas, bridge installation
work areas, and the trail realignment work areas at the Tributary Creek and
Stevens Creek work sites.
Fencing shall be installed immediately prior to the start of construction
activities under the supervision of a qualified biologist.
The MROSD shall ensure that the temporary exclusion fencing is
continuously maintained until all construction activities are completed.
MROSD shall ensure daily visual inspections of the fence for any
amphibians or reptiles that may get stuck by the fence, including
weekends. These daily checks shall be conducted by the qualified
biological monitor for the first week of construction. If no species are
observed, the qualified biological monitor may train the contractor to
conduct daily inspections and call the biologist if any species are
encountered.
The fence shall be CDFW-approved species exclusion fencing, with a
minimum height of 3 feet above ground surface, with an additional 4 to
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-33 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
6 inches of fence material buried such that species cannot crawl under
the fence, and shall include escape funnels to allow species to exit the
work areas.
The exclusion fence shall not cross Stevens Creek or Tributary Creek
to allow wildlife movement to continue through the creek corridors
when work is not occurring.
6. All excavations of a depth of 8 inches or greater shall be covered at the end
of each workday, or escape ramps shall be installed at a 3:1 grade to allow
wildlife that fall in a means to escape.
7. Vehicles or equipment parked overnight at the project staging areas or creek
sites shall be inspected for harboring species each morning by the qualified
biological monitor before vehicles or equipment are moved.
8. Project areas disturbed by vegetation removal, grading of temporary staging
areas, excavation to accommodate bridge removal at Site 1 or bridge
installation, and abandoned trail alignments shall be restored and monitored
for success according to methods described in Mitigation Measure BIO-2,
below.
Special-Status and Migratory Birds. Construction activities associated with bridge
removal and replacement at Site 1 and the installation of a new bridge at Site 2, including
ground disturbance, tree trimming and removal, ground vegetation removal, and a general
increase in noise and visual disturbance in undeveloped open space may adversely affect
nesting birds species within ¼ mile of the individual project sites during the nesting
season (February 1 – August 30). Suitable foraging and nesting habitat is present in the
project vicinity for long-eared owl (California SSC), Cooper’s hawk and sharp-shinned
hawk (California watch list species), grasshopper sparrow (California SSC), Olive-sided
flycatcher (California SSC), and several species designated a Birds of Conservation
Concern by USFWS or a Special Animal by CDFW. Other migratory and resident raptor
and passerine species forage and/or nest in the mature canyon oak, big leaf maple, and
bay laurel riparian forest and understory within and surrounding the project sites.
Removal of vegetation and trimming or removal of trees at the project sites to
accommodate the new bridge installation could destroy active bird nests. In addition,
adverse effects, such as an increase in noise and visual disturbance associated with
construction, could disrupt nesting efforts in the habitat surrounding the project sites. The
loss of an active nest would be considered a significant impact under CEQA, if that nest
were occupied by a special-status bird species. Moreover, disruption of nesting migratory
or native birds is not permitted under the federal MBTA or the California Fish and Game
Code, as it could constitute unauthorized take. Thus, the loss of any active nest by, for
example, trimming a tree or removing a shrub containing a nest, must be avoided under
federal and California law. Although compliance with existing State and federal
regulations would prevent impacts on nesting birds, implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1b and BIO-1c (described above) and Mitigation Measure BIO-1e,
Nesting Bird Protection Measures would further ensure that the project would not have
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-34 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
a significant impact on nesting birds by limiting removal of vegetation to periods outside
of the bird nesting season, to the extent feasible, and establishing no work buffer zones
around active nests on or near the project site.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1e: Nesting Bird Protection Measures. Nesting birds
and their nests shall be protected during construction by use of the following
measures:
1. Vegetation removal, tree trimming, and removal shall occur outside the bird
nesting season (nesting season is defined as February 1 to August 30), to the
extent feasible.
2. If vegetation removal, tree trimming, and removal during bird nesting season
cannot be fully avoided, a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct pre-
construction nesting surveys within 7 days prior to the start of such activities
or after any construction breaks of 14 days or more. Surveys shall be
performed for the individual project sites, vehicle and equipment staging
areas, and suitable habitat within 250 feet in order to locate any active
passerine (perching bird) nests and within 500 feet of these individual sites to
locate any active raptor (birds of prey) nests.
3. If active nests are located during the pre-construction nesting bird surveys,
the wildlife biologist shall evaluate if the schedule of construction activities
could affect the active nests and the following measures shall be
implemented based on their determination:
a. If construction is not likely to affect the active nest, it may proceed
without restriction; however, a biologist shall regularly monitor the
nest to confirm there is no adverse effect and may revise their
determination at any time during the nesting season. In this case, the
following measure would apply:
i. If construction may affect the active nest, the biologist shall
establish a no disturbance buffer. Typically, these buffer
distances are between 25 feet and 250 feet for passerines and
between 300 feet and 500 feet for raptors. These distances may
be adjusted depending on the level of surrounding ambient
activity (i.e., if the project site is adjacent to a road or active
trail) and if an obstruction, such as a large rock formation, is
within line-of-sight between the nest and construction. For bird
species that are federally and/or State-listed sensitive species
(i.e., fully protected, endangered, threatened, species of special
concern), an MROSD representative, supported by the wildlife
biologist, shall consult with r CDFW regarding modifying nest
buffers, prohibiting construction within the buffer, modifying
construction, and removing or relocating active nests that are
found on the site.
4. Any birds that begin nesting within the project site and survey buffers amid
construction activities shall be assumed to be habituated to construction-
related or similar noise and disturbance levels and no work exclusion zones
shall be established around active nests in these cases; however, should birds
nesting nearby begin to show disturbance associated with construction
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-35 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
activities, no-disturbance buffers shall be established as determined by the
qualified wildlife biologist.
Special-Status Bats. Project activities including tree trimming, tree removal, and bridge
removal at Site 1, tree trimming or removal at Site 2, or site restoration could result in
disturbance to special-status bats roosting nearby. Western red bat (SSC), hoary bat and
yuma myotis (both California Special Animals) could roost in rock crevices or outcrops
within the creek channels, or in mature trees within and surrounding the project sites.
Maternity roosts are those that are occupied by pregnant females or females with non-
flying young. Non-breeding roosts are day roosts without pregnant females or non-flying
young. Destruction of an occupied, non-breeding bat roost, resulting in the death of bats;
disturbance that causes the loss of a maternity colony of bats (resulting in the death of
young); or destruction of hibernacula2 are prohibited under the California Fish and Game
Code and would be considered a significant impact (although hibernacula are generally
not formed by bat species in the Bay Area due to sufficiently high temperatures year
round). This may occur due to direct or indirect disturbances. Direct disturbance could
include removal of the existing bridge, tree trimming or removal, site restoration or roost
destruction by any other means. Indirect disturbance to bat species could result in
behavioral alterations due to construction-associated noise or vibration, or increased
human activity in area.
Direct mortality of an individual or disturbance to maternity colonies of special-status
bats would be a significant impact. Implementing Mitigation Measures BIO-1b and
BIO-1c (described above) and Mitigation Measure BIO-1f, Avoidance and
Minimization Measures for Special-Status Bats would reduce potential impacts on
special-status bats to a less-than-significant level by increasing worker education
regarding the potential presence and sensitivities of these species, requiring pre-
construction surveys, and implementing avoidance measures if potential roosting habitat
or active roosts are located.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1f: Avoidance and Minimization Measures for
Special-Status Bats. In coordination with the MROSD, a pre-construction survey
for special-status bats shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in
advance of tree trimming or removal at both Site 1 and Site 2 and prior to
disturbance to the existing bridge at Site 1, to characterize potential bat habitat and
identify active roost sites. Should potential roosting habitat or active bat roosts be
found in trees, existing structures, and/or rock crevices or outcrops to be disturbed
under the project, the following measures shall be implemented:
1. Trimming or removal of trees, disturbance to existing structures and rock
crevices or outcrops shall occur when bats are active, approximately between
the periods of March 1 to April 15 and August 15 to October 15; outside of
bat maternity roosting season (approximately April 15 to August 15) and
outside of months of winter torpor (approximately October 15 to February
28), to the extent feasible.
2 Hibernaculum refers to the winter quarters of a hibernating animal.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-36 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
2. If trimming or removal of trees, disturbance to existing structures and rock
crevices or outcrops during the periods when bats are active is not feasible
and bat roosts being used for maternity or hibernation purposes are found on
or in the immediate vicinity of the project site where these activities are
planned, a no-disturbance buffer of 100 feet shall be established around these
roost sites until they are determined inactive by a qualified wildlife biologist.
A 100-foot no disturbance buffer is a typical protective buffer distance
however may be modified by the qualified wildlife biologist depending on
existing screening around the roost site (such as dense vegetation or a large
rock formation) as well as the type of construction activity which would
occur around the roost site.
For bat species that are considered State sensitive species (i.e. any of the
species of special concern with potential to occur on the project site), an
MROSD representative, supported by the qualified wildlife biologist, shall
consult with CDFW regarding modifying roosts buffers, prohibiting
construction within the buffer, and modifying construction around maternity
and hibernation roosts.
3. The qualified wildlife biologist shall be present during tree trimming and
disturbance to rock crevices or outcrops if bat roosting habitat or active non-
maternity or hibernation bat roosts are present (e.g. daytime bachelor roosts).
Trees, existing structures, and rock crevices with roosts shall be disturbed
only when no rain is occurring or is forecast to occur for 3 days and when
daytime temperatures are at least 50 degrees Fahrenheit (°F).
4. Trimming or removal of trees, containing or suspected to contain non-
maternity or hibernation bat roost sites shall be done under supervision of the
qualified biologist and follow a two-step removal process.
a. On the first day of tree trimming or removal and under supervision of
the qualified wildlife biologist, branches and limbs not containing
cavities or fissures in which bats could roost, shall be cut only using
chainsaws.
b. On the following day and under the supervision of the qualified
wildlife biologist, the remainder of the tree or structure may be
removed, either using chainsaws or other equipment (e.g. excavator or
backhoe).
5. Existing structures, rock crevices or outcrops containing or suspected to
contain non-maternity or hibernation bat roosts within the project site shall
be disturbed or dismantled under the supervision of the qualified wildlife
biologist in the evening and after bats have emerged from the roost to forage.
These areas shall be modified to significantly change the roost conditions,
causing bats to abandon and not return to the roost.
San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat. San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (a
California SSC) has the potential to occur in woodland habitat within and in the vicinity
of the project sites. Proposed construction activities, such as tree trimming or removal,
vegetation removal, preparation of staging areas and transportation or staging of materials
and equipment, could have a substantial adverse effect on this species should active
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-37 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
middens (nests) be present in areas where project activities are planned. Implementing
Mitigation Measures BIO-1b and BIO-1c (described above) and Mitigation Measure
BIO-1g, Avoidance and Minimization Measures for San Francisco Dusky-Footed
Woodrat would reduce potential impacts on this species to a less-than-significant level
by increasing worker education regarding the potential presence and sensitivity of these
species, conducting pre-construction surveys and biological monitoring during
construction, and requiring additional protection measures during project implementation.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1g: Avoidance and Minimization Measures for San
Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat. In coordination with the MROSD, a pre-
construction survey for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat middens shall be
conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist prior to the start of construction in
suitable habitat within and surrounding the project sites, staging areas, and access
roads. Active middens identified during surveys within the project sites, staging
areas, or along access roads shall be flagged as a sensitive resource and avoided
during construction, if feasible.
Should avoidance of active woodrat middens within the project site not be feasible,
an MROSD representative, supported by the wildlife biologist, shall consult with
CDFW regarding dismantling the middens by hand for relocation outside of the
project areas, and shall dismantle the middens under the supervision of a qualified
wildlife biologist. If young are encountered during dismantling of the nest, material
shall be replaced and a 50-foot no-disturbance buffer shall be established around
the active midden. The buffer shall remain in place until young have matured
enough to disperse on their own accord and the midden is no longer active. Nesting
substrate shall then be collected and relocated to suitable woodland habitat outside
of the project area of disturbance. Appropriate safety gear (e.g., respirator, gloves,
and tyvek suit) shall be used by the qualified wildlife biologist while relocating
woodrat nests.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The mixed woodland surrounding Tributary
Creek at Site 1 and Stevens Creek at Site 2 is considered riparian habitat in that it occurs
along stream corridors, but it does not support traditional riparian corridor vegetation
such as dense, willow thickets that drastically contrast with surrounding upland
communities. The tree canopy at each site along the creek channels is dense and
contiguous with the surrounding upland areas. Ground vegetation is relatively sparse at
Site 1 and Site 2 and not much variation occurs between annual herb and perennial fern
species growing on the creek banks and adjacent uplands, with the exception of few
additional shrub species.
As described in the Project Description, seven trees consisting of native California bay
(Umbellularia californica) and tan oak (Notholithocarpus densiflorus) trees would be
removed to accommodate bridge installation at Site 2. One native Pacific madrone
(Arbutus menziesii) would be removed at Site 1 to accommodate bridge installation at
Site 1. With the exception of one California bay tree that is six inches in diameter at
breast height (DBH) at Site 2, and the Pacific madrone that is 15 inches dbh at Site 1, all
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-38 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
other trees to be removed are immature saplings less than six inches DBH. Removal of
other additional trees at Site 1 and Site 2 may be necessary to accommodate these same
activities; however, no additional trees greater than six inches DBH are expected to be
removed from either site. Ground vegetation at Site 1 and Site 2 work areas along the
creek channels, staging areas, and trail realignment footprints would also be either
removed or disturbed in support of the proposed project. While the removal of few
immature trees and disturbance to ground vegetation at Site 1 and Site 2 would be
relatively minimal and within a limited footprint, disturbance to any amount of riparian
habitat without restoration would be considered a substantial adverse effect and therefore
potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Restoration of
Riparian Habitat would reduce project-effects in riparian habitat to a less-than-
significant level.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Restoration of Riparian Habitat
1. MROSD or its contractor shall restore riparian habitat disturbed during
project construction at Site 1 along Tributary Creek and Site 2 along Stevens
Creek, at adjacent access areas along the creek corridors, and the trail
realignment footprints to pre-project conditions following project
completion, as described below.
2. During special-status plant surveys described in BIO-1a, botanists shall
document baseline conditions of areas to be disturbed under the Project such
as species composition and percent cover. This information shall be used to
determine success of 1) restored areas following construction completion,
and 2) areas left to revegetate through self-recruitment.
3. All areas of grassland disturbed during vegetation removal and ground
disturbance shall be seeded with a regionally-appropriate native grass seed
mix following construction. Restored areas shall be monitored at least once a
year for at least 3 years or longer, as determined in consultation with CDFW
and/or as needed, to verify whether the vegetation is fully established and
self-sustaining. By Year 3, percent cover and vegetation composition shall
meet baseline cover and composition conditions determined through baseline
surveys.
4. Herbaceous ground vegetation at bridge assembly areas at Site 1 and Site 2
shall not be removed but covered with a tight weave coir mat prior to use in
order to preserve topsoil and any dormant seeds within the soil of temporary
use areas. Once construction is complete, the coir mat shall be removed and
the areas shall be allowed to revegetate through natural recruitment.
Monitoring of these disturbed areas will occur annually for 3 years or as
specified in consultation with CDFW and/or RWQCB. If in Year 1,
groundcover is not progressing towards baseline conditions (at least 30% of
baseline conditions) MROSD shall apply a native seed mix and/or plantings
to these areas.
5. Decommissioned trail segments shall be covered in slash or logs to
discourage use and act as natural erosion control.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-39 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
6. Native trees (e.g. Bay laurel, tan oak, and madrone) and non-native trees
measuring six inches in diameter or more that are removed from riparian
habitat in support of the project shall be replaced onsite or in the immediate
vicinity of the disturbed areas at a 1:1 ratio with native species that occur
within the surrounding mixed woodland. Tree replacement ratios consider
the relatively dense canopy of the mixed woodland at each location and
overall area of disturbance available for new trees to be planted and succeed.
7. Trees planted in riparian areas shall be monitored for at least three years
concurrently with restored undergrowth. The site shall achieve at least 80%
tree survival by Year 3.
c) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The project site supports the intermittent aquatic
community associated with Tributary Creek and Stevens Creek, which is federally
protected by the Corps as waters of the United States, subject to regulation under the
Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404, and State-protected by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB) as waters of the State, subject to regulation under the CWA
Section 401 and the Porter-Cologne Act. A preliminary delineation of waters of the U.S.
revealed a total of 0.071 acre (170 linear feet) of potentially jurisdictional stream “other
waters of the U.S.” occur within the project study area. Site 1, Tributary Creek study
area, contains 0.0074 acre (60 linier feet) and Site 2, Stevens Creek study area, contains
0.064 acre (110 linear feet) of “other waters”. For the purpose of this analysis, we assume
that the extent of waters of the State is equal to the extent of waters of the U.S. However,
the extent of waters of the U.S. and waters of the State are determined by the Corps and
RWQCB, respectively, and waters of the State may be determined to exceed beyond the
Corps jurisdictional boundary.
The new bridges, staging areas, and temporary construction materials (e.g., concrete
forms, equipment, and bridge materials in staging areas) would be placed above areas
defined as waters of the U.S./waters of the State as regulated under CWA Section 404
and 401 to avoid temporary and/or permanent fill within waters of the U.S. and/or waters
of the State. As the project is designed and would be implemented to avoid temporary or
permanent impacts to waters of the U.S./waters of the State, a CWA Section 404/401
authorization will not be pursued for the project. Depending on the extent of waters of the
State as determined by RWQCB, Waste Discharge Requirements may be required from
the RWQCB should the jurisdictional boundary be determined to extend beyond waters
of the U.S and into the project work area. In this case temporary construction impacts to
waters of the State could occur under the project. A Fish and Game Code Section 1602
lake and streambed authorization agreement (SAA) would also be required by CDFW for
construction activities at both Sites 1 and 2.
Ground disturbing activities would occur during the dry season, between April 15 and
October 15, when creek water levels are low. As both Tributary Creek and Stevens Creek
within the project sites are intermittent, project reaches may be completely dry during
project construction under current drought conditions; however, creek flow could be
present during construction. Potential temporary impacts on water quality during
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-40 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
construction could result from the release of hazardous construction‐related materials
(e.g., gasoline, oils, grease, lubricants, or other petroleum‐based products) into Tributary
Creek or Stevens Creek. As discussed in the Hazardous Materials and Hydrology and
Water Quality sections and Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and HYD-1, construction
contractors would implement BMPs to minimize contamination from petroleum products
and reduce erosion to reduce the project’s potential impact on aquatic communities.
Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO‐1b, BIO-1c, and BIO-1d
would reduce impacts to a less‐than‐significant level through worker environmental
awareness training, the presence of an onsite biological monitor during construction,
installation of exclusion fencing, and implementation of general construction measures.
If the RWQCB determines that the extent of waters of the State extends beyond the limits
of waters of the U.S. and into the project work area, the project may result in temporary
construction impacts to waters of the State, which would be a potentially significant
impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3, Minimization of Disturbance
to Waters of the State, would reduce impacts to less-than-significant by minimizing the
disturbance area and restoring temporary use areas to pre-project conditions.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Minimization of Disturbance to Waters of the
State. MROSD and its contractors shall minimize impacts on waters of the state by
implementing the following measures:
1. Access roads, work areas, staging areas and infrastructure shall be sited to
avoid and minimize direct and indirect impacts to jurisdictional waters.
2. Avoid construction activities in saturated or ponded streams (typically during
the spring and winter).
3. Stabilize exposed slopes and streambanks immediately upon completion of
construction activities (e.g., removal of the existing bridge at Site 1 and
following new bridge installation).
4. During construction, implement measures to catch trimmed tree limbs,
shrubs, debris, soils, and other construction materials created by or used in
vegetation removal before such materials can enter the waterway. Such
materials shall be placed in project staging areas until the materials can be
properly disposed of.
5. Restoration to pre-project conditions (typically including contours, topsoil, and
vegetation) shall be conducted, as described in Mitigation Measure BIO-2 and
as required by regulatory permits (e.g., those issued by the RWQCB and
CDFW).
d) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The proposed project is designed to avoid direct
impacts to waters of the U.S. and associated aquatic habitat within the Stevens Creek and
Tributary Creek channels that could support California red-legged frog, San Francisco
garter snake, foothill yellow-legged frog, and red-bellied newt. Project work is restricted
to the upland banks of the creek corridors allowing these species, and other native
migratory fish and wildlife, to move within the creek channels of the project work areas
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
unimpeded. While temporary impacts to these species movement through upland areas
could result from construction associated with removal of the existing bridge at Site 1 and
installation of the new bridges at Site 1 and Site 2 and general use of the work areas
during project construction, implementing Mitigation Measures BIO-1b through
BIO-1d, described above, would minimize adverse impacts to wildlife movement
throughout the duration of the project to a less-than-significant level. Following
construction, all areas of temporary disturbance would be restored to pre-project
conditions.
e) Less than Significant. The proposed project would remove seven native (California bay
and tan oak) trees from Site 2; one California bay tree with a diameter at breast height
(DBH) of six inches and at least six other trees with a (DBH) of less than six inches to
accommodate use of staging areas, bridge installation, and trail realignment. At Site 1,
one Pacific madrone with a dbh of 15 inches would be removed. Removal of other
additional trees at Site 1 and Site 2 (not exceeding six inches DBH) is not planned but
may be necessary to accommodate project activities. The City of Palo Alto Municipal
Code with partial jurisdiction over the project area designates “Protected Trees” as any
coast live oak or valley oak of 11.5 inches DBH, any redwood tree of 16 inches DBH,
and any “Heritage Trees” designated by the City Council. The Santa Clara County
General Plan includes policies and goals related to protecting biological resources. In
addition, the Santa Clara County Tree Preservation and Removal Ordinance (County
Code, Sections C16.1 to C16.17) serves to protect trees measuring 12 inches diameter at
breast height within parcels zoned “Hillsides” (three acres or less); parcels within a “-d”
(Design Review) combining zoning district; and parcels within the Los Gatos Hillside
Specific Plan Area. The project sites are not within any of these parcels. The project
would not remove any trees qualifying as protected trees or designated as heritage trees
under either the City of Palo Alto Municipal Code or the Santa Clara County Tree
Preservation and Removal Ordinance and therefore the project does not conflict with
applicable tree protection policies and the impact is considered less than significant and
no mitigation is required.
f) No Impact. The proposed project is not located within the Santa Clara Valley Habitat
Plan (which is an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community
Conservation Plan) and is not subject to other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plans; therefore no impact would occur.
References
Barry, S.J. 1994. The Distribution, habitat, and evolution of the San Francisco garter snake,
Thamnophis sirtalis tetrateaenia. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of California Davis.
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2000. California Wildlife Habitat
Relationships System Life History Account for Foothill Yellow-legged Frog. Written by: S.
Morey. Reviewed by: T. Papenfuss. Edited by: R. Duke, E. C. Beedy. Updated by: CWHR
Program Staff, January 2000.
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-41 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-42 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
CDFG, 2009. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant
Populations and Natural Communities. November 24, 2009.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), 2015a. Natural Diversity Database. March
2015. Special Animals List. Periodic publication. 51 pp.
CDFW, 2015b. Natural Diversity Database. April 2015. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and
Lichens List. Quarterly publication. 125 pp.
CDFW, 2015c. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Rarefind version 5 query of the
Mindego Hill, Cupertino, La Honda, Franklin Point, Big Basin, Castle Rock Ridge,
Woodside, Palo Alto, and Mountain View USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles,
Commercial Version. Accessed July 13, 2015.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS), 2015. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants for the
San Mateo, Woodside, Redwood Point, and Palo Alto U.S. Geographical Survey (USGS)
7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. [http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/] Accessed July 14, 2015.
Environmental Science Associates (ESA), 2015. Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge
Projects, Preliminary Delineation of Waters of the United States, Santa Clara County,
California. Prepared for Midpenninsula Regional Open Space District. April 2015.
eBird, 2015. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance [web application].
Monte Bello OSP Hotspot. eBird, Ithica, New York. [http://www.ebird.org] Accessed
December 1, 2015.
Linsdale, J.M. and L.P Tevis Jr. 1951. The dusky-footed wood rat: a record of observations made
on the Hastings Natural History Reservations. University of California, Berkeley.
McGinnis, S., P. Keel, and E, Burko. 1987. The use of upland habitats by snake species at Año
Nuevo State Reserve. Report to California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento,
California. 13 pp.
McGinnis, S. 1989. Distribution and feeding habitat requirements of the San Francisco garter
snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia). Draft of Final Report, submitted to California
Department of Fish and Game. 40 pp.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 2015. GIS data related to California red-legged frog
occurrence records within the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, supplied by the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. Shapefiles entitled “RADRpints.shp”.
Nafis, Gary. A Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles of California. Foothill Yellow-legged Frog –
Rana boylii. [http://www.californiaherps.com/frogs/pages/r.boylii.html] Accessed 1
December 2015.
Reilly, Sean B., D.M. Portik, M.S. Koo, and D.B. Wake 2014. Discovery of a New, Disjunct
Population of a Narrowly Distributed Salamander (Taricha rivularis) in California Presents
Conservation Challenges. Journal of Herpetology, Vol. 48, No. 2. University of California,
Berkeley.
Roessler, Cindy. “A Newt or Not a Newt.” Blog Post. Dipper Ranch. Blogger.com, 28 December
2014. [http://dipperanch.blogspot.com/2014/12/a-newt-or-not-newt.html] Accessed July
23, 2015.
Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP), 2015. Stevens
Creek Watershed. [http://www.scvurppp-w2k.com/ws_stevens.shtml] Accessed July 22, 2015.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-43 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Stebbins, R.C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Houghton Mifflin
Company, Boston, MA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1985. Recovery Plan for the San Francisco Garter
Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia), Portland, Oregon, September 11, 1985.
USFWS, 2005. Revised Guidance on Site Assessment and Field Surveys for California Red-
legged Frogs. Sacramento, California, August.[http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/es/Survey-
Protocols-Guidelines/Documents/crf_survey_guidance_aug2005.pdf] Accessed July 21,
2015.
USFWS, 2006. San Francisco Garter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) 5-Year Review:
Summary and Evaluation. September, 2006.
USFWS, 2015. My Project, IPaC Trust Resource Report of Federally Endangered and Threatened
Species in the Mindego Hill, Cupertino, La Honda, Franklin Point, Big Basin, Castle Rock
Ridge, Woodside, Palo Alto, and Mountain View USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangles, July 15, 2015.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2015. Biosecurity and Disease. [http://fl.biology.usgs.gov/
c1258_Dodd/html/biosecurity_and_disease.html] Accessed July 23, 2015.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-44 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Cultural Resources
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
Discussion
a) No Impact. The proposed project would result in a significant impact if the project
activities cause a substantial adverse change to a historical resource, herein referring to
historic-era architectural resources of the built environment, including buildings,
structures, and objects. A substantial adverse change includes physical demolition,
destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource.
ESA completed a records search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) of the
California Historical Resources Information System at Sonoma State University on
March 5, 2015 (File No. 14-1164); including a review of previous surveys, studies, and
records for the project site and a half-mile radius. ESA also reviewed records in the
Historic Property Data File for Santa Clara County, which contains information on sites
of recognized historical significance including those evaluated for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California
Inventory of Historical Resources, California Historical Landmarks, and California
Points of Historical Interest.
Records at the NWIC and the Historic Property Data File for Santa Clara County indicate
that no historic-era architectural resources have been previously recorded in the records
search radius. In addition, ESA staff conducted a site visit on March 18, 2015 and no
historic-era architectural resources that could be considered historical resources were
observed at the project site (Koenig, 2015). As there are no historical resources at the
project site, the proposed project would have no impact on historical resources.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation. A significant impact would occur if the proposed
project would cause a substantial adverse change to an archaeological resource, including
those that qualify as historical resources, through physical demolition, destruction,
relocation, or alteration of the resource.
Based on a compilation of ethnographic, historic, and archaeological data, Milliken
(1995) describes a group known as the Ohlone, who once occupied the general vicinity of
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-45 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
the project. Levy (1978) describes the language group spoken by the Ohlone, known as
“Costanoan.” This term is originally derived from a Spanish word designating the coastal
peoples of Central California. Today, Costanoan is used as a linguistic term that
references to a larger language family spoken by distinct sociopolitical groups that spoke
at least eight languages (as different as Spanish is from French) of the same Penutian
language group. The Ohlone once occupied a large territory from San Francisco Bay in
the north to the Big Sur and Salinas Rivers in the south. The Santa Cruz Mountains were
home to the group known as the Olpen – the only tribe on the San Francisco Peninsula
that did not occupy coastal or bayshore lands. Olpen territory appears to have been in the
interior hill and valley lands of La Honda Creek on the coast side, as well as the Corte de
la Madera Creek portion of the upper San Francisquito Creek watershed (Milliken et al.,
2009). After European contact, Ohlone society was severely disrupted by missionization,
disease, and displacement. Today, the Ohlone still have a strong presence in the San
Francisco Bay Area, and are highly interested in their historic and prehistoric past.
Results of the background research indicate that two previous cultural resources studies
have been completed within a ½-mile radius of the projects. No previously recorded
cultural resources are in the vicinity of the bridge construction areas or access routes. One
area of lithic debitage was previously identified by a District planner in the general
vicinity; this area will be avoided during construction activities and no staging areas will
occur at the location.
During a survey of the bridge construction areas and access routes on March 18, 2015
(Koenig, 2015), no archaeological resources were identified. No evidence suggesting the
presence of archaeological resources or other evidence of past human use and occupation
was observed along the trails or adjacent slopes.
Based on the analysis, the proposed project would have a low potential to affect
archaeological resources; however the discovery of archaeological resources cannot be
entirely discounted. In the unlikely event that archaeological resources are uncovered
during project implementation, any damage to the resources could be a significant
impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would reduce the impact to a
less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: MROSD shall implement the following measure:
Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources. If prehistoric or
historic-period archaeological resources are encountered, all construction
activities within 100 feet shall halt and MROSD shall be notified. Prehistoric
archaeological materials might include obsidian and chert flaked-stone tools
(e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally
darkened soil (“midden”) containing heat-affected rocks, artifacts, or
shellfish remains; and stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles,
handstones, or milling slabs); and battered stone tools, such as hammerstones
and pitted stones. Historic-era materials might include deposits of metal,
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-46 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
glass, and/or ceramic refuse. A Secretary of the Interior-qualified
archaeologist shall inspect the findings within 24 hours of discovery. If it is
determined that the project could damage a historical resource or a unique
archaeological resource (as defined pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines),
mitigation shall be implemented in accordance with PRC Section 21083.2
and Section 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, with a preference for
preservation in place. Consistent with Section 15126.4(b)(3), this may be
accomplished through planning construction to avoid the resource;
incorporating the resource within open space; capping and covering the
resource; or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. If
avoidance is not feasible, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare and
implement a detailed treatment plan in consultation with MROSD and, for
prehistoric resources, the appropriate Native American representative.
Treatment of unique archaeological resources shall follow the applicable
requirements of PRC Section 21083.2. Treatment for most resources would
consist of (but would not be not limited to) sample excavation, artifact
collection, site documentation, and historical research, with the aim to target
the recovery of important scientific data contained in the portion(s) of the
significant resource to be impacted by the project. The treatment plan shall
include provisions for analysis of data in a regional context, reporting of
results within a timely manner, curation of artifacts and data at an approved
facility, and dissemination of reports to local and state repositories, libraries,
and interested professionals.
c) Less than Significant with Mitigation. A potentially significant impact would occur if
the proposed project would destroy a unique paleontological resource or site, or a unique
geologic feature. Paleontological resources are the fossilized evidence of past life found
in the geologic record. Despite the tremendous volume of sedimentary rock deposits
preserved worldwide and the enormous number of organisms that have lived through
time, preservation of plant or animal remains as fossils is an extremely rare occurrence.
Therefore, fossils—particularly vertebrate fossils—are considered to be nonrenewable
resources. Because of their rarity and the scientific information they can provide, fossils
provide a significant record of ancient life.
Rock formations that are considered of paleontological sensitivity are those rock units
that have yielded significant vertebrate or invertebrate fossil remains. This includes, but
is not limited to, sedimentary rock units that contain significant paleontological resources
anywhere within its geographic extent. The project sites are underlain by Franciscan
Complex from the Late Jurassic through Cretaceous era. According to the Society of
Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standard assessment, this geologic unit has a high
potential to contain significant paleontological resources. According to the University of
California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) online database, however, there have been
no significant paleontological discoveries within this geologic formation in Santa Clara
County (UCMP, 2015).
Ground disturbance associated with the proposed project would include grading and
excavation into paleontologically sensitive geologic formations. While damage or
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-47 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
destruction of unique paleontological resources for the project is unlikely, the possibility
cannot be entirely dismissed. Thus, the potential impact to paleontological resources is
considered potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2 would
reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure CUL-2: MROSD shall implement the following measure:
Inadvertent Discovery of Paleontological Resources. If paleontological
resources, such as fossilized bone, teeth, shell, tracks, trails, casts, molds, or
impressions are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, all ground
disturbing activities within 100 feet of the find shall be halted until a
qualified paleontologist can assess the significance of the find and, if
necessary, develop appropriate salvage measures in conformance with
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Guidelines (SVP, 1996; SVP, 2010).
d) Less than Significant with Mitigation. A potentially significant impact would occur if
the proposed project would disturb human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries. There is no indication that the project site has been used for human
burial purposes in the recent or distant past. It is unlikely that human remains would be
encountered at the project site; yet in the event of the discovery of any human remains
during project implementation, any impact to the remains would result in a significant
impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-3 would reduce the impact to a
less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measure CUL-3: MROSD shall implement the following measure:
Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. In the event of discovery or
recognition of any human remains during construction activities, such
activities within 100 feet of the find shall cease until the Santa Clara County
Coroner has been contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of
death is required. The NAHC will be contacted within 24 hours if it is
determined that the remains are Native American. The NAHC will then
identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendant
from the deceased Native American, who in turn would make
recommendations to MROSD for the appropriate means of treating the
human remains and any grave goods.
References
Koenig, Heidi, Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects, Cultural Resources Survey
Report. Prepared for Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. March 2015.
Levy, Richard S., Costanoan. In California, edited by R.F. Heizer, Volume 8. Handbook of North
American Indians, W.G. Sturtevant, general editor, pp. 485-497. Smithsonian Institution,
Washington D.C. 1978.
Milliken, Randall, A Time of Little Choice. Ballena Press Anthropological Papers No. 43. 1995.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-48 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Milliken, Randall, Laurence H. Shoup, and Beverley R. Ortiz, Ohlone/Costanoan Indians of the
San Francisco Peninsula and their Neighbors, Yesterday and Today. Prepared for National
Park Service, Golden Gate National Recreation Area. June 2009.
Northwest Information Center (NWIC), Records Search File No. File No. 14-1164. On file, ESA,
March 2015.
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). Conditions of Receivership for Paleontologic Salvage
Collections, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology News Bulletin, Vol. 166, p. 31-323.
February 1996.
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). Assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts to
nonrenewable paleontologic resources: standard guidelines, Society of Vertebrate
Paleontology News Bulletin. 2010.
University of California Museum of Paleontolgoy (UCMP), Online database available at
http://ucmpdb.berkeley.edu/. Accessed March 27, 2015.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-49 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
6. GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY —
Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction,
or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
Discussion
a.i) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The San Francisco Bay Area generally
experiences a high level of seismic activity due to its tectonic setting. Surface rupture
occurs when the ground surface is broken due to fault movement during earthquakes.
Such hazards are generally assumed to occur in the vicinity of an active fault trace.
Active fault lines in Santa Clara County include the San Andreas fault and the various
faults that branch from it.
The State Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Alquist-Priolo Act) prohibits the
development of structures for human occupancy across active fault traces. Under the
Alquist-Priolo Act, the California Geological Survey (CGS, formerly the California
Division of Mines and Geology) has established zones on either side of the active fault that
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-50 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
delimits areas susceptible to surface fault rupture.3 These zones are referred to as fault
rupture hazard zones and are shown on official maps published by the CGS
(Figure GEO-1). Site #1 falls within the rupture hazard zone of the San Andreas Fault,
and is located less than 500 ft from an active fault trace known as the Pilarcitos fault
(CGS, 1974). Site #2 is located approximately a quarter-mile from this same trace, but
outside the designated Alquist-Priolo fault zone. Therefore, the possibility of surface fault
rupture is high near Site #1, but low near Site #2.
These seismically vulnerable conditions are typical for the open spaces that traverse the
spine of the San Francisco Peninsula, particularly those such as Monte Bello OSP which
fall primarily within the San Andreas Rift Zone. The project sites are located in a remote
area that only experiences recreational use; the projects do not include construction of
habitable spaces. Human “occupancy” such as camping is not allowed at or near either
bridge site, and people would generally be on the bridges for short periods of time, so the
likelihood of exposure to potential adverse effects such as injury or death from fault
rupture is low.
As applicable, the new bridges would comply with the seismic design requirements set
forth in the California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, the California Building Code
(CBC). Compliance with the CBC would insure that the structures would resist collapse
from ground shaking expected in the project area during a major earthquake. In addition
to compliance with the required seismic standards, incorporation of Mitigation Measure
GEO-1 would further minimize the impact from fault rupture to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: MROSD will implement the following measure:
MROSD shall develop project design specifications consistent with and/or
incorporating the site preparation and grading, seismic design, foundation
design, and bridge design recommendations presented in the project-specific
engineering geology investigation.
a.ii) Less than Significant with Mitigation. Seismic activity in the region is dominated by
the San Andreas Fault system. According to the U.S. Geologic Survey’s third Uniform
California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, there is a less than 1% chance that an earthquake
of magnitude 6.7 or higher will occur along the Pilarcitos Fault near Sites #1 and #2
between 2015 and 2045, but an almost 7% chance of the same magnitude quake in that
same period along the main trace of the San Andreas Fault, less than a quarter-mile east
3 CGS designates zones that are most likely to experience fault rupture, although surface fault rupture is not necessarily
restricted to those specifically zoned areas. An active fault is defined by the State of California as a fault that has had
surface displacement within Holocene time (approximately the last 11,000 years). A potentially active fault is defined
as a fault that has shown evidence of surface displacement during the Quaternary (last 1.6 million years), unless direct
geologic evidence demonstrates inactivity for all of the Holocene or longer. This definition does not mean that faults
lacking evidence of surface displacement are necessarily inactive. A fault can be considered sufficiently active if there
is some evidence that Holocene displacement occurred on one or more of its segments or branches. A structure for
human occupancy is one that is intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy, which is expected to have
a human occupancy rate of more than 2,000 person hours per year (Hart, 1997).
Attachment 2
SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle;
Santa Clara County 2012 (AP zones) based on CGS 1974
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure GEO-1
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Site #1 - Bridge Replacement
Site #2 - New Bridge
Accurately Located Fault Traces
Approximately Located Fault Traces
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone
Note: Only data for Santa ClaraCounty is displayed; fault zonesnear Site #1 extend to the NWinto San Mateo County.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-52 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
of the Pilarcitos Fault (Field et al., 2013). Accordingly, earthquake hazard maps from the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), which predict the potential for ground
shaking during major earthquakes on active faults in the San Francisco Bay Area, map
both Sites #1 and #2 as having high earthquake shaking potential (ABAG, 2013). It is
likely that in the event of an earthquake within the San Andreas Fault Zone both sites
would experience seismic shaking (Best, 2015).
Predicting seismic events is not possible, nor is providing mitigation that can entirely
reduce the potential for injury and damage that can occur during a seismic event. Some
structural damage is typically not avoidable during an earthquake. However, as discussed
under (i) above, the project sites are located in remote areas that are only utilized for
recreation; neither project involves the construction of habitable structures. Since people
would generally use the bridges for short periods of time, the likelihood of exposure to
potential adverse effects such as injury or death from seismic ground shaking rupture is
low. The incorporation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, above, would reduce this impact
to less than significant.
a.iii) Less than Significant Impact. Seismic shaking can trigger secondary ground failures
caused by liquefaction. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where saturated subsurface soils
lose strength because of increased pore pressure and exhibit properties of a liquid rather
than those of a solid. The soils most susceptible to liquefaction are clean, loose,
uniformly graded, saturated, and fine-grained and occur close to the ground surface,
usually at depths of less than 50 feet. Data from the California Geological Survey
indicate that both sites are outside liquefaction hazard zones (CGS, 2005a); mapping
from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) also maps both project sites in
an area with very low risk of liquefaction (ABAG, 2013). Potential project-related
impacts due to liquefaction are therefore considered less than significant.
a.iv); c) Less than Significant with Mitigation. Landslides generally are any type of ground
movement that occurs primarily due to gravity acting on relatively weak soils and
bedrock on an over-steepened slope. Slope instability is often initiated or accelerated
from soil saturation and groundwater pressure, though may also be aggravated by grading
activity, such as removal of toe support by excavation or addition of new loads, such as
fill placement. Areas that are more prone to landslides include old landslides, the bases or
tops of steep or filled slopes, and drainage hollows.
The project site is located in steep, unstable terrain prone to land sliding. Figures GEO-2A
and GEO-2B display geologic units in the vicinity of the project site, and Figure GEO-3
displays landslide hazard areas as mapped by CGS (2005b). Site #1 is located on soils that
were likely partially deposited by a historic landslide/debris flow down the Tributary Creek
canyon (Best, 2015). The steep banks along the Tributary Creek channel are susceptible to
failure during periods of high storm flow, and especially during a large magnitude
earthquake (Best, 2015). Therefore, the risk of damage due to slope instability is moderate.
Attachment 2
SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle;
USGS 2000 (geology)
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure GEO-2A
Regional Geology
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Site #1 - Bridge Replacement
Site #2 - New Bridge
See Figure GEO-2B for legend
Attachment 2
SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle;
USGS 2000 (geology)
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure GEO-2B
Regional Geology - Legend
Geologic Units
Alluvial fan and fluvial deposits
Alluvial terrace deposits
Artificial fill
Butano Sandstone
Chert
Conglomerate
Diabase and gabbro
Greenstone
Lambert Shale
Lambert Shale and San Lorenzo Formation, undivided
Limestone
Mindego basalt and related volcanic rocks
Monterey Formation
Older alluvial fan deposits
Purisima Formation
San Lorenzo Formation
Sandstone
Santa Clara Formation
Serpentinite
Shale in Butano Sandstone
Sheared rock (melange)
Tahana Member
Twobar Shale Member
Unnamed marine sandstone and shale
Vaqueros Sandstone
Water
Attachment 2
SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle;
Santa Clara County 2012 (landslide hazard zones) based on CGS 2005
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure GEO-3
Landslide Hazard Zones
Site #1 - Bridge Replacement
Site #2 - New Bridge
Landslide Hazard Zones
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-56 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
The issue of slope stability has been addressed in the engineering geology study prepared
by Timothy Best, CEG (2015), which includes specific design and engineering
recommendations. The proposed projects would not destabilize the existing geologic
substrate by the replacement of the existing underground structures at Sites #1 and #2 and
restoration of the associated Stevens Creek Nature Trail segments (see Chapter 1, Project
Description, for details), and would maintain the existing slopes and site conditions.
Geological concerns that could lead to destabilization of the newly installed structures,
primarily the settlement of placed fills, are addressed in the engineering geology study
with recommendations on engineering remedies. Standard construction procedures
include compaction of backfill materials to minimize the potential damage to the
structures. With incorporation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 (i.e., implementing the
engineering geology recommendations) the potential hazard from unstable slopes would
be minimized. Therefore, the project would not increase the potential exposure of people
or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death at the project site due to landslides and slope instability.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation. Construction activities associated with the
proposed project would require land disturbing activities such as grading and excavation
that could increase the susceptibility of soils to erosion by wind and/or water, and
subsequently result in significant soil loss or erosion. Slopes adjacent to the project sites
vary from moderate to relatively steep (e.g., up to 75%, see Figures GEO-4A and
GEO-4B), though slopes along the active trail beds are much more gradual (between
15-30%). Clayey soils on steep slopes are susceptible to erosion when exposed to
concentrated surface water flow, and the potential for erosion is increased when
established vegetation is disturbed or removed. Established vegetation will only be
removed within re-routed alignments of the Stevens Creek Nature Trail at Sites #1 and #2.
If uncontrolled or not managed, soil erosion resulting from project construction would be
a potentially significant impact. Implementation of construction and erosion-control best
management practices (BMPs) would control and reduce the potential risk of increased
soil erosion. BMPs are individual or combined measures that can be implemented in a
practical and effective manner on the project site which, when applied, would prevent or
minimize the potential erosion and displacement of soil. Incorporation of Mitigation
Measure HYD-1 in the Hydrology and Water Quality section below would reduce this
potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
d) No Impact. Depending on the clay and silt content, some soils can expand or shrink with
changes in the water content. In general, the effects of expansive soils can damage
foundations, concrete slabs, and aboveground structures over long periods of time. No
issues pertaining to expansive soils were identified in the engineering geology report by
Timothy Best, CEG (2015). Further, the bridges would be backfilled with engineered
material having specific qualities that conform to common engineering and building
practices, and not any material having notable or uniquely hazardous expansive properties.
Therefore, the proposed project would not be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), and thus there would be no potential impact.
Attachment 2
SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle;
NRCS 2014 (soils)
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure GEO-4A
Regional Soils
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Note: Only data for Santa ClaraCounty is displayed.
Site #1 - Bridge Replacement
Site #2 - New Bridge
See Figure GEO-4B for legend
Attachment 2
SOURCE: USGS Mindego Hill, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle;
NRCS 2014 (soils)
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02 Figure GEO-4B
Regional Soils - Legend
Soils
Alumrock-Zepplin complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes
Aptos loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes
Ben Lomond gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes
Ben Lomond-Casrock complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes
Ben Lomond-Casrock complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes
Ben Lomond-Felton complex, 30 to 75 percent slopes
Casrock sandy loam, conglomerate bedrock, 15 to 30 percent slopes
Casrock-Skyridge-Rock outcrop complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes
Cropley clay, 2 to 9 percent slopes
Diablo-Urbanland complex, 9 to 15 percent slopes
Felton fine sandy loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes
Flaskan sandy clay loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes
Footpath-Mouser complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes
Footpath-Mouser complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes
Katykat-Sanikara complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes
Maymen gravelly sandy clay loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes
Mouser-Footpath complex, 8 to 30 percent slopes
Mouser-Maymen complex, 30 to 75 percent slopes
Pits, mine
Sanikara-Footpath complex, 30 to 75 percent slopes
Sanikara-Mouser-Rock outcrop complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes
Urban Land-Montavista-Togasara complex, 9 to 15 percent slopes
Zeppelin-Mccoy complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-59 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
e) No Impact. The proposed project would not include any elements that would require a
septic or other alternative wastewater system. Thus, there would be no impact.
References
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), 2013. San Mateo County Earthquake Hazard
Map. Available online: http://resilience.abag.ca.gov/earthquakes/sanmateo/
Best, Timothy C., CEG, 2015. Draft Engineering Geologic Review: Stevens Creek Nature Trail
Bridge Upgrade Project. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve, Santa Clara County, CA, prepared for Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District, November 19, 2015.
California Geological Survey. 2005a. Seismic Hazard Zones Report for the Mindego Hill 7.5-
Minute Quadrangle, Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties, California. Available online:
http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/evalrpt/mindh_eval.pdf
_____. 2005b. State of California Seismic Hazard Zones: Mindego Hill Quadrangle. Available
online: http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/quad/MINDEGO_HILL/maps/
ozn_mindh.pdf
_____. 1974. State of California Special Study Zones: Mindego Hill Quadrangle. Available
online: http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/quad/MINDEGO_HILL/maps/
MINDEGO_HILL.PDF
Field, E.H., Biasi, G.P., Bird, P., Dawson, T.E., Felzer, K.R., Jackson, D.D., Johnson, K.M.,
Jordan, T.H., Madden, C., Michael, A.J., Milner, K.R., Page, M.T., Parsons, T., Powers,
P.M., Shaw, B.E., Thatcher, W.R., Weldon, R.J., II, and Zeng, Y., 2013. Uniform
California earthquake rupture forecast, version 3 (UCERF3)—The time-independent
model: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2013–1165, 97 p., California Geological
Survey Special Report 228, and Southern California Earthquake Center Publication 1792,
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1165/.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2008. Forecasting California’s Earthquakes – What Can We
Expect in the Next 30 Years? USGS Fact Sheet 2008-3027.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-60 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS —
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
Discussion
a) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would generate greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions from temporary construction activities, including from combustion of
fossil fuels used in mobile equipment and power tools used for site preparation,
excavation, backfilling, and site restoration. BAAQMD has not adopted a GHG
emissions threshold with respect to construction-related GHGs. In lieu of specific
guidance from BAAQMD regarding significance thresholds for construction-related
GHG emissions, significance is assessed by a consideration of the scope and duration of
construction-related emissions. Given that the project activities would be temporary in
nature and would occur over the brief construction timeframe described in the Project
Description, the proposed project is not expected to result in an ongoing burden to
regional or global GHG inventories. The California Emissions Estimator Model
(CalEEMod) indicates that project construction would result in an estimated 85.12 metric
tons of carbon dioxide equivalents in 2015. Details of the GHG modeling can be found in
Appendix A. These emissions would be below any quantitative threshold considered by
BAAQMD for GHG emissions (BAAQMD, 2009). There would be no operational
emissions after construction. The impact is considered less than significant.
b) Less than Significant Impact. California has passed several bills and the governor has
signed at least three executive orders regarding GHGs. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (the Global
Warming Solutions Act) was passed by the California legislature on August 31, 2006. It
requires the state’s GHG emissions to be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020.
The Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan, adopted by the City in 2007, presents a
comprehensive inventory of municipal (City government-generated) and community-
generated emissions, proposes reduction targets, and suggests practical steps to reach those
targets. These practical steps include measures addressing utility programs, purchasing,
transportation, land use, green building, zero waste, and education.
The purpose of the proposed projects is to improve the environmental and recreational
value of the Stevens Creek Nature Trail by replacing a vulnerable bridge at Site #1, and
placing a new bridge at Site #2. The projects would not conflict with any existing GHG
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-61 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
laws, plans, policies, or regulations adopted by the California legislature or CARB and
would be consistent with policies in the Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan. Therefore,
this impact would be less than significant.
References
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), 2009. Revised Draft Options and
Justification Report: CEQA Thresholds of Significance. October, 2009.
City of Palo Alto, 2007. Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan. December 3. Available online:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/9986
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-62 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS —
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Discussion
a) No Impact. This project will not result in the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials. The District does not currently routinely transport, use, or dispose of
hazardous materials at the Preserve, and District Ordinance 93-1, Section 409.2 prohibits
persons from possessing or using harmful substances on District lands. Potential risks
associated with releases during the construction process are discussed in section (b),
below.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation. Project construction would include excavation of
subsurface soils and the possible interception of shallow groundwater. Such activity
could result in the release of hazardous materials, if the excavated soil or shallow
groundwater that is intercepted is contaminated. This could expose construction workers
and the public to hazardous materials during construction activities and could result in a
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-63 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
release of hazardous materials into the environment, such as Tributary Creek or Stevens
Creek. However, shallow groundwater conditions were not documented during the
engineering geology investigation (Best, 2015). Further, the potential to encounter
hazardous materials in soil and groundwater was evaluated utilizing database searches of
the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker (SWRCB, 2015) and
the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal-EPA) Department of Toxic
Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor databases (DTSC, 2015).4 These databases were
reviewed to identify known environmental cases listed within a half-mile of the project
site. Review of the databases did not identify any known environmental cases in the
vicinity of the proposed project (i.e., within approximately one-half mile). Thus, it is
unlikely that project construction would intercept shallow groundwater and this is
not considered a potential source of hazardous materials exposure for the proposed
project.
Project construction could potentially require the use of certain hazardous materials such
as fuels and oils. Inadvertent release of these materials into the environment could
adversely impact soil, surface waters, or groundwater quality. This could be a significant
impact. MROSD is a government agency and is subject to the strict safety practices
developed and enforced by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
Furthermore, MROSD has a Safety Officer and safety training program and its
contracting procedures require that any contractor hired to carry out, or help in carrying
out a project, must also comply with the relevant OSHA regulations. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, along with MROSD’s existing practices and OSHA’s
existing regulations, would reduce any risk associated with hazardous materials used
during construction to less-than-significant levels.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: MROSD and/or its contractor(s) shall use BMPs
based on the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Erosion and Sediment
Control Field Manual to reduce the potential for release of construction-related
fuels and other hazardous materials into the environment, as follows in Table 2-2:
4 The GeoTracker website includes the following types of environmental cases: leaking underground storage tank
(LUST) sites; land disposal sites; military sites; other cleanup sites; permitted underground storage tank (UST)
facilities; and permitted hazardous waste generators. The EnviroStor database identifies the following: Federal
Superfund (National Priorities List) sites; state response sites; voluntary cleanup sites; school cleanup sites;
corrective action sites; tiered permit sites; and hazardous waste facilities.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-64 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE 2-2
CONSTRUCTION-RELATED BMPS TO PROTECT SOIL, SURFACE WATER, AND
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
BMP Category BMP Description Timing Inspection & Maintenance
Solid Waste
Management
Remove all trash and construction-related
waste to a secure, covered location at the
end of each working day to maintain a clean
work site. Dispose of hazardous materials
according to all specific regulations.
Implement during
construction.
Inspect for trash on a daily
basis
Materials Storage Store chemicals in non-reactive container.
Store bagged, dry-reactive materials in a
secondary container. Protect all material
storage areas rom vandalism
Implement during
construction.
Inspect storage areas daily
to ensure no leaks or spills
have occurred
Spill Prevention
and Control
Good housekeeping practices shall be
followed to minimize storm water
contamination from any petroleum products
or other chemicals. Maintain spill cleanup
materials where readily accessible during
use
Implement during
construction
Clean up leaks and spills
immediately using
absorbent materials and as
little water as possible
Vehicle and
Equipment
Maintenance &
Fueling
Conduct proper and timely maintenance of
vehicles and equipment. Cleaning or
equipment maintenance shall be prohibited
except in areas located near the entrance to
the Preserve. If fueling must occur on-site,
use designated areas located away from
drainage courses and a drip pan to catch
spills. Place drip pans under heavy
equipment stored onsite overnight.
Implement during
construction
Inspect on-site vehicles and
equipment for leaks on a
routine basis; periodically
check incoming vehicles for
leaking oil and fluids while
on paved roads near the
entrance to the Preserve
Training All personnel shall be instructed regarding
the correct procedure for spill prevention
and control, waste disposal, use of
chemicals, and storage materials.
Implement during
construction
None.
c) No Impact. There are no schools located within one-quarter mile of the project site.
Therefore, the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school.
d) No Impact. The project site is not included on any of the environmental databases
maintained by the SWRCB (2013) or the DTSC (2013). Therefore, the proposed project
would not cause a significant hazard to the public or the environment related to a known
release of hazardous materials and no impact would occur.
e, f) No Impact. Because there are no public airports or private airstrips within two miles of
the project area, no impact would occur.
g) Less than Significant Impact. Project construction would be short-term and
maintenance activities associated with the project facilities would be minimal. During
construction of the proposed project, it is expected that a small amount of project-related
construction traffic may occur along Page Mill Road and Skyline Blvd. However, the
proposed project would not include any work within public roadways, and access for
emergency vehicles would not be obstructed. As described in the Transportation and
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-65 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Traffic section below, vehicle access to and from the project site would occur along
Canyon Trail from Page Mill Road (Site #1) and Skid Road Trail from Skyline Blvd.
(Site #2), and the project would not affect traffic flow for emergency service providers.
Therefore, the proposed project would have a less-than-significant effect on emergency
access. Impacts related to impairment of or interference with an adopted emergency
response plan or evacuation plan would be less than significant.
h) Less than Significant with Mitigation. District Ordinance 93-1 Section 404 prohibits
fires and smoking on District lands. In addition, District Rangers, who are trained in fire-
fighting techniques and carry fire suppression equipment, regularly patrol the Preserve.
District staff members generally serve as first responders to fire emergencies within the
preserves, with the primary fire protection responsibility falling to CAL FIRE, County
Fire Departments, and municipal fire protection agencies. The District’s radio and
repeater system combined with ranger patrols and staff members on call 24 hours per day
enable prompt and effective communication with emergency service providers in the
event of a wildland fire or an emergency response call.
Construction of the proposed project would occur within forested areas of Santa Clara
County. The project setting amid mature trees, bushes, and grasslands provides a setting
conducive to the ignition and spread of a wildland fire if appropriate measures are not
taken during construction activities. The project area is mapped outside a Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone by CAL FIRE (2008); nevertheless, a wildland fire could expose
people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 would reduce the impact to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: MROSD and/or its contractor shall implement the
following fire safety construction practices:
Grass and other fuels should be cut or otherwise reduced around construction
sites where vehicles are allowed to park.
Flammable materials shall be removed to a distance of 10 feet from any
equipment that could produce a spark, fire, or flame.
The use of mechanical construction equipment shall be minimized during
hot, dry, windy weather.
Water shall be provided to suppress potential fires caused by construction
work.
Workers shall be reminded that smoking is prohibited at the work site and on
any District land per contract conditions and the District Ordinance.
Workers shall maintain working ABC fire extinguishers on all vehicles in the
work area.
All equipment to be used during construction must have an approved spark
arrestor.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-66 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Construction personnel shall be trained in fire safe work practices, use of fire
suppression equipment, and procedures to follow in the event of a fire.
Construction personnel shall stop all work if the site is greater than
80 degrees F, less than 30% humidity, and wind-speeds greater than 10MPH.
Workers shall contact the Palo Alto Dispatch at 650-470-1258 and the
CALFIRE – Skylonda Dispatch at 650-851-1860 for emergency response in
the event of a fire (note that these numbers are for emergencies only).
References
Best, Timothy C., CEG, 2015. Draft Engineering Geologic Review: Stevens Creek Nature Trail
Bridge Upgrade Project. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve, Santa Clara County, CA, prepared for Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District, November 19, 2015.
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), 2015. EnviroStor database.
Available online: http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/
CALFIRE, 2008. Santa Clara County Hire Hazard Severity Map: Local Responsibility Area.
Available online: http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fhsz_maps_santaclara.php
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), 2015. GeoTracker database. Available online:
http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-67 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Hydrology and Water Quality
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY —
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production
rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of a
site or area through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or by other means, in a manner that
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of a site
or area through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river, or by other means, substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would
result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
that would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche,
tsunami, or mudflow?
Discussion
a, f) Less than Significant with Mitigation. Tributary Creek is a small, relatively steep,
intermittent tributary to Stevens Creek with a watershed of approximately 110 acres (this
serves as the watershed for Site #1). For most of its length, and particularly near Site #1,
Tributary Creek is highly incised with little to no active floodplain. Stevens Creek is a
much larger drainage that serves as one of the primary freshwater inflows to South San
Francisco Bay. The Stevens Creek watershed upstream of Site #2 is approximately 560 ac
(Figure HYD-1). Upper Stevens Creek is characterized by a gravel- and cobble-bed
Attachment 2
St
e
v
e
n
s
C
r
e
e
k
Ad
o
b
e
C
r
e
e
k
Lambert C
r
e
e
k
Indian
C
r
e
e
k
Bay C
r
e
e
k
W
e
s
t
F
o
r
k
A
d
o
b
e
C
r
e
e
k
L
o
s
T
r
a
n
c
o
s
C
r
e
e
k
Pete
r
s
C
r
e
e
k
C
o
r
t
e
M
a
d
e
r
a
C
r
e
e
k
SOURCE: NAIP 2012 (air photo), USDA-NRCS, USGS, &
EPA 2015 (hydro), USGS StreamStates (watersheds)
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects . 130573.02Figure HYD-1
Site Watersheds
Creeks
Bridge Replacement (Site 1)
Site 1 Watershed (~110 ac)
New Bridge (Site 2)
Site 2 Watershed (~560 ac)
Note: Watershed extents are exportedfrom USGS StreamStats; bridge locationsare based on imprecise shapefiles oftrails from MROSD. Therefore, the twodo not map precisely relative to each other.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-69 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
channel confined within a relatively narrow valley; adjacent slopes tend to be steep,
limiting the extent and distribution of floodplain habitat. Most floodplain habitat occurs
on narrow gravel/sand terraces adjacent to the active low-flow channel.
Both of the proposed new bridges will be sited above the modeled 100-year flood
elevation to minimize the likelihood that they will constrain the passage of flood flows
and drive bed scour immediately downstream. The Site #2 bridge will eliminate the
existing ford crossing, enabling trail users to stay out of the floodplain and creek. Over
the long-term, therefore, project implementation would likely have a beneficial impact
with respect to water quality. The potential adverse impacts of the proposed projects
would be short-term and related to the temporary construction activities required to
construct the bridges and re-route associated portions of the Stevens Creek Nature Trail.
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would require land disturbing
activities such as grading, earthmoving, backfilling, and compaction. Additionally,
project construction would involve the use of chemicals and solvents such as fuel and
lubricating grease for motorized equipment. Construction and ground disturbance
activities associated with the proposed project would occur in close proximity to
Tributary and Stevens Creeks, and such activities could cause dislodging of soil and
erosion or inadvertent spills of construction related chemicals, resulting in potentially
adverse water quality impacts related to sedimentation, turbidity, and/or fuels and oils.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would reduce the potential water quality
impacts related to fuels and oils and inadvertent spills to a less-than-significant level.
The proposed land disturbing activities would occur over an area of less than one acre, and
thus the proposed project would not be subject to a Construction General Permit under the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. Therefore, the
proposed project would not be required to implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP). However, construction of the bridges could result in the discharge of
sediment or pollutants from the construction sites, which could result in a violation of water
quality standards. To control and minimize the impact, project activities within the creek
would be conducted during the dry season as feasible (i.e., May - October), or during
periods of no stream flow, and this would largely minimize the potential for the proposed
projects to significantly impact water quality and/or aquatic habitat. However, to ensure the
erosion potential is minimized, Mitigation Measure HYD-1 would be necessary to reduce
the water quality impacts of project construction to a less-than-significant level. After
construction is completed, disturbed areas would be restored to minimize the potential for
future erosion. Operation and maintenance activities would be similar to those under
existing conditions, including continued use of the trail and monitoring of vegetation. Such
activities would not involve soil disturbance and are not expected to result in a discharge of
pollutants or violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.
Mitigation Measure HYD-1: Stormwater and Erosion BMPs. MROSD or its
contractor(s) shall implement erosion-control measures consistent with the
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-70 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
District’s BMPs for road/trail work near streams (MROSD, 2013).5 These BMPs
are based on the most recent versions of the Erosion and Sediment Control Field
Manual (RWQCB, 2002) and the Construction Best Management Practices (BMP)
Handbook (CASQA, 2009), and have been approved by CDFW and the RWQCB.
Stormwater and erosion control measures shall include, but not be limited to, the
following:
Temporary erosion control measures shall be employed for disturbed areas (no
disturbed surfaces shall be left without erosion control measures in place):
- Place fiber rolls along the perimeter of the sites to reduce runoff flow
velocities and prevent sediment from leaving the sites or entering
Tributary or Stevens Creeks;
- Place silt fences down-gradient of disturbed areas to slow runoff and
retain sediment;
- Revegetate all disturbed soil per a Habitat Restoration and Monitoring
Plan, or otherwise protect soil from erosion with mulch, coir mats, or
related materials following the end of construction activities.
Construction activities shall be scheduled to minimize land disturbance during
peak runoff periods and during storm events. To the extent feasible, grading
activities shall be limited to the immediate area required for construction;
As necessary (i.e., during storms that may occur within the construction
window), surface runoff, including ponded water, shall be diverted away
from areas undergoing grading, construction, excavation, vegetation
removal, and/or any other activity which may result in a discharge to
Tributary or Stevens Creek. Normal flow pathways must be restored upon
completion of work at that location;
If and when conditions are too extreme for treatment by surface protection
and/or measures described above, sediment entrained by runoff shall be
temporarily contained on site. Temporary sediment traps, filter fabric fences,
inlet protectors, vegetative filters and buffers, or settling basins shall be used
to detain runoff water long enough for sediment particles to settle out.
Construction materials, including topsoil and fuels, shall be stored, covered,
and isolated so as to prevent runoff losses and potential surface water
contamination.
b) No Impact. The proposed projects would not require long-term withdrawal of
groundwater and would not introduce any impervious surfaces that might affect
groundwater recharge. Further, project construction activities are unlikely to require any
notable amount of dewatering, as groundwater was not encountered during the
engineering geology investigation (Best, 2015), and shallow groundwater would only be
likely during the winter or late spring months, which would be outside of the construction
5 The District selects appropriate BMPs for erosion control based on multiple factors, including the expertise of
project engineers/planners, permit conditions from regulatory agencies, existing agreements with regulatory
agencies, and other factors. The document cited here does not instruct the user which BMPs are appropriate to
install given the location and situation; it describes what the BMP technique should look like if selected.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-71 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
period window. There would be no permanent, adverse impacts to groundwater supplies
or aquifers as a result of the projects.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed projects would not substantially alter the
drainage pattern of either project site. Following construction, the drainage patterns
would be similar to those under current conditions. At Site #1, the new bridge at
Tributary Creek would be wider and higher than the existing bridge, and would be
located above the 100-year flood elevation, therefore would not change the existing bed
or bank. Further, the larger bridge would also reduce the magnitude of flow expansion
and contraction at the channel/bridge transition, improving the continuity of sediment
transport under the bridge. At Site #2, the new bridge would be located well above the
100-year flood elevation, facilitating the downstream passage of water and sediment
similar to existing conditions. Thus, this potential impact would be less than significant.
d) No Impact. As described above, the proposed project would not substantially alter the
drainage pattern of the project site, and following construction the drainage pattern would
be similar to that under current conditions. The project would not substantially increase
or otherwise impact the volume of runoff generated from the project site. Thus, there
would be no impact with respect to on- or off-site flooding.
e) No Impact. As described above, there would be no substantial change in the drainage
pattern of or runoff volume from the project site. The proposed project would not
increase the amount of impervious surface or otherwise contribute substantially to
increased runoff or pollutants within runoff (other than those already described and
assessed above in a)). Thus, there would be no impact with respect to the creation or
contribution of runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems, or with respect to additional sources of polluted runoff.
g, h, i) No Impact. According to FEMA (2009), neither project site lies within the100-year flood
hazard area for Tributary or Stevens Creek. Further, the proposed projects do not involve
construction of any habitable structures, or any structure for that matter that would
potentially impede or redirect flood flows or expose people or structures to significant
risk of flooding. In addition, there are no dams upstream of either Site #1 or Site #2.
Therefore, the projects would have no impact related to 100-year flood hazard areas or
flooding resulting from dam failure.
j) No Impact. The proposed project would not be subject to seiches, which form in
enclosed bodies of water, such as lakes or reservoirs, when exposed to significant ground
shaking. The project sites are over 12 miles from the Pacific Ocean and at an elevation of
approximately 1800 ft, and therefore not be susceptible to a tsunami, which is a large
wave or series of waves usually generated by an earthquake, volcanic eruption, or coastal
landslide.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-72 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mudflows consist of rapid landslides with high volumes of water that can be associated
with rare events such as torrential storms or volcanic eruptions. The project site is located
in an area that is generally susceptible to landslide (see “Geology & Soils”, above).
However, implementation of the project would not alter the likelihood of mudflows
occurring, or the degree or nature of risk to which people or structures would be exposed
in the event of a mudflow. Therefore, the project would have no impact related to seiches,
tsunamis, or mudflows.
References
Best, Timothy C., CEG, 2015. Draft Engineering Geologic Review: Stevens Creek Nature Trail
Bridge Upgrade Project. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve, Santa Clara County, CA, prepared for Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District, November 19, 2015.
California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), 2009. Construction BMP Handbook.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2009. Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06085C0185H.
Effective Date May 18, 2009.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 2013. Best Management Practices for Routine
Maintenance Activities in Water Courses. Based on approved BMPs from the California
Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual, Tim Best, CEG, the BMP Appendix to the
District’s 5-Year agreement with CDFW for streambed alteration (Section 1600 permits),
and other sources.
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), 2002. Erosion and
Sediment Control Field Manual, Fourth Edition. August, 2002.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-73 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Land Use and Land Use Planning
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
10. LAND USE AND LAND USE PLANNING —
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan
or natural community conservation plan?
Discussion
a) No Impact. The proposed projects involve replacement of an existing trail bridge,
construction of a new trail bridge, minor re-routes of portions of the Stevens Creek
Nature Trail, and site restoration. There are no established communities in the project
area. Therefore, the proposed project would not physically divide an established
community.
b) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located in an area zoned by Santa Clara
County for Other Public Open Lands (Santa Clara County 1994), and is designated as
Publicly Owned Conservation Lands in the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (City of Palo
Alto 2011). The purposes of the proposed projects are to replace an existing bridge that is
vulnerable to erosion (Site #1) and install a new bridge that will eliminate trampling of
creek habitats (Site #2). Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any
applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
proposed project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect. Project construction activities could cause temporary, short-term
impacts as discussed in other sections of this chapter and any potentially significant
impacts would be minimized to less than significant through mitigation as discussed in
the Air Quality, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Material, and Hydrology
and Water Quality sections. The project impact would be less than significant.
c) No Impact. The project site does not lie within the jurisdiction of a Habitat Conservation
Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would
not conflict with any applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community
Conservation Plan. There would be no impact.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-74 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
References
City of Palo Alto. 2007. Comprehensive Plan. Available online:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/topics/projects/landuse/compplan.asp.
Santa Clara County, 1994. General Plan: 1995 – 2010. Adopted December 20, 1994. Available
online: http://www.sccgov.org/sites/planning/PlansPrograms/GeneralPlan/Pages/GP.aspx
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-75 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mineral Resources
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
11. MINERAL RESOURCES — Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Discussion
a, b) No Impact. The project would not result in the loss of availability of a known or locally
important mineral resource. The site has not been classified as a Mineral Resource Zone
(CMDG, 1987). Field observations by District staff have revealed no evidence of the
presence of mineral resources in the project area. In addition, there are no mines, mineral
plants, oil, gas, or geothermal wells located at the project site (USGS, 2003; CDC, 2015).
The local land use plans do not indicate presence of locally important mineral resources
at the project site. There would be no impact.
References
California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1987. Mineral
Land Classification: Aggregate Materials in the San Francisco-Monterey Bay Area,
Special Report 145146, Part III.
California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (CDC),
2015. DOGGR Online Mapping System:
http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/index.html#close. Accessed April 8, 2015.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2003. Active Mines and Mineral Plants in the U.S. Available
online at http://mrdata.usgs.gov/mineral-resources/active-mines.html. accessed April 8,
2015.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-76 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Noise
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
12. NOISE — Would the project:
a) Result in exposure of persons to, or generation of,
noise levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Result in exposure of persons to, or generation of,
excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
c) Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase
in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
area, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, in
an area within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project expose people residing
or working in the area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project located in the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
Discussion
a) Less than Significant Impact. Noise impacts are considered significant based on their
levels and proximity to sensitive receptors, including schools, hospitals, religious facilities,
and parks. Monte Bello Open Space Preserve is an undeveloped open space area with low
levels of ambient noise. The nearest developed neighborhood is over a mile from the
project sites; low-density rural ranches are located outside the Preserve’s borders along
Skyline Blvd. (Highway 35) and Page Mill Road, over a third of a mile from the project
sites.
The standard unit of measurement for sound is the decibel (dB). Sounds can range from
0 decibels (threshold of hearing) to 160 dB (instant perforation of eardrum). Normal
conversation at three feet is roughly 60 dB, busy street traffic is 70 dB, and the threshold of
pain is 130 dB.
Construction of the proposed project would consist of replacing an existing bridge
located at Site #1 and assemble/install a new bridge at Site #2. The locations of Sites #1
and #2 can be found in Figures 1-2 and 1-5. Construction activities at Site #1 would
include project site mobilization, widening of Stevens Creek Natural Trail, existing
bridge removal and fill excavation, bridge foundation construction, bridge assembly and
placement, and construct trail reroutes. The construction activities at Site #2 would be
similar to Site #1, but there is currently no bridge at Site #2, so construction at this site
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-77 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
would not include bridge removal. Off-road construction equipment used during
construction at both sites would include all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), small bobcat
tractors, motorized wheelbarrows, graders, and excavators. Construction materials and
equipment would be transported by motorized wheelbarrow to the sites from the staging
area shown in Figure 1-5. Replacement of the bridge at Site #1 and construction of the
new bridge at Site #2 is anticipated to take 20 to 30 days to complete, respectively.
Bridge components for each bridge would be transported by ATV’s to each of the sites.
According to the City of Palo Alto Municipal Code 9.10.060, construction, alteration and
repair activities on non-residential property which are authorized by a valid City building
permit are prohibited on Sundays and holidays and are also prohibited except between the
hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on
Saturday provided that the construction, demolition or repair activities during those hours
meet the following standards:
1) No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding 110 dBA at
a distance of 25 feet. If the device is housed within a structure on the property, the
measurement shall be made outside the structure at a distance as close to 25 feet
from the equipment as possible.
2) The noise level at any point outside of the property line of the project shall not
exceed 110 dBA.
3) The holder of a valid construction permit for a construction project in a non-
residential zone shall post a sign at all entrances to the construction site upon
commencement of construction, for the purpose of informing all contractors and
subcontractors, their employees, agents, material men and all other persons at the
construction site, of the basic requirements described in City of Palo Alto Municipal
Code 9.10.060.
A) Said sign(s) shall be posted at least five feet above ground level, and shall be of
a white background, with black lettering, which lettering shall be a minimum
of one and one-half inches in height.
B) Said sign shall read as follows: Construction hours for non-residential
property; (Includes Any and All Deliveries); Monday - Friday 8:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m.; Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Sunday/holidays Construction
prohibited. Violation of this Ordinance is a misdemeanor punishable by a
maximum of six months in jail, $1,000 fine, or both; Violators will be
prosecuted.
The proposed project would be implemented in compliance with these restrictions.
Following construction, the proposed project would not involve any new source or
activity that would generate noise in the long term. Maintenance activities such as
periodic inspection of the bridges following construction would be consistent with
current routine operations. Thus, the proposed project would not change the existing
noise level in the long term. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result
in noise exposure in excess of standards. This impact would be considered less-than-
significant.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-78 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
b) Less than Significant Impact. Vibration impacts from construction activities primarily
occur as a result of large or impact equipment. Such equipment includes pile drivers,
bulldozers and caisson drills (FTA, 2006), none of which will be used to construct project
elements. The project would use excavators, bulldozers and pneumatic tools during
construction. There is a residential receptor located 0.3 miles from the project site.
According to the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment Manual (FTA, 2006), a
large bulldozer could generate vibration levels of approximately 87 VdB from a distance
of 25 feet. Based on this reference vibration level, the residential receptor located
approximately 0.3 miles from the project site could be exposed to a vibration level of
approximately 33 VdB. According to the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment
Manual (FTA, 2006), the average human’s perceptibility of vibration is about 65 VdB
and human response to vibration is not usually significant unless the vibration exceeds
70 VdB. The residential receptor located 0.3 miles from the project site would be exposed
to vibration levels below the FTA human perception threshold during onsite construction.
Therefore the project impact related to vibration impacts would be less than significant.
c) No Impact. The proposed project would not create any new permanent noise sources or
levels that would exceed established standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not
result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity.
There would be no impact.
d) Less than Significant Impact. The project sites are located in wooded areas where the
noise environment is influenced primarily by sounds in a natural habitat setting and
occasional recreational visitors. The proposed project would primarily involve short-term
construction activities at the site described in Chapter 1, Project Description. Project
construction would result in short-term increases in noise levels in the project area. Noise
from construction would be generated by gasoline- and diesel-powered equipment such
as mini-excavators and ATVs. Table 2-3 presents the noise levels generated by off-road
construction equipment representative of the proposed project.
TABLE 2-3
TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS FROM CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITIES AND CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Type of Equipment Lmax, dBA Hourly Leq, dBA/% Use1
ATV2 84 80/40
Excavator 85 81/40
Bobcats2 84 80/40
Motorized Wheelbarrows2 84 80/40
Pneumatic Tools 85 82/50
NOTES:
1 % used during the given time period (usually an hour – Hourly Leq) were obtained from the FHWA Roadway
Construction Noise Model User’s Guide, (FHWA, 2006).
2 ATV’s, Bobcats and motorized wheelbarrows are assumed to have the same noise level as a tractor.
SOURCE: Federal Transit Administration, 2006.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-79 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
The operation of off-road construction equipment at the project sites could result in short-
term and sporadic increases in noise levels surrounding the project area. The nearest
sensitive uses to any of the construction areas would be recreational uses in the park,
although access to Stevens Creek Trail would be restricted during construction. There are
no permanent residences located in Monte Bello OSP, and the nearest residential
receptors are located approximately 0.3 miles from the project sites. The duration of
exposure to construction noise for trail users would be variable, but in any instance,
relatively brief (less than an hour). Therefore, the construction of the proposed project
would not result in a substantial noise increase and result in a less than significant impact.
e) No Impact. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two
miles of a public use airport. Also refer to d) above. The proposed project would not
involve any new permanent employees or residents following construction. There would
be no impact.
f) No Impact. The proposed project would not be located within the vicinity of a private
airstrip. Therefore there would be no project-related impact with regard to exposure of
people residing or working to excessive noise levels from a private airstrip.
References
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2006. Roadway Construction Noise Model User Guide,
January 2006.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA), 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment,
May 2006.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-80 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Population and Housing
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
13. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing
units, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Discussion
a) No Impact. The proposed project involves replacing an existing bridge at Site #1 and
constructing a new bridge at Site #2. The project would involve a limited construction
work force and it is expected that regional labor could meet the construction workforce
requirements. The proposed project would not construct new homes or businesses in the
area or extend new roads or other infrastructure into undeveloped areas. Therefore, the
proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in the local population or induce
growth directly or indirectly; there would be no impact.
b, c) No Impact. See a) above. There is no housing associated with the proposed project. The
proposed project would not displace people or existing housing units or necessitate
construction of replacement housing. There would be no impact.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-81 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Public Services
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
14. PUBLIC SERVICES — Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of, or the need for, new
or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the following public
services:
i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
Discussion
a.i, ii) Less than Significant Impact. The District’s Operations Department already provides
ranger patrol in the Preserve and maintenance staff to care for trails, bridges and parking
areas. The District coordinates with other local agencies via mutual aid arrangements in
providing public services, including police and fire protection. District rangers
(headquartered immediately south of Monte Bello OSP across Skyline Blvd.) are
responsible for enforcing District regulations and certain selected sections of California
code pertaining to vandalism, bicycle helmets, and parking. The City of Palo Alto Police
Department and Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office are involved in enforcement of all
other code sections.
District staff serve as the most likely first responder for fire emergencies, particularly
given the proximity of the Skyline Field Office to Monte Bello OSP. Since the Preserve
is within the incorporated boundaries of the City of Palo Alto, it is outside the State
Responsibility Area, and the Palo Alto Fire Department is technically responsible for
local fire protection. The City of Palo Alto operates seven full time stations, and one
summer station (Station 8 – Foothills Park, 8.3 miles from Monte Bello OSP) (WRM
2009). The City also participates in an “auto-aid” agreement with CAL FIRE. Such
agreements allow for the nearest fire suppression resource to respond to a wildland fire
(CAL FIRE, 2011). It is likely that in the event of a wildland fire at Monte Bello OSP,
resources from both the City fire station at Foothill Park (when operational) and the CAL
FIRE Skylonda Station 58 (9 miles north on Skyline Blvd.) would be utilized.
Because the construction activities would be short-term and would involve a limited
workforce, project construction would not significantly increase demand for fire and
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-82 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
police protection services and would not change any uses on the site. The proposed
project would not be expected to significantly affect CAL FIRE’s or the District’s ability
to maintain service ratios, response times, other performance objectives, and new or
physically altered facilities would not be required. Therefore, the project impact with
respect to the provision of fire and police protection facilities would be less than
significant.
a.iii) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed projects would only result in a temporary
increase of construction worker employees in the project area, there would be no
substantial adverse impacts to schools and no new or physically altered facilities would
be required. The impact would be less than significant.
a.iv) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located on District land within Monte
Bello OSP which offers a network of hiking, biking, and equestrian trails. The proposed
project would only temporarily employ construction workers at the project site and would
not result in an increase in the use of existing park and recreation facilities in the area.
Furthermore, the proposed project would restore improve the sustainability of Stevens
Creek Nature Trail by moving a portion of it out of Stevens Creek. The impact would be
less than significant.
a.v) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not involve new permanent
employees and therefore is not expected to increase the use of other public facilities such
as libraries or hospitals. This impact would be less than significant.
References
CAL FIRE. 2011. Unit Strategic Fire Plan: Santa Clara Unit. June 15. Available online:
http://cdfdata.fire.ca.gov/pub/fireplan/fpupload/fpppdf1073.pdf.
Wildland Resource Management, Inc. (WRM), 2009. Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan
Update. January 15. Available online: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/
documents/39197.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-83 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Recreation
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
15. RECREATION — Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would
occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities that
might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
Discussion
a,b) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project involves replacement of an existing
bridge and construction of a new bridge along Stevens Creek Nature Trail. The trail is
variously used by hikers, bicyclists, and equestrians. Segments of the trail near the project
sites would be temporarily closed for public use during construction (see Project
Description in Chapter 1). Because the expected closure of the Stevens Creek Nature
Trail would be brief, there would be no long-term impact on other recreational facilities.
Use of the other nearby trails could increase during the project construction period;
however the increase would not be permanent and would not result in substantial physical
deterioration of the trails. In addition, the proposed project does not involve residential
facilities and would not cause a permanent increase in the use of existing recreational
facilities. This impact would be less than significant.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-84 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Transportation and Traffic
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
16. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC —
Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to, level of service
standards and travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities,
or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of
such facilities?
Discussion
a) Less than Significant Impact. As discussed below, the project would not significantly
conflict with applicable transportation plans or measures and roadways.
Key Access Roadways
Regional access for the project site would be provided by Interstate 280, and local access
would be provided by Page Mill Road and Skyline Boulevard (Highway 35). Access for
construction- related activities would be through access roads within Monte Bello OSP
(Canyon Trail and Skid Road Trail).
Page Mill Road is an arterial road that runs roughly N-S from the urban core of Palo Alto to
the rural foothill communities. It serves as a primary route between the communities of Palo
Alto and Los Gatos and the unincorporated portions of Santa Clara and San Mateo County.
In the vicinity of the Monte Bello OSP, Page Mill Road is a two-lane road.
Skyline Boulevard is an arterial road that runs NW-SE along the spine of the San Francisco
Peninsula from San Francisco to Highway 17, and serves as a main route to and from many
rural communities within San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz Counties. In the vicinity
of the Monte Bello OSP, Skyline Boulevard is a two-lane road.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-85 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Canyon Trail is a narrow unpaved fire road within Monte Bello OSP that begins at a gate
off Page Mill Road and continues through the preserve as a multi-use trail and road.
Vehicular access to this road is closed to the general public; the road is only open to
District staff, contractors, and agency partners (e.g., vector control).
Skid Road Trail is a narrow unpaved fire road within Monte Bello OSP that connects a
trailhead along Skyline Boulevard with trails and related recreational facilities within the
preserve. Similar to Canyon Trail, vehicular access to this road is closed to the general
public.
Project Characteristics
There would be no new long-term trips associated with the proposed project, as MROSD
would monitor and maintain Stevens Creek Nature Trail as it is currently managed. The
replacement of an existing bridge at Site #1 would not increase Preserve visitation. The
new bridge at Site #2 will help Preserve visitors cross the creek without entering into the
stream channel, but the new bridge is not likely to increase Preserve visitation. Therefore,
these new features would not attract more visitors and increase new long-term trips. The
duration of potentially significant impacts related to short-term disruption of traffic flow
and increased congestion generated by construction vehicles would be limited to the
period of time needed to complete construction of the project components. Therefore, the
analysis presented herein is focused on the short-term project construction effects.
Traffic-generating construction activities related to the proposed project would consist of
the daily arrival and departure of construction workers (which would average three
workers per day) and District personnel and trucks hauling equipment and materials.
There would be miscellaneous deliveries of other construction components, which would
be shipped on demand to the site throughout the construction period.
Construction-generated traffic would be temporary and therefore would not result in any
long-term degradation in operating conditions (level of congestion/delay) on any project
area roadways. The primary off-site impacts resulting from the movement of construction
trucks would include a short-term and intermittent lessening of roadway capacities due to
the slower movements and larger turning radii of the trucks compared to passenger
vehicles. Therefore, this short-term increase in vehicle trips would have a less-than-
significant effect on traffic flow on roadways.
b) No Impact. The level of service standards for roadways that are part of the Santa Clara
County Congestion Management Program network are intended to regulate long-term
traffic increases from operation of new development and do not apply to temporary
construction projects (VTA, 2013). There would be no new long-term trips associated
with the proposed project, as MROSD would monitor and maintain the bridges and trails
as is currently conducted. Further, there would be no increase in long-term trips to the
project site once the proposed project is completed and fully operational. As such, the
proposed project would not exceed level of service standards established by the Valley
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-86 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Transportation Authority (the county congestion management agency) for designated
Congestion Management Program roadways.
c) No Impact. The project site is not located close to any airport, and the proposed project
would not intrude into an airport’s air space, nor would construction or operation
activities affect air traffic patterns; therefore, no impact would occur.
d) No Impact. Once complete, the proposed project would re-route short portions of the
Stevens Creek Nature Trail within Monte Bello OSP. The re-routes would not introduce
or create any new design features (e.g., sharp curves) that would result in safety hazards
on the trail. Furthermore, the proposed project would not alter the physical configuration
of the existing roadway network serving the area, and would not introduce unsafe design
features. The proposed project also would not introduce uses that are incompatible with
existing uses already served by the road system that serves the project area. Therefore, the
proposed project would have no traffic hazard impact.
e) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not include any work within
public roadways, and access for emergency vehicles would not be obstructed. Vehicle
access to and from the project staging areas would occur along Page Mill Rd. and Skyline
Blvd. The number of short-term vehicle trips generated by the proposed project would
not affect traffic flow for emergency service providers. Therefore, the proposed project
would have a less-than-significant impact on emergency access.
f) Less than Significant Impact. Due to the location and short-term nature of construction
activities where potential effects could occur, the proposed project would not
permanently eliminate alternative transportation corridors or facilities (e.g., bike paths or
lanes, turnouts, etc.), either directly or indirectly. In addition, the proposed project would
improve segments of an existing trail. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict
with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. However,
the temporary closure of Stevens Creek Nature Trail for the duration of construction
would have temporary adverse effects on public use by bicyclists, walkers, and
equestrians. The effects would be minimized by implementing measures such as public
notification of the time and duration of trail closure, and the use of signs and construction
fencing, as appropriate, to provide wayfinding on existing open trails. Provision of such
improvement measures would ensure that the proposed project would have a less-than-
significant impact on the performance and safety of the trail.
References
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), 2013. Congestion Management Plan.
October. Available online: http://www.vta.org/sfc/servlet.shepherd/version/download/
068A0000001Q7pt.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-87 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Utilities and Service Systems
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS —
Would the project:
a) Conflict with wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities, or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider that would serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Discussion
a, b) No Impact. The proposed project would not produce any wastewater nor would it require
the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of such
facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with wastewater treatment
requirements of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board and would
not affect capacity of the County’s wastewater treatment system; no impact would occur.
c) Less than Significant Impact. As described in Chapter 1, Project Description, the
purposes of the projects are to replace an existing bridge over Tributary Creek and place
a new bridge over Stevens Creek. Construction activities associated with these projects
could cause short-term temporary impacts such as air emissions, water quality, and
biological resources, which are discussed in this chapter. Any mitigation that may be
required is described in the Air Quality, Geology, Soils, and Seismicity, Hazards and
Hazardous Materials, and Hydrology and Water Quality sections above. The impacts are
considered less than significant.
d) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not require new water
supplies. The proposed project would primarily involve short-term construction related to
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-88 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
the replacement of existing structures. No new water entitlement would be required. The
impact would be less than significant.
e) No Impact. The proposed project would not require construction of new or expansion of
current wastewater facilities. No impact is expected.
f, g) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would require excavation at the
project sites. Excavated spoils would be re-used as backfill and trailbed. Debris from the
bridge that would be removed at Site 1 would consist of untreated redwood decking,
which will be recycled, and bolts and other fixtures. The proposed project would comply
with the applicable local, state, and federal regulations concerning solid waste. Therefore,
the impact would be less than significant.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-89 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE —
Would the project:
a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Have environmental effects that would cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Discussion
a, c) Less than Significant Impact. The purposes of the proposed projects are to replace an
existing bridge that is vulnerable to erosion (Site #1) and construct a new bridge to
eliminate trampling of creek habitats (Site #2). As discussed in the sections above, the
proposed project would not permanently degrade the quality of the environment. There
could be short-term and temporary effects associated with construction, such as increased
dust, noise, and water quality, which would be either minimized by regulatory
compliance or through implementation of proposed mitigation measures, as described in
the individual resource sections in this chapter. There would be no substantial adverse
effects on human beings. The impact would be less than significant.
b) Less than Significant Impact. In general, the inherently low intensity uses in the
Preserve and dispersed nature of the open space management program minimizes the
potential for cumulative impacts, since any less than significant impact would generally
be site-specific, localized, and not expected to have the potential for considerable
combined cumulative impacts throughout the region. The possibility of cumulatively
considerable impacts is minimized by the overall lack of disturbance to the watershed as
a whole associated with open space use.
Unlike residential and economic development projects in urban or suburban areas, the
District only implements minimal improvements such as parking lots, bridges, unpaved
roads, and natural surface trails within its open space lands. The proposed project, along
with similar land management actions by the District or other open space and recreation
agencies, would tend to support regional resource protection and enhance public
recreational opportunities for local and regional residents and as such have a beneficial
combined cumulative impact.
Attachment 2
2. Environmental Checklist
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects 2-90 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
This page intentionally left blank
Attachment 2
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-1 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
APPENDIX A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas
Emission Calculations
Table of Contents
Construction Criteria Pollutant Emissions at sites #1 and 2 A-2
Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions at sites #1 and 2 A-36
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-2 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Construction Criteria Pollutant Emissions at sites #1 and 2
Monte Bello Project - Off-Road Emissions
Santa Clara County, Summer
1.0 Project Characteristics
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
City Park 3,346.00 Acre 3,346.00 145,751,760.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Urban
Wind Speed (m/s)2.2
Precipitation Freq (Days)
58
Climate Zone
4
Operational Year
2016
Utility Company
Pacific Gas & Electric Company
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
641.35
CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.029
N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-3 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Acreage of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
Construction Phase - Assumed construction schedule based on the Project Description
Off-road Equipment - Assumed construction equipment list based on PD
Off-road Equipment - Assumed construction equipment list based on PD
Off-road Equipment - Assumed construction list based on PD
Off-road Equipment - Assumed construction list based on PD
Trips and VMT - Assumed worker trips based on PD
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 155,000.00 30.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 155,000.00 30.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6,000.00 22.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6,000.00 22.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 1/22/2016 12/11/2015
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/30/2015 10/31/2015
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 12/1/2015 10/31/2015
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 12/12/2015 11/1/2015
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-4 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 11/1/2015 10/1/2015
tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 162.00 97.00
tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 162.00 97.00
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.38 0.37
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.38 0.37
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 4.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 4.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00
tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2016
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 6.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 6.00
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 23,889.00 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 23,889.00 0.00
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-5 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 61,216.00 3.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 61,216.00 3.00
2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year
lb/day lb/day
2015
5.8144
41.2271
30.9084
0.0447
0.1886
3.1869
3.2504
0.0500
3.0502
3.0671
0.0000
4,331.0856
4,331.0856
0.8902
0.0000
4,349.7798
Total 5.8144
41.2271
30.9084
0.0447
0.1886
3.1869
3.2504
0.0500
3.0502
3.0671
0.0000
4,331.0856
4,331.0856
0.8902
0.0000
4,349.7798
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-6 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year
lb/day lb/day
2015
5.8144
41.2271
30.9084
0.0447
0.1886
3.1869
3.2504
0.0500
3.0502
3.0671
0.0000
4,331.0856
4,331.0856
0.8902
0.0000
4,349.7798
Total 5.8144
41.2271
30.9084
0.0447
0.1886
3.1869
3.2504
0.0500
3.0502
3.0671
0.0000
4,331.0856
4,331.0856
0.8902
0.0000
4,349.7798
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-7 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Area
3,535.5632
3.3600e-
003
0.3504
3.0000e-
005
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
0.7323
0.7323
2.0700e-
003
0.7758
Energy
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Mobile
18.3759
34.5378
167.5325
0.3406
23.9774
0.4650
24.4424
6.3922
0.4274
6.8196
29,647.4938
29,647.4938
1.2266
29,673.2517
Total 3,553.9391
34.5411
167.8829
0.3407
23.9774
0.4663
24.4437
6.3922
0.4287
6.8209
29,648.2261
29,648.2261
1.2286
0.0000
29,674.0275
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-8 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Area
3,535.5632
3.3600e-
003
0.3504
3.0000e-
005
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
0.7323
0.7323
2.0700e-
003
0.7758
Energy
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Mobile
18.3759
34.5378
167.5325
0.3406
23.9774
0.4650
24.4424
6.3922
0.4274
6.8196
29,647.4938
29,647.4938
1.2266
29,673.2517
Total 3,553.9391
34.5411
167.8829
0.3407
23.9774
0.4663
24.4437
6.3922
0.4287
6.8209
29,648.2261
29,648.2261
1.2286
0.0000
29,674.0275
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-9 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num
Days
Week
Num
Days
Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site #2 Site Preparation 10/1/2015 10/31/2015 5 22
2 Site Preparation Site #1 Site Preparation 10/1/2015 10/31/2015 5 22
3 Bridge Construction/Assembly
Site #1
Building Construction 11/1/2015 12/11/2015 5 30
4 Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly
Site #2
Building Construction 11/1/2015 12/11/2015 5 30
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-10 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Acres of Paving: 0
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0 (Architectural Coating –
sqft)
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Site Preparation Site #2 Excavators 1 8.00 162 0.38
Site Preparation Site #2 Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Site Preparation Site #2 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Site #1 Excavators 1 8.00 162 0.38
Site Preparation Site #1 Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Site Preparation Site #1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 4.00 9 0.56
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 4.00 81 0.73
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Excavators 1 8.00 97 0.37
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-11 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 4.00 9 0.56
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 4.00 81 0.73
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Excavators 1 8.00 97 0.37
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Trips and VMT
Phase Name
Offroad
Equipment Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling
Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling
Trip Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle
Class
Hauling
Vehicle
Class
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-12 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Site Preparation Site
#2
4
10.00
0.00 0.00 12.40 7.30 20.00
LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation Site
#1
4
10.00
0.00 0.00 12.40 7.30 20.00
LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Bridge
Construction/Assembly
8
3.00
0.00 6.00 12.40 7.30 20.00
LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Bridge
Cosntruction/Assembly
8
3.00
0.00 6.00 12.40 7.30 20.00
LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
3.2 Site Preparation Site #2 - 2015
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Off-Road
1.2594
12.4415
8.4162
0.0115
0.8569
0.8569
0.7884
0.7884
1,203.7762
1,203.7762
0.3594
1,211.3231
Total 1.2594
12.4415
8.4162
0.0115
0.0000
0.8569
0.8569
0.0000
0.7884
0.7884
1,203.7762
1,203.7762
0.3594
1,211.3231
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-13 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Hauling
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
0.0445
0.0521
0.6092
1.1300e-
003
0.0943
7.7000e-
004
0.0951
0.0250
7.1000e-
004
0.0257
98.3977
98.3977
5.1900e-
003
98.5067
Total 0.0445
0.0521
0.6092
1.1300e-
003
0.0943
7.7000e-
004
0.0951
0.0250
7.1000e-
004
0.0257
98.3977
98.3977
5.1900e-
003
98.5067
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-14 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Off-Road
1.2594
12.4415
8.4162
0.0115
0.8569
0.8569
0.7884
0.7884
0.0000
1,203.7762
1,203.7762
0.3594
1,211.3231
Total 1.2594
12.4415
8.4162
0.0115
0.0000
0.8569
0.8569
0.0000
0.7884
0.7884
0.0000
1,203.7762
1,203.7762
0.3594
1,211.3231
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-15 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Hauling
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
0.0445
0.0521
0.6092
1.1300e-
003
0.0943
7.7000e-
004
0.0951
0.0250
7.1000e-
004
0.0257
98.3977
98.3977
5.1900e-
003
98.5067
Total 0.0445
0.0521
0.6092
1.1300e-
003
0.0943
7.7000e-
004
0.0951
0.0250
7.1000e-
004
0.0257
98.3977
98.3977
5.1900e-
003
98.5067
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-16 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
3.3 Site Preparation Site #1 - 2015
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Off-Road
1.2594
12.4415
8.4162
0.0115
0.8569
0.8569
0.7884
0.7884
1,203.7762
1,203.7762
0.3594
1,211.3231
Total 1.2594
12.4415
8.4162
0.0115
0.0000
0.8569
0.8569
0.0000
0.7884
0.7884
1,203.7762
1,203.7762
0.3594
1,211.3231
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-17 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Hauling
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
0.0445
0.0521
0.6092
1.1300e-
003
0.0943
7.7000e-
004
0.0951
0.0250
7.1000e-
004
0.0257
98.3977
98.3977
5.1900e-
003
98.5067
Total 0.0445
0.0521
0.6092
1.1300e-
003
0.0943
7.7000e-
004
0.0951
0.0250
7.1000e-
004
0.0257
98.3977
98.3977
5.1900e-
003
98.5067
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-18 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Off-Road
1.2594
12.4415
8.4162
0.0115
0.8569
0.8569
0.7884
0.7884
0.0000
1,203.7762
1,203.7762
0.3594
1,211.3231
Total 1.2594
12.4415
8.4162
0.0115
0.0000
0.8569
0.8569
0.0000
0.7884
0.7884
0.0000
1,203.7762
1,203.7762
0.3594
1,211.3231
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-19 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Hauling
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
0.0445
0.0521
0.6092
1.1300e-
003
0.0943
7.7000e-
004
0.0951
0.0250
7.1000e-
004
0.0257
98.3977
98.3977
5.1900e-
003
98.5067
Total 0.0445
0.0521
0.6092
1.1300e-
003
0.0943
7.7000e-
004
0.0951
0.0250
7.1000e-
004
0.0257
98.3977
98.3977
5.1900e-
003
98.5067
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-20 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
3.4 Bridge Construction/Assembly Site #1 - 2015
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Off-Road
2.8893
20.5311
15.2285
0.0218
1.5922
1.5922
1.5239
1.5239
2,120.7277
2,120.7277
0.4434
2,130.0394
Total 2.8893
20.5311
15.2285
0.0218
1.5922
1.5922
1.5239
1.5239
2,120.7277
2,120.7277
0.4434
2,130.0394
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-21 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Hauling
4.5800e-
003
0.0668
0.0430
1.5000e-
004
3.4800e-
003
1.0300e-
003
4.5100e-
003
9.5000e-
004
9.5000e-
004
1.9000e-
003
15.2958
15.2958
1.3000e-
004
15.2985
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
0.0133
0.0156
0.1828
3.4000e-
004
0.0283
2.3000e-
004
0.0285
7.5000e-
003
2.1000e-
004
7.7200e-
003
29.5193
29.5193
1.5600e-
003
29.5520
Total 0.0179
0.0824
0.2257
4.9000e-
004
0.0318
1.2600e-
003
0.0330
8.4500e-
003
1.1600e-
003
9.6200e-
003
44.8151
44.8151
1.6900e-
003
44.8505
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-22 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Off-Road
2.8893
20.5311
15.2285
0.0218
1.5922
1.5922
1.5239
1.5239
0.0000
2,120.7277
2,120.7277
0.4434
2,130.0394
Total 2.8893
20.5311
15.2285
0.0218
1.5922
1.5922
1.5239
1.5239
0.0000
2,120.7277
2,120.7277
0.4434
2,130.0394
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-23 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Hauling
4.5800e-
003
0.0668
0.0430
1.5000e-
004
3.4800e-
003
1.0300e-
003
4.5100e-
003
9.5000e-
004
9.5000e-
004
1.9000e-
003
15.2958
15.2958
1.3000e-
004
15.2985
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
0.0133
0.0156
0.1828
3.4000e-
004
0.0283
2.3000e-
004
0.0285
7.5000e-
003
2.1000e-
004
7.7200e-
003
29.5193
29.5193
1.5600e-
003
29.5520
Total 0.0179
0.0824
0.2257
4.9000e-
004
0.0318
1.2600e-
003
0.0330
8.4500e-
003
1.1600e-
003
9.6200e-
003
44.8151
44.8151
1.6900e-
003
44.8505
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-24 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
3.5 Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site #2 - 2015
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Off-Road
2.8893
20.5311
15.2285
0.0218
1.5922
1.5922
1.5239
1.5239
2,120.7277
2,120.7277
0.4434
2,130.0394
Total 2.8893
20.5311
15.2285
0.0218
1.5922
1.5922
1.5239
1.5239
2,120.7277
2,120.7277
0.4434
2,130.0394
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-25 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Hauling
4.5800e-
003
0.0668
0.0430
1.5000e-
004
3.4800e-
003
1.0300e-
003
4.5100e-
003
9.5000e-
004
9.5000e-
004
1.9000e-
003
15.2958
15.2958
1.3000e-
004
15.2985
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
0.0133
0.0156
0.1828
3.4000e-
004
0.0283
2.3000e-
004
0.0285
7.5000e-
003
2.1000e-
004
7.7200e-
003
29.5193
29.5193
1.5600e-
003
29.5520
Total 0.0179
0.0824
0.2257
4.9000e-
004
0.0318
1.2600e-
003
0.0330
8.4500e-
003
1.1600e-
003
9.6200e-
003
44.8151
44.8151
1.6900e-
003
44.8505
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-26 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Off-Road
2.8893
20.5311
15.2285
0.0218
1.5922
1.5922
1.5239
1.5239
0.0000
2,120.7277
2,120.7277
0.4434
2,130.0394
Total 2.8893
20.5311
15.2285
0.0218
1.5922
1.5922
1.5239
1.5239
0.0000
2,120.7277
2,120.7277
0.4434
2,130.0394
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-27 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Hauling
4.5800e-
003
0.0668
0.0430
1.5000e-
004
3.4800e-
003
1.0300e-
003
4.5100e-
003
9.5000e-
004
9.5000e-
004
1.9000e-
003
15.2958
15.2958
1.3000e-
004
15.2985
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
0.0133
0.0156
0.1828
3.4000e-
004
0.0283
2.3000e-
004
0.0285
7.5000e-
003
2.1000e-
004
7.7200e-
003
29.5193
29.5193
1.5600e-
003
29.5520
Total 0.0179
0.0824
0.2257
4.9000e-
004
0.0318
1.2600e-
003
0.0330
8.4500e-
003
1.1600e-
003
9.6200e-
003
44.8151
44.8151
1.6900e-
003
44.8505
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-28 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Mitigated
18.3759
34.5378
167.5325
0.3406
23.9774
0.4650
24.4424
6.3922
0.4274
6.8196
29,647.4938
29,647.4938
1.2266
29,673.2517
Unmitigated
18.3759
34.5378
167.5325
0.3406
23.9774
0.4650
24.4424
6.3922
0.4274
6.8196
29,647.4938
29,647.4938
1.2266
29,673.2517
4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
City Park 5,320.14 5,320.14 5320.14 11,357,715 11,357,715
Total 5,320.14 5,320.14 5,320.14 11,357,715 11,357,715
4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-
W
H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-29 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
City Park
9.50
7.30
7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 66
28 6
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
0.552322 0.058092 0.185339 0.123855 0.029634 0.004459 0.012625 0.022329 0.001774 0.001272 0.006012 0.000525 0.001763
5.0 Energy Detail
4.4 Fleet Mix
Historical Energy Use: N
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-30 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGas
Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
City Park
0
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-31 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated
NaturalGas
Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
City Park
0
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-32 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
6.0 Area Detail
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
lb/day lb/day
Mitigated
3,535.5632
3.3600e-
003
0.3504
3.0000e-
005
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
0.7323
0.7323
2.0700e-
003
0.7758
Unmitigated
3,535.5632
3.3600e-
003
0.3504
3.0000e-
005
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
0.7323
0.7323
2.0700e-
003
0.7758
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-33 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory
lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
416.4414
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Consumer
Products
3,119.0877
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Landscaping
0.0342
3.3600e-
003
0.3504
3.0000e-
005
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
0.7323
0.7323
2.0700e-
003
0.7758
Total 3,535.5632
3.3600e-
003
0.3504
3.0000e-
005
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
0.7323
0.7323
2.0700e-
003
0.7758
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-34 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory
lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
416.4414
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Consumer
Products
3,119.0877
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Landscaping
0.0342
3.3600e-
003
0.3504
3.0000e-
005
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
0.7323
0.7323
2.0700e-
003
0.7758
Total 3,535.5632
3.3600e-
003
0.3504
3.0000e-
005
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
1.2600e-
003
0.7323
0.7323
2.0700e-
003
0.7758
7.0 Water Detail
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
8.0 Waste Detail
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-35 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Vegetation
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-36 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions at sites #1 and 2
Monte Bello Project - Off-Road Emissions
Santa Clara County, Annual
1.0 Project Characteristics
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
City Park 3,346.00 Acre 3,346.00 145,751,760.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Urban
Wind Speed (m/s)2.2
Precipitation Freq (Days)
58
Climate Zone
4
Operational Year
2016
Utility Company
Pacific Gas & Electric Company
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
641.35
CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.029
N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-37 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Acreage of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
Construction Phase - Assumed construction schedule based on the Project Description
Off-road Equipment - Assumed construction equipment list based on PD
Off-road Equipment - Assumed construction equipment list based on PD
Off-road Equipment - Assumed construction list based on PD
Off-road Equipment - Assumed construction list based on PD
Trips and VMT - Assumed worker trips based on PD
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 155,000.00 30.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 155,000.00 30.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6,000.00 22.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 6,000.00 22.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 1/22/2016 12/11/2015
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 10/30/2015 10/31/2015
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 12/1/2015 10/31/2015
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 12/12/2015 11/1/2015
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-38 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 11/1/2015 10/1/2015
tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 162.00 97.00
tblOffRoadEquipment HorsePower 162.00 97.00
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.38 0.37
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor 0.38 0.37
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 2.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 3.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 4.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentUnitAmount 4.00 1.00
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00
tblOffRoadEquipment UsageHours 7.00 8.00
tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2016
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 6.00
tblTripsAndVMT HaulingTripNumber 0.00 6.00
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 23,889.00 0.00
tblTripsAndVMT VendorTripNumber 23,889.00 0.00
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-39 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 61,216.00 3.00
tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 61,216.00 3.00
2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Year
tons/yr MT/yr
2015
0.1158
0.8935
0.6611
9.4000e-
004
2.9200e-
003
0.0667
0.0696
7.8000e-
004
0.0631
0.0639
0.0000
84.7337
84.7337
0.0194
0.0000
85.1409
Total 0.1158
0.8935
0.6611
9.4000e-
004
2.9200e-
003
0.0667
0.0696
7.8000e-
004
0.0631
0.0639
0.0000
84.7337
84.7337
0.0194
0.0000
85.1409
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-40 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Year
tons/yr MT/yr
2015
0.1158
0.8935
0.6611
9.4000e-
004
2.9200e-
003
0.0667
0.0696
7.8000e-
004
0.0631
0.0639
0.0000
84.7336
84.7336
0.0194
0.0000
85.1408
Total 0.1158
0.8935
0.6611
9.4000e-
004
2.9200e-
003
0.0667
0.0696
7.8000e-
004
0.0631
0.0639
0.0000
84.7336
84.7336
0.0194
0.0000
85.1408
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-41 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Area
645.2371
3.0000e-
004
0.0315
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.0598
0.0598
1.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.0633
Energy
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Mobile
3.2330
6.6922
31.1834
0.0585
4.2148
0.0848
4.2995
1.1268
0.0779
1.2047
0.0000
4,622.5099
4,622.5099
0.2024
0.0000
4,626.7592
Waste
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
58.4127
0.0000
58.4127
3.4521
0.0000
130.9066
Water
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
4,059.2151
4,059.2151
0.1836
0.0380
4,074.8419
Total 648.4702
6.6925
31.2149
0.0585
4.2148
0.0849
4.2996
1.1268
0.0780
1.2048
58.4127
8,681.7848
8,740.1975
3.8382
0.0380
8,832.5710
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-42 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Area
645.2371
3.0000e-
004
0.0315
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.0598
0.0598
1.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.0633
Energy
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Mobile
3.2330
6.6922
31.1834
0.0585
4.2148
0.0848
4.2995
1.1268
0.0779
1.2047
0.0000
4,622.5099
4,622.5099
0.2024
0.0000
4,626.7592
Waste
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
58.4127
0.0000
58.4127
3.4521
0.0000
130.9066
Water
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
4,059.2151
4,059.2151
0.1836
0.0380
4,074.8419
Total 648.4702
6.6925
31.2149
0.0585
4.2148
0.0849
4.2996
1.1268
0.0780
1.2048
58.4127
8,681.7848
8,740.1975
3.8382
0.0380
8,832.5710
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-43 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio-
CO2
NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num
Days
Week
Num
Days
Phase Description
1 Site Preparation Site #2 Site Preparation 10/1/2015 10/31/2015 5 22
2 Site Preparation Site #1 Site Preparation 10/1/2015 10/31/2015 5 22
3 Bridge Construction/Assembly
Site #1
Building Construction 11/1/2015 12/11/2015 5 30
4 Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly
Site #2
Building Construction 11/1/2015 12/11/2015 5 30
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-44 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Acres of Paving: 0
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0 (Architectural Coating –
sqft)
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Site Preparation Site #2 Excavators 1 8.00 162 0.38
Site Preparation Site #2 Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Site Preparation Site #2 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Site #1 Excavators 1 8.00 162 0.38
Site Preparation Site #1 Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Site Preparation Site #1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 4.00 9 0.56
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 4.00 81 0.73
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Excavators 1 8.00 97 0.37
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-45 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Bridge Construction/Assembly Site
#1
Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 4.00 9 0.56
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 4.00 81 0.73
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Excavators 1 8.00 97 0.37
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Forklifts 2 8.00 89 0.20
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site
#2
Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Trips and VMT
Phase Name
Offroad
Equipment Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling
Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling
Trip Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle
Class
Hauling
Vehicle
Class
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-46 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Site Preparation Site
#2
4
10.00
0.00 0.00 12.40 7.30 20.00
LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Site Preparation Site
#1
4
10.00
0.00 0.00 12.40 7.30 20.00
LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Bridge
Construction/Assembly
8
3.00
0.00 6.00 12.40 7.30 20.00
LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Bridge
Cosntruction/Assembly
8
3.00
0.00 6.00 12.40 7.30 20.00
LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
3.2 Site Preparation Site #2 - 2015
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Off-Road
0.0139
0.1369
0.0926
1.3000e-
004
9.4300e-
003
9.4300e-
003
8.6700e-
003
8.6700e-
003
0.0000
12.0125
12.0125
3.5900e-
003
0.0000
12.0878
Total 0.0139
0.1369
0.0926
1.3000e-
004
0.0000
9.4300e-
003
9.4300e-
003
0.0000
8.6700e-
003
8.6700e-
003
0.0000
12.0125
12.0125
3.5900e-
003
0.0000
12.0878
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-47 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
4.6000e-
004
6.4000e-
004
6.2500e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0100e-
003
2.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.9141
0.9141
5.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.9152
Total 4.6000e-
004
6.4000e-
004
6.2500e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0100e-
003
2.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.9141
0.9141
5.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.9152
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-48 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Off-Road
0.0139
0.1369
0.0926
1.3000e-
004
9.4300e-
003
9.4300e-
003
8.6700e-
003
8.6700e-
003
0.0000
12.0125
12.0125
3.5900e-
003
0.0000
12.0878
Total 0.0139
0.1369
0.0926
1.3000e-
004
0.0000
9.4300e-
003
9.4300e-
003
0.0000
8.6700e-
003
8.6700e-
003
0.0000
12.0125
12.0125
3.5900e-
003
0.0000
12.0878
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-49 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
4.6000e-
004
6.4000e-
004
6.2500e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0100e-
003
2.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.9141
0.9141
5.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.9152
Total 4.6000e-
004
6.4000e-
004
6.2500e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0100e-
003
2.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.9141
0.9141
5.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.9152
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-50 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
3.3 Site Preparation Site #1 - 2015
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Off-Road
0.0139
0.1369
0.0926
1.3000e-
004
9.4300e-
003
9.4300e-
003
8.6700e-
003
8.6700e-
003
0.0000
12.0125
12.0125
3.5900e-
003
0.0000
12.0878
Total 0.0139
0.1369
0.0926
1.3000e-
004
0.0000
9.4300e-
003
9.4300e-
003
0.0000
8.6700e-
003
8.6700e-
003
0.0000
12.0125
12.0125
3.5900e-
003
0.0000
12.0878
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-51 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
4.6000e-
004
6.4000e-
004
6.2500e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0100e-
003
2.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.9141
0.9141
5.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.9152
Total 4.6000e-
004
6.4000e-
004
6.2500e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0100e-
003
2.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.9141
0.9141
5.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.9152
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-52 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Off-Road
0.0139
0.1369
0.0926
1.3000e-
004
9.4300e-
003
9.4300e-
003
8.6700e-
003
8.6700e-
003
0.0000
12.0125
12.0125
3.5900e-
003
0.0000
12.0878
Total 0.0139
0.1369
0.0926
1.3000e-
004
0.0000
9.4300e-
003
9.4300e-
003
0.0000
8.6700e-
003
8.6700e-
003
0.0000
12.0125
12.0125
3.5900e-
003
0.0000
12.0878
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-53 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
4.6000e-
004
6.4000e-
004
6.2500e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0100e-
003
2.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.9141
0.9141
5.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.9152
Total 4.6000e-
004
6.4000e-
004
6.2500e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
003
1.0000e-
005
1.0100e-
003
2.7000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
2.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.9141
0.9141
5.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.9152
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-54 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
3.4 Bridge Construction/Assembly Site #1 - 2015
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road
0.0433
0.3080
0.2284
3.3000e-
004
0.0239
0.0239
0.0229
0.0229
0.0000
28.8584
28.8584
6.0300e-
003
0.0000
28.9851
Total 0.0433
0.3080
0.2284
3.3000e-
004
0.0239
0.0239
0.0229
0.0229
0.0000
28.8584
28.8584
6.0300e-
003
0.0000
28.9851
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-55 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling
7.0000e-
005
1.0400e-
003
7.5000e-
004
0.0000
5.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
7.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.2079
0.2079
0.0000
0.0000
0.2080
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
1.9000e-
004
2.6000e-
004
2.5600e-
003
0.0000
4.1000e-
004
0.0000
4.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.3739
0.3739
2.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.3744
Total 2.6000e-
004
1.3000e-
003
3.3100e-
003
0.0000
4.6000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
4.8000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
1.4000e-
004
0.0000
0.5819
0.5819
2.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.5824
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-56 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road
0.0433
0.3080
0.2284
3.3000e-
004
0.0239
0.0239
0.0229
0.0229
0.0000
28.8583
28.8583
6.0300e-
003
0.0000
28.9851
Total 0.0433
0.3080
0.2284
3.3000e-
004
0.0239
0.0239
0.0229
0.0229
0.0000
28.8583
28.8583
6.0300e-
003
0.0000
28.9851
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-57 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling
7.0000e-
005
1.0400e-
003
7.5000e-
004
0.0000
5.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
7.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.2079
0.2079
0.0000
0.0000
0.2080
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
1.9000e-
004
2.6000e-
004
2.5600e-
003
0.0000
4.1000e-
004
0.0000
4.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.3739
0.3739
2.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.3744
Total 2.6000e-
004
1.3000e-
003
3.3100e-
003
0.0000
4.6000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
4.8000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
1.4000e-
004
0.0000
0.5819
0.5819
2.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.5824
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-58 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
3.5 Bridge Cosntruction/Assembly Site #2 - 2015
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road
0.0433
0.3080
0.2284
3.3000e-
004
0.0239
0.0239
0.0229
0.0229
0.0000
28.8584
28.8584
6.0300e-
003
0.0000
28.9851
Total 0.0433
0.3080
0.2284
3.3000e-
004
0.0239
0.0239
0.0229
0.0229
0.0000
28.8584
28.8584
6.0300e-
003
0.0000
28.9851
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-59 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling
7.0000e-
005
1.0400e-
003
7.5000e-
004
0.0000
5.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
7.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.2079
0.2079
0.0000
0.0000
0.2080
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
1.9000e-
004
2.6000e-
004
2.5600e-
003
0.0000
4.1000e-
004
0.0000
4.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.3739
0.3739
2.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.3744
Total 2.6000e-
004
1.3000e-
003
3.3100e-
003
0.0000
4.6000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
4.8000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
1.4000e-
004
0.0000
0.5819
0.5819
2.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.5824
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-60 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road
0.0433
0.3080
0.2284
3.3000e-
004
0.0239
0.0239
0.0229
0.0229
0.0000
28.8583
28.8583
6.0300e-
003
0.0000
28.9851
Total 0.0433
0.3080
0.2284
3.3000e-
004
0.0239
0.0239
0.0229
0.0229
0.0000
28.8583
28.8583
6.0300e-
003
0.0000
28.9851
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-61 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling
7.0000e-
005
1.0400e-
003
7.5000e-
004
0.0000
5.0000e-
005
2.0000e-
005
7.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
1.0000e-
005
3.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.2079
0.2079
0.0000
0.0000
0.2080
Vendor
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Worker
1.9000e-
004
2.6000e-
004
2.5600e-
003
0.0000
4.1000e-
004
0.0000
4.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.3739
0.3739
2.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.3744
Total 2.6000e-
004
1.3000e-
003
3.3100e-
003
0.0000
4.6000e-
004
2.0000e-
005
4.8000e-
004
1.2000e-
004
1.0000e-
005
1.4000e-
004
0.0000
0.5819
0.5819
2.0000e-
005
0.0000
0.5824
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-62 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated
3.2330
6.6922
31.1834
0.0585
4.2148
0.0848
4.2995
1.1268
0.0779
1.2047
0.0000
4,622.5099
4,622.5099
0.2024
0.0000
4,626.7592
Unmitigated
3.2330
6.6922
31.1834
0.0585
4.2148
0.0848
4.2995
1.1268
0.0779
1.2047
0.0000
4,622.5099
4,622.5099
0.2024
0.0000
4,626.7592
4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
City Park 5,320.14 5,320.14 5320.14 11,357,715 11,357,715
Total 5,320.14 5,320.14 5,320.14 11,357,715 11,357,715
4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-
NW
H-W or C-
W
H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-63 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
City Park
9.50
7.30
7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 66
28 6
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
0.552322 0.058092 0.185339 0.123855 0.029634 0.004459 0.012625 0.022329 0.001774 0.001272 0.006012 0.000525 0.001763
5.0 Energy Detail
4.4 Fleet Mix
Historical Energy Use: N
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Electricity
Unmitigated
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
NaturalGas
Mitigated
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-64 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGas
Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
City Park
0
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-65 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated
NaturalGas
Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use
kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
City Park
0
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-66 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Unmitigated
Electricity
Use Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use
kWh/yr tons/yr MT/yr
City Park
0
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-67 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated
Electricity
Use Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use
kWh/yr tons/yr MT/yr
City Park
0
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Total 0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-68 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
6.0 Area Detail
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated
645.2371
3.0000e-
004
0.0315
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.0598
0.0598
1.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.0633
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-69 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Unmitigated
645.2371
3.0000e-
004
0.0315
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.0598
0.0598
1.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.0633
6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory
tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating
76.0006
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Consumer
Products
569.2335
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Landscaping
3.0700e-
003
3.0000e-
004
0.0315
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.0598
0.0598
1.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.0633
Total 645.2371
3.0000e-
004
0.0315
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.0598
0.0598
1.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.0633
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-70 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-
CO2
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory
tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating
76.0006
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Consumer
Products
569.2335
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
Landscaping
3.0700e-
003
3.0000e-
004
0.0315
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.0598
0.0598
1.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.0633
Total 645.2371
3.0000e-
004
0.0315
0.0000
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
1.1000e-
004
0.0000
0.0598
0.0598
1.7000e-
004
0.0000
0.0633
7.0 Water Detail
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-71 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Category
tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated
4,059.2151
0.1836
0.0380
4,074.8419
Unmitigated
4,059.2151
0.1836
0.0380
4,074.8419
7.2 Water by Land Use
Unmitigated
Indoor/Outdoor
Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use
Mgal tons/yr MT/yr
City Park
0 / 3986.7
4,059.2151
0.1836
0.0380
4,074.8419
Total 4,059.2151
0.1836
0.0380
4,074.8419
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-72 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated
Indoor/Outdoor
Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use
Mgal tons/yr MT/yr
City Park
0 / 3986.7
4,059.2151
0.1836
0.0380
4,074.8419
Total 4,059.2151
0.1836
0.0380
4,074.8419
8.0 Waste Detail
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Category/Year
Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-73 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated
58.4127
3.4521
0.0000
130.9066
Unmitigated
58.4127
3.4521
0.0000
130.9066
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Unmitigated
Waste
Disposed Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use
tons tons/yr MT/yr
City Park
287.76
58.4127
3.4521
0.0000
130.9066
Total 58.4127
3.4521
0.0000
130.9066
Attachment 2
Appendix A
Criteria Pollutant and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects A-74 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
Mitigated
Waste
Disposed Total
CO2
CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use
tons tons/yr MT/yr
City Park
287.76
58.4127
3.4521
0.0000
130.9066
Total 58.4127
3.4521
0.0000
130.9066
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Vegetation
Attachment 2
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-1 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
APPENDIX B
Biological Resources – Species List
Based on review of the biological literature of the region, information presented in previous
environmental documentation, and an evaluation of the habitat conditions of the project area, a
species was designated as “absent” if: (1) the species’ specific habitat requirements are not
present, or (2) the species is presumed, based on the best scientific information available, to be
extirpated from the project area or region. A species was designated as having a “low potential”
for occurrence if: (1) its known current distribution or range is outside of the project area or
(2) only limited or marginally suitable habitat is present within the project area. A species was
designated as having a “moderate potential” for occurrence if: (1) there is low to moderate quality
habitat present within the project area or immediately adjacent areas, or (2) the project area is
within the known range of the species, even though the species was not observed during
reconnaissance surveys. A species was designated as having a “high potential” for occurrence if:
(1) moderate to high quality habitat is present within the project area, and (2) the project area is
within the known range of the species.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-2 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
SPECIES LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING
Plants
San Mateo thorn-mint
Acanthomintha duttonii
FE/CE/1B.1 Chaparral and valley grassland. Affinity for serpentine soil.
30 – 260m. Blooms April – June
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the project study area. Single
occurrence documented within 10 miles and no occurrences
documented south of Purisima Creek OSP.
Ben Lomond spineflower
Chorizanthe pungens var. hartwegiana
FE/--/1B.1 Yellow pine forest in disturbed areas along the coast. 90 –
350m.
Blooms April - July
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the project study area. Single
occurrence includes a population south of the study area in
Big Basin Redwoods State Park.
Crystal Springs fountain thistle
Cirsium fontinale var. fontinale
FE/CE/1B.1 Chaparral, valley grassland, wetland riparian communities
and in seeps. Occurs almost always under natural
conditions in wetlands. Affinity to serpentine soil.
Blooms March – October
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the project study area. Single
occurrence documented within 10 miles and no occurrences
documented south of Crystal Springs Reservoir.
San Mateo woolly sunflower
Eriophyllum latilobum
FE/CE/1B.1 Foothill woodland. Affinity to serpentine soil. 20 – 630m.
Blooms March – June
Moderate. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Nearest occurrence is within three miles located north of the
study area along Highway 35. Presumed extant in the area.
Santa Cruz wallflower
Erysimum teretifolium
FE/CE/1B.1 Chaparral and yellow pine forest.
60 – 300m. Blooms March – July
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles; populations
documented south of the study area from Boulder Creek to
Scotts Valley in Santa Cruz County.
Santa Cruz cypress
Hesperocyparis abramsiana var. abramsiana
FE/CE/1B.2 Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, and low
montane coniferous forest with sandstone or granite
substrate.
Low. Project study area is outside of the understood species
range. Documented south of the project study area in the
Santa Cruz Mountains.
Butano Ridge cypress
Hesperocyparis abramsiana var. butanoensis
FE/CE/1B.2 Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, and low
montane coniferous forest with sandstone or granite
substrate. Only seven known stands of this cypress variety
occur in the Santa Cruz Mountains.
260 – 770m.
Low. Project study area is outside of the understood species
range. The single occurrence within 10 miles is located
southwest of the project study area in the Santa Cruz
Mountains and consists of a small grove within a well-
developed redwood forest.
Marin western flax
Hesperolinon congestum
FT/CT/1B.1 Chaparral and valley/foothill grassland; serpentine soils.
Blooms April-July
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the project study area. Single
occurrence documented 10 mile northwest of the project; no
documented occurrences south of Purisima Creek OSP.
Point Reyes meadowfoam
Limnanthes douglasii ssp. sulphurea
--/CE/1B.2 Coastal prairie, freshwater wetlands and wetland-riparian
areas.
40 – 110m.Blooms March – May
Low. Project study area is outside of understood species
range concentrated in Point Reyes.
White-rayed pentachaeta
Pentachaeta bellidiflora
FE/CE/1B.1 Open dry rocky slopes and grassland, often on soils
derived from serpentinite.
Blooms March-May
Low. Suitable habitat not found in the study area. No
documented occurrences south of Crystal Springs Reservoir.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-3 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
SPECIES LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING (cont.)
Plants (cont.)
San Francisco popcornflower
Plagiobothrys diffusus
--/CE/1B.1 Coastal prairie and valley grassland. 17 – 260m. Blooms
March – June
Low. Suitable habitat is not found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within 10 miles of the project;
populations documented south of the study area along the
coast in Santa Cruz County.
California seablite
Suaeda californica
FE/--/1B.1 Margins of coastal salt marshes and swamps. 0-5 m.
Blooms July – October
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
showy rancheria clover
Trifolium amoenum
FE/--/1B.1 Valley grassland and wetland-riparian areas. Usually occurs
in wetlands, but occasionally not wetlands. 8 – 160m.
Blooms April – June
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the project study area. Single
historical occurrence on SF peninsula is in Colma.
Invertebrates
San Bruno elfin butterfly
Callophrys mossii bayensis
FE/--/-- Coastal scrub and bunchgrass grassland habitats, with
larval foodplant, Sedum spathulifolium; adults nectar on
Lomatium utriculatum, Achillea millefolium, Arabis
blepharophylla, Erysimum franciscanum, Ranunculus
californicus, and Fragaria californica
Period of Identification: March-April
Low. Suitable habitat and supportive host plants not found in
the study area.
Bay checkerspot butterfly
Euphydryas editha bayensis
FT/*/-- Native grasslands on serpentine soils in San Francisco
Bay area. Host plants: foothill plantain (Plantago erecta)
(primary); denseflower Indian paintbrush (Castilleja
densiflora) and owl’s clover (C. exserta).
Period of identification: March - May
Low. Suitable habitat not found in the project study area and
supportive host plants not observed during reconnaissance
survey.
Myrtle’s silverspot butterfly
Speyeria zerene myrtleae
FE/*/-- Coastal dune and prairie communities with host plants
including Grindelia hirsutula, Abronia latifolia, Mondardella,
Cirsium vulgare, Erigeron glaucus where found on the San
Francisco and Marin peninsulas.
Low. Suitable habitat and supportive host plants not found in
the study area.
Fish
tidewater goby
Eucyclogobius newberryi
FE/CSC/-- Brackish water habitats along the California coast from
Agua Hedionda Lagoon, San Diego Co. to the mouth of
the Smith River. Found in shallow lagoons and lower
stream reaches, they need fairly still but not stagnant
water and high oxygen levels.
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
delta smelt
Hypomesus transpacificus
FT/CE/-- Endemic to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta distributed
from Suisun Bay upstream through the Delta in Contra
Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, and Solano Counties.
Spawning occurs in brackish-water river channels and
sloughs of the Delta.
Absent. The project study area is outside of the species
range.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-4 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
SPECIES LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING (cont.)
Fish (cont.)
steelhead
Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) mykiss
central California coast DPS
FT/*/-- Spawns and rears in coastal streams between the Russian
River in Sonoma County and Soquel Creek in Santa Cruz
County, as well as drainages tributary to San Francisco
Bay, where gravelly substrate and shaded riparian habitat
occurs.
Absent. The project study area occurs above the Stevens
Creek Dam and reservoir which blocks passage to the San
Francisco Bay outlet.
longfin smelt
Spirinchus thaleichthys
FC/CT/-- Found throughout the nearshore coastal waters and open
waters of San Francisco Bay-Delta including the river
channels and sloughs of the Delta. Spawns in the Delta.
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area. The
project study area occurs above the Stevens Creek Dam and
reservoir which blocks passage to the San Francisco Bay
outlet.
Amphibians
California tiger salamander
Ambystoma californiense
FT/CT/-- Vernal or temporary pools in annual grasslands, or open
stages of woodlands. Typically adults use mammal
burrows.
Absent. Species occurrence documented in the regional
vicinity though suitable habitat not found in the project study
area.
California red-legged frog
Rana draytonii
FT/CSC/-- Streams, freshwater pools, and ponds with overhanging
vegetation. Also found in woods adjacent to streams.
Requires permanent or ephemeral water sources such as
reservoirs and slow moving streams and needs pools of
>0.5 m depth for breeding.
High. Suitable habitat is present in the project study area at
Stevens Creek. Marginal breeding habitat is present at the
project sites in nearby pools that lacked emergent vegetation
to deposit egg masses. Critical habitat for this species is
designated within half a mile south of the project sites.
Reptiles
San Francisco garter snake
Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia
FE/CE, FP/-- Most often observed in the vicinity of standing water; ponds,
lakes, marshes, and sloughs. Temporary ponds and
seasonal bodies of water are also used. Banks with
emergent and bankside vegetation are preferred and used
for cover.
Moderate. Marginal habitat is present in the project study
area; several documented occurrences within the regional
vicinity. Prey species California newt and Sierran tree frog
observed during reconnaissance survey though Stevens Creek
does not support dense, emergent bank vegetation for cover
usually present in preferred habitat.
Birds
marbled murrelet
Brachyramphus marmoratus
FT/CE/-- Breeds in coniferous forests near the coast and prefers old
growth, mature stands. Nests on large horizontal branches
high in the trees. Winters at sea.
Low. Forest within the study area is largely riparian dominated
by deciduous trees with few conifers. Individuals could occur in
the study area but are unlikely to nest here. Critical habitat for
this species is designated approximately 4.5 miles south of the
study area.
Western snowy plover
Charadrius nivosus nivosus
FT/CSC/-- Nest on coasts and estuaries on dune-backed beaches
and salt pans at lagoons/estuaries.
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-5 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
SPECIES LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING (cont.)
Birds (cont.)
White-tailed kite
Elanus leucurus
--/FP/-- Foothills and valleys with oaks, rivers, and marshes; open
woodland, desert grassland.
Moderate. Although the species is present regionally in more
open habitats, it is unlikely to nest or forage in the relatively
dense, forested study area, but could nest in edge habitat along
parking and access trails.
American peregrine falcon
Falco peregrines anatum
FD, BCC/FP/-- Wetlands, lakes, rivers, or other water bodies. Also utilizes
human-made structures.
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
California black rail
Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus
FP/CT, FP/-- Salt and freshwater marshes, grassy wet meadows. Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
Ridgway’s rail
Rallus obsoletus
FE/CE, FP/-- Salt marsh wetlands along the San Francisco Bay. Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
California least tern
Sterna antillarum browni
FE/CE, FP/-- Open beaches free of vegetation along the California
coast.
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
Mammals
Salt-marsh harvest mouse
Reithrodontomys raviventris
FE/CE, FP/-- Dense pickleweed vegetation required with other
halophytes often present.
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
Salt-marsh wandering shrew
Sorex vagrans halicoetes
--/CSC/-- Salt marshes of the south arm of San Francisco Bay.
Found at medium to high marsh 6-8 ft above sea level
where abundant driftwood is scattered among pickleweed.
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
Plants
Blasdale’s bent grass
Agrostis blasdalei
--/--/1B.2 Coastal strand, coastal prairie, northern coastal scrub and
dunes.
5 – 350m. Blooms May - July
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
Franciscan onion
Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum
--/--/1B.2 Clay, volcanic, or serpentine substrate in valley and foothill
grassland and cismontane woodland.
Blooms May - June
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the study area. Closest
populations documented five miles north of the study area in
Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve in San Mateo County.
California androsace
Androsace elongata ssp. acuta
--/--/4.2 Slopes in chaparral, foothill woodland, northern costal
scrub and coastal sage scrub.
Blooms March - June
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area. No
documented occurrences in the regional study area.
slender silver moss
Anomobryum julaceum
--/--/4.2 Damp rock and soil outcrops in broadleaf upland forest,
lower montane coniferous forest, and North Coast
coniferous forest.
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area. Single
occurrence within 10 miles is located in Big Basin Redwoods
State Park south of the project area.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-6 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES (cont.)
Plants (cont.)
coast rockress
Arabis blepharophylla
--/--/4.2 Coastal prairie, mixed evergreen forest and northern
coastal scrub.
5 – 800m. Blooms February – May
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the project study area. No
occurrences documented within 10 miles; nearest populations
documented north of the study area in Jasper Ridge Biological
Preserve in San Mateo County.
Anderson’s manzanita
Arctostaphylos andersonii
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral, mixed evergreen forest, and redwood forests in
openings and along edges. 80 – 820m.
Blooms November – March
Moderate. Suitable habitat is present within the project study
area. Several occurrences are documented in similar open
space preserves of the region within 10 miles of the project;
nearest occurrence is located seven miles south of the project in
the San Lorenzo River watershed.
Schreiber’s manzanita
Arctostaphylos glutinosa
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral and closed-cone pine forests. 210 – 770m.
Blooms March – April
Low. Suitable habitat is present within the project study area. No
occurrences documented within 10 miles; nearest populations
documented south of the project study area in Big Basin
Redwoods State Park.
Ohlone manzanita
Arctostaphylos ohloneana
--/--/1B.1 Siliceous shale outcrops, chaparral and knobcone-pine
woodland. 400 – 500m. Blooms Feb - Mar
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the project study area. No
occurrences documented within 10 miles; few occurrences in
Santa Cruz County.
King’s Mountain manzanita
Arctostaphylos regismontana
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral, mixed evergreen forest, and north coastal
coniferous forest. 200 – 660m.
Blooms January – April
Low. Suitable habitat is present within the project areas; few
individuals documented in similar open space preserves of the
region within 10 miles.
Boony Doon manzanita
Arctostaphylos silvicola
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral, yellow pine forest and closed-cone pine forests.
100 – 890m. Blooms February – March
Low. Suitable habitat is present within the project study area.
Closest populations documented 10 miles south of the project
study area in Big Basin Redwoods State Park.
coastal marsh milk-vetch
Astragalus pycnostachyus var.
pycnostachyus
--/--/1B.2 Wetlands and riparian areas primarily located in coastal
regions
Blooms April – October
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
alkali milk-vetch
Astragalus tener var. tener
--/--/1B.2 Alkali playa and flats, valley, annual, and foothill grassland,
vernal pools, low ground, and flooded lands. 1-170 m.
Blooms March – June
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
Brewer’s calandrinia
Calandrinia breweri
--/--/4.2 Chaparral, northern coastal scrub and coastal sage scrub
in disturbed habitat.
Blooms March - June
Low. Suitable habitat is present within the project study area. No
occurrences documented within 10 miles of the project; nearest
occurrence is located north of the study area in San Mateo
County.
round-leaved filaree
California macrophylla
--/--/1B.1 Valley grassland and foothill woodland. 15 – 1200m.
Blooms March – May
Low. Marginal habitat is found onsite. No occurrence
documented within 10 miles of the project; closest documented
occurrence is a historical record in Pescadero.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-7 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES (cont.)
Plants (cont.)
Oakland star-tulip
Calochortus umbellatus
--/--/4.2 Chaparral, valley grassland, yellow pine forest and mixed
evergreen forest. Has an affinity to serpentine soils.
Blooms March - May
Low. Suitable habitat found in the project study area. No
occurrences documented within 10 miles; nearest documented
occurrence is a historical record at Kings Mountain north of the
study area.
Santa Cruz Mountains pussypaws
Calyptridium parryi var. hesseae
--/--/1B.1 Chaparral and foothill woodlands.
Blooms May - August
Low. Suitable habitat found in the project study area. No
occurrences documented within 10 miles of the project; few
occurrences documented near Eagle Rock in the Santa Cruz
Mountains.
Congdon’s tarplant
Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii
--/--/1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland. Alkaline soils, sometimes
described as heavy white clay. 1-230m.
Blooms May – October
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area. Nearest
occurrence is 10 miles northeast along the San Francisco Bay.
Point Reyes salty bird's-beak
Chloropyron maritimum ssp. palustre
--/--/1B.2 Coastal salt marsh usually with Salicornia, Distichlis,
Jaumea, Spartina, etc. 0-15m.
Blooms June – October
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area. Nearest
occurrence is 10 miles northeast along the San Francisco Bay.
Franciscan thistle
Cirsium andrewsii
--/--/1B.2 Mixed evergreen forest, northern coastal scrub and
wetland, riparian areas along the coast. Affinity to
serpentine soil. 13 – 1950m.
Blooms March – July
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area. No
occurrences within 10 miles of the project; few occurrences in
San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties.
lost thistle
Cirsium praeteriens
--/--/1A Presumed extinct; habitat unknown.
Blooms June – July
Absent. Species presumed extinct.
Santa Clara red-ribbons
Clarkia concinna ssp. automixa
--/--/4.3 Cismontane woodland, chaparral. Found on slopes and
near drainages. 90-1500m.
Blooms May – June
High. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area. Nearest
occurrence documented within a mile of the project sites at the
headwaters of Stevens Creek. Presumed extant in the area.
San Francisco collinsia
Collinsia multicolor
--/--/1B.2 Closed-cone coniferous forests, coastal scrub, sometimes
on serpentinite derived soils.10 – 430m.
March-May
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Historical occurrence is documented at Stanford University
within 10 miles of the project.
clustered lady’s slipper
Cypripedium fasciculatum
--/--/4.2 Yellow pine forest, redwood forest, Douglas-fir forest, and
wetland-riparian areas. Occurs in stream banks and
seeps. 640 – 1890m. Blooms March – August
Low. Suitable habitat found in the project study area. No
occurrences documented within 10 miles of the project.
mountain lady’s-slipper
Cypripedium montanum
--/--/4.2 Yellow pine forest, mixed evergreen forest and wetland,
riparian areas. 370 – 1980m.
Blooms March – August
Low. Suitable habitat found in the project study area. No
occurrences documented within 10 miles of the project.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-8 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES (cont.)
Plants (cont.)
western leatherwood
Dirca occidentalis
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral, foothill woodland, mixed evergreen forest,
broadleaved upland forest, closed-cone pine forest, north
coastal coniferous forest, and wetland-riparian areas.
Equally likely to occur in wetlands and non-wetlands.
12 – 560m.
Blooms January – March
High. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Several occurrences documented in the region; multiple
occurrences documented within one mile of project sites.
Presumed extant in the area.
California bottle-brush grass
Elymus californicus
--/--/4.3 Evergreen forests, foothill woodlands and riparian areas.
Blooms May – August
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Several occurrences documented north of the study area near
Crystal Springs Reservoir and south of the study area near
Capitola.
Ben Lomond buckwheat
Eriogonum nudum var. decurrens
--/--/1B.1 Chaparral, foothill woodland, and yellow pine forest in
coastal areas. Occurs almost always under natural
conditions in non-wetlands. 80 – 220m.
Blooms June – October
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Several occurrences documented south of the study area in
the mountains above Santa Cruz and Capitola.
Hoover’s button-celery
Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri
--/--/1B.1 Found in alkaline depressions, vernal pools, roadside
ditches and other wet places near the coast. 3-45m.
Blooms in July
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area. Historical
occurrences documented north of the study area.
sand-loving wallflower
Erysimum ammophilum
--/--/1B.2 Coastal strand and dunes. 0 – 70m. Blooms February –
June
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
San Francisco wallflower
Erysimum franciscanum
--/--/4.2 Northern foredune, northern coastal scrub, northern
coastal bluff scrub, central dune scrub.
March-June
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
minute pocket moss
Fissidens pauperculus
--/--/1B.2 North coast coniferous forest with damp coastal soils.
10 – 1024m.
Moderate. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Nearest documented occurrence is within five miles of the
project south of the study area in Portola Redwoods State
Park.
stinkbells
Fritillaria agrestis
--/--/4.2 Chaparral, valley grassland, foothill woodland and wetland,
riparian areas. Affinity to serpentine soils.
11 – 1640m. Blooms March – June
Low. Suitable habitat is found within the project study area. No
occurrences documented within 10 miles of the project;
nearest populations documented southwest of the study area
in Ano Nuevo State Park.
fragrant fritillary
Fritillaria liliacea
--/--/1B.2 Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub, valley and foothill
grassland; clayey soils, often serpentinite.
February-April
Low. Suitable habitat is found within the project study area.
Nearest occurrence documented within seven miles of the
project north of the study area near Lake Lagunitas
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-9 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES (cont.)
Plants (cont.)
Toren’s grimmia
Grimmia torenii
--/--/1B.3 Chaparral, cismontane woodland and lower montane
coniferous forest in openings of rocky areas, boulders, and
on rock walls.
Low. Suitable habitat is found within the project study area.
Nearest occurrence is located 10 miles southwest of the
project in Big Basin Redwoods State Park.
vaginulate grimmia
Grimmia vaginulata
--/--/1B.1 Chaparral in openings of rocky areas, boulders, and on
rock walls.
Low. Suitable habitat is found within the project study area.
Nearest occurrence is located 10 miles southwest of the
project in Big Basin Redwoods State Park.
Short-leaved evax
Hesperevax sparsiflora var. brevifolia
--/--/1B.2 Sandy bluffs and flats in coastal scrub and coastal dunes.
March – June
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
Loma Prieta hoita
Hoita strobilina
--/--/1B.1 Mixed evergreen forest and chaparral. Affinity for
serpentine soil. 90 – 1170m. Blooms May – July
Low. Suitable habitat is not found in the project study area.
Single occurrence within 10 miles is historical and located 10
miles southeast of the project study area.
coast iris
Iris longipetala
--/--/4.2 Coastal prairie, lower montane coniferous forest, meadows
and seeps, mesic sites. 5 – 430m.
Blooms March – May
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
legenere
Legenere limosa
--/--/1B.1 Vernal pools. Found in beds of vernal pools. 1-880m.
Blooms April – June
Low. Suitable habitat is not found in the project study area.
Single occurrence within 10 miles is located three miles north
of the project sites.
serpentine leptosiphon
Leptosiphon ambiguus
--/--/4.2 Valley grassland, foothill woodland, and northern coastal
scrub. Has an affinity to serpentine soils.
Blooms March – June
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
Crystal Springs lessingia
Lessingia arachnoidea
--/--/1B.2 Valley grassland, foothill woodlands and northern coastal
scrub in disturbed areas.
Blooms July - October
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
wooly-headed lessingia
Lessingia hololeuca
--/--/3 Valley grassland, yellow pine forest and northern coastal
scrub. Has an affinity to serpentine soils.
Blooms June - October
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
coast lily
Lilium maritimum
--/--/1B.1 Coastal scrub prairie, mixed evergreen forest, northern
coastal scrub, pine and coniferous forests and wetland and
riparian areas.
Blooms May – August
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
San Mateo tree lupine
Lupinus arboreus var. eximius
--/--/3.2 Coastal scrub and dunes.
Blooms April - July
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-10 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES (cont.)
Plants (cont.)
arcuate bush-mallow
Malacothamnus arcuatus
--/--/1B.2 Gravelly alluvium in chaparral and cismontane woodland.
April – September
High. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Nearest occurrence is documented in Skyline Open Space
within a mile of project sites. Presumed extant in the area.
Davidson’s bush-mallow
Malacothamnus davidsonii
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral, northern coastal scrub, coastal sage scrub, and
riparian areas. Usually occurs in non-wetlands but
occasionally found in wetlands. 140 – 1850m. Blooms
June – January
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
Mt. Diablo cottonweed
Micropus amphibolus
--/--/3.2 Valley grassland, foothill woodlands and mixed evergreen
forest. Has an affinity to serpentine soils.
Blooms March - May
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
woodland woolythreads
Monolopia gracilens
--/--/1B.2 Mixed evergreen forest, broadleaved upland forest,
redwood forest, and chaparral, and valley and foothill
grasslands. Affinity to serpentine soil. 60 – 1360m. Blooms
March – July
High. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Nearest occurrence documented within a mile of project sites;
several occurrences within the regional study area.
pincushion navarretia
Navarretia myersii var. myersii
--/--/1B.1 Found in vernal pools; often in acidic soils.
20 – 330m. Blooms April – May
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
Kellman’s bristle moss
Orthotrichum kellmanii
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral and cismontane woodland with sandstone and
carbonate substrate.
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Nearest occurrences documented 10 miles south of the project
study area in Big Basin Redwoods State Park. Presumed
extant in the area; however, the populations are not described
as widespread throughout the survey area.
Dudley’s lousewort
Pedicularis dudleyi
--/--/1B.1 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley grassland, and
redwood forest in coastal areas. 8 – 360m. Blooms April –
June
Moderate. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Nearest documented occurrences are south of the project
study area in Portola Redwoods State Park.
Santa Cruz Mountains beardtongue
Penstemon rattanii var. kleei
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral, yellow pine forest and northern coastal
coniferous forests. 10 – 660m. Blooms May – June
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles of the project study
area.
Monterey pine
Pinus radiata
--/--/1B.1 Closed-cone coniferous forest and cismontane woodland. Low. Native stands are limited to Ano Nuevo, Cambria, and
the Monterey Peninsula.
white-flowered rein orchid
Piperia candida
--/--/1B.2 Yellow pine forest, north coastal coniferous forest, and
broadleaved upland forest. Affinity to serpentine soil.
40 – 730m. Blooms May – September
High. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Occurrence documented within 1.5 miles of project sites;
presumed extant in the area.
Choris’ popcornflower
Plagiobothrys chorisianus var. chorisianus
--/--/1B.2 Mesic sites in chaparral, coastal scrub, and coastal prairie.
4 – 300m. Blooms March – June
High. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
Several occurrences documented on Skyline Blvd. within one
mile of the project sites. Presumed extant in the area.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-11 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES (cont.)
Plants (cont.)
Oregon polemonium
Polemonium carneum
--/--/2B.2 Northern coastal scrub, coastal prairie and yellow pine
forest.
Blooms April - September
Low. Suitable habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
Lobb’s aquatic buttercup
Ranunculus lobbii
--/--/4.2 Valley grassland, foothill woodland, redwood forest,
freshwater wetlands, wetland-riparian areas and vernal
pools. Occurs almost always under natural conditions in
wetlands.
12 – 810m. Blooms February – May
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
Hoffmann’s sanicle
Sanicula hoffmannii
--/--/4.3 Chaparral, mixed evergreen forest, northern coastal scrub
and coastal sage scrub. Affinity to serpentine soils. 0 – 280m.
Blooms March – May
Low. Suitable habitat is present in the project study area.
Project study area is outside of known species range.
San Francisco campion
Silene verecunda ssp. verecunda
--/--/1B.2 Mudstone, shale, or serpentine substrates in coastal
scrub, coastal prairie, chaparral and valley and foothill
grassland.
March – June
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
Santa Cruz microseris
Stebbinsoseris decipiens
--/--/1B.2 Coastal prairie, chaparral, mixed evergreen forest, closed-
cone pine forest and northern coastal scrub.
0 – 510m. Blooms April – May
Low. Suitable habitat is present in the project study area.
Closest documented occurrences located south of Big Basin
Redwoods State Park and along the coast near Swanton.
slender-leaved pondweed
Stuckenia filiformis ssp. alpina
--/--/2B.2 Marshes and swamps, in shallow, clear water of lakes and
drainage channels. 15-2,310m. Blooms May – July
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the project study area.
Historical occurrence documented north of the study area near
Palo Alto.
Caper-fruited tropidocarpum
Tropidocarpum capparideum
--/--/1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland. Alkaline clay. 1-455m.
Blooms March – April
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the study area. No
occurrences documented within ten miles.
Methuselah’s beard lichen
Usnea longissima
--/--/4.2 Found on tree branches in old growth hardwood or
coniferous forests, broadleaf upland forests, and north
coast coniferous forests. 50 – 1460m.
Low. Marginal habitat is found in the project area.
Documented within 5 miles of the project study area near
Castle Rock State Park; considered extirpated.
Invertebrates
Monarch butterfly
Danaus plexippus
(wintering sites)
--/*/-- Eucalyptus groves (winter sites).
Period of identification: Winter
Low. Few eucalyptus occur in the project study area though
no wintering populations are previously documented.
unsilvered fritillary
Speyeria adiaste
--/*/-- Openings in redwood and coniferous forests, oak
woodlands, and chaparral. Preferred caterpillar hosts is the
goosefoot yellow violet (Viola purpurea ssp. quercetorum).
Period of identification: June - July
Low. Marginal habitat occurs in the project study area; host
plant not observed during reconnaissance survey.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-12 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES (cont.)
Amphibians
foothill yellow-legged frog
Rana boylii
--/CSC/-- Partly-shaded, shallow streams and riffles with a rocky
substrate in a variety of habitats. Needs at least some
cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying. Needs at least 15
weeks to attain metamorphosis.
Moderate. Suitable habitat is present in the project study area.
red-bellied newt
Taricha rivularis
--/LS/-- Stream and river dweller found in coastal woodlands and
redwood forests of northern California. Eggs are laid in fast-
moving portions of rocky streams. Adults retreat into
vegetation and under stones during the day.
High. Isolated population is found within the Stevens Creek
watershed. Not observed during the March 2015
reconnaissance survey but likely to occur in the project study
area.
Reptiles
Western pond turtle
Emys marmorata
--/CSC/-- Ponds, marshes, rivers, streams, and irrigation ditches with
aquatic vegetation. Requires basking sites and suitable
upland habitat for egg-laying. Nest sites most often
characterized as having gentle slopes (<15%) with little
vegetation or sandy banks.
Low. Marginal habitat is present in the project study area;
Stevens Creek project sites lack deep pools with basking sites.
Birds
Cooper’s hawk
Accipiter cooperii
--/WL/-- Nests in riparian areas and oak woodlands, and hunts
songbirds at woodland edges.
High. Suitable nesting habitat is present in the project study
area.
sharp-shinned hawk
Accipiter striatus
--/WL/-- Nests in dense forests and hunts songbirds along edge
habitat. May prefer conifer but also occur in mixed
woodlands.
High. Suitable nesting habitat is present in the project study
area.
long-eared owl
Asio otus
--/CSC/-- Breeds in dense coniferous or mixed woodland or riverine
areas.
High. Suitable nesting habitat is present in the project study
area; successful nesting pair is documented in Stevens Creek
Canyon at the creek headwaters.
Western burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia
BCC/CSC/-- Open grasslands and shrublands where perches and
existing rodent burrows are available
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
oak titmouse
Baeolophus inornatus
BCC/*/-- Warm, dry oak or oak-pine woodlands. High. Suitable nesting habitat is present in tree cavities within
the project study area.
Northern harrier
Circus cyaneus
--/CSC/-- Nests in salt or freshwater wetlands, forages over
wetlands, annual grasslands.
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
olive-sided flycatcher
Contopus cooperi
BCC/CSC/-- Nests in open conifer forest and woodland habitats. High. Suitable nesting habitat is present in the project study
area.
black swift
Cypseloides niger
BCC/CSC/-- Breeds in areas with cliff faces, on coasts or inland
canyons. Nests are in sheltered crevices or ledges under
overhangs near water, such as a seep or waterfall.
Low. Project sites offer marginal nesting habitat though other
areas of the study area could host nesting pairs or small
colonies though none are previously documented in the
region. Individuals could forage in the project study area.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-13 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES (cont.)
Birds (cont.)
Saltmarsh common yellowthroat
Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
BCC/CSC/-- Requires thick, continuous cover down to water surface for
foraging; tall grasses, tule patches, willows for nesting.
Low. Marginal habitat is present in the study area; though
could occur during migration.
Alameda song sparrow
Melospiza melodia pusillula
--/CSC/-- Salt marshes of eastern and south San Francisco Bay. Absent. Suitable nesting habitat is not present; project study
area is outside of known species range.
Nuttall’s woodpecker
Picoides nuttallii
BCC/*/-- Oak and riparian woodlands. High. Suitable nesting habitat is present in the project study
area.
Allen’s hummingbird
Selasphorus sasin
BCC/*/-- Brush and woodlands. High. Suitable nesting habitat is present in the project study
area.
Mammals
Pallid bat
Antrozous pallidus
--/CSC/
WBWG High
Most common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas for
roosting. Very sensitive to disturbance of roosting sites.
Forages primarily on the ground.
Low. Marginal roosting and foraging habitat for this species is
present in the project study area.
Townsend’s big-eared bat
Corynorhinus townsendii
--/CC, CSC/
WBWG High
Inhabits caves and mines, but may also use bridges,
buildings, rock crevices and tree hollows in coastal
lowlands, cultivated valleys and nearby hills characterized
by mixed vegetation throughout California below
3,300 meters.
Low. Marginal roosting and foraging habitat for this species is
present in the project study area.
Santa Cruz kangaroo rat
Dipodomys venustus venustus
--/*/-- Pine forest with chaparral habitat in the low foothills of the
Santa Cruz Mountains in areas with sandy or loamy soils.
Low. Suitable habitat not found in the study area and the
project study area is outside of the species known range.
western red bat
Lasiurus blossevillii
--/CSC/
WBWG High
Roosts primarily in trees, 2-40 feet above ground, from sea
level up through mixed conifer forests. Prefers habitat
edges and mosaics with trees that are protected from
above and open below with open areas for foraging.
High. Suitable foraging and roosting habitat is present in the
project study area’s mature trees and relatively open
understory.
Hoary bat
Lasiurus cinereus
--/*/
WBWG
Medium
Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics, with access to
trees for cover and open areas or habitat edges for
foraging. Roosts in dense foliage of medium to large trees.
Feeds primarily on moths; requires water.
High. Suitable roosting habitat is present in the project study
area’s mature trees.
San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat
Neotoma fuscipes annectens
--/CSC/-- Forests with moderate canopy cover and brushy
understory.
High. Suitable habitat is found in the project study area.
yuma myotis
Myotis yumanensis
--/*/ WBWG
Low-Medium
Roosts in caves, old buildings and under bark usually near
water bodies for foraging. Forms maternity colony in the
spring. Period of identification: August – October,
January – February
High. Suitable roosting habitat is present in the project study
area’s mature trees and the bridge at site #1. Foraging is likely
over Stevens Creek and tributaries.
Attachment 2
Appendix B
Biological Resources – Special List
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects B-14 ESA / 130573.02
Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2016
TABLE B-1
SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES CONSIDERED IN EVALUATION OF THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
Common Name
Scientific Name
Listing Status USFWS/
CDFW/Other
Habitat Description /
Blooming Period Potential to Occur in the Study Area
OTHER SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES (cont.)
Mammals (cont.)
Salt-marsh wandering shrew
Sorex vagrans halicoetes
--/CSC/-- Salt marshes of the south arm of San Francisco Bay.
Found at medium to high marsh 6-8 ft above sea level
where abundant driftwood is scattered among pickleweed.
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
American badger
Taxidea taxus
--/CSC/-- Most abundant in drier open stages of most shrub, forest,
and herbaceous habitats, with friable soils. Needs sufficient
food, friable soils and open, uncultivated ground. Preys on
burrowing rodents.
Absent. Suitable habitat not found in the study area.
a Potential to Occur Categories:
Unlikely = The project site and/or immediate vicinity do not support suitable habitat for a particular species. Project site is outside of the species known range. Species identified as unlikely to occur are not addressed further in the
ISMND.
Low Potential = The project site and/or immediate vicinity only provide limited habitat. In addition, the species’ known range may be outside of the project site.
Moderate Potential = The project site and/or immediate vicinity provide suitable habitat.
High Potential = The project site and/or immediate vicinity provide ideal habitat conditions.
STATUS CODES:
FEDERAL: (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
FT = Listed as Threatened (likely to become Endangered within the foreseeable future) by
the Federal Government.
BCC = Bird of Conservation Concern
FSC = Federal Species of Concern
FC = Candidate for federal listing
FD= Delisted
STATE:
CT = Listed as Threatened by the State of California
CE= Listed as Endangered by the State of California
CC = California Candidate for Listing
CSC = California Species of Special Concern
CFP= California Department of Fish and Wildlife designated “fully protected”
WL = Watch list
§3503.5 = Protection for nesting species of Falconiformes (hawks) and Strigiformes (owls)
* Special animal-listed on CDFW’s Special Animal List
OTHER:
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) California Rare Plant Ranks (CRPR):
1A = Presumed extirpated in California; Rare or extinct in other parts of its range.
1B = Rare, threatened, or endangered throughout range; Most species in this rank are endemic to California.
2A = Extirpated in California, but common in other parts of its range.
2B = Rare, threatened, or endangered in California but common in other parts of its range.
3 = Need more information about species to assign it a ranking.
4 = Limited distribution and therefore warrants monitoring of status.
.1 = Seriously endangered in California
.2 = Fairly endangered in California
LS= Locally Significant Species
WBWG = Western Bat Working Group:
Low = Stable population
Medium = Need more information about the species, possible threats, and protective actions to implement.
High= Imperiled or at high risk of imperilment.
Attachment 2
Page 1 of 5
Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration
A notice, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources
Code 21,000, et sec.) that the following project will not have a significant effect on the environment.
File Number TAZ APN(s) Date
n/a n/a Publicly Owned Conservation
Land January 19, 2015
Project Name Project Type (Use)
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects Bridge replacement and new trail bridge installation with the
purpose of providing safe access for trail users.
Owner Applicant
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) MROSD
Project Location
The project site is within Monte Bello Open Space Preserve (the Preserve). The Preserve is at the head of the Stevens
Creek watershed above Palo Alto. Within the Preserve, the project area includes two creek crossing locations along the
Stevens Creek Nature Trail, one at a crossing on an unnamed creek slightly upstream of its confluence with the mainstem
of Stevens Creek, and another upstream of the first crossing at an existing at-grade wet ford across the mainstem of
Stevens Creek.
Project Description
The District has identified two creek crossing locations (Sites 1 and 2) along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail alignment in
need of retrofitting. Site #1 is the location of an existing 24-ft-long wooden beam bridge over an unnamed tributary
(‘Tributary Creek’) to Stevens Creek. Stevens Creek Nature Trail in this area is multi-use, but can be closed to cyclists and
equestrians. Channel incision and bank erosion underneath the bridge threaten its integrity, making it vulnerable to damage
and/or failure during large storm events. Site #2 is an existing at-grade wet ford across the mainstem of Stevens Creek,
upstream of the general vicinity of Site #1. Stevens Creek Nature Trail in this location is currently open only to pedestrians.
The proposed project includes bridge construction activities at Sites 1 and 2. Work at Site #1 would replace the existing
24-ft-long wooden beam bridge across Tributary Creek with a new 45- to 50-ft-long steel bridge that is farther from the
actively eroding creek banks. Work at Site #2 would replace an existing at-grade wet ford crossing of the Stevens Creek
mainstem with a new 45- to 50-ft-long steel bridge to improve safety and avoid sensitive creek and riparian habitats.
Please refer to the Project Description, Chapter 1, of the IS/MND for more information about the project.
Purpose of Notice
The purpose of this notice is to inform you that MROSD Staff has recommended that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be
approved for this project. MROSD Staff has reviewed the Initial Study for the project, and based upon substantial evidence
in the record, finds that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment with implementation of
mitigation measures.
Public Review Period: Begins: 01/27/16 Ends: 02/27/16
Public Comments regarding the correctness, completeness, or adequacy of this mitigated negative declaration are invited
and must be received on or before the end of the public review period. Such comments should be based on specific
environmental concerns. Written comments should be addressed to the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 330
Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 or by email at: bapple@openspace.org. For additional information regarding this
Mitigated Negative Declaration, please contact Bryan Apple at 650-691-1200.
Attachment 3
Page 2 of 5
Public Meeting or Hearing: Date: 03/09/16 Time: 7:00 PM Place: MROSD Office (see address below)
Action is scheduled on this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration by the MROSD Board of Directors on March 9, 2016
beginning at 7:00 pm in the MROSD Administrative Office, located at 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA, 94022. It should be
noted that the approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration does not constitute approval of the project under consideration.
The decision to approve or deny the project will be made separately. Meeting information will be posted on the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District website at http://www.openspace.org/about_us/meetings.asp or you may
contact the District Clerk at 650-691-1200.
The Negative Declaration and Initial Study may be viewed at the following locations:
(1) Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA 94022
(2) The document is also available online during the review period at http://www.openspace.org/about-us/notices
Other Agencies sent a copy of this document:
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
City of Palo Alto San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
Potentially Significant effects on the environment:
3.b) Exhaust emissions caused by the use of mobile equipment, trenching and earthmoving activities would result in
emissions of fugitive dust including PM10 and PM2.5, which could be a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure AIR-1 would reduce the project’s construction impacts from fugitive dust emissions to a less-than-significant level.
4.a) The proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect on special-status plants including San Mateo woolly
sunflower, Anderson’s manzanita, Santa Clara red-ribbons, western leatherwood, minute pocket moss, arcuate bush-
mallow, woodland woolythreads, Dudley’s lousewort, white-flowered rein orchid, and Choris’ popcornflower. In addition, the
proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect on special-status wildlife including
California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake, foothill yellow-legged frog, red-bellied newt, special-status and
migratory birds, special-status bats, and San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-
1a through BIO-1g would reduce potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife to a less-than-significant level.
4.b) The proposed project would remove eight trees (six are less than six inches diameter at breast height [dbh], one is
exactly six inches dbh, and one is 15 inches dbh), and disturb some ground vegetation along the creeks. Disturbance to
any amount of riparian habitat without restoration is a substantial adverse effect and therefore significant. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would reduce project-effects on riparian habitat to a less-than-significant level.
4.c) Potential temporary impacts on water quality during construction could result from the release of hazardous
construction‐related materials into the unnamed tributary creek or Stevens Creek, which could result in a potentially
significant impact on aquatic communities. Also, if the Regional Water Quality Control Board determines the extent of the
waters of the State extends beyond the limits of the U.S. and into the project work area, the project may result in temporary
construction impacts to waters of the State, which would be a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measures
HAZ-1, HYD-1, BIO-1b, BIO-1c, BIO-1d, BIO-3 would reduce impacts on jurisdictional waters to a less-than-significant
level.
4.d) Construction associated with the removal of the existing bridge at Site 1 and installation of the new bridges at Site 1
and Site 2 and general use of the work areas during project construction could result in potentially significant temporary
impacts to native wildlife movement within upland areas adjacent to the creek channels. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1b through BIO-1d would reduce impacts on wildlife movement to a less-than-significant level.
5.b) Although the potential to affect archaeological resources would be low, the discovery of resources could occur during
project implementation and any damage to the resources would be a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure CUL-1 would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.
5.c) While the damage or destruction of unique paleontological resources during project construction from ground
disturbances is unlikely, the damage or destruction of unique paleontological resources could occur and would result in a
significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2 would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.
5.d) It is unlikely that human remains would be encountered at the project sites; yet in the event of the discovery of any
human remains during project implementation, any impact to the remains would result in a significant impact.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-3 would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.
6.a.i) The possibility of a surface fault rupture is high near Site #1, but low near Site #2. However, the project sites are
located in remote areas that are only utilized for recreation. The likelihood of exposing people to potential adverse effects
Attachment 3
Page 3 of 5
such as injury or death from fault rupture is low because people would generally be on the bridges for short periods of time.
Compliance with the California Building Code and implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would ensure that the
impact from fault rupture would be less than significant.
6.a.ii) It is likely that in the event of an earthquake within the San Andreas Fault Zone both project sites would experience
seismic shaking. However, the project sites are located in remote areas that are only utilized for recreation. The likelihood
of exposing people to potential adverse effects such as injury or death from a seismic ground shaking rupture is low
because people would generally be on the bridges for short periods of time. Incorporation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1
would reduce this impact to less than significant.
6.a.iv, c) The risk of damage due to slope instability is moderate at the project sites. However, the issue of slope stability
has been addressed in the engineering geology study prepared by Timothy Best, CEG.1 With incorporation of Mitigation
Measure GEO-1 the potential hazard from unstable slopes would be minimized to a less-than-significant level.
6.b) If uncontrolled or not managed, soil erosion resulting from project construction would be a potentially significant impact.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-1 would reduce this potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
8.b) Project construction could potentially require the use of certain hazardous materials such as fuels and oils. Inadvertent
release of these materials into the environment could adversely impact soil, surface waters, or groundwater quality, which
could be a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, along with MRSOD’s existing practices and
OSHA’s existing regulations, would reduce any risk associated with hazardous materials used during construction to less-
than-significant levels.
8.h) Although the project area is mapped outside a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone,2 the project setting amid mature
trees, bushes, and grasslands provides a setting conducive to the ignition and spread of a wildland fire if appropriate
measures are not taken during construction activities. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 would reduce the
impact to less than significant.
9.a, f) Construction and ground disturbance activities associated with the proposed project would occur in close proximity to
Tributary and Stevens Creeks, and such activities could cause dislodging of soil and erosion or inadvertent spills of
construction related chemicals, resulting in potentially adverse water quality impacts related to sedimentation, turbidity,
and/or fuels and oils. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 and HYD-1 would reduce the potential water quality
impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation Measures included in the project to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level:
Mitigation Measure AIR-1 would reduce construction impacts from fugitive dust emissions to less-than-significant levels
by requiring staff and/or the construction contractor(s) to implement a dust abatement program that includes, but is not
necessarily limited to Bay Area Air Quality Management District recommended measures to control dust.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1a would reduce potentially significant impacts on special-status plants by requiring pre-
construction protocol-level surveys, implementing avoidance measures, and relocating extant populations if present.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1b would reduce potentially significant impacts on special-status plants, wildlife, wetlands, and
wildlife movement by requiring a project-specific Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training be
implemented by a qualified biologist and attended by all construction personnel prior to beginning work onsite. The WEAP
training would include information that would increase worker education regarding the potential presence and sensitivity of
relevant biological resources.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1c would minimize impacts on special-status species and sensitive biological resources by
requiring the contractor to implement various general construction measures. Precautions that would be taken in the project
site include setting a speed limit of project-related vehicles on unpaved roads, prohibiting firearms and pets, restricting
wildlife access to garbage and food waste, and establishing reporting protocols for personnel to report harm, injury, or
mortality to special-status species.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1d would reduce potentially significant impacts on the California red-legged frog, San Francisco
garter snake, foothill yellow-legged frog, and red-bellied newt during project-related activities by implementing specific
1 Best, Timothy C., CEG, 2015. Draft Engineering Geologic Review: Stevens Creek Nature Trail Bridge Upgrade Project. Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District, Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, Santa Clara County, CA, prepared for Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District,
November 19, 2015. 2 CALFIRE, 2008. Santa Clara County Hire Hazard Severity Map: Local Responsibility Area. Available online: http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/
fhsz_maps_santaclara.php
Attachment 3
Page 4 of 5
protection and avoidance measures such as erecting exclusionary fencing around key project boundaries (i.e. all staging
areas, bridge installation work areas, and the trail realignment work areas at the Tributary Creek and Stevens Creek work
sites), conducting pre-construction surveys and biological monitoring during construction, and requiring additional protection
measures during project construction.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1e would reduce potentially significant impacts on nesting birds by limiting removal of vegetation to
periods outside of the bird nesting season, to the extent feasible, and establishing no work buffer zones around active nests
on or near the project site.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1f would reduce potentially significant impacts on special-status bat by limiting removal of
vegetation to periods outside of the roosting season, to the extent feasible, and by implementing avoidance measures if
potential roosting habitat or active roosts are present.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1g would reduce potentially significant impacts on the special-status San Francisco dusky-footed
woodrat by requiring a pre-construction survey for active middens in suitable habitat within and surrounding the project
area, staging areas, or along access roads. The measure would require avoidance, to the extent feasible, or relocation in
consultation with the CDFW if active middens area identified.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would reduce project-effects on riparian habitats to a less-than-significant level by requiring
MROSD or its contractors to restore riparian habitat disturbed during project construction at Site 1 along Tributary Creek
and Site 2 along Stevens Creek, at adjacent access areas along the creek corridors, and the trail realignment footprints to
pre-project conditions following project completion.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would reduce potentially significant impacts on jurisdictional waters by requiring MROSD and its
contractors to minimize the disturbance area and restoring temporary use areas to pre-project conditions.
Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would reduce potential significant impacts on archaeological resources to a less-than-significant
level by requiring the implementation of avoidance measures if archeological resources are encountered, additional
measures if the project could damage an identified historical resource or unique archaeological resource, and, if avoidance
is not feasible, the preparation of a detailed treatment plan.
Mitigation Measure CUL-2 would reduce potential significant impacts on unique paleontological resources to a less-than-
significant level by requiring the implementation of avoidance measures and appropriate salvage measures if
paleontological resources are identified.
Mitigation Measure CUL-3 would reduce potential significant impacts on human remains to a less-than-significant level by
requiring avoidance and appropriate treatment measures including consultation with the County Coroner and/or Native
American Heritage Commission if human remains or grave goods are found.
Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce potentially significant impacts from fault rupture, seismic ground shaking rupture,
and unstable slopes by requiring MROSD to develop project design specifications consistent with and/or incorporating
various recommendations in the specific engineering geology investigation.
Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 would reduce potentially significant impacts from the potential release of construction-related
fuels and other hazardous materials into the environment by implementing Best Managem ent Practices (BMPs) based on
the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 would reduce potential significant impacts from wildland fires to a less-than-significant level by
requiring MROSD and/or its contractors to implement various fire safety construction practices including restricting
mechanical construction equipment use, providing water to suppress potential fires, and halting work under certain
conditions.
Mitigation Measure HYD-1 would reduce potentially significant impacts on wetlands, on water quality, and from soil erosion
with the implementation of erosion-control measures consistent with the MROSD’s BMP’s for road/trail work near streams.3
3 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 2013. Best Management Practices for Routine Maintenance Activities in Water Courses. Based on
approved BMPs from the California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration Manual, Tim Best, CEG, the BMP Appendix to the District’s 5-Year
agreement with CDFW for streambed alteration (Section 1600 permits), and other sources.
Attachment 3
Attachment 3
Attachment 4
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND 1
RESOLUTION NO. 16-____
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ADOPTING A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION INCLUDING A
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION WITH
THE MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
I. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (“MROSD”) is a lead agency, as
provided for under section 21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA,
Public Resources Code sections 21000 et seq.).
II. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (collectively referred to as the
MND), attached to the MROSD Board Report, dated March 9, 2016, and incorporated
into this Resolution as if fully set forth herein; was prepared for the Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve Bridge Projects (“Project”) pursuant to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code sections 21000 et seq.) and
the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code. Regulations sections 15000 et seq.).
III. A Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt a MND was distributed to the California Office of
Planning and Research’s State Clearinghouse, interested agencies, individuals, adjacent
property owners, and nearby residents, and posted in a general circulation newspaper, at
the County of Santa Clara Clerk Recorder’s Office, and on the MROSD website,
notifying all interested parties of the availability and 30‐day public review period of the
MND from January 27, 2016 to February 27, 2016. Copies of the full MND were
available on the MROSD website, at the MROSD Administrative Office at 330 Distel
Circle, Los Altos, CA 94022, and printed copies were available upon request.
IV. The MND identified potentially significant adverse impacts on the environment,
including specific impacts to Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources,
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Hydrology and
Water Quality and found that mitigation for the proposed Project would avoid or mitigate
these impacts to below a level of significance by adoption and implementation of the
proposed mitigation measures as part of the Project and through implementation of the
Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP).
V. A Mitigation Monitoring Program (Exhibit A) was prepared to ensure compliance with
the MND’s mitigation measures and attached to the MROSD Board Report, dated March
9, 2016, and incorporated into this Resolution as if fully set forth herein.
VI. On March 9, 2016, the Board of Directors of MROSD conducted a duly noticed public
meeting whereby all oral and written comments received during the public review period
and a staff recommendation for approval of the MND were presented to the Board of
Directors of MROSD. The Board of Directors of MROSD reviewed and considered the
information in the MND, administrative record, and Staff Reports for completeness and
compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.
Attachment 4
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, based upon the Initial Study, Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, all comments received, and all substantial
evidence in light of the whole record presented, the MROSD Board of Directors finds that:
1. The MND and NOI were prepared and publicly noticed in accordance with all legal
requirements pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public
Resources Code sections 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code.
Regulations sections 15000 et seq.).
2. All interested parties desiring to comment on the MND were given the opportunity to
submit oral and written comments on the adequacy of the MND prior to this action by
the MROSD Board of Directors and all comments raised during the public comment
period and at the public meeting on the MND were responded to adequately.
3. Prior to approving the Project, the MROSD Board has considered the MND, along with
all comments received during the public review process.
4. The MND identified all potentially significant impacts to the environment and finds
potentially significant impacts will be mitigated to less than significant or avoided by
adoption of the mitigation measures as described in the MND as part of the Project and
through implementation of the MMP.
5. The MROSD Board finds that, on the basis of the whole record before it, including the
MND and all comments received, there is no substantial evidence that the Project will
have a significant effect on the environment in that, although the Project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect since
Mitigation Measures have been made a part of the Project to avoid such effects.
6. The MROSD Board determines that the MND reflects MROSD’s independent
judgment and analysis and adopts the MND.
7. The MROSD Board adopts the MMP and finds that these mitigation measures are fully
enforceable conditions on the Project and shall be implemented as part of the Project.
8. The location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the
record of proceedings upon which this decision is based are located at the offices of the
General Manager of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 330 Distel Circle,
Los Altos, California 94022.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District on ____, 2016, at a Regular Meeting thereof, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Attachment 4
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND 3
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
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA
EXHIBIT A
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
State Clearinghouse Number: 2016012050
Santa Clara County, CA
January 19, 2016
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022-1404
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 2
MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE BRIDGE PROJECTS
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
This mitigation monitoring program (MMP) includes a brief discussion of the legal basis and
purpose of the program, a key to understanding the monitoring matrix, discussion and direction
regarding noncompliance complaints, and the mitigation monitoring matrix itself.
LEGAL BASIS AND PURPOSE OF THE MITGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM
Public Resources Code (PRC) 21081.6 requires public agencies to adopt mitigation monitoring
or reporting programs whenever certifying and environmental impact report or mitigated
negative declaration. This requirement facilitates implementation of all mitigation measures
adopted through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process.
MONITORING MATRIX
The following pages provide a series of tables identifying the mitigations incorporated into the
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Bridge Projects at Monte Bello Open Space Preserve (the
project). These mitigations are reproduced from the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
project. The columns within the tables have the following meanings:
Number: The number in this column refers to the Initial Study section where the
mitigation is discussed.
Mitigation: This column lists the specific mitigation identified within the Mitigated
Negative Declaration.
Timing: This column identifies at what point in time, review process, or phase the
mitigation will be completed. The mitigations are organized by order in
which they appear in the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Who will
verify?
This column references the District staff that will ensure implementation
of the mitigation.
Agency /
Department
Consultation:
This column references any public agency or District Department with
which coordination is required to ensure implementation of the mitigation.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife is listed as CDFW. The
United States Fish and Wildlife Service is listed as USFWS.
Verification: This column will be initialed and dated by the individual designated to
confirm implementation.
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 3
NONCOMPLIANCE COMPLAINTS
Any person or agency may file a complaint asserting noncompliance with the mitigation measure
associated with the project. The complaint shall be directed to the District’s General Manager in
written form, providing specific information on the asserted violation. The General Manager
shall cause an investigation and determine the validity of the complaint; if noncompliance with
the mitigation has occurred, the General Manager shall cause appropriate actions to remedy any
violation. The complainant shall receive written confirmation indicating the results of the
investigation or the final action corresponding to the particular noncompliance.
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 4
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
Mitigation in
Section 3.b
(AIR-1) : During construction activities, the Applicant shall require staff and/or the
construction contractor(s) to implement a dust abatement program that includes, but is not
necessarily limited to, the following BAAQMD-recommended measures as needed, to
control dust:
• All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
• All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
• All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet
power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping
shall be prohibited.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour.
• Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or
reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California
airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of
Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all
access points.
• All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with
manufacturer’s specifications.
During construction District Project
Manager or their
designee
N/A
Mitigation in
Section 4.a
(BIO-1a) A qualified botanist shall conduct appropriately timed surveys for special-status
plant species with a moderate or high potential to occur in the study area in all suitable habitat
that would be potentially disturbed by the project. Surveys shall be conducted following the
current CDFW protocol (CDFG, 2009). If no special-status plants are found during focused
surveys, the botanist shall document the findings of found species in a letter to CDFW, and no
further mitigation will be required.
If special-status plants are found during focused surveys, the following measures shall be
implemented:
1. Information regarding the special-status plant populations shall be reported to the
CNDDB, mapped, and documented in a technical memorandum provided to MROSD.
2. If federally or state listed species are present, MRSOD shall comply with the federal
and State Endangered Species Acts through consultation with USFWS and CDFW,
Prior to construction District Natural
Resource Staff or
Qualified
Botanist
Botanist, CDFW,
USFWS
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 5
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
respectively.
3. If any population can be avoided during project implementation, it shall be clearly
marked in the field by a qualified botanist and avoided during construction activities.
Before ground clearing or ground disturbance, all on-site construction personnel shall be
instructed as to the species’ presence and the importance of avoiding impacts to this
species and its habitat though the Worker Environmental Awareness Program training
(see Mitigation Measure BIO-1b).
4. If special-status plant populations cannot be avoided, MROSD shall consult with CDFW
to coordinate relocation of special-status plants. To the extent feasible, special-status
plants that would be impacted by the project shall be relocated within local suitable
habitat. This can be done either through salvage and transplanting or by collection and
propagation of seeds or other vegetative material. Any plant relocation would be done
under the supervision of a qualified biologist.
5. If more than two years elapses between the focused floristic surveys and commencement
of ground disturbance activities, or if project construction spans multiple years, a final set
of appropriately timed focused botanical surveys shall be conducted and populations
mapped. The results of these final surveys shall be combined with previous survey
results to produce habitat maps showing habitat where the special-status plants have been
observed during either of the focused floristic surveys conducted for the project.
Mitigation in
Section 4.a,
4.c, 4.d
(BIO-1b) A project-specific Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training
shall be developed and implemented by a qualified biologist for the project and attended by
all construction personnel prior to beginning work onsite. The training could consist of a
recorded presentation that could be reused for new personnel. The WEAP training shall
generally include but not be limited to the following:
1. Applicable State and federal laws, environmental regulations, project permit
conditions, and penalties for non-compliance;
2. Special-status plant and animal species with potential to occur at or in the vicinity of
the project site (i.e. California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake, foothill
yellow-legged frog, red-bellied newt, special-status and migratory birds, special-status
bats, and San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat), their habitat, the importance of these
species and their habitat, the general measures that are being implemented to conserve
these species as they relate to the project, and the boundaries within which the project
Prior to construction District Natural
Resource Staff or
Qualified
Biologist
Biologist
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 6
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
construction shall occur, avoidance measures, and a protocol for encountering such
species including a communication chain;
3. Pre-construction surveys and biological monitoring requirements associated with each
phase of work and at each project site;
4. Known sensitive resource areas in the project vicinity that are to be avoided and/or
protected as well as approved project work areas; and
5. Best management practices (BMPs) and their location on the project site for erosion
control and/or species exclusion.
Mitigation in
Section 4.a,
4.c, 4.d
(BIO-1c) MROSD shall ensure that the following general measures are implemented by the
contractor while working in the project site during construction to prevent and minimize
impacts on special-status species and sensitive biological resources:
1. Project-related vehicles shall observe a 15 mile-per-hour speed limit on unpaved roads
in the project site.
2. No firearms or pets shall be allowed in the project site.
3. The contractor shall provide closed garbage containers for the disposal of all food-related
trash items. All garbage shall be collected daily from the project site and placed in a closed
container from which garbage shall be removed weekly. Construction personnel shall not
feed or otherwise attract fish or wildlife to the project site.
4. As necessary, erosion control measures shall be implemented to prevent any soil or
other materials from entering any nearby aquatic habitat. Erosion control measures
shall be installed adjacent to aquatic habitat to prevent soil from eroding or falling into
the area.
5. Erosion control measures shall be implemented as described in Mitigation Measure
HYD-1. Sediment control measures shall be furnished, constructed, maintained, and
later removed. Plastic monofilament of any kind (including those labeled as
biodegradable, photodegradable, or UV-degradable) shall not be used. Only natural
burlap, coir, or jute wrapped fiber rolls shall be used.
6. If vehicle or equipment maintenance is necessary, it shall be performed in designated
upland staging areas (not at either creek work site), and spill kits containing cleanup
materials shall be available onsite. Maintenance activity and fueling must occur away
During construction District Project
Manager or their
designee
CDFW, USFWS
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 7
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
at least 100 feet from waters of the United States.
7. No equipment used in support of project implementation (e.g. small bobcat or
motorized wheelbarrow) shall enter or cross creeks while water is flowing.
8. Project personnel shall be required to report immediately any harm, injury, or
mortality of a listed species (federal or State) during construction, including
entrapment, to the construction foreman, qualified biologist, or MROSD staff.
MROSD staff or their consultant shall provide verbal notification to the USFWS
Endangered Species Office in Sacramento, California, and/or to the local CDFW
warden or biologist (as applicable) within 1 working day of the incident. MROSD or
their consultant shall follow up with written notification to the appropriate agencies
within 5 working days of the incident. All special-status species observations shall be
recorded on California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) field sheets and sent to
the CDFW by the MROSD staff or their consultant.
9. The spread of invasive non-native plant species and plant pathogens shall be avoided or
minimized by implementing the following measures:
a. Construction equipment shall arrive at the project clean and free of soil, seed, and
plant parts to reduce the likelihood of introducing new weed species.
b. Any imported fill material, soil amendments, gravel, or other materials required
for construction and/or restoration activities that will be placed within the upper
12 inches of the ground surface shall be free of vegetation and plant material.
c. Certified weed-free imported erosion control materials (or rice straw in upland
areas) shall be used exclusively, if possible.
d. To reduce the movement of invasive weeds into uninfested areas, the contractor
shall stockpile topsoil removed during excavation (e.g., during excavation of
bridge supports) and shall subsequently reuse the stockpiled soil for re-
establishment of disturbed project areas.
Mitigation in
Section 4.a,
4.c, 4.d
(BIO-1d) The following conservation measures shall be implemented to minimize or
eliminate potential adverse impacts on California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter
snake, foothill yellow-legged frog, and red-bellied newt during project-related activities:
1. MROSD staff or their consultant shall submit the name and credentials of biologists
qualified to act as the biological monitor to CDFW for approval at least 15 days before
Prior to and during
construction
District Natural
Resource Staff or
their designee
Biologist, CDFW
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 8
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
construction work begins. General minimum qualifications are a 4-year degree in
biological sciences or other appropriate training and/or experience in surveying,
identifying, and handling California red-legged frogs (CRLF), San Francisco garter
snake (SFGS), and foothill yellow-legged frog (FYLF).
A “take” permit from USFWS will not be pursued for the project, therefore CRLF and
SFGS would not be relocated if encountered in project areas but allowed to disperse of
their own volition while all work is halted within 50 feet of individuals. If a CRLF is not
dispersing on its own volition, the on-site biologist shall monitor the frog while work
continues, as long as the on-site biologist can ensure the safety of the frog. A take permit
is not required for foothill yellow-legged frog as the species is not federally-listed
threatened or endangered; however, CDFW may condition qualified biologists to
relocate FYLF under the project’s 1602 lake and streambed alteration agreement.
2. A CDFW-approved biologist shall survey the work sites 2 weeks before the onset of
construction for CRLF, SFGS, FYLF, and red-bellied newt to determine presence (and
life stage) of these species within the project sites. Additionally, a CDFW-approved
biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey of the project work areas for CRLF,
SFGS, FYLF, and red-bellied newt immediately prior to the start of construction
activities. The surveys will consist of walking the project limits and within the project
sites to ascertain presence of these species.
If CRLF or SFGS are found, individuals shall not be disturbed but allowed to disperse
on their own volition. Should CRLF egg masses, metamorphs, or tadpoles be found, a
100-foot no-disturbance buffer shall be established around the location(s) until
juveniles disperse from the breeding sites. If a CRLF is not dispersing on its own
volition, the on-site biologist shall monitor the frog while work continues, as long as
the on-site biologist can ensure the safety of the frog. The CDFW-approved biologist
shall immediately inform the construction manager that work should be halted or
modified (in the case of a buffer or non-dispersing individual), if necessary, to avert
avoidable take of listed species.
If adult FYLF or red-bellied newts are found during surveys, they will be relocated
outside of the work area by a CDFW-approved biologist. Should egg masses,
metamorphs, or tadpoles of these species be found, a 100-foot no-disturbance buffer
shall be established around the location(s) until juveniles disperse from the breeding
site, as determined by a qualified biologist, or in coordination with CDFW.
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 9
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
The specific methods for handling amphibians and decontamination shall follow
USFWS (2005) and USGS (2015) protocols, respectively. These protocols describe
field equipment maintenance, disinfection, and field hygiene procedures designed to
minimize potential spread of pathogens when handling amphibians.
3. Project work areas will be monitored by a CDFW-approved biologist (qualified
biological monitor) during fence installation and ground disturbing activities to
identify, capture, and relocate non-listed sensitive amphibians (FYLF and red-bellied
newt) if found, and halt or observe work in the vicinity of CRLF and SFGS if
encountered onsite. The biologist shall have the authority to stop construction
activities and develop alternative work practices, in consultation with construction
personnel and resource agencies (as appropriate), if construction activities are likely to
affect special‐status species or other sensitive biological resources.
4. To the extent feasible, MROSD and its contractors shall initiate work within Stevens
Creek and Tributary Creek banks between May 1 and November 1 (i.e., generally
identified as the nonbreeding season). Installation of the bridge components that would
not disturb the creek channels or banks (i.e. placement of the wooden platform and
railings) is not restricted to this time period.
5. MROSD or its contractors shall install temporary exclusion fencing around key project
boundaries, including all project staging areas, bridge installation work areas, and the
trail realignment work areas at the Tributary Creek and Stevens Creek work sites.
o Fencing shall be installed immediately prior to the start of construction activities
under the supervision of a qualified biologist.
o The MROSD shall ensure that the temporary exclusion fencing is continuously
maintained until all construction activities are completed.
o MROSD shall ensure daily visual inspections of the fence for any amphibians or
reptiles that may get stuck by the fence, including weekends. These daily checks
shall be conducted by the qualified biological monitor for the first week of
construction. If no species are observed, the qualified biological monitor may
train the contractor to conduct daily inspections and call the biologist if any
species are encountered.
o The fence shall be CDFW-approved species exclusion fencing, with a minimum
height of 3 feet above ground surface, with an additional 4 to 6 inches of fence
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 10
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
material buried such that species cannot crawl under the fence, and shall include
escape funnels to allow species to exit the work areas.
o The exclusion fence shall not cross Stevens Creek or Tributary Creek to allow
wildlife movement to continue through the creek corridors when work is not
occurring.
6. All excavations of a depth of 8 inches or greater shall be covered at the end of each
workday, or escape ramps shall be installed at a 3:1 grade to allow wildlife that fall in
a means to escape.
7. Vehicles or equipment parked overnight at the project staging areas or creek sites shall
be inspected for harboring species each morning by the qualified biological monitor
before vehicles or equipment are moved.
8. Project areas disturbed by vegetation removal, grading of temporary staging areas,
excavation to accommodate bridge removal at Site 1 or bridge installation, and
abandoned trail alignments shall be restored and monitored for success according to
methods described in Mitigation Measure BIO -2, below.
Mitigation in
Section 4.a
(BIO-1e) Nesting birds and their nests shall be protected during construction by use of the
following measures:
1. Vegetation removal, tree trimming, and removal shall occur outside the bird nesting
season (nesting season is defined as February 1 to August 30), to the extent feasible.
2. If vegetation removal, tree trimming, and removal during bird nesting season cannot
be fully avoided, a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct pre-construction nesting
surveys within 7 days prior to the start of such activities or after any construction
breaks of 14 days or more. Surveys shall be performed for the individual project sites,
vehicle and equipment staging areas, and suitable habitat within 250 feet in order to
locate any active passerine (perching bird) nests and within 500 feet of these
individual sites to locate any active raptor (birds of prey) nests.
3. If active nests are located during the pre-construction nesting bird surveys, the wildlife
biologist shall evaluate if the schedule of construction activities could affect the active
nests and the following measures shall be implemented based on their determination:
a. If construction is not likely to affect the active nest, it may proceed without
restriction; however, a biologist shall regularly monitor the nest to confirm there
Prior to and during
construction
District Natural
Resource Staff or
Qualified
Biologist
Wildlife biologist,
CDFW
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 11
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
is no adverse effect and may revise their determination at any time during the
nesting season. In this case, the following measure would apply:
i. If construction may affect the active nest, the biologist shall establish a no
disturbance buffer. Typically, these buffer distances are between 25 feet and
250 feet for passerines and between 300 feet and 500 feet for raptors. These
distances may be adjusted depending on the level of surrounding ambient
activity (i.e., if the project site is adjacent to a road or active trail) and if an
obstruction, such as a large rock formation, is within line-of-sight between
the nest and construction. For bird species that are federally and/or State-
listed sensitive species (i.e., fully protected, endangered, threatened, species
of special concern), an MROSD representative, supported by the wildlife
biologist, shall consult with r CDFW regarding modifying nest buffers,
prohibiting construction within the buffer, modifying construction, and
removing or relocating active nests that are found on the site.
4. Any birds that begin nesting within the project site and survey buffers amid
construction activities shall be assumed to be habituated to construction-related or
similar noise and disturbance levels and no work exclusion zones shall be established
around active nests in these cases; however, should birds nesting nearby begin to show
disturbance associated with construction activities, no-disturbance buffers shall be
established as determined by the qualified wildlife biologist.
Mitigation in
Section 4.a
(BIO-1f) In coordination with the MROSD, a pre-construction survey for special-status
bats shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in advance of tree trimming or
removal at both Site 1 and Site 2 and prior to disturbance to the existing bridge at Site 1, to
characterize potential bat habitat and identify active roost sites. Should potential roosting
habitat or active bat roosts be found in trees, existing structures, and/or rock crevices or
outcrops to be disturbed under the project, the following measures shall be implemented:
1. Trimming or removal of trees, disturbance to existing structures and rock crevices or
outcrops shall occur when bats are active, approximately between the periods of
March 1 to April 15 and August 15 to October 15; outside of bat maternity roosting
season (approximately April 15 to August 15) and outside of months of winter torpor
(approximately October 15 to February 28), to the extent feasible.
2. If trimming or removal of trees, disturbance to existing structures and rock crevices or
Prior to and during
construction
District Natural
Resource Staff or
Qualified
Biologist
Wildlife biologist,
CDFW
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 12
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
outcrops during the periods when bats are active is not feasible and bat roosts being
used for maternity or hibernation purposes are found on or in the immediate vicinity of
the project site where these activities are planned, a no-disturbance buffer of 100 feet
shall be established around these roost sites until they are determined inactive by a
qualified wildlife biologist. A 100-foot no disturbance buffer is a typical protective
buffer distance however may be modified by the qualified wildlife biologist depending
on existing screening around the roost site (such as dense vegetation or a large rock
formation) as well as the type of construction activity which would occur around the
roost site.
For bat species that are considered State sensitive species (i.e. any of the species of
special concern with potential to occur on the project site), an MROSD representative,
supported by the qualified wildlife biologist, shall consult with CDFW regarding
modifying roosts buffers, prohibiting construction within the buffer, and modifying
construction around maternity and hibernation roosts.
3. The qualified wildlife biologist shall be present during tree trimming and disturbance
to rock crevices or outcrops if bat roosting habitat or active non-maternity or
hibernation bat roosts are present (e.g. daytime bachelor roosts). Trees, existing
structures, and rock crevices with roosts shall be disturbed only when no rain is
occurring or is forecast to occur for 3 days and when daytime temperatures are at least
50 degrees Fahrenheit (°F).
4. Trimming or removal of trees, containing or suspected to contain non-maternity or
hibernation bat roost sites shall be done under supervision of the qualified biologist
and follow a two-step removal process.
a. On the first day of tree trimming or removal and under supervision of the
qualified wildlife biologist, branches and limbs not containing cavities or fissures
in which bats could roost, shall be cut only using chainsaws.
b. On the following day and under the supervision of the qualified wildlife biologist,
the remainder of the tree or structure may be removed, either using chainsaws or
other equipment (e.g. excavator or backhoe).
5. Existing structures, rock crevices or outcrops containing or suspected to contain non-
maternity or hibernation bat roosts within the project site shall be disturbed or
dismantled under the supervision of the qualified wildlife biologist in the evening and
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 13
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
after bats have emerged from the roost to forage. These areas shall be modified to
significantly change the roost conditions, causing bats to abandon and not return to the
roost.
Mitigation in
Section 4.a
(BIO-1g) In coordination with the MROSD, a pre-construction survey for San Francisco
dusky-footed woodrat middens shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist prior to
the start of construction in suitable habitat within and surrounding the project sites, staging
areas, and access roads. Active middens identified during surveys within the project sites,
staging areas, or along access roads shall be flagged as a sensitive resource and avoided
during construction, if feasible.
Should avoidance of active woodrat middens within the project site not be feasible, an
MROSD representative, supported by the wildlife biologist, shall consult with CDFW
regarding dismantling the middens by hand for relocation outside of the project areas, and
shall dismantle the middens under the supervision of a qualified wildlife biologist. If young
are encountered during dismantling of the nest, material shall be replaced and a 50-foot no-
disturbance buffer shall be established around the active midden. The buffer shall remain in
place until young have matured enough to disperse on their own accord and the midden is
no longer active. Nesting substrate shall then be collected and relocated to suitable
woodland habitat outside of the project area of disturbance. Appropriate safety gear (e.g.,
respirator, gloves, and tyvek suit) shall be used by the qualified wildlife biologist while
relocating woodrat nests.
Prior to and during
construction
District Natural
Resource Staff or
Qualified
Biologist
Wildlife biologist,
CDFW
Mitigation in
Section 4.b
(BIO-2)
1. MROSD or its contractor shall restore riparian habitat disturbed during project
construction at Site 1 along Tributary Creek and Site 2 along Stevens Creek, at
adjacent access areas along the creek corridors, and the trail realignment footprints to
pre-project conditions following project completion, as described below.
2. During special-status plant surveys described in BIO-1a, botanists shall document
baseline conditions of areas to be disturbed under the Project such as species composition
and percent cover. This information shall be used to determine success of 1) restored
areas following construction completion, and 2) areas left to revegetate through self-
recruitment.
3. All areas of grassland disturbed during vegetation removal and ground disturbance
Prior to and following
project construction
District Natural
Resource Staff or
their designee
Botanist, CDFW
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 14
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
shall be seeded with a regionally-appropriate native grass seed mix following
construction. Restored areas shall be monitored at least once a year for at least 3 years
or longer, as determined in consultation with CDFW and/or as needed, to verify
whether the vegetation is fully established and self-sustaining. By Year 3, percent
cover and vegetation composition shall meet baseline cover and composition
conditions determined through baseline surveys.
4. Herbaceous ground vegetation at bridge assembly areas at Site 1 and Site 2 shall not
be removed but covered with a tight weave coir mat prior to use in order to preserve
topsoil and any dormant seeds within the soil of temporary use areas. Once
construction is complete, the coir mat shall be removed and the areas shall be allowed
to revegetate through natural recruitment. Monitoring of these disturbed areas will
occur annually for 3 years or as specified in consultation with CDFW and/or RWQCB.
If in Year 1, groundcover is not progressing towards baseline conditions (at least 30%
of baseline conditions) MROSD shall apply a native seed mix and/or plantings to these
areas.
5. Decommissioned trail segments shall be covered in slash or logs to discourage use and
act as natural erosion control.
6. Native trees (e.g. Bay laurel, tan oak, and madrone) and non-native trees measuring six
inches in diameter or more that are removed from riparian habitat in support of the
project shall be replaced onsite or in the immediate vicinity of the disturbed areas at a
1:1 ratio with native species that occur within the surrounding mixed woodland. Tree
replacement ratios consider the relatively dense canopy of the mixed woodland at each
location and overall area of disturbance available for new trees to be planted and
succeed.
7. Trees planted in riparian areas shall be monitored for at least three years concurrently
with restored undergrowth. The site shall achieve at least 80% tree survival by Year 3.
Mitigation in
Section 4.c
(BIO-3) MROSD and its contractors shall minimize impacts on waters of the state by
implementing the following measures:
1. Access roads, work areas, staging areas and infrastructure shall be sited to avoid and
minimize direct and indirect impacts to jurisdictional waters.
2. Avoid construction activities in saturated or ponded streams (typically during the
Prior, during and following
construction
District Project
Manager or their
designee
N/A
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 15
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
spring and winter).
3. Stabilize exposed slopes and streambanks immediately upon completion of
construction activities (e.g., removal of the existing bridge at Site 1 and following new
bridge installation).
4. During construction, implement measures to catch trimmed tree limbs, shrubs, debris,
soils, and other construction materials created by or used in vegetation removal before
such materials can enter the waterway. Such materials shall be placed in project
staging areas until the materials can be properly disposed of.
5. Restoration to pre-project conditions (typically including contours, topsoil, and
vegetation) shall be conducted, as described in Mitigation Measure BIO-2 and as
required by regulatory permits (e.g., those issued by the RWQCB and CDFW).
Mitigation in
Section 5.b
(CUL-1) If prehistoric or historic-period archaeological resources are encountered, all
construction activities within 100 feet shall halt and MROSD shall be notified. Prehistoric
archaeological materials might include obsidian and chert flaked-stone tools (e.g., projectile
points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil (“midden”)
containing heat-affected rocks, artifacts, or shellfish remains; and stone milling equipment
(e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones, or milling slabs); and battered stone tools, such as
hammerstones and pitted stones. Historic-era materials might include deposits of metal,
glass, and/or ceramic refuse. A Secretary of the Interior-qualified archaeologist shall
inspect the findings within 24 hours of discovery. If it is determined that the project could
damage a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource (as defined pursuant to the
CEQA Guidelines), mitigation shall be implemented in accordance with PRC Section
21083.2 and Section 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, with a preference for preservation
in place. Consistent with Section 15126.4(b)(3), this may be accomplished through
planning construction to avoid the resource; incorporating the resource within open space;
capping and covering the resource; or deeding the site into a permanent conservation
easement. If avoidance is not feasible, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare and
implement a detailed treatment plan in consultation with MROSD and, for prehistoric
resources, the appropriate Native American representative. Treatment of unique
archaeological resources shall follow the applicable requirements of PRC Section 21083.2.
Treatment for most resources would consist of (but would not be not limited to) sample
excavation, artifact collection, site documentation, and historical research, with the aim to
target the recovery of important scientific data contained in the portion(s) of the significant
During construction District Natural
Resource Staff or
their designee
Archaeologist,
Native American
representative
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 16
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
resource to be impacted by the project. The treatment plan shall include provisions for
analysis of data in a regional context, reporting of results within a timely manner, curation
of artifacts and data at an approved facility, and dissemination of reports to local and state
repositories, libraries, and interested professionals.
Mitigation in
Section 5.c
(CUL-2) MROSD shall implement the following measure:
Inadvertent Discovery of Paleontological Resources. If paleontological resources,
such as fossilized bone, teeth, shell, tracks, trails, casts, molds, or impressions are
discovered during ground-disturbing activities, all ground disturbing activities within
100 feet of the find shall be halted until a qualified paleontologist can assess the
significance of the find and, if necessary, develop appropriate salvage measures in
conformance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Guidelines (SVP, 1996; SVP,
2010).
During construction District Natural
Resource Staff or
their designee
Paleontologist
Mitigation in
Section 5.d
(CUL-3) MROSD shall implement the following measure:
Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. In the event of discovery or recognition of
any human remains during construction activities, such activities within 100 feet of the
find shall cease until the Santa Clara County Coroner has been contacted to determine
that no investigation of the cause of death is required. The NAHC will be contacted
within 24 hours if it is determined that the remains are Native American. The NAHC will
then identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendant from the
deceased Native American, who in turn would make recommendations to MROSD for
the appropriate means of treating the human remains and any grave goods.
During construction District Natural
Resource Staff or
their designee
Santa Clara County
Coroner, NAHC
Mitigation in
Section 6.a.i,
6.a.ii, 6.a.iv,
6.c
(GEO-1) MROSD will implement the following measure:
MROSD shall develop project design specifications consistent with and/or incorporating
the site preparation and grading, seismic design, foundation design, and bridge design
recommendations presented in the project-specific engineering geology investigation.
Throughout project
implementation
District Project
Manager or their
designee
N/A
Mitigation in
Section 4.c,
8.b, 9.a, 9.f
(HAZ-1): MROSD and/or its contractor(s) shall use BMPs based on the Regional Water
Quality Control Board’s Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual to reduce the
potential for release of construction-related fuels and other hazardous materials into the
environment, as follows in the table below:
CONSTRUCTION-RELATED BMPS TO PROTECT SOIL,
During construction District Project
Manager or their
designee
N/A
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 17
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
SURFACE WATER, AND GROUNDWATER QUALITY
BMP Category BMP Description Timing Inspection & Maintenance
Solid Waste
Management
Remove all trash and construction-
related waste to a secure, covered
location at the end of each working
day to maintain a clean work site. Dispose of hazardous materials
according to all specific regulations.
Implement
during
construction
.
Inspect for trash on a
daily basis
Materials
Storage
Store chemicals in non-reactive
container. Store bagged, dry-reactive
materials in a secondary container.
Protect all material storage areas rom
vandalism
Implement
during
construction
.
Inspect storage areas
daily to ensure no
leaks or spills have
occurred
Spill Prevention
and Control
Good housekeeping practices shall be followed to minimize storm water
contamination from any petroleum
products or other chemicals.
Maintain spill cleanup materials
where readily accessible during use
Implement during
construction
Clean up leaks and spills immediately
using absorbent
materials and as little
water as possible
Vehicle and
Equipment
Maintenance
& Fueling
Conduct proper and timely
maintenance of vehicles and
equipment. Cleaning or equipment
maintenance shall be prohibited
except in areas located near the
entrance to the Preserve. If fueling
must occur on-site, use designated
areas located away from drainage
courses and a drip pan to catch spills.
Place drip pans under heavy
equipment stored onsite overnight.
Implement
during
construction
Inspect on-site
vehicles and
equipment for leaks
on a routine basis;
periodically check
incoming vehicles for
leaking oil and fluids
while on paved roads
near the entrance to
the Preserve
Training All personnel shall be instructed
regarding the correct procedure for
spill prevention and control, waste
disposal, use of chemicals, and
storage materials.
Implement
during
construction
None.
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 18
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
Mitigation in
Section 8.h
(HAZ-2) MROSD and/or its contractor shall implement the following fire safety
construction practices:
• Grass and other fuels should be cut or otherwise reduced around construction sites
where vehicles are allowed to park.
• Flammable materials shall be removed to a distance of 10 feet from any equipment
that could produce a spark, fire, or flame.
• The use of mechanical construction equipment shall be minimized during hot, dry,
windy weather.
• Water shall be provided to suppress potential fires caused by construction work.
• Workers shall be reminded that smoking is prohibited at the work site and on any
District land per contract conditions and the District Ordinance.
• Workers shall maintain working ABC fire extinguishers on all vehicles in the work
area.
• All equipment to be used during construction must have an approved spark arrestor.
• Construction personnel shall be trained in fire safe work practices, use of fire
suppression equipment, and procedures to follow in the event of a fire.
• Construction personnel shall stop all work if the site is greater than 80 degrees F, less
than 30% humidity, and wind-speeds greater than 10MPH.
• Workers shall contact the Palo Alto Dispatch at 650-470-1258 and the CALFIRE –
Skylonda Dispatch at 650-851-1860 for emergency response in the event of a fire
(note that these numbers are for emergencies only).
Prior to and during
construction
District Project
Manager or their
designee
Palo Alto Dispatch,
CALFIRE
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 19
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
Mitigation in
Section 4.c,
6.b, 9.a, 9.f
(HYD-1) MROSD or its contractor(s) shall implement erosion-control measures consistent
with the District’s BMPs for road/trail work near streams (MROSD, 2013).1
• Temporary erosion control measures shall be employed for disturbed areas (no disturbed
surfaces shall be left without erosion control measures in place):
These BMPs are
based on the most recent versions of the Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual
(RWQCB, 2002) and the Construction Best Management Practices (BMP) Handbook
(CASQA, 2009), and have been approved by CDFW and the RWQCB. Stormwater and
erosion control measures shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
- Place fiber rolls along the perimeter of the sites to reduce runoff flow velocities and
prevent sediment from leaving the sites or entering Tributary or Stevens Creeks;
- Place silt fences down-gradient of disturbed areas to slow runoff and retain
sediment;
- Revegetate all disturbed soil per a Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan, or
otherwise protect soil from erosion with mulch, coir mats, or related materials
following the end of construction activities.
• Construction activities shall be scheduled to minimize land disturbance during peak
runoff periods and during storm events. To the extent feasible, grading activities shall be
limited to the immediate area required for construction;
• As necessary (i.e., during storms that may occur within the construction window),
surface runoff, including ponded water, shall be diverted away from areas undergoing
grading, construction, excavation, vegetation removal, and/or any other activity which
may result in a discharge to Tributary or Stevens Creek. Normal flow pathways must be
restored upon completion of work at that location;
Prior to, during, and
following construction
District Project
Manager or their
designee
N/A
• If and when conditions are too extreme for treatment by surface protection and/or
measures described above, sediment entrained by runoff shall be temporarily
contained on site. Temporary sediment traps, filter fabric fences, inlet protectors,
vegetative filters and buffers, or settling basins shall be used to detain runoff water
1 The District selects appropriate BMPs for erosion control based on multiple factors, including the expertise of project engineers/planners, permit conditions from regulatory
agencies, existing agreements with regulatory agencies, and other factors. The document cited here does not instruct the user which BMPs are appropriate to install given the
location and situation; it describes what the BMP technique should look like if selected.
Resolutions/2016/16-___Monte Bello OSP Bridge Projects– Adopt MND_ExA 20
Number Mitigation Timing Who will verify?
Department
or Agency
Consultation
Verification
(Date &
Initials)
long enough for sediment particles to settle out. Construction materials, including
topsoil and fuels, shall be stored, covered, and isolated so as to prevent runoff losses
and potential surface water contamination.
References:
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), 2009. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities. November 24,
2009.
California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), 2009. Construction BMP Handbook.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 2013. Best Management Practices for Routine Maintenance Activities in Water Courses. Based on approved BMPs from the California Salmonid
Stream Habitat Restoration Manual, Tim Best, CEG, the BMP Appendix to the District’s 5-Year agreement with CDFW for streambed alteration (Section 1600 permits), and other sources.
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), 2002. Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual, Fourth Edition. August, 2002.
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). Conditions of Receivership for Paleontologic Salvage Collections, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology News Bulletin, Vol. 166, p. 31-323. February
1996.
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). Assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts to nonrenewable paleontologic resources: standard guidelines, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology News
Bulletin. 2010.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2005. Revised Guidance on Site Assessment and Field Surveys for California Red-legged Frogs. Sacramento, California,
August.[http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/es/Survey-Protocols-Guidelines/Documents/crf_survey_guidance_aug2005.pdf] Accessed July 21, 2015.
United States. Geological Survey (USGS), 2015. Biosecurity and Disease. [http://fl.biology.usgs.gov/c1258_Dodd/html/biosecurity_and_disease.html] Accessed July 23, 2015.
R-16-25
Meeting 16-06
March 9, 2016
AGENDA ITEM 4
AGENDA ITEM
Contract Amendment for Consultant Services to Finalize the Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space
Preserve Plan (includes the Bear Creek Stables Site Plan and Alma College Site Rehabilitation
Plan) and Environmental Impact Report
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Approve a contract amendment with Populous, Inc., for an amount not-to-exceed $122,545,
increasing the total contract amount to $392,425, to finalize the Bear Creek Redwoods Open
Space Preserve Plan (Preserve Plan) and Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
SUMMARY
An amendment to the consultant contract is required to finalize the development and
environmental review of the Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve Plan. Funds are
available in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16 Budget to cover expenses through June. Additional
funds will be requested as part of the new FY2016-17 Budget to complete remaining tasks past
June 2016.
MEASURE AA
The Bear Creek Redwoods Preserve Plan supports Measure AA Portfolio #21 Bear Creek
Redwoods: Public Recreation and Interpretive Projects, and more specifically Project #21-6,
Phase I Bear Creek Redwoods Public Access Improvements, Project #21-4, Bear Creek Stables
Site Plan, and Project #21-5, Alma College Site Rehabilitation Plan.
DISCUSSION
In February 2015, after a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) process, the District entered
into a contract with Populous, Inc., for an amount of $228,650 to develop site design alternatives
for Bear Creek Stables and to complete the Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve Plan and
environmental review (R-15-25). The contract was amended by $41,230 in October 2015 (R-15-
149) to include additional public meetings and environmental analysis. Since then, several new
issues have surfaced related to the potential high capital cost of the proposed site improvements
at Bear Creek Stables and the identification and incorporation of new potential water source
options to support the project, requiring additional planning and environmental review
assistance. In addition, Populous has been asked to provide technical assistance beyond what
R-16-25 Page 2
was originally expected to respond to other new issues as information has emerged. These
additional tasks are described in further detail below:
• Development of three additional Bear Creek Stables Site Design Alternatives as directed by
the Board on February 24, 2016 to reduce up front capital costs for the District and a long-
term tenant. These three additional alternatives include: (1) Phased Implementation Plan
for Site Design Alternative A, (2) Phased Implementation Plan for Site Design Alternative
B, and (3) New Minimal Site Design Alternative C. The fee for this scope of work is
$10,860.
• Evaluation of the Alma Water System and the Webb Creek Well as potential new water
source options, evaluation of new major road and trail repair projects not previously
identified as part of the development of the Preserve Plan and Draft EIR documents, as
well as potential impacts to archaeological sites within the vicinity of these projects. In
addition, substantial, unforeseen changes to both documents were required due to the
concurrent nature of the Preserve planning and environmental analysis. These changes
include: removal of the original Stables Alternative C, additional analysis of potential
groundwater impacts from proposed use of the Holmes Well, additional traffic analysis
based on feedback from Santa Clara County, additional analysis of septic system
installation, and incorporation of a peer review analysis of the Alma College Site
Rehabilitation Plan and consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office. The fee for
this scope of work is $81,685.
• Assistance with development of a Request for Proposals for a long-term tenant at Bear
Creek Stables as well as a Stables Lease Agreement (led by the Real Property Department).
The fee for this scope of work is $10,000.
• In addition, a new contingency of $20,000 is also requested at this time to address any
potential future technical assistance leading up to Board approval of the project, including
the potential for extensive EIR responses. The original contingency has been used to
conduct additional analysis needed to address the various CEQA sections in the EIR
document.
FISCAL IMPACT
The FY2015-16 Budget, with midyear adjustments, contains sufficient funds to cover the
requested contract amendments through the remainder of this fiscal year. Additionally, the
proposed FY2016-17 Budget will include $289,000 to complete the Preserve Plan and EIR
(including the Bear Creek Stables Site Plan and the Alma College Site Rehabilitation Plan).
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
To date, there has been one Board meeting (CEQA public scoping meeting), three Planning and
Natural Resources Committee meetings, and an Open House/public workshop held to discuss the
Preserve Plan, Stables Site Plan and Alma College Site Rehabilitation Plan.
At their September 29, 2015 meeting, the Planning and Natural Resources Committee confirmed
a comprehensive series of proposed implementation actions for the Preserve Plan for Board
R-16-25 Page 3
consideration, including a proposed phasing plan and the addition of staff resources to open and
operate the Preserve for general public use in 2018. Detailed information regarding the Stables
Site Plan and various site design alternatives were considered by the full Board at their February
24, 2016 meeting.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
The recommended contract amendment does not constitute a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act. An EIR is being prepared for the Bear Creek Redwoods Preserve
Plan, Bear Creek Stables Site Plan and Alma College Site Rehabilitation Plan.
NEXT STEPS
If the General Manager’s recommendations are approved, staff will amend the contract with
Populous to finalize the Preserve Plan and EIR. It is anticipated that the Draft EIR and Preserve
Plan documents will be available for public review and comment in late Spring 2016.
Responsible Department Head:
Jane Mark, AICP, Planning Department
Prepared by:
Lisa Bankosh, Planner III, Planning Department
Gretchen Laustsen, Planner III, Planning Department
Contact person:
Lisa Bankosh, Planner III, Planning Department
R-16-27
Meeting 16-05
March 9, 2016
AGENDA ITEM 5
AGENDA ITEM
Proposed Purchase of the Cunha Trust property as an addition to La Honda Creek Open Space
Preserve, located at 4150 Sears Ranch Road in unincorporated San Mateo County (Assessor’s
Parcel Numbers 083-361-080, 083-361-110, and 078-290-050)
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as set out in the staff report.
2. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the purchase of the Cunha Trust property.
3. Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan as described in Attachment 4 to the staff
report.
4. Authorize the General Manager to amend the existing Grazing Lease with Wilson Cattle
Company and/or AGCO Hay Company to include pasture lands associated with this
property.
5. Adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the General Manager to file, upon close of escrow,
a notice of Williamson Act nonrenewal with San Mateo County for Assessor’s Parcel
Number 078-290-050.
6. Indicate the intention to withhold dedication of the Cunha Trust property as public open
space at this time.
SUMMARY
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) proposes to purchase the 30.08 acre
Cunha Trust property at a purchase price of $3,090,000.00 as an addition to the La Honda Creek
Open Space Preserve (Preserve). The following report presents a description of the property, a
Preliminary Use and Management Plan, the District’s environmental review, terms and
conditions, and financial considerations. The Fiscal Year 2015-16 Budget contains sufficient
funds to cover the cost of this purchase.
MEASURE AA
A 5-year Measure AA Project List was approved by the Board on October 29, 2014 which
includes Portfolio #7 - Driscoll Ranch Public Access, Endangered Wildlife Protection, and
Conservation Grazing. This proposed purchase serves the goals of Project #7.1 by acquiring
R-16-27 Page 2
lands with high habitat and wildlife connectivity value that will also further facilitate future
public access as desirable additions to the Preserve, and the goals of Project #7.5 by supporting
and expanding conservation grazing in the Driscoll Ranch area of the Preserve.
DISCUSSION
The Cunha Trust property is located at the end of a short private stretch of Sears Ranch Road,
immediately adjacent to the southern end of the Driscoll Ranch Area of the Preserve. Rising
approximately 850 feet in elevation, the property has views of Driscoll Ranch, Ray’s Peak, and
the community of La Honda. Readily accessible from Sears Ranch Road, the house and other
small structures are close to and have views into one of the main entrances to the Preserve, but
are shielded from view from the road by topography and vegetation.
The proposed purchase constitutes a natural extension of the Preserve. It consolidates all access
rights over the private portion of Sears Ranch Road thereby ensuring continued District and
future public access to the Preserve; provides a buffer between private property and the planned
public staging/parking area that will be located at the end of Sears Ranch Road; secures an
improved vehicular route to access the District’s Apple Orchard area of the Preserve; provides
support facilities (including a functioning well) for Operations and the Preserve’s grazing
tenants; and provides an opportunity to designate a staff residence close to a proposed staging
area for increased oversight of District lands and expanded District presence and integration as
part of the local community. Purchase of the property and intended uses are compatible with the
District’s Vision Plan and Coastal Service Plan.
Property Description (Map – Attachment 3)
The 30.08-acre property is located at the northwest terminus of Sears Ranch Road, about one
half mile west of Highway 84 (La Honda Road) and the Town of La Honda, in an unincorporated
area of San Mateo County. The property abuts the Driscoll Ranch Area of the Preserve on the
east and north side, and the Apple Orchard area of the Preserve on the west side. A private
parcel abuts the southern boundary.
The public right-of-way of Sears Ranch Road terminates at a corner of the property. A private
extension of Sears Ranch Road continues for 665 feet up to the entrance to the Preserve. The
underlying ownership of the private extension is held by the property proposed for purchase. As
part of the Driscoll Ranch purchase in 2006, the District acquired the non-exclusive rights for
ingress/egress over the private portion of Sears Ranch Road. Purchase of the Cunha Trust
property would consolidate the District’s ownership of the private section of Sears Ranch Road.
Natural Resource Value
Mature stands of mixed evergreen and oak woodlands are interspersed with open grassland over
the majority of the property. Mature non-native plantings and fruit trees are found close to the
house. As part of the contiguous open space that surrounds it, the property provides habitat for a
variety of animal species. Trees and brush on the property provides both forage and cover for
smaller species, including a wide variety of birds that frequent this landscape. The multi-story
tree canopy provides roosting sites for raptors that hunt on the open grasslands of the Preserve.
Improvements and Land Use
The property is improved with a 3,000 square foot single-family residence built in 1975, attached
garage, an 1,800 square foot prefabricated metal storage building, and unpermitted trailer
R-16-27 Page 3
residence. The structures, with the exception of the trailer, are in good condition and well
maintained. The residence is served by a permitted well, septic system, and electrical service. A
diesel generator housed separately provides back up power. The property is accessed from Sears
Ranch Road, which provides the primary access to the Driscoll Ranch area of the Preserve. La
Honda Elementary School, a church, and some single family residences are also located on the
same road.
Grasslands total about 20 acres of the property. They are grazed by the Wilson Cattle Company,
which holds the grazing lease for the adjacent 300-acre Apple Orchard area of the Preserve.
Fences, ranch roads, and water sources for livestock are in good repair. Internal ranch roads
provide alternate and much improved access to the Apple Orchard area of the Preserve.
Water Rights and Resources
The property is within the San Gregorio Creek Adjudicated Watershed. No blue line streams are
associated with the property and the property has no contact with any natural channel of the
watershed system. Per the 1984 Report on the San Gregorio Creek Adjudication decree, no
adjudicated water rights are associated with the property. A domestic well, permitted by San
Mateo County in 2007, serves the house, and a seep with a spring box serves a cattle trough. The
well is in good condition and provides sufficient water at the rate of 6-7 gallons per minute.
COASTSIDE PROTECTION PROGRAM PROCESS
The property is located within the boundaries of the District’s Service Plan for the San Mateo
County Coastal Annexation Area (Service Plan), adopted June 2003. The Service Plan and
subsequent conditions approved by San Mateo Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo)
both established a number of policies and procedures for conducting the Coastside Protection
Program (Program). The Program guides the District’s purchase of open space lands and their
use and management within the Coastside Protection Area.
The District’s coastside land purchases are subject to a Memorandum of Understanding between
the San Mateo County Farm Bureau and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. In
accordance with this memorandum, District staff provided a property tour for the Farm Bureau
Executive Committee on January 26, 2016 and presented information and solicited comments on
the proposed purchase of the Cunha Trust property at a regularly scheduled Farm Bureau
meeting on February 1, 2016. The Farm Bureau was generally supportive of the purchase.
USE AND MANAGEMENT
Planning Considerations
The property is comprised of two legal parcels within the sphere of influence of the Town of La
Honda. The parcels were created in 1972 as part of subdivision of parcels associated with the
former Driscoll Ranch and another adjacent property. The subdivision also created a non-
exclusive easement that extended access from the end of Sears Ranch Road to the Driscoll
Ranch. The property has been held under the same ownership since the 1972 subdivision.
All parcels have a General Plan designation of Open Space-Rural, with a zoning designation of
RM (Resource Management). Permits are on file with the County of San Mateo for the house
and the metal storage building. The vacant trailer residence is unpermitted. According to the
California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, portions of the property are suitable for
R-16-27 Page 4
grazing. Per the San Mateo County General Plan, recreation, open space, and natural preserves
are allowable uses in rural land use areas with an Open Space–Rural designation.
If purchased, the property would be incorporated into the Preserve and the proposed Preliminary
Use and Management Plan implemented. Any subsequent planning to analyze opportunities for
natural resource management and public use compatible with surrounding rural land use would
incorporate public input, be subject to further environmental review, and be done in accordance
with the District’s Coastside Protection Program Service Plan, which calls for consultation with
appropriate agencies and organizations.
Buildings and Infrastructure Considerations
As described above, the majority of the structures are well-maintained. The unpermitted trailer
is in poor condition. It is recommended that the house be retained as a staff residence to provide
after-hours District presence off Sears Ranch Road and site monitoring of what will become the
first major parking area and trailhead entrance into the Driscoll Ranch Area (scheduled to be
opened to the public in 2017). Minor repairs, appliance purchase, installation of a reserve tank
for domestic water, and modest updating of the interior would be needed to convert the house to
a staff residence. These items are described further in Budget Considerations and would be
undertaken by the District’s Real Property and Land and Facilities Departments. The storage
building would be retained to support field operations and/or the adjacent conservation grazing
tenant. The layout configuration of the house lends itself to renting the residence as one unit or
dividing the structure into two units with a shared use of the laundry room and garage. The
unpermitted trailer residence is recommended for removal.
The access driveway from Sears Ranch Road to the house is in poor condition and needs repairs
to ensure continued access to the house and the Butler building. Costs associated with repairs
are described further in Budget Considerations.
Rangeland Management Considerations
The property’s 20 acres of grassland are grazed by the Wilson Cattle Company, which also holds
a grazing lease with the District for the adjacent Apple Orchard area of the Preserve. Internal
ranch roads provide direct access from the southern and western half of the property to the Apple
Orchard area of the Preserve as well as improved access from Sears Ranch Road to the Apple
Orchard area for vehicles and cattle. Much of the northern half of the property is directly
contiguous to the Driscoll Ranch Area of the Preserve.
The acreage in grassland is too small to form a separate grazing unit. If the Board authorizes the
purchase of the property, the configuration of the pastures would be evaluated so as to determine
how best to incorporate them into the grazing leases on the surrounding Preserve. Under the
General Manager’s Authority, the District would amend the Apple Orchard grazing lease with
Wilson Cattle Company and/or the Driscoll Ranch grazing lease with AGCO Hay Company to
include the property’s grazing lands. Conservation grazing would continue to be consistent with
the practices recommended in the Driscoll Ranch Resource Management Plan (Rana Creek et. al.
2005, amended June 2014). Routine inspections would occur to ensure lessee’s compliance with
the District’s Rangeland Monitoring program and terms of lease.
Williamson Act
A portion of the Cunha Trust property may be subject to a Land Conservation Agreement
between the County of San Mateo and Marie J. Meyer and Kathleen V. Lera under the California
R-16-27 Page 5
Land Conservation Act of 1965 (also known as the Williamson Act). A Williamson Act
Contract (Contract) is a voluntary agreement between a landowner and the County to encourage
ongoing commercial agriculture in exchange for property tax reduction. A Contract between the
County and the then-owners of the property was recorded in 1966 over what was then a 450 acre
parcel. However, the County of San Mateo no longer has record of this Contract in their
database.
Recent title research has revealed that a 9-acre portion (APN 078-290-050) may be still subject
to the 1966 Meyer/Lera Contract. Rudolph W. Driscoll, Sr. acquired the 450-acre parcel after
1966. In 1972, Driscoll conveyed 9 acres of the 450-acre parcel to the Cunhas. In 1997, the
Contract apparently was eliminated as part of a Court Judgment between Driscoll and the County
of San Mateo; however, the Contract may remain in effect on the 9-acre portion of the property
conveyed to Cunha in 1972. In d iscussing this matter with the County Counsel’s office, it was
decided that the District should file for non-renewal of the Contract as it typically does on new
land purchases. As the 9 acres are undeveloped and will continue to be grazed, no underlying
change in land use would occur while the Contract is in effect.
Preliminary Use and Management Plan
The Preliminary Use and Management Plan (PUMP) as described in Attachment 4 establishes a
status quo land management approach in the interim between the purchase and the completion of
a subsequent long-term plan. The PUMP would take effect at the close of escrow and remain
effective until the plan is amended or a Comprehensive Use and Management Plan or amended
Preserve Master Plan is approved for the Preserve. The PUMP includes site occupancy
strategies, site security, new signage, and maintenance of the property in good condition. If
changes to land use or the physical environment are proposed in the future, the plan would be
subject to further environmental review and public input.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
Project Description
The project consists of the purchase of the 30-acre Cunha Trust property as an addition to the
District’s open space preserve system, concurrent adoption of a Preliminary Use and
Management Plan, and minor work to establish and maintain District boundary identification.
Minor maintenance, roadway repairs, removal of house trailer, and erosion and sediment control
measures in accordance with District and Service Plan standards may be conducted along the
existing access route to prevent erosion and water quality degradation. Resource management
activities may be conducted to control invasive plants and remove non-native hazardous trees.
The surrounding land would be preserved as open space and maintained in a natural condition.
The property is within the boundaries of the District’s Service Plan for the San Mateo County
Coastal Annexation Area. The Service Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)
incorporated policies, guidelines, and mitigations to ensure compatibility with the County
General Plan and Local Coastal Plan. Actions proposed to purchase the property and implement
the Preliminary Use and Management Plan are in compliance with the Service Plan and FEIR.
On February 10, 2015, the San Mateo County Planning Commission confirmed that the
acquisition of this property for open space is in compliance with the County’s General Plan.
R-16-27 Page 6
CEQA Determination
The District concludes that this project would not have a significant effect on the environment.
It is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Article
19, Sections 15316, 15317, 15325 and 15061, and 15301of the CEQA Guidelines as follows:
Section 15316 exempts the acquisition of land in order to create parks if the land is in a natural
condition and the management plan proposes to keep the area in a natural condition. The
Preliminary Use and Management Plan specifies that the property would not be further
developed at this time and all land surrounding structures would remain in a natural condition.
Section 15317 exempts the acceptance of fee interests in order to maintain the open space
character of an area. The District would acquire fee interest in order to maintain the open space
character of the property.
Section 15325 exempts transfers of ownership of interests in land in order to preserve open
space. This acquisition would transfer fee ownership of the property to the District and ensure
that the open space would be preserved. The Preliminary Use and Management Plan ensures that
the property would be preserved as open space by incorporating it into the La Honda Creek Open
Space Preserve.
Section 15061(b)(3) exempts actions recommended in the Preliminary Use and Management
Plan as it has been determined that there is no possibility the recommended actions would have a
significant effect on the environment.
Section 15301 exempts actions related to the operation, repair, maintenance, or minor alteration
of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment. Repairs to the access
driveway, maintenance upgrades to the interior of the house, upgrades to the domestic water
system, demolition and removal of trailer and any other minor improvements resulting from
implementation of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan are included in this exemption.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
The property is proposed for purchase at a price of $3,090,000. The value was determined by
fair market value, based upon an independent appraisal commissioned by the District. The fair
market value of the property is comprised of the value of the two legal parcels. The 12+ acre
residence parcel is valued at $2,400,000, and the 17+ acre vacant parcel is valued at $690,000 for
a total fair market value of $3,090,000.
As part of this transaction, the District will deposit an additional $10,000 into escrow for the
seller to remove the unpermitted trailer residence located behind the storage building by June 30,
2016. When this work is completed to the District’s satisfaction, the actual costs incurred not to
exceed $10,000 will be released to the seller, and any unspent funds will be returned to the
District. The property would be purchased on an all cash and “As-Is” basis at the close of
escrow.
R-16-27 Page 7
FISCAL IMPACT
FY2015–2016 Budget for New Land Purchases:
New Land Purchases Budget (Adjusted Mid-Year FY 2015-2016) $17,800,000.00
Land approved for purchase this year $ 9,672,225.00
Cunha Trust Property ($ 3,090,000.00)
New Land Purchase Budget Remaining $5,037,775.00
The Chief Financial Officer was consulted on this proposed purchase and has indicated that,
considering cash flow and account balances, funds are available for this property purchase.
Structures and Improvements
Costs for painting and re-carpeting the interior of the house and purchase/hookup of new kitchen
appliances is estimated at $15,000. These costs are budgeted for in the Real Property budget for
FY2015-16.
The repair of approximately 1,400 linear feet of the existing asphalt driveway to maintain access
to the house is recommended. Asphalt or gravel replacement and upgrades to drainage structures
is estimated to be $100,000 (including design, permitting, and installation). Installation of a
5,000 gallon reserve tank for domestic water is also recommended. Purchase and installation of
a tank, pump, and piping is estimated at $10,000. These costs totaling $110,000 are being
budgeted in the Land and Facilities budget for FY2016-17.
Current Coastside Protection Area Fiscal Considerations
The Cunha Trust property is located within the service area of San Mateo County Fire. However,
under the terms of the District/County Fire agreement, the District is not required to pay a
County Fire fee when the District leases the property for a private agricultural or residential use,
which is subject to a possessory interest tax. The use of the grassland areas of the property would
be leased to the District’s existing grazing tenant(s) and the residence would rented as an
employee residence. Therefore, no County Fire fee is required.
The property is located within the service area of the La Honda-Pescadero Unified School
District. Under the terms of the District/School agreement, the District would pay $1,184.82,
which would increase annually by 2%. This amount will be reduced by the amount of the
possessory tax paid by the District’s grazing tenant, and the future residential tenant. The
possessory tax will not be calculated by the County until 2017 and will be deducted from the
District’s School service fee at that time.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
The District’s Real Property Committee held a meeting on the property on February 23, 2016
with neighbors and interested members of the public to familiarize themselves with the property
and receive public input on the proposed purchase. Notice of the meeting was distributed on
February 18, 2016 to property owners of land located adjacent to and surrounding the property,
as well as interested parties. Two members of the Real Property Committee were in attendance.
Two members of the public attended the meeting. Staff provided a presentation of the property,
described how it would be managed as an extension of the adjacent Preserve, and reviewed the
proposed Preliminary Use and Management Plan and the purchase terms. Public attendees
R-16-27 Page 8
offered their support for the purchase. The Real Property Committee approved recommending
this purchase to the full Board of Directors in a vote of 2-0.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Property owners of land located adjacent to and surrounding the subject property, as well as
neighbors along Sears Ranch Road, the Driscoll Ranch Area mailing list, and attendees of the
February 23, 2016 Real Property Committee meeting have been mailed a copy of this agenda.
Accordingly, all notice required by the Brown Act and the Coastal Protection Program has been
provided.
NEXT STEPS
Upon approval by the Board of Directors, staff would proceed with the close of escrow for the
purchase of the property and take the next steps identified in the Preliminary Use and
Management Plan as contained in this report. The District’s Skyline Field Office would manage
the property as an addition to La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve.
1. After the close of escrow, staff will monitor the seller’s removal of the dilapidated mobile
home trailer from the property.
2. Under the General Manager’s authority, amendment(s) to long-term grazing lease
agreement(s) will be executed.
3. Identified maintenance and infrastructure improvements will be completed by Real
Property and the Land and Facilities Department.
Attachments:
1. Resolution – Authorizing Acceptance of Purchase Agreement
2. Resolution – Notice of Nonrenewal of Land Conservation Contract
3. Location Map
4. Preliminary Use and Management Plan
Responsible Department Manager:
Michael Williams, Real Property Manager
Prepared by:
Elish Ryan, Real Property Planner III
Michael Williams, Real Property Manager
Graphics prepared by:
Ryan Haines, GIS Intern
Attachment 1
Resolutions/2016/16-__Cunha 1
RESOLUTION NO. 16-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AUTHORIZING
ENTRY INTO A PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH JUDITH WILSON,
JEANETTE MODENA, HENRIETTA WEEKS AND MARY PAMELA
MUTEFF, SUCCESSOR CO-TRUSTEES OF THE CUNHA LIVING
TRUST DATED AUGUST 24, 1997; AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL
MANAGER OR OTHER OFFICER TO EXECUTE ACCEPTANCE OF
THE GRANT TO DISTRICT, AND AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL
MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS
NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO THE CLOSING OF THE
TRANSACTION (LA HONDA CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE -
LANDS OF CUNHA TRUST)
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve
as follows:
SECTION ONE. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District does hereby accept the offer contained in that certain Purchase Agreement with the
Judith Wilson, Jeanette Modena, Henrietta Weeks and Mary Pamela Muteff, Successor Co-
Trustees of the Cunha Living Trust dated August 24, 1997 (Seller) and the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District (District), a copy of which purchase agreement is attached hereto
and by reference made a part of, and authorizes the President of the Board of Directors or other
appropriate officer to execute the Agreement on behalf of the District.
SECTION TWO. The General Manager, President of the Board of Directors or other
appropriate officer is authorized to execute Certificates of Acceptance for the Grant Deed on
behalf of the District.
SECTION THREE. The General Manager or the General Manager’s designee is
authorized to expend up to $135,000.00 to cover the cost of title insurance, escrow fees, access
road repairs, water infrastructure improvements and painting and carpeting of interior of
residence.
SECTION FOUR. The General Manager or the General Manager’s designee shall cause
to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to Seller. The General Manager is further
authorized to execute any and all other documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the
closing of the transaction.
SECTION FIVE. The General Manager and General Counsel are further authorized to
approve any technical revisions to the attached Purchase Agreement and other documents in
escrow which do not involve any material change to any term of the Agreement, which are
necessary or appropriate to the closing or implementation of this transaction.
SECTION SIX. The purpose of this Section is to enable the District to reimburse its
general fund for the cost of certain land acquisitions. The District wishes to finance certain of
these real property acquisitions and expects to use taxable and/or tax-exempt debt, such as bonds,
Resolutions/2016/16-__Cunha Purchase 2
but such financing is not cost-justified for the District unless the principal amount of the
financing is large enough to justify the related financing costs. Consequently, it is the District’s
practice to buy property with its general funds and, when a financing is cost-justified based on
the aggregate value of acquisitions, to issue obligations to reimburse itself for previous
expenditures of general funds. These general funds are needed for operating and other working
capital needs of the District and are not intended to be used to finance property acquisitions on a
long-term basis.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District on _____, 2016, 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
Attachment 2
Resolutions/2016/16-__Cunha-Williamson Act Nonrenewal 1
RESOLUTION NO. 16-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 51245 APPROVING THE FILING OF
A NOTICE OF NONRENEWAL OF THE WILLIAMSON ACT LAND
CONSERVATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
AND MARIE J. MEYER AND KATHERINE V. LERA
WHEREAS, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (“District”), upon close of
escrow, will own a parcel of land in the County of San Mateo, known as San Mateo County
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 078-290-050 and 083-361-110, which is subject to a Land
Conservation Agreement between the County of San Mateo and Marie J. Meyer and Katherine
V. Lera under the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (also known as the Williamson
Act); and
WHEREAS, the mission of the District includes preservation of open space lands in
perpetuity so that acquisition of such contracted lands accomplishes the purposes of the
Williamson Act; and
WHEREAS, the procedures established by the County of San Mateo for administering
such contracts serve no useful purpose when land is owned by a park or open space agency
preserving such lands’ open space and agricultural resources, yet such procedures can impose a
procedural and financial burden on the District’s ability to efficiently carry out its operations;
and
WHEREAS, the benefits of reduced property tax in exchange for such land preservation
is no longer relevant once the District has acquired such lands, as the District is exempt from
property tax in most situations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors hereby:
1. Authorizes the General Manager of the District, pursuant to Government Code Section
51245, to file a notice of nonrenewal with the County of San Mateo for Assessor’s Parcel
Numbers 078-290-050 and 083-361-110, (currently subject to the same Land Conservation
Contract) and, upon close of escrow, owned by the District.
2. Authorizes the General Manager as agent of the District to execute and submit all
documents and take such actions as may be necessary or convenient to accomplish the
purpose of this Resolution, or to comply with the requirements of the County of San Mateo
or the State Williamson Act, in order to accomplish the nonrenewal of the contract described
above.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District on _____, 2016, at a regular meeting thereof, by the following vote:
Attachment 2
Resolutions/2016/16-__Cunha-Williamson Act Nonrenewal 2
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
MindegoLake
LowerTurtle
LangleyCreek
Harrington C reek
La
HondaCreek
M i n d e g o C r e e k
SanG
r
e
g
o
rio C ree
k
Woodruff Creek
W e e k s Creek
P i n e Tree Gulch
Jo n e s G ulch
Boges
s
C
r
eek
Woo d h a m s C r e e k
Ham m s G u l c h
£¤84
£¤35
S
e
a
r
s
R
a
n
c
h
R
o
a
d
BearGulchRd
R
a
lstonRd
L o s t Trail
Raple y T r a i l
CAStateRout e 8 4 Laguna
Dr
CuestaReal
S c e nic Dr
Roquena Dr
O ld L a H o n d a R d
H a m m s G u lch Trail
Sea
rs
R
anchRd
CAS
t
a
t
e
R
o
ut
e
8
4
C
A
State
Route35
Midpen in s ula Reg i ona lOpen Sp ac e Di st r ic t
At t a c h m e n t 3 - C u n h a Tr u s t P r o p e r t y, L a H o n d a , C A
March, 2016
Path: G:\Projects\La_Honda_Creek\Wilson_Cunha_Properties\Cunha_Propery_Board_Packet.mxd
Created By: eryan
0 0.750.375MilesI
(MROSD)MR O S D Prese rve s
Pr i va te Pr o per t y
While th e District strives t o use the b est available d igital data, t his d at a d oe s not repr esen t a le gal survey and is mer ely a graphic illustr at ion of geographic fe at ures.
Highl ig ht ed Pr o pe rt y
Half Moon Bay
Redwood City
PaloAlto
Area ofDetail
Ot her Pr o t ect ed O p en Sp a ceor Pa rk La nd s
La Honda CreekOpen Space Preserve
Cunha Trust Property30.0 Acres
La Honda CreekOSP
!La Honda
Sears
Ranch
R
d.
Attachment 4
Preliminary Use and Management Plan
Cunha Trust Property
As an addition to La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve
Public Access: Designate the property as closed to general public access. Future public
access and trail connectivity may be considered at a later date,
particularly if new regional trail connections are made possible.
Signs and Site
Security:
Install and maintain closed area and preserve boundary signs where
appropriate.
Structures and
Improvements:
Retain house and perform minor upgrades to interior finishes and
necessary repairs to convert house into a staff residence to increase
District presence and oversight to support future public use in the
Driscoll Ranch Area of the Preserve. If needed, investigate the
operational need, costs, and permit requirements related to dividing the
house into two rental units.
Retain metal storage building to support field operations and
conservation grazing. If not completed by June 30, 2016 by the prior
owner, finish the removal of the unpermitted trailer residence.
Water Rights
and Water
Resources:
The property is within the San Gregorio Creek Adjudicated Watershed.
No blue line streams are associated with the property and the property
has no contact with any natural channel of the watershed system. Per
the 1984 Report on the San Gregorio Creek Adjudication, no
adjudicated water rights are associated with the property. A domestic
well permitted by the County of San Mateo in 2007 serves the house,
and a seep with spring box serves a cattle trough.
Investigate best location and associated costs for installation of a 5,000
gallon reserve tank for permitted domestic well and install.
Maintain domestic well and spring box that serves the cattle trough.
Resource
Management:
Control invasive plant and animal species consistent with the District’s
adopted Integrated Pest Management Program’s recommendations.
Coordinate with appropriate state and local agencies as needed to ensure
that District’s resource management of these properties aligns with
regional watershed protection enhancement goals.
Rangeland
Management:
Evaluate strategies to incorporate pasture lands into grazing leases for
surrounding lands. Amend Apple Orchard grazing lease with Wilson
Cattle Company and/or Driscoll Ranch grazing lease with AGCO Hay
Company as needed.
Attachment 4
Continue site grazing consistent with practices recommended in the
Driscoll Ranch Resource Management Plan (Rana Creek et al 2005,
amended June 2014) and amend plan to incorporate the property.
Perform routine inspections to ensure grazing lessee’s compliance with
the District’s Rangeland management objectives and terms of the
lease(s).
Patrol: Conduct routine patrol of property.
Wildfire Fuel
Management:
Conduct conservation grazing for reduction of wild land fire fuels,
implement defensible space protocols within 100 feet of all structures,
and other current District-wide fuel management practices as
appropriate. Further assess vegetation communities on the property to
determine wildfire management needs and consult with San Mateo
County and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection in
developing site-specific fuel modification and management
recommendations as part of the subsequent planning process.
Fences and
Gates:
Maintain gates and fences as necessary. Install new fences and gates as
necessary to prevent unauthorized vehicular entry at the property
boundaries.
Roads and
Trails:
Retain existing ranch roads for seasonal use, in coordination with the
grazing tenant.
Repair and maintain the surfaced entrance road that serves the house
as well as unpaved internal circulation roads as needed.
Coastal
Service Plan:
Operate and manage the property in conformity with the provisions of
the Coastal Service Plan for the Coastside Protection Program, and the
mitigation measures adopted pursuant to the Coastal Service Plan
Environmental Impact Report.
Site Safety
Inspection:
Perform routine inspection and repair of structures, well, fences, and
other infrastructure.
Name: Incorporate as addition to the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve.
Dedication: Withhold dedication of property as open space at this time.
Attachment 4
Subsequent
Planning:
Include property in future amendments of the La Honda Creek Open
Space Preserve Master Plan. When the opportunity for regional trail
connectivity arises, develop a long-term site plan to fully integrate the
property into the Preserve.
Any subsequent planning process for the property would incorporate
public input, require further environmental review, and be done in
accordance with the District’s Coastside Protection Program Service
Plan, which calls for consultation with appropriate agencies and
organizations.
R-16-26
Meeting 16-06
March 9, 2016
AGENDA ITEM 6
AGENDA ITEM
Final Design Approval of the Weather Shelters and Summit Stair for the Mount Umunhum
Summit Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Direct the General Manager to make any desired final adjustments to the final draft design of
the summit and trailhead weather shelters, summit stair, and associated updated cost estimate
for the Mount Umunhum Summit Project.
2. Confirm the removal of a third weather shelter at the east summit.
3. Direct the General Manager to proceed with the production of construction documents,
which will form the basis for permit submittals and a Request for Bids package.
SUMMARY
A Preferred Option for the Mount Umunhum Summit Project (Summit Project) was selected by
the Board in November 2015 (R-15-160), at which time the Board directed staff to complete
final design development for construction. Certain elements of this Project, specifically the
weather shelters and stairs, represent a substantial departure from amenities offered at other
Preserves and carry significant cost. Therefore, at this time staff is returning to the Board with
final designs for these shelters and stairs. Following Board confirmation, staff will finalize
construction documents, which will be used to support permit application submittals and form
the basis for a Request for Bids to solicit bid proposals for construction this year.
MEASURE AA
The 5-year Measure AA Project List approved by the Board at their October 29, 2014 meeting
includes the voter-approved Priority Action #23 (Portfolio #23) that encompasses all of the
Mount Umunhum Public Access and Interpretation Projects in the amount of $27.972 million.
BACKGROUND
The Summit Project at Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve will provide a unique destination to
some of the best views in the Bay Area with a grand opening date to open the site to the public
scheduled for October 22, 2016. Consulting landscape architects Restoration Design Group
(RDG) have developed final concept design plans for two shelters: one at the summit near the
R-16-26 Page 2
vehicle turnaround, and one at the summit trailhead of the Mount Umunhum Trail. These designs
are included as Attachment 1. RDG is also working on a final design for summit stairs, which
were not yet ready for inclusion with this report, but will be distributed at or before this meeting.
At this time, final Board concurrence is needed on the design for these shelters and stairs in order
to advance the design development documents to 100% construction documents and maintain the
schedule to meet the goal of opening the summit to the public in seven months.
DISCUSSION
The Preferred Option selected by the Board last November includes an ADA-accessible drop-off
area, accessible trails at the summit, a substantial weather shelter at the summit, a second
substantial shelter at the trailhead (Attachment 1), summit stairway, vault restrooms, interpretive
features, parking, restoration of natural landforms, and native vegetation restoration. The cost
estimate provided in this report does not include any of the radar tower long-term options nor
provision of water. Water will be trucked to the site and stored in a series of tanks for horse
troughs, irrigation, and limited wildland fire suppression. Originally, the Board had approved the
potential installation of a third shelter at the east summit. Further investigations since then,
however, have determined that there is no ideal location for an additional shelter at the summit as
another structure would compete with the existing natural views of the Guadalupe watershed and
the newly restored (topographic and vegetative) peak; therefore, it is the recommendation of the
General Manager and the design consultants to eliminate the shelter from this location all
together.
FISCAL IMPACT
Below is an updated cost summary table showing estimates of probable cost for the structures:
Item
Revised
cost
estimate
Previous
cost
estimate
Reason for Increase
Summit shelter $550,000 $400,000 Upgrade in materials, scale, and size
Trailhead
shelter $330,000 $275,000 Same as above
Summit stair $ 845,000 $380,000
Additional section of stair directly to parking
area to avoid pedestrians sharing road with
vehicles entirely
On February 10, 2015, the Board approved an increase of $300,000 in the Planning
Department’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16 Midyear Budget for a total of $911,000 for schematic
design, permitting, construction documents, and initial construction of the new parking areas,
restrooms, landing zone, other public access improvements and site amenities. Funds in the
amount of $5.47 million will be requested in the proposed FY2016-17 budget to complete the
construction of the Summit Project improvements. This estimate is higher than previously
anticipated due to additional necessary soft costs, including compaction testing and special
construction surveying, as well as additional fencing and an increase in the costs for the revised
structure designs as shown in the table above. Costs for the Summit Project are eligible for
Measure AA reimbursement ($27.972 mission allocation, of which approximately $26 million
R-16-26 Page 3
remain). In addition, the Summit project will receive half of the $1 million State Coastal
Conservancy grant ($500,000).
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
Construction of the Mount Umunhum Summit Area was evaluated in the Mount Umunhum
Environmental Restoration and Public Access Plan EIR, which was certified by the Board on
October 17, 2012 (R-12-91). The design and construction of the summit shelters and stairs as
proposed will result in no additional adverse environmental impacts not already identified and
addressed in the EIR.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
The Planning and Natural Resources Committee advanced their preferred option to the full
Board at their August 25, 2015 meeting, where a Preferred Option was unanimously approved.
NEXT STEPS
Remaining work will focus on the production of bid documents for contracting, and initiating
permitting. Construction is scheduled for Spring/Summer 2016. The timeline to meet the goal of
providing public access to the summit of Mount Umunhum by October 2016 appears in the table
below.
Mount Umunhum Summit Project Implementation Milestones
Refined Conceptual Design April 21, 2015 (completed)
Draft Schematic Design for Committee Review* June 30, 2015 (completed)
Final Schematic Design for Committee Review August 11, 2015 (completed)
Board Consideration of Committee Preferred Option August 26 (completed)
Construction Documents May 2016
Approve Visitor Amenities Construction Contract Spring 2016
Construction Phase Summer - Fall 2016
Public Access Grand Opening October 22, 2016
Restoration Planting and Irrigation Fall 2016 – Fall 2017
A hydrogeological study was completed to assess the feasibility of establishing a potable water
system for the summit. The study identified a potential well location, but recommended that a
geophysical survey also be completed to better define and confirm subsurface conditions given
the potential uncertainty of reaching water (estimated well depth ranges from 500 to 700 feet).
The cost for the geophysical survey, well drilling, and associated infrastructure is estimated at
$125,000. Given the high cost and uncertainty of finding water, this element is being deferred
until visitor use patterns and demand are better understood to confirm the need for potable water.
R-16-26 Page 4
Attachments
1. Summit and trailhead weather shelter final designs
Responsible Department Head:
Jane Mark, AICP, Planning Manager (for vacant Engineering and Construction Manager
position)
Prepared by:
Damon Adlao, Capital Project Manager, Engineering and Construction
Meredith Manning, Senior Planner, Planning
Contact:
Damon Adlao, Capital Project Manager
02.17.2016
Trailhead Shelter Schematic Design - Plan
WARE ASSOCIATES
Architecture Engineering
440 Grand Avenue, Suite 250 Oakland, CA 94610 T 510.922.9888 F 510,9222.9624
VOUNT UVU\HUV SUV
vJIT PROJECT
TRAILHEAD SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 1
TRAILHEAD SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 2
TRAILHEAD SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 3
TRAILHEAD SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 4
TRAILHEAD SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 5
TRAILHEAD SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 6
TRAILHEAD SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 7
TRAILHEAD SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 8
TRAILHEAD SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 9
, 1st esmiuMli ka.„-goiromaAwapiitiN
Jo 0010stalifava Asism---040- 'eft,. A
u4011
141mal
-wito
�1mint f� 40111 1* ibis ,l 4*.x
ftftwibi llr4it -
vaNIONARTAffist ±
4•$kwi.
j 1 u
•
rfflarAWAINEWAY
li
sl iers \ice o.11 IBIERIFMair of
NATURAL EXHI
02.18.2016
11
11111, /11,111111
z`' -Y,
Summit Shelter - Hip Roof Scheme - Plan
WARE ASSOCIATES
Architecture Engineering
440 Grand Avenue, Suite 250 Oakland, CA 94610 T 510.922 SB8d r u10,9222. S%4
VOU\T UVU\HUV SUMMIT PROJECT
SCALE: 1" 10'
Mdpenlnsula Regional Open Space District
SUMMIT SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 1
SUMMIT SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 2
SUMMIT SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 3
SUMMIT SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 4
SUMMIT SHELTER - HIP ROOF ANGLED WALL SCHEME - 5
SUMMIT SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 6
SUMMIT SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 7
SUMMIT SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 8
SUMMIT SHELTER - HIP ROOF SCHEME - 9
R-16-21
Meeting 16-05
March 09, 2016
AGENDA ITEM 7
AGENDA ITEM
Ten-year Status Report and Recommended Continuation of a Slender False Brome Integrated
Pest Management Program
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Continue the Slender False Brome Program on District preserves and nearby private parcels for
an approximate program cost of $1,250,000 over the next ten years.
SUMMARY
On December 14, 2005 (R-05-122), the District’s Board of Directors approved a ten-year plan to
control slender false brome (Brachypodium sylvaticum, ‘SFB’) from the Thornewood Open
Space Preserve and the surrounding Woodside neighborhoods. Four major tasks were approved
under this work plan: 1) reclassification of SFB as a noxious weed by the state of California; 2)
treatment and monitoring of SFB on District land; 3) treatment and monitoring of SFB on
adjacent lands; and 4) pursuit of grants for SFB control. Task 1 was completed in 2006. This
progress report will focus on tasks 2 through 4 and recommends an approach for the next ten
years. Treatment of SFB has largely been successful; however, the infestation area is larger than
originally estimated. The General Manager recommends continuation of the program, estimated
to cost $1,250,000 over the next ten years, with a program focus on treating SFB on District
preserves and on properties most likely to infest District preserves, while at the same time
encouraging partners to control SFB on other properties.
DISCUSSION
Population size and range of SFB
Increased efforts at detection have revealed that SFB is more widespread throughout San Mateo County
and the Santa Cruz Mountains than originally believed. In 2009, the total net area of land infested with
SFB was believed to be 100 acres (40 acres of District land and 60 acres of adjacent private lands). The
estimated population of SFB is now known to be at least 250 acres (75 acres of District land and 175
acres of adjacent private lands and other land management public agencies). However, the full extent of
population size and range on lands not owned or managed by the District is unknown.
Treatment and monitoring of SFB on District land
As of December 2014, the SFB program has been incorporated into the District-wide Integrated
Pest Management Program. District management efforts thus far have involved the removal of
SFB from woodland areas but have not addressed treatment options for the removal of SFB from
sensitive riparian habitats due to ongoing consultation with regulatory agencies for potential
impacts to California red-legged frog.
R-16-21 Page 2
Treatment and monitoring of SFB on adjacent private lands
Since 2009, 103 property owners have had their land surveyed for SFB; approximately 200
infested acres have been treated between one and six times, and a total of $173,114 has been
issued in reimbursements to those property owners. Monitoring on private parcels has led to a
greater understanding of treatment efficacy on the population of SFB. Multiple grant funds
(2008 through 2011) were directed toward controlling SFB on private property, but these funds
are no longer available.
Collaboration with Other Agencies
In the early stages of the outbreak of SFB, the San Mateo Weed Management Area working
group assisted in the monitoring and mapping efforts, as well as the education and outreach of
the general public using state funding. In 2011, funding for the CDFA Noxious Weed Program
was eliminated from the California State budget. At this time, two other public agencies have
known populations of SFB: County of San Mateo and Redwood National and State Parks.
Observations and mapping is shared among agencies and the general public though the web-
based database Calflora (www.calflora.org). The RCD has received funding from the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service to address SFB infestations in the La Honda area, which is currently the
only source of governmental funding for SFB control besides the District’s funding.
Recommendation for Continuation of the Program
Staff recommends that the future SFB program on District lands continue until regrowth no
longer occurs. Treatment at creekside areas in Thornewood and La Honda Creek OSPs is already
permitted and will be implemented this fiscal year. Treatment at creekside areas District-wide
will be implemented once the Fish and Wildlife recovery permit has been received (anticipated
in Spring of 2016) and as staff capacity allows.
Staff recommends that the future program also continue to focus on treating infested properties
immediately adjacent to District lands and parcels which otherwise have the potential to infest
District preserves. Use of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District IPM Program’s
modeling for invasion pathways will determine priority properties.
FISCAL IMPACT
Cost of Program since Inception
When the District Board of Directors approved the ten-year plan for SFB in 2005, it was
estimated to cost $1.2 million. As of December 1, 2015, the entire program is estimated to have
cost the District $809,500, which includes staff time.
Existing San Mateo County RCD Contract
The District contracted with the San Mateo RCD in March 2014 (see R-14-48) to implement
SFB control on private lands with potential to infest District lands. This contract was for a total
amount not to exceed $311,866 and $191,500 is remaining on this contract to continue work
through March 31, 2017. These funds will be proposed in the Natural Resources Department
Budget for FY2016-17.
Continuation of Program Costs
Yearly costs to control SFB on District lands is estimated to cost $25,000 per year. Control on
private properties, administered by the RCD, will amount to an additional $100,000 per year.
The RCD will continue to pursue additional grant funding for this work. Funding for this
R-16-21 Page 3
program will be requested in future year budgets to continue the services outlined in this report.
The total cost of this program for 10 years is anticipated to be $1,250,000.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
On January 19, 2016 the Ten-year Status Report and Recommended Continuation of a Slender
False Brome Integrated Pest Management Program was brought before the Planning and Natural
Resource Committee. The Committee recommends to the full Board of Directors a continuation
of the Slender False Brome Program on District preserves and nearby private parcels for an
approximate program cost of $1,250,000 over the next ten years.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. Notices were also sent to persons
requesting notice of resource management activities and to property owners and residents near
Thornewood, El Corte de Madera, and La Honda Creek Open Space Preserves.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
The continuation of the SFB control program is covered under CEQA by the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District IPM Program
approved in December 2014.
NEXT STEPS
If program continuation is approved by the Board of Directors, next steps will include:
• Yearly treatment and its potential environmental impacts will be evaluated as part of the
District-wide Integrated Pest Management Program.
• Staff will investigate and implement additional Integrated Pest Management techniques
and mapping efforts.
• Staff will investigate a Memorandum of Understanding with the San Mateo County RCD
for a long-term commitment to oversee work with private property owners on parcels
which could potentially infest District lands.
• Staff will continue to encourage and develop partnerships with other agencies to address
SFB infestations, which do not pose a threat to District lands.
• Provide assistance to the San Mateo RCD to pursue grant funding for SFB management.
Attachment(s)
1. Slender False Brome Project Area
Responsible Department Head:
Kirk Lenington, Natural Resources Manager
Prepared by:
Coty Sifuentes-Winter, IPM Coordinator, Natural Resources
Graphics prepared by:
Jamie Hawk, GIS Technician
!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!!!!!!
!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!
!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!
!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!
!!!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!
!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!
!!!
!
!!!!!!
!
!!
!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!
!!!!!!!
!!!
!
!!!!
!!
!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!
!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!
!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!!!
!!!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!
!!!!!
!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!
!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!
!!!
!!!!
!
!!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!!!
!!!!!
!
!!!!
!!!
!
!!
!!!
!!
!!
!!!!!
!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!!!!
!!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!!
!
!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!
!
!
!!!!
!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!
!!!
!!
!!!!!!!!
!
!
!!
!
!!!
CoalCreek
El Cortede MaderaCreek
Foothills
La HondaCreek
LosTrancos
MonteBello
PurisimaCreekRedwoods
Rancho SanAntonio
RussianRidge SkylineRidge
TeagueHill
Thornewood
Tunit asCreek
WindyHill
LaH ondaC
r
e
e
k
TunitasCreek
StevensCreek
E
l
CortedeMaderaCreek
MindegoCreek
Pu risimaCreek
E a s t F o r k T u nitasCreek
L a w rence Creek
Bogess
Creek
A
r
r
oyoL eon
HarringtonCreek
Dry Creek
ClearCreek
M i lls C reek
Lobito s Creek
UV101
UV1
UV280
UV35
UV84
Mi d p en in su la Re g io na lOpen S p ac e Di st r ic t
S l e n d er f a l se b r o m e (B r a c h y p o di um s y l v a t i c um )*
Januar y, 2016
Path: G:\Projects\a_Districtwide\SlenderFalseBrome\SFB_DistrictwideOccurences_2009-2013.mxd
Created By: jhawk
0 21MilesI
(M RO S D )MR O SD Pr ese rves
Pr i va te Pr op er t y
While the District strive s t o u se t he best availab le digit al d at a, this data does not rep resent a legal survey an d is mer ely a graphic illustration of geographic featur es.
Fremont
Sunnyvale
SanJose
Half Moon Bay
RedwoodCity
SanMateo
Union City
Mountain ViewPalo Alto
Cupertino
Milpitas
Area ofDetail
Ot her Pr o t ect ed L an ds
!Sl end er f als e b ro me o bs erva t io n (20 09 - 2 01 3)
*Ex c lu d e s S a ra t o g a G a p O p e n S p a ce Pr e s e r v e
From:Jennifer Woodworth
Bcc:BOARD; Ana Ruiz; Kevin Woodhouse; Stefan Jaskulak
Subject:Response to Board member questions
Date:Wednesday, March 09, 2016 10:25:52 AM
Good morning,
Below please find the responses to questions received regarding the items on tonight’s agenda.
Responses are below in blue. Thank you again for submitting your questions prior to the Board
meeting.
Jen
Director Cyr
Claims Item
71648 10338 – The Ed Jones Co Inc 2 retirement badges 3/2/16 $275.14
$137.00 per badge?
Yes, the cost is $137.00 per badge, which includes tax and shipping.
Director Kishimoto
* why are we replacing these narrow bridges with ones 5 foot wide or more?
The trails on both sides are generally much narrower.
Maybe it’s nice to linger on the bridges to view the streams and it would let
people pass.
There are a couple of reasons why the passageway for the proposed new foot bridges are designed
to be 5-feet wide;
1] Where possible, District bridge design standards provide ATV (All Terrain Vehicle) access (48"
width) across bridges. Though portions of the trails are not maintained to that width, it is
important to provide sufficient access for maintenance and patrol to facilitate easy and quick
ingress/egress, particularly in cases requiring emergency response.
2] A wider bridge also provides trail users with sufficient space to pass each other, which is
particularly important if equestrian and bicycle use is allowed and given that the passageway
(bridge) is constrained on two sides.
3] The railings are required by code to be 52" tall. Having bridges that are a bit wider than they are
tall prevents a "tunnel" feel that is less conducive to experiencing the natural surroundings.
4] It is advisable to have the built facilities (in this case the bridges) a bit wider to accommodate
any potential future changes in use or trail width so as to not become a limiting factor in the future
or result in the need for a wider replacement.
Jennifer Woodworth, MMC
District Clerk
jwoodworth@openspace.org
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA 94022
P: (650) 691-1200 - F: (650) 691-0485
E-mail correspondence with the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (and attachments, if
any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such may therefore be subject to
public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act.