Exhibit 9.CEQA Memorandum and Studies1
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
MEMORANDUM
Date May 21, 2025
To Ryan Safty, Associate Planner, Town of Los Gatos
From Patrick Kallas, Project manager
Akoni Danielsen, Principal Project Manager/President
Subject La Rinconada Country Club Redesign – CEQA Categorical Exemption Qualification
I. Introduction to Categorical Exemptions
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contain classes of projects that have
been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and are, therefore, exempt
from the provisions of CEQA. CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 – 15333 constitute the list of
categorically exempt projects and contain specific criteria that must be met in order for a project to
be found exempt. CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities Class 1 Categorical Exemptions,
and 15302, Replacement or Reconstruction Class 2 Categorical Exemptions set forth conditions for
projects which replace or reconstruct existing facilities that may be found categorically exempt.
Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 includes a list of exceptions to exemptions, none of
which may apply to a project in order for it to qualify for a categorical exemption (i.e., if an
exception applies, a project is precluded from being found categorically exempt).
The Town of Los Gatos, serving as the Lead Agency, is completing environmental review for the La
Rinconada Country Club Modernization project (“project”) in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA
Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et. seq.), and the regulations and policies
of the Town of Los Gatos. This Memorandum describes the proposed project and provides analysis
and evidence to support a determination by the Town of Los Gatos that the project would be
eligible for a Categorical Exemption under CEQA.
II. Existing Conditions
La Rinconada Country Club was founded by A.P. Giannini in 1928. The first nine holes were
completed in 1928 and the second nine later in 1929. Since 1929, modest improvements have been
made to the golf course. The Country Club property is accessed by a driveway connecting to
Clearview Drive. This access point leads into a 171-space parking lot which serves the clubhouse,
y,//dϵ
2
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
country club facilities and golf course. The country club, including the golf course and associated
amenities, covers approximately 118.4 acres and is surrounded by residential neighborhoods. The
country club also borders the Rinconada Water Treatment Plant on the west. The location and
extent of the project area can be seen in Figure 1, 2, and 3.
Boulder
Creek
Los Gatos
Saratoga
Campbell
ƵƉĞƌƟŶŽ
^ĂŶ:ŽƐĞ
^ĂŶƚĂ
Clara
^ƵŶŶLJǀĂůĞ
DŽƵŶƚĂŝŶ
sŝĞǁ
880
280
680
280
101
85
85
8717
17
237
Base Map: ESRI, ArcGIS.
Project Site
PaciĮc Ocean
Monterey Bay
San JoséSan José
SunnyvaleSunnyvale
FremontFremontSan MateoSan Mateo
Redwood CityRedwood City
LivermoreLivermore
OaklandOakland
San FranciscoSan Francisco
Santa CruzSanta Cruz
Mountain ViewMountain View
Morgan HillMorgan Hill
Project SiteProject Site
SanFranciscoBay
Los GatosLos Gatos
Los AltosLos Altos
0 .5 1 2 4 Miles
REGIONAL MAP FIGURE 1
Pollard Road
Knowles Drive
University Av e n u eWinchester BoulevardLar
k
A
v
e
n
u
eLa R
inconada
Dr
ive
Karl AvenueVineland Avenue
Daves Avenue
Bruce Avenue
ConsƟtuƟon Avenue
Bicknell RoadMore Aven u eClearview Drive
Granada Way
R oxbury LaneLos Gatos BoulevardQuito RoadWest Hacienda Avenue
Westmont Avenue
West Parr Avenue
San Tomas Aquinas C reekU.P.R.R.
Pollard Road
Knowles Drive
UniversityAv e nu eWinchester BoulevardLar
k
A
v
e
n
u
eLa R
inconada
Dr
ive
Karl AvenueVineland Av
e
n
u
e
Daves Aven
u
e
Bruce Av
e
n
u
e
ConsƟtuƟonAvenue
BicknellRoadMoreAvenue Clearview Drive
Granada
Wa
y
R oxbury LaneLos Gatos BoulevardQuito RoadWest Hacienda Avenue
Westmont Avenue
West Parr Avenue
San TomasAquinas C reekU.P.R.R
.
85
85
17Los Gatos CreekLosGatosCreekProject Boundary
Base Map: ESRI, ArcGIS
0 200 1,200 1,600 2,400 Feet
VICINITY MAP FIGURE 2
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
Park
Church
Water
Treatment
Plant (Closed)
Wedgewood AvenueWedgewood AvenueRoxb
ury
La
n
e
Granada
WayGran
a
da
W
ay
Capistr
a
n
o
Pl
ace
Las Uvas Ct
B ick nell Ro a d Karl AvenueMontclair Road
Via PintoKarl AvenueVia Del SurEaton Lane Winchester BoulevardLa Rinconada DriveLa Rinconada
Driv
eGolf Links DriveClearview Drive Wimb
ledon
D
r
ive
P
o
l
l
a
r
d
R
o
a
d
West Parr Avenue
Pine
W
o
o
d
L
a
n
e
U.P.R.R.
Wedgewood AvenueWedgewood AvenueRoxb
ury
La
n
e
Granada
WayGr
a
n
a
d
a
W
ay
Capistr
a
n
o
Pl
ac
e
Las UvasCt
B ick nell Ro a d Karl AvenueMontclair Road
Via PintoKarl AvenueViaDelSurEaton Lane Winchester BoulevardLa Rinconada DriveLa R
inconada
Dr
ive Golf Links DriveClearview Drive Wimb
ledon
D
r
ive
P
o
l
l
a
r
d
R
o
a
d
West Parr Avenue
Pine
W
o
o
d
L
a
n
e
U.P.
R
.
R
.
85
Photo Date: Aug. 2023
0 100 600 800 1,200 Feet
Project Boundary
Aerial Source: Google Earth Pro, Feb. 12, 2025.
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH AND SURROUNDING LAND USES FIGURE 3
6
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
III.Project Description
Proposed Golf Course Modernization
The proposed project would modernize the 18-hole layout and replant the entire course by
replacing fairways with more drought tolerant Bermuda grasses, adding native drought tolerant
trees, and installing a more efficient irrigation system. The adjusted course layout would leave 17 of
the 18 holes in their current locations. The only hole location that would be modified would be the
13th hole which would be slightly reoriented on the south side of the project site. All existing on-
site structures would remain unchanged and no changes are proposed for the driving range,
clubhouse, pool/fitness center, parking area, or maintenance facility. Minimal above grade work is
planned other than a slight realignment of the entrance drive to improve safety with golf play and a
small, approximately 250 square foot, restroom facility for the back 9 holes. Upon project
completion, the Country Club would continue to operate one 18-hole golf course on the property
and the membership numbers would remain unchanged. The proposed project would not expand
or increase the use of any facilities at La Rinconada Country Club. The proposed project would not
alter ingress and egress to the property.
Irrigation System and Cart Paths
As part of the proposed project, the irrigation system would be modernized, on-site drainage
systems would be upgraded, and the fairway grass would be replaced with a modern hybrid
Bermuda grass that requires 30-35 percent less irrigation water than the current course grass which
would reduce irrigation water consumption to approximately 30 million gallons per year. In addition
to the turf change and drainage upgrades, the proposed project would replace most of the existing
golf course cart paths with reduced footprint cart paths. Replacement of the cart paths would
reduce impervious surfaces on the golf course by approximately 70 percent.
Tree Removal
There are approximately 1,200 trees on the property, most of which are non-native species planted
by the Club over the past 50 years. Recently introduced coast redwoods and eucalyptus trees
would be replaced by native oaks as a part of the proposed project. The plan would remove
approximately 240 trees, most of which are redwoods and eucalyptus. The proposed project would
replace the trees removed at a one-to-one ratio, planting approximately 1ϳϯnative tree species on
the golf course and payment of in-lieu fees for the remaining tree replacement. Most of the trees
proposed for removal are on the interior of the course; only approximately 30 are on the perimeter
near homes. This would restore the property to a more natural state similar to the late 1920’s.
Construction
As part of construction activities, grading would be balanced on-site with approximately 52,780
cubic yards of cut and fill. The area of disturbance is shown in Figure 4, Project Disturbance Area. No
7
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
soil would be imported to or exported from the site. Construction of the proposed project is
estimated to take approximately seven to eight months to complete and is scheduled to begin in
early March of 2026. The proposed project would implement standard soil management
procedures to limit dust and debris on and around the project site, refer to Condition of Approval in
Section IV.(c), Air Quality Effects, below. Construction equipment and materials would be staged on
site and construction works would park on site as well during construction.
275
280
285
290
295
300
305
310
315
320
325
330
335
340
345
350
355
360
365
370
375
380
375
380
385
280
285
290
295
300
305
310
315
320
325
285
290
295
300
305
310
315
320
325
330
335
340
345
350
355
350
350
355
360
365
370
375380
350
350
350
355
360
365
370
370
365375
375
375
375
380
380
380
380
380
380
375
375
375
370370
365
365
355
360
380
380
380385
385
385
390
390
390
395
395
395
400
400
400
400
400
395
395
395 395
370
370
370
370
365
365
365
365
360
360
360
360
355
355
355
350
345
330
325
330
335
340
345
350
355
360
365
370
280
285
280
290
295
300
305
310
315
320
285
290
295
300
305
310
285290
295
300305
310
315
320
325
330
335
280
280
275
275
280
38037537036536035535
0
350345335325
340
345
350
355
3453403359
8
7
3
5
6
2
1
12 13 14
15
16 17
10
18
11
36
0
69
67
270
270
275
280
4
AREA NOT PARTOF PROJECTAREA NOT PARTOF PROJECTAREA NOT PARTOF PROJECTAREA NOT PARTOF PROJECTAREA NOT PARTOF PROJECTAREA NOT PARTOF PROJECT40.26' PUBLIC STREET EASEMENT60' SCVWD EASEMENT10' SEWER EASEMENT40' ROAD EASEMENTLEGEND
AREA OF WORK
AREA NOT PART OF PROJECT
SITE PLAN FIGURE 4
9
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
IV. Environmental Review
The purpose of this section is to document whether any of the exceptions listed in CEQA Guidelines
Section 15300.2 apply to the project, and assess the project’s eligibility for a Categorical Exemption
from CEQA under Section 15301, Existing Facilities Class 1 Categorical Exemptions, and 15302,
Replacement or Reconstruction Class 2 Categorical Exemptions.
Section 15300.2 – Exceptions
(a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be
located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a
particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to
apply all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of
hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted
pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.
This exception only applies to Class 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 exemptions. The proposed project is
categorically exempt under Class 1 and/or Class 2; therefore, this exception is not applicable to the
project under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(a).
(b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative
impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.
The La Rinconada Country Club has undergone minor revisions for the last 100 years since it was
constructed. The timing of these changes has not been close chronologically, therefore, the impacts
associated with each modification to the country club would be far enough apart in time to not
compound with prior projects. Additionally, the La Rinconada Country Club does not anticipate
additional renovations in the near future which may result in cumulative impacts. For these
reasons, the proposed modernization of the La Rinconada Country Club would not result in
cumulative impacts.
(c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a
reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to
unusual circumstances.
Air Quality Effects
The information in this section is based in part on the Construction Emissions and Health Risk
Assessment completed by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. This report, which evaluates project emissions
to confirm the project complies with General Plan Policy ENV-8.1: Air Quality Standards noted
below, is included for reference as Appendix A of the document.
The Town of Los Gatos has the following General Plan policies that are applicable to the project.
10
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
Policy ENV-8.1: Air Quality Standards. Federal, State, and regional air quality goals, policies,
standards, and requirements shall be addressed during environmental review for local land use and
development decisions. Applicable standards or requirements, if not already in the proposed plans,
shall be incorporated as conditions of approval.
Policy ENV-8.9: Air Pollution Impacts During Construction. Require project proponents to prepare
and implement a construction management plan that incorporates Best Available Control Measures
and all best management practices in accordance with the Air District standards to reduce criteria
pollutants.
General Plan Policy ENV-8.9: Include Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) basic
BMPs to control dust and exhaust during construction. During any construction period ground
disturbance, the applicant shall ensure that the project contractor implement measures to control
dust and exhaust. Implementation of the measures recommended by BAAQMD and listed below
would reduce the air quality impacts associated with grading and new construction to a less-than-
significant level.
x All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved
access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
x All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
x All visible mud/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 is prohibited.
x All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).
x All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
practicable. Building pads shall be laid as soon as practicable after grading unless seeding or
soil binders are used.
x All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind
speeds exceed 20 mph.
x All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.
x Unpaved roads providing access to site located 100 feet of further from a paved road shall
be treated with a six - to 12-inch layer of compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
Air Quality Construction Emissions
Based on the Construction Emissions and Health Risk Assessment, air pollutant emissions associated
with project construction were predicted using appropriate computer models. In addition, potential
project construction health risk impacts and the impact of existing toxic air contaminant (TAC)
sources affecting the existing nearby sensitive receptors (e.g., residents) were evaluated. The air
pollutants associated with the construction period include reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen
oxides (NOx), and particulate matter from exhaust (PM2.5 and PM10). The analysis was conducted
following guidance provided by the BAAQMD, the results of which are summarized below in Table
1.
11
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
The proposed project would require approximately seven months of grading and excavation work
(161 days) that would disturb 87.76 acres of ground area. Construction activities would require the
operation of heavy construction machinery and would disturb uncovered soil which would create
air quality contaminants for the entirety of the construction period. Average daily construction
emissions were estimated for the proposed project based on the equipment and operations
required for the project. These are summarized in Table 1 below.
Table 1 Construction Period Air Pollutant Emissions
Year ROG NOx PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Exhaust
2026 Construction Emissions (Tons) 0.15 1.32 0.04 0.04
2026 Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 1.86 16.35 0.50 0.46
BAAQMD Thresholds (pounds per day) 54 54 82 54
Exceed Threshold No No No No
Source: Illingworth& Rodkin, Inc. La Rinconada Country Club Redesign Construction Emissions & Health Risk
Assessment. February 7, 2025
Based on the emissions expected for the proposed project, the construction activities would not
exceed BAAQMD air quality impact thresholds for criteria air pollutants, and therefore the project
complies with Policy ENV-8.1, noted above. The proposed project, like virtually all projects which
involve ground disturbance, would also generate dust in the form of PM10 and PM2.5 through
disturbance and hauling of soils around the site. The project would implement the following
Condition of Approval to comply with Policy ENV-8.9 which requires standard best management
practices to limit fugitive dust pollutants.
Condition of Approval
During any construction period ground disturbance, the applicant shall ensure that the project
contractor implements measures to control dust and exhaust. Implementation of the measures
recommended by BAAQMD and listed below would reduce the air quality impacts associated with
grading and new construction to a less-than-significant level.
x All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved
access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
x All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
x All visible mud/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 is prohibited.
x All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).
12
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
x All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
practicable. Building pads shall be laid as soon as practicable after grading unless seeding or
soil binders are used.
x All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind
speeds exceed 20 mph.
x All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.
x Unpaved roads providing access to site located 100 feet of further from a paved road shall
be treated with a six - to 12-inch layer of compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
x Publicly visible signs shall be posted with the telephone number and name of the person to
contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take
corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s General Air Pollution Complaints number
shall be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
Therefore, the proposed project would not exceed BAAQMD thresholds for criteria pollutants or
fugitive dust and, by implementing the standard measures in Policy ENV-8.9, would have a less than
significant effect.
Air Quality Health Risk Effects
During construction of the proposed project the increase in diesel particulate matter (DPM) and
other PM2.5 can result in increased lifetime cancer risk and other health hazards. The construction
health risks were modeled for their impacts on existing residences surrounding the site and Roxbury
Elderly Care, located west of the site near the northern edge of the golf course. The effects were
modeled for impacts on all receptor types (i.e., third trimester, infants, children, and adults). The
total modeled DPM was calculated to be 0.04 tons and the fugitive dust was found to be less than
0.01 tons. Based on the modeling conducted for these emissions, the expected construction risk
impacts are shown in Table 2 below.
Table 2 Construction Risk Impacts at the Off-Site Sensitive Receptors
Year Cancer Risk (Per
Million)
Annual PM 2.5
(micrograms/m3)
Hazard
Index
Project Construction Impacts most affected receiver 2.10 (infant) 0.01 <0.01
Project Construction Impacts at Roxbury Elder Care <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
BAAQMD Single Source Thresholds (pounds per day) >10 >0.3 >1.0
Exceed Threshold No No No
Source: Illingworth& Rodkin, Inc. La Rinconada Country Club Redesign Construction Emissions & Health Risk
Assessment. February 7, 2025
13
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
Based on the health risks associated with the project at the most sensitive receptor, the proposed
project would not exceed BAQQMD thresholds, and accordingly, would comply with Policy ENV-8.1,
and the project would have a less than significant health risk effect.
Noise and Vibration Effects
The information in this section is based in part on the Construction Noise and Vibration Assessment
completed by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. This report is included for reference as Appendix B of the
document.
Noise Effects
The Town of Los Gatos Code of Ordinances Section 16.20.035 limits construction activities to the
hours of 8:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekdays and between the hours of 9:00 am and 4:00 pm on
Saturdays. No construction is permitted on Sundays or holidays. Section 16.20.035 also states that
at least one of the following conditions shall be met:
x construction noise limits of 85 dBA at a distance of 25 feet for any single piece of equipment
and
x noise level at any point outside of the property plane of the project site is limited to 85 A-
weighted sound level (dBA)
Construction of the proposed project is estimated to take approximately seven to eight months to
be completed, beginning in March of 2026. Construction would progress across the country club
from hole to hole, and only portions of the property will experience construction activity at any
single point in time. In general, the construction activity would last approximately two to four
weeks per hole, depending on where the hole is located. The proposed hours of construction are
8:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekdays and 9:00 am to 4:00 pm on Saturdays. No construction would
occur on Sundays or holidays.
The construction activities that would be a part of the proposed project include earth-moving
activities with heavy equipment and hauling of primarily landscape construction materials. Based on
this activity, the proposed project would be expected to generate maximum noise levels of 70 to 90
dBA at a distance of 50 feet. A summary of the expected noise levels at receptors within 25 feet of
the construction activities is summarized below in Table 3.
14
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
Table 3 Construction Noise Levels from Heavy Equipment at 25 feet
Phase Number of
Workdays
Construction Equipment
(Quantity)
Maximum Noise
Level dBA Lmax
Average Noise
Level dBA Leq
Site
Preparation 120 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe (3)a 90 87
Grading/
Excavation 150 Excavator (10) a
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe (3) a
87
90 88
Paving 5
Paver (1)a
Paving Equipment (1)
Roller (1)
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe (3) a
83
83
86
90
87
a Denotes two loudest pieces of construction equipment per phase.
Source: Illingworth& Rodkin, Inc. La Rinconada Country Club Golf Course Modernization Project Construction
Noise and Vibration Assessment. January 30, 2025
As shown in Table 3, average construction noise levels would range from 87 to 88 dBA Leq when the
two loudest pieces of construction equipment operate simultaneously, 25 feet from an individual
receptor. These predicted noise levels represent worst-case conditions, and under these conditions,
noise levels would be reduced to 84 to 85 dBA Leq if the two loudest pieces of construction
equipment per phase operate 35 feet or further from sensitive receptors. Therefore, the
construction would conflict with the policy requirement to keep noise below 85 dBA outside the
property plane as some places on the 8th, 16th, and 18th holes for the golf course if the two loudest
pieces of equipment were operating simultaneously. Therefore, with the following conditions of
approval, included in the project, the proposed project would further reduce noise effect during
construction. These actions are standard construction measures applied to most construction
projects in urban areas.
Conditions of Approval
x Construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 pm on weekdays
and between the hours of 9:00 am and 4:00 pm on Saturdays. No construction is permitted
on Sundays or holidays.
x Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers
that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
x Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.
x Locate stationary noise-generating equipment, such as air compressors or portable power
generators, as far as possible from sensitive receptors as feasible. If they must be located
near receptors, adequate muffling (with enclosures where feasible and appropriate) shall be
used to reduce noise levels at the adjacent sensitive receptors. Any enclosure openings or
venting shall face away from sensitive receptors.
15
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
x Locate construction staging areas at locations that will create the greatest distance between
the construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site
during all project construction.
x Locate material stockpiles, as well as maintenance/equipment staging and parking areas, as
far as feasible from residential receptors.
x Designate a "disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to any
complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause
of the noise complaint (e.g., bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures be
implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the
disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include in it the notice sent to
neighbors regarding the construction schedule.
The implementation of these reasonable controls would minimize disturbance at existing noise-
sensitive receptors in the project vicinity. Additionally, the majority of residences adjacent to the
project site are set back further than 35 feet from any work areas and only a small area of the back
yards would be exposed to elevated noise levels near the 8th, 16th, and 18th holes for the golf
course. Considering that the construction activity would last approximately two to four weeks per
hole, and less than one construction season in total, and that the majority of construction would
occur more than 35 feet from nearby receptors, the potential temporary exceedances of the Town’s
Code of Ordinances for a single piece of equipment over 85 dBA would result in a less than
significant effect.
Vibration Effect
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) recommends a vibration limit of 0.5 in/sec
peak particle velocity (PPV) for new residential and modern commercial/industrial structures, a
vibration limit of 0.3 in/sec PPV for older residential structures, and a vibration limit of 0.25 in/sec
PPV for historic buildings. The Town of Los Gatos recognizes a structure as historic if any one of the
following apply:
x Any structure / site that is located within a historic district
x Any structure / site that is historically designated within the LHP overlay
x Any primary structure constructed prior to 1941, unless the Town has specifically
determined the structure has no historic significance or architectural merit.
Based on the Town’s definition of historic structures, this analysis uses a vibration limit of 0.25
in/sec PPV to conservatively assess the potential for vibration impacts because the clubhouse and
homes in the surrounding area could be old enough, i.e. prior to 1941, to be considered historic
structures.
Based on the construction equipment planned to be used for the proposed project, the vibratory
levels in Table 4 would be expected.
16
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
Table 4 Construction Vibration Levels by Phase in in/sec PPV
Phase Construction Equipment 5 feet 10 feet 15 feet 20 feet 25 feet
Site
Preparation Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 0.018 0.008 0.005 0.004 0.003
Grading /
Excavation
Excavator
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe
0.446
0.018
0.208
0.008
0.133
0.005
0.097
0.004
0.076
0.003
Paving
Paver
Paving Equipment
Roller
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe
0.018
0.018
1.233
0.018
0.008
0.008
0.575
0.008
0.005
0.005
0.368
0.005
0.004
0.004
0.268
0.004
0.003
0.003
0.210
0.003
Source: Illingworth& Rodkin, Inc. La Rinconada Country Club Golf Course Modernization Project Construction
Noise and Vibration Assessment. January 30, 2025
The proposed project could exceed vibratory impact levels if vibratory rollers are used within 20
feet of vibration sensitive buildings built before 1941. To reduce any potential vibration effects the
following Conditions of Approval are expected for the proposed project.
Condition of Approval
x Smaller equipment (less than 18,000 pounds) shall be used near the property lines adjacent
to the residential buildings to minimize vibration levels. For example, a smaller vibratory
roller similar to a Caterpillar model CP433E vibratory compactor could be used when
compacting materials within 25 feet of vibration-sensitive buildings.
x Small tractors/loaders/backhoes shall be used within 10 feet of vibration-sensitive buildings
instead of excavators.
x Designate a Disturbance Coordinator responsible for registering and investigating claims of
excessive vibration. The contact information of such person shall be clearly posted on the
construction site.
Based on the distance of residential structures from the edge of the golf course and the location of
construction activities on the project site, the vibratory equipment would not be used for long
periods of time near any structure which could be damaged by vibration along the 8th, 16th, and 18th
holes of the golf course. Therefore, by implementing the best management practices above,
primarily around the clubhouse area, the proposed project would result in less than significant
vibratory effect during construction.
Biological Effects
The proposed project would disturb up to approximately 87.76 acres of vegetated areas landscaped
for use as a golf course. This includes non-native grasses covering a majority of the area and trees
lining the golf course hole boundaries. The site is not mapped as habitat for special status plants or
17
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
animals, and does not contain regulated habitats, i.e. riparian areas or wetlands or waters of the US
or the state, as the ornamental ponds are man-made features subject to regular irrigation and
maintenance. The proposed project would remove and replace this landscaping which would
disturb any animals that are using the trees or other landscaped areas as habitat. Additionally, the
proposed project would be required to comply with the Tree Replacement Standards identified in
Table 3-1 of the Town of Los Gatos Zoning Regulations.
The proposed project would remove up to 240 trees across the golf course area. The full list of trees
removed as a part of the project is included in Appendix C. To protect birds that may be nesting in
the trees, the project would implement standard nesting survey requirements as required by the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Department of Fish and Wildlife Code. These requirements
are summarized below. Through inclusion of this standard condition of approval the project would
avoid negative effects on birds.
Condition of Approval
x Construction shall be scheduled to avoid the nesting season to the extent feasible. The
nesting season for most birds, including most raptors, in the San Francisco Bay Area extends
from February 1st through August 31st.
If it is not possible to schedule construction and tree removal between September 1 and
January 31, then pre-construction surveys for nesting birds shall be completed by a qualified
ornithologist to ensure that no nests are disturbed during project implementation. This
survey shall be completed no more than 14 days prior to the initiation of grading, tree
removal, or other construction activities during the early part of the breeding season
(February through April) and no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of these activities
during the late part of the breeding season (May through August).
During this survey, the ornithologist shall inspect trees and other possible nesting habitats
within and immediately adjacent to the construction area for nests. If an active nest is found
sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by construction, the qualified ornithologist,
in consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), shall determine the
extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established around the nest to ensure that
raptor or migratory bird nests shall not be disturbed during project construction.
(d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in
damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock
outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic
highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted
negative declaration or certified EIR.
18
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
There are no officially designated state scenic highways in the project area. The nearest officially
designated state highway is State Route 9, which is located approximately 1.25 miles southwest of
the project site and is not visible from the project site.1 The project, therefore, would not damage
scenic resources within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway, and no exception
to the exemption applies under 15300.2(d).
(e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site
which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
The provisions in California Government Code Section 65962.5 are commonly referred to as the
“Cortese List”. Properties considered to be on the Cortese List include current and closed leaking
underground storage tank (LUST) case sites, in addition to sites with other hazardous conditions.
The California Government Code does not provide a provision for the removal of an affected
property from the Cortese List. Therefore, even properties with closed LUST cases in which no
further work is required are still considered to be on the Cortese List.
The project site is recorded on the Cortese List Geotracker database for two closed LUST cases,
which are associated with an area of the site in which no work is proposed. Due to the case closure,
and to confirm if there are any hazards present on the portion of the site where the proposed golf
course modernization would occur, Cornerstone Earth Group prepared a memorandum to evaluate
the status of the closed LUST cases and the potential for the proposed project to disturb areas
covered by the closed LUST cases.2
Based on the case information, a 500-gallon gasoline underground storage tank (UST) was removed
from the Site in 1993. In 1998, an additional 500-gallon diesel UST and a 1,000-gallon gasoline UST
were removed. All three USTs were located at the golf course maintenance facility on the furthest
southern portion of the project site, a small triangular area southeast of the 16th and 17th holes that
is not included within the area of proposed modernization work.
As a part of the case closure, sampling was conducted at the location of each of the three USTs. Soil
and groundwater samples detected only low concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons, diesel
range petroleum hydrocarbons, and xylene. These detected concentrations did not exceed current
residential or commercial environmental screening levels (ESLs). The associated LUST cases were
closed by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) in 1997 and 1998.
While the LUST cases technically remain on the Cortese list for record keeping, the maintenance
facility area which includes the area of the closed LUST cases, is not part of the golf course
renovation plan. In addition, based on the Grading Plan, no earthwork activities are planned near
1 California Department of Transportation. “California State Scenic Highway System Map”. Accessed January 15,
2025. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa.
2 Cornerstone Earth Group, Inc. Environmental Review La Rinconada Country Club Golf Course Renovation. January
9, 2025.
19
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
the maintenance facility area and former UST locations at the golf course maintenance facility.
Thus, the former UST locations should not have an adverse impact on the planned golf course
renovation work, and no exception to the exemption applies under 15300.2, as there are no current
conditions affecting the property that warrant inclusion on the Cortese list.3
(f) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
The project site is a country club which was established in 1928, approximately 97 years ago. The
golf course was modified in 1989, including reconstruction of greens, replanting of grasses,
regrading of some fairways, and changes to drainage of the course. The property is not included on
the California Register of Historic Places, nor has it been determined eligible for listing on the
California Register by the State Historical Resources Commission. The country club is also not
identified in the Los Gatos General Plan as a registered historic place, nor has it been identified by
the County of Santa Clara in its historic register as a historic property. Therefore, the property is not
considered a mandatory historic resource under Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(1) or a presumptive
historic resource under Section 15064.5(a)(2).
The proposed project would primarily replace the grass and some trees on the project site and
would only require the relocation of one golf hole for the country club. This improvement would be
similar to the improvements conducted in the 1990’s and would not change any of the uses of the
country club facilities. No physical changes are proposed to the clubhouse or any other structures.
Therefore, given the property is not listed as a historic resource by the state, county, or Town of Los
Gatos, the modifications proposed as a part of the modernization project would not create a
change in the significance of any historic resource.
Section 15301 – Existing Facilities
Section 15301, or Class 1, applies to projects consisting of the operation, repair, maintenance,
permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures,
facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion
of existing or former use. The key consideration is whether the project involves negligible or no
expansion of use. These conditions, along with the project’s consistency with them, are described
below.
The proposed modernization project would encompass grading of the site and reconstruction of the
golf course which would reduce the water consumption on-site and allow for greater water
infiltration due to reduced impervious surfaces. The changes to the golf course area would not
expand the number of players, the frequency or magnitude/intensity of events, or overall utility of
the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an expansion of use and would
3 California Environmental Protection Agency. “Cortese List Data Resources”. Accessed January 15, 2025.
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.
20
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
only perform minor alteration of the existing facility and would meet the requirements for a Section
15301 exemption.
Section 15302 – Replacement and Reconstruction
Section 15302, or Class 2, applies to projects consisting of replacement or reconstruction of
existing structures, facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the
structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure
replaced. These conditions, along with the project’s consistency with them, are described below.
The proposed project would regrade the golf course area of the project site and reorganize the golf
course layout. The reorganization of the site would construct the same uses within the existing
boundary of the facilities of the country club. Additionally, the proposed project would not alter any
of the structures on site other than a minor realignment of the primary access road for the project
site and a new 250-square foot bathroom structure in the middle of the course. Therefore, the
proposed project would be consistent with the conditions for a Section 15302 exemption because
the country club would replace the existing course area in kind, and would not change the purpose
or capacity of the La Rinconada Country Club.
V. Conclusion
As documented in Section IV. Environmental Review, with the incorporation of the City’s standard
conditions of approval, none of the exceptions contained in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply
to the project and the project is consistent with the criteria in CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 and
15302. The project, therefore, qualifies as exempt from the provisions of CEQA under Class 1 and
Class 2 of the CEQA Guidelines.
21
1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 x San José, CA 95126 x Tel: (408) 248-3500 x www.davidjpowers.com
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Construction Emissions and Health Risk Assessment
Appendix B: Construction Noise and Vibration Assessment
Appendix C: Arborist Tree Inventory
Appendix D: Environmental Review La Rinconada Country Club Golf Course Renovation
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 · WRA #350018
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Patrick Kallas, David J. Powers
and Associates
pkallas@davidjpowers.com
FROM:Daniel Elting, WRA, Inc.
daniel.elting@wra-ca.com
CC:
Andy Kimball, La Rinconada
Country Club
akimball@Larinconadacc.com
DATE: Revised April 18, 2025
SUBJECT:La Rinconada Country Club Redesign Project Biological Constraints Assessment
1.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an analysis of biological resources at the La
Rinconada Country Club (Study Area) in Los Gatos, Santa Clara County, California. The report is
intended to support a review of the La Rinconada Country Club Redesign Project (Project) per
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As part of that review, the memorandum
addresses potential Project affects in accordance with Appendix G of the CEQA guidelines.
Provided herein are descriptions of habitats present, and a discussion of potential environmental
constraints.
2.0 BACKGROUND AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
The La Rinconada Country Club (Study Area) is an approximately 129-acre complex which
includes an 18-hole golf course, tennis courts, private recreation areas, ornamental ponds, pools,
and other buildings and facilities. The Study Area is situated approximately 0.25 miles south of
Highway 85 within an urbanized area in Los Gatos, California with private access driveways to
the east from Clearview Drive and La Rinconada Drive. The Study Area is surrounded on all sides
by residential development. The site has been used for recreation since the late 1920’s and
contains a network of well-maintained paved roads and pathways throughout the site.
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project will be composed of a redesign of the existing golf course on site. Golf
course modifications will be implemented through scattered earthwork on approximately 37
acres of existing course holes and ornamental ponds (Project Area; Figure 1). Additional Project
components will include upgrades to irrigation systems and concrete pathways, turf lawn
replacement, and removal and replacement of approximately 190 trees within the Project Area.
Following the completion of construction, the proposed land-use will be equivalent to the
existing use as recreation.
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 2
3.1 Project Layout
The Project would incur only slight changes modifications in grade of the existing golf course and
make no major modifications in existing land cover. All existing on-site structures would remain
unchanged but two ornamental ponds will be de-watered and re-graded to slightly different
specifications. Upon project completion, the Country Club will continue to operate one 18-hole
golf course and the membership capacity will remain unchanged. The Project would not expand
or increase the use of any facilities at the Country Club, nor alter ingress and egress routes to
the property. A Project Master Plan including Grading limits are provided in Attachment A..
3.2 Irrigation System and Cart Paths
As part of the proposed Project, the existing irrigation system will be modernized, existing
drainage systems will be upgraded, and the fairway grass will be replaced with hybrid
bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon); the hybrid bermudagrass will require 35 percent less
irrigation water than the current course grass. In addition to the turf change and drainage
upgrades, the Project would reduce the number of existing golf course cart paths which will
decrease the impervious surface area on the golf course by approximately 70 percent.
3.3 Tree Removal
There are approximately 1,200 trees on the property, most of which are non-native species
planted by the Country Club over the past 50 years. A total of 256 trees will be removed as part
of the Project; most of which are recently planted redwoods (Sequoia sempervirens) and
eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.) trees. The Country Club will obtain all necessary permits associated
with the removal of trees including heritage trees as defined by the City of Los Gatos (City) Code
of Ordinances. Removed trees will be replaced at a 1:1 ratio by native oak trees (Quercus sp.)
or other regionally appropriate native tree species. Details for trees to be removed and a
proposed re-planting plan to City compliance are provided in Attachment A.
3.4 Construction
As part of construction activities, grading would be balanced on-site with approximately 60,000
cubic yards of cut and fill. No soil would be imported to or exported from the site. Construction
of the proposed Project is estimated to take approximately seven months to complete and is
scheduled to begin in March of 2026.
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 3
4.0 METHODS
This evaluation is based on a review of literature and database sources as well as a site visit
completed by WRA, Inc. (WRA) on January 24, 2025. Prior to the site visit, WRA biologists
reviewed literature resources and performed database searches to assess the potential for
sensitive land cover types (e.g., wetlands) and special-status species (e.g., endangered plants),
including:
x SoilWeb (CSRL 2025)
x Contemporary aerial photographs (Google Earth 2025)
x Historical aerial photographs (NETR 2025)
x National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS 2025a)
x California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB; CDFW 2025a)
x California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Inventory (CNPS 2025a)
x Consortium of California Herbaria 2 (CCH2 2025)
x USFWS Information Planning and Consultation database (USFWS 2025b)
x eBird Online Database (eBird 2025)
x California Bird Species of Special Concern in California (Shuford and Gardali 2008)
x California Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern (Thomson et al. 2016)
x A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins 2003)
x A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition (CNPS 2025b)
x California Natural Community List (CDFW 2025)
On January 24, 2025, WRA biologists Daniel Elting and Maya Avendano conducted a field
assessment of the 129-acre Study Area to observe conditions for the presence of sensitive land
cover types and the potential to support habitat for special-status plant and wildlife species.
Potentially jurisdictional areas and sensitive habitats were mapped using a combination of
mapping-grade GPS devices and hand-drawn boundaries on high-resolution aerial imagery.
5.0 RESULTS
5.1 Vegetation Communities and Other Land Cover
WRA observed six land cover types within the Study Area. Non-sensitive land cover types include
developed and ornamental ponds, and potentially sensitive land covers include intermittent
stream, seasonal wetland swale, oak woodland and riparian woodland. Land cover types within
the Study Area are mapped in Figure 1.
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 4
5.1.1 Non-Sensitive Land Cover Types
DEVELOPED
Developed areas comprise the majority of the Study Area
and consist of meticulously maintained fairway lawns and
putting greens, sand bunkers, paved roads and concrete
areas, buildings, swimming pool facilities, and ornamental
landscaping. Mowed lawns are fields of non-native turf
grasses with scattered non-native forbs such as English
plantain (Plantago lanceolata), common sowthistle (Sonchus
oleraceus), with planted stands of coast redwoods, coast live
oaks (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), and
eucalyptus. This land cover type is not considered sensitive
by any regulatory entities.
ORNAMENTAL PONDS
The Study Area contains two manmade ornamental ponds
which were created sometime in the mid 1960’s and
1970’s (NETR 2025). The ponds are managed and filled
with water year-round. The banks of the ponds are
artificially hardscaped with rocks and concrete, with some
areas having a more gradual, vegetated bank. While
minimal, there are some areas on the fringes of the ponds
with sparse, emergent aquatic vegetation encroaching
into the water from the bank. The ponds were created
through excavation of dry land and artificially filled with
diverted water. These water features are unlikely to be
recognized as sensitive by federal or state agencies.
Sensitive Habitats.
5.1.2 Sensitive Habitats
INTERMITTENT STREAM
An intermittent stream flows from south to north in the central
portion of the Study Area into an artificial drain. Intermittent
streams exhibit flow during portions of the year but do not
convey water during the dry season. The stream ordinary high-
water mark (OHWM) was determined by scour, water staining,
debris build up, and changes in vegetation. Flowing water was
present in the stream at the time of the January 24, 2025, site
visit. The stream is surrounded by riparian woodland
vegetation including arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) and curly
dock (Rumex crispus). Intermittent stream may be considered
sensitive by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and
the United States Army Corps. of Engineers (Corps.)
Photo 1. Developed land cover in the Study
Area is largely dominated by mowed lawns
and paved cart paths.
Photo 2. Southeast ornamental pond in the
Study Area.
Photo 3. Intermittent stream, with banks
mapped based on scour and erosion
from water flow.
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 5
RIPARIAN WOODLAND
Riparian woodland occurs in the central portion of the Study
Area adjacent to the main office building of the Country Club.
Riparian habitat consists of woody-species-dominated
vegetation that grows because of, or contributes organic
material to, the intermittent stream within the Study Area.
Riparian woodland is primarily dominated by coast live oak,
with ash trees (Fraxinus sp.), elderberry (Sambucus sp.) and
willows (Salix sp.) co-dominant. Poison oak (Toxicodendron
diversilobum)and French broom (Genista monspessulana)
largely dominate the midstory, with sparse herbs growing
through the leaf litter, such as Italian arum (Arum italicum).
Riparian woodland land cover type is considered sensitive by
CDFW. The Project Area will not be within Riparian Woodland
and no affects or disturbance to Riparian Woodland will occur.
SEASONAL WETLAND SWALE
A potential seasonal wetland exists in the central portion
of the Study Area in a heavily modified drainage area
immediately north of the central ornamental pond. The
wetland serves as a drainage basin for coneyance
structures to both the north and south. South of the
wetland an artificial swale drains into the wetland from
the nearby pond. North of the wetland a culvert outlet
drains into the wetland originating from underground
segments of stormwater conveyance beneath roadways.
Some inundation was present in the wetland during the
January 24, 2025 site visit near the northern most culvert.
Vegetation in the seasonal wetland swale was dominated
by wetland plants including cattail (Typha sp.), watercress
(Nasturtium officinale), curly dock (Rumex crispus), and
pale knotweed (Persicaria lapathifolia). Boundaries of the potential seasonal wetland were
mapped based on changes in dominant vegetation and topography but were not formally
assessed for the three wetland parameters used by the Corps. to delineate wetland boundaries.
This seasonal wetland is unlikely to meet the definition of Waters of the U.S. by the Corps. but
may be considered sensitive by CDFW and the RWQCB.
Photo 5. Seasonal wetland swale in the
Study Area.
Photo 4. Riparian woodland associated
with the intermittent stream in the
Study Area.
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 6
Oak Woodland
The western portion of the Study Area contains a stand of
valley oak woodland surrounding a private park/recreation
area with trails and tennis courts. This habitat primarily
contains valley oak with sparse blue oak (Quercus
douglasii) with minimal understory due to regular mowing
and maintenance of walking trails. Oak woodland and
associated trees may be considered sensitive at state and
local levels.
6.0 SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
6.1 Special-status Plant Species
Based upon a review of the resource databases listed in Section 3.0, 76 special-status plant
species have been documented in the vicinity of the Study Area. All special-status plant species
are unlikely or have no potential to occur within the Study Area because suitable conditions are
lacking (e.g., edaphic [soil] conditions, topography, unique pH, associated natural communities,
low levels of disturbance). No special-status plant species were observed within the Study Area
on the January 24, 2025 survey.
6.2 Special-status Wildlife Species
Based upon a review of the resource databases listed in Section 4.0, 40 special-status wildlife
species have been documented in the vicinity of the Study Area. Of these species, most are
excluded based on a lack of habitat features (e.g., tidal marsh, old growth redwood or fir forest,
grassland, sandy beaches or alkaline flats, and the presence of specific host plants). Additional
species are excluded due to the lack of hydrological connection with streams that could support
breeding populations of amphibians, and absence of quality foraging habitat within the Study
Area. As such, most special-status wildlife species documented from the vicinity do not have the
potential to occur within the Study Area.
6.2.1 Species Discussion
Northwestern Pond Turtle (NWPT; Actinemys marmorata) is a federally proposed threatened
reptile that is known to occur within the vicinity of the Study Area. The nearest recorded
occurrence of pond NWPT is in the Vascona Reservoir approximately 0.75 miles southeast of the
Study Area (CNDDB 2024). Within the Study Area, the southeast ornamental pond provides
potential habitat for NWPT due to the presence of minimal aquatic foraging vegetation and
sparse basking sites in the form of above-surface rocks. However, the surrounding urban areas,
heavy human disturbance, and fragmentation of suitable aquatic corridors surrounding the Study
Area make the potential for establishment of pond turtles low. No NWPT were observed on the
January 24, 2025 survey and they were determined to be unlikely to occur in the Study Area.
Photo 5. Oak woodland in western portion
of the Study Area.
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 7
San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (SFDFWR;
Neotoma fuscipes annectens)is a regional subspecies of
dusky footed woodrat that is a CDFW Species of Special
Concern. SFDFWR use habitats with dense canopy cover
including oak woodland, chaparral, and riparian
woodlands. Mound shaped dens or “middens” are
constructed by SFDWR using large twigs and
occasionally anthropogenic items such as trash or debris
(Kelly 1990). The nearest recorded occurrence of SFDWR
is approximately 7 miles north of the Study Area along
Saratoga Creek in Cupertino, California. During the site
visit on January 24, 2025, three San Francisco dusky-
footed woodrat nests were observed within riparian
woodland surrounding the intermittent stream in the
northeast portion of the Study Area. The presence of presumed active dens within the Study Area
indicates that SFDFR are present in the Study Area. However they are only present within
Riparian Woodland areas which are to be completed avoided by Project activities.
6.2.2 Protected Nesting Birds and Roosting Bats
species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) as well as by California Fish and
Game Codes (CFGC) have potential to nest in trees, vegetation, or on structures within or
adjacent to the Study Area. No active nests were observed in the January survey as the survey
was outside of the breeding season of most species (Feb – Sep). Additionally, no inactive raptor
nest structures from previous seasons were observed in any of the trees on site. Additionally
special-status bats including CDFW Species of Special Concern (SSC) Townsend’s big-eared bat
(Corynorhinus townsendii,) and pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) have a potential to roost in
mature trees in the Study Area, although the frequent level of day-time disturbance make this
unlikely.
Photo 6. SFDFN den discovered in riparian
woodland habitat. Den constructed atop
an abandoned shipping pallet.
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 8
7.0 ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE
THRESHOLD CRITERIA
Pursuant to Appendix G, Section IV of the State CEQA Guidelines, a project would have a
significant affect on biological resources if it would:
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.
These thresholds were utilized in completing the analysis of potential Project affects for CEQA
purposes. For the purposes of this analysis, a “substantial adverse effect” is generally interpreted
to mean that a potential affect could directly or indirectly affect the resiliency or presence of a
local biological community or species population. Potential affects to natural processes that
support biological communities and special-status species populations that can produce similar
effects are also considered potentially significant. Affects to individuals of a species or small
areas of existing biological communities may be considered less than significant if those affects
are speculative, beneficial, de minimis, and/or would not affect the resiliency of a local
population.
8.0 POTENTIAL AFFECTS AND AVOIDANCE MEASURES
The purpose of this assessment is to evaluate the potential affects of Project construction and
operation on existing conditions for biological resources within the Project Area. This section is
structured to specifically address each significance threshold for biological resources from CEQA
Appendix G. Recommendations for avoidance and minimization measures are detailed for affects
that area determined to be potentially significant (Table 1).
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 9
Table 1: Summary of Potential to Affect and Minimization
CEQA Assessment
Category IV.-
Biological
Resources
Biological
Resources
Considered
Potentially significant
affects
Summary of avoidance
measures
Question A. Special-
status species
Special-status Plants
Special-status
Wildlife
Designated Critical
Habitat
Project may affect federal
federally proposed
northwestern pond turtle
Project may affect San
Francisco dusky footed
woodrats or their dens, a
California Species of Special
Concern (SSC)
Project may affect nesting
birds protected by the CFGC by
destroying active nests or
causing disturbance that
results in nest abandonment.
Project may affect special-
status and non-status roosting
bats by destroying active
roosts or causing disturbance
that results in roost
abandonment.
Pre-construction wildlife survey
in ornamental ponds prior to
de-watering or grading. Turtles
to be re-located by a USFWS
approved biologist to nearby
suitable habitat if observed.
SFDFR are presumed present on
site in the riparian woodland
habitat, this area will not be
affected by project activities
and so there will be no affect.
If construction activities cannot
be avoided during nesting
(February 1-August 31). Pre-
construction bird surveys within
500 feet of construction area
within 14 days of initial ground
disturbance or vegetation
removal.
If nests of protected avian
species are present, no-work
exclusion zones around any
active protected nest until all
young have fledged or are
independent of nest.
Avoid tree removal activities
during bat maternity season
(April-October).
Pre-construction bat surveys
within 14-30 days of initial
ground disturbance or veg
removal. Regardless of timing of
tree removal or trimming, allow
all felled trees and large limbs
to remain on the ground for at
least 24 hours.
Question B. Sensitive
natural communities
& riparian habitat
Sensitive Natural
Communities
Streams, Lakes, &
Riparian Habitat
No affect, the Project footprint
does not include any sensitive
habitat mapped within the
greater Study Area.
Not applicable.
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 10
CEQA Assessment
Category IV.-
Biological
Resources
Biological
Resources
Considered
Potentially significant
affects
Summary of avoidance
measures
Question C. State and
federally protected
wetlands
Wetlands
Unvegetated surface
waters
No affect, the Project footprint
does not include any of the
wetlands or waters mapped
within the greater Study Area.
Not applicable.
Question D. Fish &
wildlife corridors
Essential Fish
Habitat
Wildlife Corridors
No affect, no EFH or wildlife
corridors present in the Study
Area
Not applicable.
Question E. Local
policies
Protected Trees
Other biological
protections
No affect because the Project
will obtain a use and grading
permit as well as a tree
removal permit from the City
of Los Gatos.
Not applicable.
Question F. Local,
state, federal
conservation plans
Habitat Conservation
Plans
No affect, the Project is outside
of the Santa Clara County
Habitat Plan Boundary.
Not applicable.
8.1 Project Affect and Minimizatino Evaluation for Special-status Species
8.1.1 Special-Status Wildlife
This section analyzes the Project’s potential effects and potential minimization measures for
special-status species in reference to the significance threshold outlined in CEQA Appendix G,
Part IV (a):
a)Does the project have the potential to 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?
Potential for potentially significant effects to special-status species are discussed below.
Potential Affect BIO-1:The southeastern ornamental pond has limited potential to support
northwestern pond turtle, a federal proposed species. While no turtles were
observed on the January 2025 site visit, there are sparse basking sites in the form
of above surface rocks, but corridors for turtles to reach the ponds are virtually
absent.
To reduce potential effects to northwestern pond turtle to a less-than-significant level, the
following measures shall be implemented:
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 11
Avoidance Measure BIO-1: Prior to de-watering or grading of existing ornamental ponds, a
qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-activity survey of the ponds to ensure no
NWPT are present and will be affected. If turtles are discovered, a federally-
approved biologist shall capture and re-locate the turtles to nearby suitable
habitat in consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
NESTING BIRDS
Special-status and non-status nesting birds protected under the CFGC have the potential to nest
in trees, shrubs, herbaceous vegetation, and on bare ground and man-made structures within
and adjacent to the Project Area Project construction activities have the potential to affect nests
in these areas if construction is initiated during the breeding bird season (typically February 1
through August 31). Potential effects include direct destruction of nests as well as indirect visual
and acoustic disturbance to nesting birds from construction in adjacent areas that have the
potential to result in nest abandonment. Destruction of nests or indirect disturbance from
construction that results in nest abandonment are considered potentially significant affects
under CEQA.
Potential Affect BIO-2: Project construction activities have the potential to directly or indirectly
affect special-status nesting birds and other native nesting birds protected by the
MBTA and CFGC. Construction could directly destroy active nests or cause
disturbance that results in nest abandonment.
To reduce potential for affecting nesting birds to a less-than-significant level, the following
measures shall be implemented:
Avoidance Measure BIO-2:Initiation of construction activities during the avian nesting season
(typically February 1 through August 31) will be avoided to the extent feasible. If
construction initiation during the nesting season cannot be avoided, pre-
construction nesting bird surveys will be conducted within 14 days of initial
ground disturbance or vegetation removal to avoid disturbance to active nests,
eggs, and/or young of nesting birds. Surveys can be used to detect the nests of
special-status as well as non-special-status birds. Surveys will encompass the
entire construction area and the surrounding 500 feet. An exclusion zone where no
construction would be allowed will be established around any active nests of any
protected avian species found in the Project Area until a qualified biologist has
determined that all young have fledged and are independent of the nest.
Suggested exclusion zone distances differ depending on species, location, and
placement of nest, and will be at the discretion of the biologist and, if necessary,
the CDFW. These surveys would remain valid as long as construction activity is
consistently occurring in a given area and will be completed again if there is a
lapse in construction activities of more than 14 consecutive days during the
breeding bird season.
ROOSTING BATS
Special-status and non-status bat species have the potential to be present in redwood or oak
trees throughout the Project Area. Project construction activities have the potential to affect
nests in these areas if construction is initiated during the bat maternity season (generally April
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 12
through October). Potential effects include direct destruction of roosts as well as indirect visual
and acoustic disturbance to roosting bats from construction in adjacent areas. Destruction of
roosts or indirect disturbance from construction that results in roost abandonment are
considered potentially significant effects under CEQA. Based on extensive development within
and adjacent to the Study Area, the area of lost potential roosting habitat is considered a less
than significant effect.
Potential Affect BIO-3: Project construction activities have the potential directly or indirectly
disturb special-status and non-status roosting bats. Construction could directly
destroy active roosts or cause disturbance that results in roost abandonment.
To reduce potential effects of roosting bats to a less-than-significant level, the following
measures shall be implemented:
Avoidance Measure BIO-3: Initiation of construction activities during the bat maternity season
(generally April through October) will be avoided to the extent feasible, any tree
removal or trimming should be conducted outside of the bat maternity season
(generally April through October). If this work window is not feasible, pre-
construction bat roost assessments conducted by a qualified biologist at least 14
days and no more than 30 days prior to removal are recommended to determine
if bats roosts are present that may be affected by Project activities. If special-
status bat species or maternity roosts are detected during these surveys,
additional measures including avoidance of the roost sites until the end of the
maternity roosting season may be recommended.
8.1.2 Sensitive Natural Communities Affects and Avoidance Evaluation
This section addresses the question outlined in CEQA Appendix G, Part IV (b):
b) Does the Project 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.
While there is sensitive habitat mapped within the Study Area, such as potential seasonal
wetland swale, intermittent stream, oak woodland and riparian woodland, there is no sensitive
habitat within the proposed Project footprint and Project activities will be well isolated from
sensitive areas. The Project will not adversely affect sensitive natural communities.
8.1.3 Affects and Avoidance Evaluation for Wetlands and Other Areas Regulated by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to affect and minimization for wetlands and other
areas presumed or determined to be within the jurisdiction of the Corps. in reference to the
significance threshold outlined in CEQA Appendix G, Part IV (c):
c) Does the Project have the potential to have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 13
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means;
While there is a potential seasonal wetland swale and an intermittent stream within the Study
Area, there are no wetlands and waters within the Project footprint. The Project will not adversely
affect jurisdictional wetlands.
8.1.4 Affects and Minimization Evaluation for Habitat Corridors and Linkages
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to affect and minimization for habitat corridors and
linkages in reference to the significance threshold outlined in CEQA Appendix G, Part IV (d):
d) Does the Project have the potential to 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;
Movement and migratory corridors are segments of land that provide a link between core habitat
areas (Beier 1992, Soule and Terborgh 1999). The majority of the Study Area is developed or
previously disturbed and is within a densely developed urban area. The site does not contain
sufficient natural features to function as a wildlife movement corridor. The Project will not
adversely effect movement or migratory corridors resulting from the Project because no movement
or migratory corridors are present on the site.
8.1.5 Affects and Minimization Evaluation for Local Policies and Ordinances
This section analyzes the Project’s potential to affect conflicts with local policies and ordinances
in reference to the significance threshold outlined in CEQA Appendix G, Part IV (e):
e) Does the Project have the potential to conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance;
The Project may affect trees protected by the Town of Los Gatos’s Tree Removal and Pruning
Permit. A tree removal permit will be obtained from the City of Los Gatos prior to the removal of
such trees, in compliance with the City codes.A tree re-planting plan will be implemented as a
condition of the permit to replace all removals at a 1:1 with native oak trees or other regionally
appropriate species. Tree removal and re-planting plans including data on all trees on site are
provided in Attachment A.
The Project will not adversely affect or conflict with local codes and ordinances protecting
biological resources.
8.1.6 Habitat Conservation Plans
This section analyzes the Project’s potential effects and minimization based on conflicts with any
adopted local, regional, and state habitat conservation plans in reference to the significance
threshold outlined in CEQA Appendix G, Part IV (f):
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 14
f) Does the Project have the potential to conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
The Study Area is mapped outside of the Habitat Plan Study Area in the Santa Clara County
Habitat Plan. Additionally, the Study Area is surrounded by fully developed residential uses and
would not affect special-status species habitat or other sensitive habitats or involve a change in
use type of the existing land cover. Therefore, the Project would not adversely affect or conflict
with the Santa Clara County Habitat Plan.
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 15
REFERENCES
Beier, P and S. Loe. 1992. A checklist for evaluating affects to wildlife movement corridors.
Wildlife Society Bulletin. 20: 434-440.
[CCH2] Consortium of California Herbaria 2. 2025. CCH2 Portal. Online at:
http://cch2.org/portal/index.php; most recently accessed: February 2025.
[CDFW] California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2022. California Natural Community List.
Biogeographic Data Branch. Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program,
Sacramento, California. July 5.
[CDFW] California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2025. California Natural Diversity Database.
Biogeographic Data Branch, Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program,
Sacramento, California. Available online at: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-
and-Data; most recently accessed: February 2025.
[CNPS] California Native Plant Society. 2025a. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online
edition, v8-03 0.39). Sacramento, California. Online at: http://rareplants.cnps.org/; most
recently accessed: February 2025.
[CNPS] California Native Plant Society. 2025b. A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition.
Sacramento, California. Online at: http://vegetation.cnps.org/; most recently accessed:
February 2025.
[CSRL] California Soil Resource Lab. 2025. SoilWeb. Online at:
http://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/; most recently accessed: February 2025.
eBird. 2025. eBird: an online database of bird distribution and abundance [web application].
eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Available: http://www.ebird.org;
most recently accessed: April 2025.
Google Earth. 2025. Aerial Imagery 1948-2025. Most recently accessed: February 2025.
Kelly, P. A. 1990. Population ecology and social organization of dusky-footed woodrats,
Neotoma fuscipes . Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of California, Berkeley, 191 pp.
[NETR] Nationwide Environmental Title Research. 2025. Historic Aerials. Available online at:
http://www.historicaerials.com/; most recently accessed: February 2025.
Soulé, M.E. and J. Terbough. 1999. Conserving nature at regional and continental scales - a
scientific program for North America. Bioscience 49:809-817.
Stebbins, RC. 2003. Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
March 27.
WRA, Inc.| 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901
www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868 16
Shuford, W.D., and T. Gardali (eds). 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked
assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate
conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field
Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and CDFG, Sacramento.
Thomson, R.C., A.N. Wright, and H.B. Shaffer. 2016. California Amphibian and Reptile Species of
Special Concern. Co-published by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and
University of California Press. Oakland, California.
[USGS] United States Geological Survey. 2021. San Jose West 7.5-minute Quadrangle map.
[USFWS] U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2025a. National Wetlands Inventory website. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Online at: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/;
most recently accessed: February 2025.
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2025b. Information for Planning and
Conservation Database. Available online at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/; most recently
accessed: February 2025.
DOOH (O
3
D
G
U
H :HGJHZRRG$YH:HGJHZRRG$YH*U DQ DGD
:
D\/D 5LQFRQDGD&RXQWU\ &OXE/D 5LQFRQDGD7HQQLV &RXUWV6PLWK &UHHN
.D UO
$
Y
H
%LFNQHOO5G6PLWK&UHHN.DUO $Y H
6PLWK&UHHN
'
U (DWRQ/Q9DOOH\ )Z\H\)Z\:HGJHZRRG $YH&OHDUYLHZ'U/D 5LQFRQDGD'U0XOEHUU\ 'U
(DVWYLHZ 'U
:9DOOH\)Z\&O DUD 6W*ROI /LQNV'U/D 5LQ FRQDGD 'U
(DVWYLHZ 'U &ODUD 6W=HQD $YH(DWRQ/Q1DWDO\H 5G *URVYHQRU&W:LQFKHVWHU%OYG:1HZHOO $YH:, 0 ! , "