Loading...
19 Highland Ave - Addendum & Exhibit 19TOWN OF LOS GATOS ITEM NO: 4 ADDENDUM PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting Date: June 8, 2016 PREPARED BY: Mami Moseley, Associate Planner MMoseley@los gatosca.gov APPLICATION NO.: Architecture and Site Application S-15-077 LOCATION: 19 Highland Avenue (north side of Highland Avenue just east of 15 Highland A venue) APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: Ed Pearson CONTACT PERSON: Ed Pearson APPELLANTS: Badame, Roberts, Smullen, and Spalding Families APPLICATION SUMMARY: Consider an appeal of a decision of the Development Review Committee approving an Architecture and Site application to construct a new single-family residence and remove large protected trees on property zoned HR-2 Y2 . APN 529-37-033 EXHIBITS: Previously received with May 11,2016 Desk Item Report: I. Emails from appellants , received May 11 , 2016 Previously received with June 8, 2016 Staff Report 2. Location Map 3. Required Findings and Considerations 4. Recommended Conditions (nine pages) 5. Adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (3 pages) 6. Town Council Resolution (200 1-128) 7. December 8, 2010 Planning Commission meeting minutes (15 pages) 8. Consulting Architect's Report , dated February 24, 2016 9. 2010 Arborist Report (26 pages), dated February 15 , 2010 10. Project Data Sheet 11. Letter from Anthony Badame, received March 24,2016 12. March 29 , 2016 Development Review Committee minutes (two pages) 13. Appeal letter, received April 8, 2016 (four pages) 14. May 11, 2016 Planning Commission meeting minutes 15. Applicant's response letter and Attachments (1-14), received May 27 ,2016 16. Public comment received through 11 :00 a .m., Thursday, June 2, 2016 17. Additional letters from applicant (11 pages), received June 2, 2016 Planning Commission Staff Report -Page 2 19 Highland A venue/S-15-077 June8,2016 18 . Development plans (16 pages), received March 22 , 2016 Received with this Addendum Report: 19. Letter from appellant (58 pages), received on June 2, 20 16. REMARKS: The attached letter was received after completion of the staff report. proved by: Joel Paulson, A ICP Community Development Director JSP:MFM:cg cc: Ed Pearson, 239 Thurston Street, Lo s Gato s , CA 95030 Lisa Roberts, 78 Alpine A venue, Los Gatos, CA 95030 Theresa Spalding, 15 Highland A venue, Los Gatos , CA 95030 Dede Smullen, 25 Highland A venue, Los Gatos, CA 95030 Anthony Badame, 1 Highland A venue, Los Gatos , CA 95030 N :\DEV\PC REPORTS\20 16\H ighland -19-appeai -6-8-16 -ADD.doc 7008 Bristol Drive, Berkeley, CA 94705 (510) 849-2354 Marni F. Moseley, AICP, Associate Planner Town of Los Gatos Planning Division 110 East Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 June 1, 2016 SUBJECT: 19 HIGHLAND AVENUE CREEK AND CEQA ISSUES Dear Ms. Moseley, Grassetti Environmental Consulting (GECo) has been retained by a group of concerned citizens to review California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance and creek setback issues associated with the 19 Highland Avenue project. As GECo’s principal, with over 33 years of CEQA experience, I have reviewed the CEQA documentation, supporting documents, more recent biological analyses, and local and regional stream setback requirements in preparation of this letter. I also have conducted a site visit to visually assess site conditions (from adjacent landowners’ property and from Highland Avenue). In addition, GECo has retained a consulting biologist, Pacific Biology, to review existing biological resources reports, conduct a visual site visit, and opine on the appropriate classification of the creek and extent of riparian habitat. The Pacific Biology assessment report is attached to this letter, as are my qualifications. On the basis of communications between our client and your office, we understand that the Town intends to use the 2010 CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration as the CEQA documentation for the proposed project. Similarly, based on email communications, we understand that the Town considers the applicable setback of the proposed house from the creek as 15 feet. This letter addresses the appropriateness of these determinations, as well as overall adequacy of the CEQA document. In summary, I have concluded that, based on a review of available information, there is no evidence supporting the use of the 15-foot setback (the appropriate creek setback on the project site is 25 feet), the Initial Study is deficient in addressing the setback issue, and the Town’s impermissible CEQA process has resulted in a denial of resource agency and public review of the proposed project. Creek Setback Issues Town-Required Setbacks The Town of Los Gatos is a participant in the Santa Clara Water Resources Collaborative. The 19 Highland Avenue Page 2 Creek and CEQA Comments June 1, 2016 2 Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams (G&S) was developed by the Collaborative to protect in-stream and riparian water quality, resources, and habitat. The G&S contains the requirements and guidance for development adjacent to streams. The Town Council adopted a resolution implementing the G&S on February 20, 2007. Specifically, the Town adopted Chapters 2 and 3 of the G&S as Town requirements. Chapter 2 describes how streams and setback zones are delineated. Chapter 3 describes stream protection policies and requirements, including required stream setbacks. The Town is responsible for implementing these standards. It is required to review potential impacts to streams as part of the development review process. Projects adjacent to streams are required to be forwarded to the SCVWD for comment. As detailed on p. 3.8 of the G&S, to minimize impacts to streams, structures are required be setback from the stream. The required setback between the stream and the structure is called the “slope stability protection area”. The “Slope Stability Protection Area” is an area between a structure and the stream2. In some cases, a range of numbers is indicated. The assumption is that each local jurisdiction will select one of the numbers based on their existing priorities, permitting processes, and on-site conditions. It is also assumed that the channel depth of most streams in urban Santa Clara County is 10 feet deep or less. STABILITY PROTECTION AREA Stream with Little or No Hardening Structurally 3 Engineered System Ephemeral Stream Size of Protection Area (as measured from Top of Bank)4 25-20 feet 15 feet 10-15 feet Notes: Potential Additions to the Slope A. For a large lot (greater than 10,000 sq. ft), add 5 feet. B. For a large home in which the FAR triggers a discretionary review, work with applicant to ensure that impacts such as drainage are redirected away from a stream and pursue opportunities to increase the slope stability protection area to better protect the stream (and home) from impacts. For example, consider decreasing the required front yard setback in order to accommodate an increased rear yard setback/slope stability area. 1 Single Family Unit refers to both (a) new single-family units on existing lots of record and (b) new single- family remodels/rebuilds as defined by local regulations/policy/ guidelines 2 In addition to protecting this area, BMP’s should be used that are reflective of Guidelines and Standards, for activities adjacent to these areas where discretionary review is used (i.e redirecting drainage away from the stream and no removal of native riparian plants 3 A “structurally engineered system” is designed to provide slope stability. It may be a concrete-lined channel (U-frame or trapezoidal) or a stream substantially modified with riprap, gabions, structurally engineered sacked concrete, etc. 4 Area measured for Slope Stability Requirement to be measured based on location of Top of Bank, whether stream is on or off of property. 19 Highland Avenue Page 3 Creek and CEQA Comments June 1, 2016 3 Applicability of Required Setbacks to Project Site The project site has been assessed by a number of biological reports with respect to creek setback issues. The most detailed of these studies was conducted by Wood Biological Consulting in their January 2008 report1. That study identified riparian areas on the site and discussed applicable setbacks. As described on p. 2 of the Wood report: The unnamed tributary to Los Gatos Creek is presumed to be a second or third order intermittent stream. Downstream of the property, the stream course is directed into a concrete-lined channel, which ultimately drains into a buried culvert. The low-gradient stream enters the property from the east at approximately 72 feet in elevation and exits the site in the west at 60 feet in elevation, traversing approximately 320 feet. The banks of the creek channel are incised, scoured, and show some evidence of bank failure especially in the meanders. On site, the channel varies in width at the scour line from 3 to 5 feet, with widths at top of bank ranging from 6 to 11 feet. The stream is shown as a "blue-line" water course on the USGS topographic map and the channel qualifies as a waters of the U.S. and a waters of the State, subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act (as administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE] and the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) and the California Fish and Game Code (as administered by the California Department of Fish and Game [CDFG]), respectively. With respect to the site’s riparian corridor, Wood states: Although no typical riparian habitat is present on the subject property, the rationale for determining the limits of the riparian zone, as shown on the attached figure, is based on the following limits claimed by the CDFG (see Section 5, below), as currently applied pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code. These limits are generally applied to the outer edge of the dripline of native trees whose canopies extend over the tops of bank of a regulated stream course. A tree need not be rooted within a creek channel to be considered part of the riparian zone. For example, in areas where there is a continuous canopy of native trees extending beyond the top of bank, the CDFG will assume that they contribute to the habitat values for fish and wildlife species that occupy, or could occupy the channel (CDFG Warden N. Kozicki, pers. comm. To M. Wood, 2004; CDFG Environmental Specialist D. Johnston, pers. comm. To M. Wood, 2007). Specifically, riparian trees provide shade and contribute woody and leaf debris on the channel banks, thereby enhancing wildlife habitat values. Wood concludes that: Based on the condition and local context of the creek channel and riparian habitat at the Highland Avenue property, establishment of a 25 foot-wide setback between the top of bank and any permanent structures is consistent with the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Stream (SCVWRPC 2006) as well as standard requirements of the 1 Wood Biological Consulting, January 28, 2008, Riparian Habitat Assessment and Biological Peer Review, 19 Highland Avenue, Los Gatos, prepared for Geier and Geier Consulting. It should be noted that the Wood report identified much of the site proposed for the project house as riparian. 19 Highland Avenue Page 4 Creek and CEQA Comments June 1, 2016 4 CDFG. In addition, establishment of a 10 foot-wide setback between the top of bank and paved surfaces are also consistent with regional and state guidelines, provided appropriate construction and post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) are designed, implemented and maintained. The February 2016 H. T. Harvey Biological Resources report changes the classification of the on-site stream to “ephemeral” in the following discussion: In addition, a drainage, best characterized as an ephemeral stream (defined as a waterway that conveys water surface runoff during and immediately after precipitation events in a typical year) crosses the site. At the time of the recent survey (February 19, 2016), the on-site drainage supported flowing water from recent rains (approximately l-inch of rain received on February 19, 2016); water in the drainage was approximately 18 inches across, on average, and was an estimated 4-6 inches deep. Flows within this drainage appear to be flashy and are likely to disappear into the relatively permeable Los Gatos and Mayhem soils that underlie the property a few days after a rainfall event. It is important to note that the Harvey conclusion that the creek was “ephemeral” was based solely on conjecture, as a heavy rain had occurred the day before their visit. The May 26, 2016 Live Oak Associates’ biological peer review of the H.T. Harvey report2 contradicts this conclusion, stating, “During the April 2016 Site Visit, although there had been no rainfall in the site’s vicinity for at least a week, water was observed flowing in the low-flow channel of the creek approximately 2 feet wide and between 2 and 4 inches deep.”3 Similarly, on my site visit to the site in late May 2016, at least two weeks after any rainfall, and it was flowing at that time. To clarify the creek’s status with respect to setback requirements, GECo retained Pacific Biology to conduct a visual site survey. Additionally, Josh Phillips and Jake Schweizer of Pacific Biology visited the site in early June 2016, and concluded that the creek is definitely intermittent and not ephemeral. Additionally, they identified potential project impacts to riparian vegetation associated with the creek that were not considered or disclosed in the 2010 IS/MND. The pacific Biology Report is included as Attachment 1 to this letter. The Wood Biological Consulting report is included as Attachment 2. Based on these actual dry-season creek observations, it is clear that the onsite stream is not ephemeral, but rather, as detailed in the Pacific Biology and Wood reports, an intermittent 2 Live Oak Associates, Inc. May 5, 2016, Biological Evaluation Peer review for the 19 Highland Avenue project, prepared for Alex H. Jewell, Kimley-Horn Associates. 3 It should be noted that the Live Oak report does express concern regarding the adequacy of the proposed setbacks, recommending that the project biologists, H.T. Harvey, conduct a more detailed analysis of the setbacks. To our knowledge, H.T. Harvey mapped the top of banks in March 2016 (letter from H. T. Harvey & Associates to Ed Person (project applicant) on March 22, 2016, but had not responded in detail to Live Oak’s recommendations. 19 Highland Avenue Page 5 Creek and CEQA Comments June 1, 2016 5 stream, subject to applicable setbacks applicable to that class of stream. In the case of this large-lot site, applicable setbacks to the structures would be 25 feet. As detailed in the Live Oak report, proposed minimum setbacks for the project range from about 7 feet for the driveway to about 12 feet for the house. Proposed decks and stairways have further reduced setbacks. Therefore the proposed setbacks do not meet the Town’s requirements, and the project must be redesigned to meet these setbacks and limit project impacts to the creek. Improper Regulatory Agency Consultation This non-compliance with required setbacks is further aggravated by the Town’s failure to appropriately consult with regulatory agencies with jurisdiction and public trust responsibilities for wildlife habitat and water quality. Instead of involving the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board through the standard CEQA process, the Town allowed the applicant to send an eight-sentence letter to each of these agencies4. That letter included neither biological reports nor project plans. It simply stated “At this time, what I’m requesting, (sic) is correspondence from you (sic) dept. regarding any requirements, permits/policies etc. that may have changed since the planning approval for this site in 2010.” The Town is apparently considering the agencies’ non-response to these letters to constitute a lack of concern over the project’s potential impacts on affected resources. These letters do not constitute adequate agency consultation and the agencies’ lack of response does not indicate lack of impacts or lack of agency concern. No documents or plans were provided to the agencies to review. No setbacks or riparian zones were identified. Further, for projects of this type, the CDFW typically only reviews planning- related documents through the CEQA process and then only upon payment of its required CEQA document review fees, or through its Streambed Alteration Agreement process. The RWQCB typically also typically responds via the CEQA or permit processes. As described below, the Town’s failure to correctly implement CEQA on this project ensured that the agencies would not comment on the project. Failure to Correctly Implement CEQA The Town apparently is relying on the 2010 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for a previously proposed house on the site as the CEQA documentation for the current project. In a May 24, 2016 email to Dorothea Smullen, Marnie Moseley, Associate Planner, stated: The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were circulated and adopted in compliance with the requirements of CEQA in 2010. No comments were received. The document was adopted by the 4 Letters from Ed Person to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board dated January 28, 2016. 19 Highland Avenue Page 6 Creek and CEQA Comments June 1, 2016 6 Planning Commission. As discussed, the IS and MND do not expire. The proposed project conforms with the analysis provided within the 2010 document and would be subject to the Mitigation Measures from the adopted MMRP. Re-circulating the document would be inconsistent with CEQA regulations. The adopted document continues to be available for review within the public file. Staff did reach out to both CDFW and RWQCB after we talked last to see if they had any comments that they did not provide to the applicant within the 30 day period5. No additional comments were provided to staff. The Town’s CEQA and agency consultation approach fails to meet the most basic CEQA requirements. First, it is important to note that the current project is not identical to the previously proposed development considered in the 2010 IS/MND. The current project has a larger footprint, larger square footage, and has reduced creek setbacks than the 2010 project. At least two new biological resource analyses have been prepared for the current project. Some of the information in the 2010 IS/MND is outdated and does not apply to the current project. For example, the 2010 IS/MND (p. 10) states: Based on the condition and context of the creek channel and riparian habitat at the Highland Avenue property, the establishment of a 20-foot wide setback between the top of bank and any permanent structures as proposed by the project plans is consistent with the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams as well as standard requirements of the CDFG. In addition, establishment of a 10- foot wide setback between the top of bank and paved surfaces also is consistent with regional and state guidelines, provided appropriate construction and post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) are designed, implemented, and maintained. The current project has substantially reduced setbacks that do not meet Town or resource agency requirements. Although the Town has conducted biological reviews of these setbacks, the peer review identified the need for additional work regarding the setbacks, and the public and resource agencies have not been afforded an opportunity to comment on those analyses via the CEQA process. The 2010 IS/MND states that the project plans have been reviewed by CDFG (now CDFW) with respect to a Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAE). This was incorrect in 2010 and is incorrect with respect to the current project, neither of which applied for such an Agreement. The SAE, included as Attachment I to the 2010 IS/MND, states that the agency assumes a project with minimum 20-foot structure setbacks and 10-foot roadway setbacks, neither of which is the case for the current project6. The Wood Biological Resources report, prepared for the 2010 IS/MND, also classifies much of the part of the site proposed for development as “riparian” habitat, yet the 2010 IS/MND did not address this potential impact. This deficiency remains applicable to the current project. Further, the 2010 approvals have lapsed and the applicant has changed. This is clearly a new project, the approval of which triggers a new CEQA review, as described below. CEQA 5 Based on the letters sent to the regulatory agencies, it was not the Town who reached out, but rather the applicant. As described above, this approach to agency consultation is virtually guaranteed to result in a non- response from the agencies. 6 California Department of Fish and Game, Project Description and Project Conditions, December 8, 2003. Included as Attachment I to the 2010 IS/MND 19 Highland Avenue Page 7 Creek and CEQA Comments June 1, 2016 7 defines a project as an “action”, which is, in this case, approval of the proposed house plans. The action is not a previous approval. Therefore the CEQA process begins de novo. CEQA allows use of a previous Initial Study, if applicable, to a new project, and sets forth a specific series of actions that a lead agency (in this case, the Town of Los Gatos) must take to comply with CEQA. These are detailed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and 151537. CEQA Guidelines 15063 describes the use and required contents of an Initial Study, including the use of an earlier Initial Study. Regarding the use of a previous CEQA document, Section 15063(d)(3) states that the IS contents must include, Identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix, or other method provided that entries on a checklist…are briefly explained to indicate that there is some evidence to support the entries. The brief explanation may be either through a narrative or a reference to another information source such as….an earlier EIR or negative declaration. The CEQA Guidelines (Section 15063(g)) also set forth requirements for agency consultation with responsible and trustee agencies. The Guidelines further set forth a specific process for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (Sections 15072, 15073, and 15074). This process involves circulation of a Draft Initial Study and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, public and agency review of the IS/MND, and consideration and adoption of the MND. The Town has sidestepped the required CEQA process in favor of another process of its own making. This is expressly prohibited by CEQA case law. In the Salmon Protection and Watershed Network v. County of Marin decision (December 2004), the Court of Appeals ruled: Reliance upon mitigation measures (whether included in the application or later adopted) involves an evaluative process of assessing those mitigation measures and weighing them against potential environmental impacts, and that process must be conducted under established CEQA standards and procedures for EIRs or negative declarations. (emphasis added) As clearly stated in this decision, a Lead Agency must perform its evaluation under the procedures established by CEQA, and may not make up its own parallel CEQA process. Should the Town choose to rely on the analyses in the 2010 IS/MND, augmented by the more recent biological resources reports, the CEQA process for this project would be to prepare a new IS/Notice of Intent to Adopt and MND (including the new project plans, setbacks, new biological analyses, etc), circulate it to the public and applicable resource agencies, consider public and agency comments, and then, should the Town choose to approve the project, adopt the IS and a new Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan. Therefore, it is my professional opinion that Town’s substitute process is impermissible and fails to meet the public and agency involvement and goals of CEQA. 7 Although Guidelines Section 15153 applies to Environmental Impact Reports, it can reasonably be assumed that an analogous process would apply to Initial Studies. 19 Highland Avenue Page 8 Creek and CEQA Comments June 1, 2016 8 Conclusions As summarized above, the creek on the project is “intermittent” and not “ephemeral”. Therefore the project fails to comply with required stream setbacks8. The Town has failed to consult with applicable state resources agencies, and failed to meet CEQA procedural requirements for impact assessment, public and agency disclosure, and review. In addition, the 2010 MND does not correctly characterize the stream and associated riparian zone. It is my professional opinion that the project should be re-designed to comply with Town and resource agency setback standards, a new IS should be prepared, and that document should be re-circulated for public and agency review according to CEQA requirements. Please feel free to contact me at 510 849-2354 if you have any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Richard Grassetti Principal Grassetti Environmental Consulting Attachments: Pacific Biology Letter Report; Wood Biological Consulting report; GECo Qualifications 8 It should be noted that the 7-12 foot stream setbacks proposed for project components also failed to meet the 15-foot setback requirement for ephemeral creeks 19 Highland Avenue Page 9 Creek and CEQA Comments June 1, 2016 9 Attachment A: Pacific Biology June 2, 2016 letter report 635 Carmel Avenue, Albany, CA 94706 Telephone/Fax: (510) 527-1008 TO: Richard Grassetti, Grassetti Environmental Consulting FROM: Josh Phillips, Principal Biologist DATE: June 2, 2016 SUBJECT: 19 Highland Avenue - Biological Resources Review Pacific Biology was retained by Grassetti Environmental Consulting to review the biological documentation prepared for the 19 Highland Avenue property, conduct a reconnaissance-level site visit, determine if the creek was correctly classified as ephemeral, and identify other biological resources issues that were not been fully evaluated. Josh Phillips (Principal Biologist of Pacific Biology) and Jake Schweitzer (Senior Ecologist of Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting) conducted the site visit on June 1, 2016. 1 Based on information provided by Grassetti Environmental Consulting, it is understood that the Town of Los Gatos intends to use the 2010 CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration as the CEQA documentation for the proposed project. It is also understood that the Town of Los Gatos considers the applicable setback of the proposed house from the creek to be 15 feet, which is the setback from an ephemeral creek recommended in the adopted Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams.2 This letter addresses the appropriateness of these determinations, as well as other biological resources issues that have not been adequately evaluated. In summary and as discussed below, the creek is not ephemeral because (1) flowing water and ponding was present at the time of the site visit despite no recent rain events, (2) wetland- associated plant species (indicator status of FACW), which requires prolonged periods of soil moisture, occurs in portions of the creek and floodplain, and (3) indicators of wetland hydrology were present, including water-stained vegetation and leaves and drift deposits, which indicate 1 Due to access restrictions, all observations and photos of the subject property were from adjacent properties. 2 The Town of Los Gatos is a participant in the Santa Clara Water Resources Collaborative. The Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams (G&S) was developed by the Collaborative to protect in-stream and riparian water quality, resources, and habitat. The G&S contains the requirements and guidance prolonged periods of flowing water. Therefore, the currently proposed creek setbacks, which are based on the faulty assumption that the creek is ephemeral, do not comply with the adopted Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams. Additionally, the 2010 CEQA documentation being used for the project is inadequate because it does not accurately describe the currently proposed creek setbacks and does not include an evaluation of potential indirect impacts to the creek and associated biological resources. Classification of the Creek As described in the letter submitted by Grassetti Environmental Consulting, the appropriate creek setback (i.e., Stability Protection Area) is dependent on correctly classifying the creek.3 For example and as detailed in the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams, an ephemeral stream requires a Stability Protection Area of 10-15 feet. An ephemeral stream is defined as a stream that has flowing water only during or for a short duration after precipitation events in a typical year. Observations of the creek and associated vegetation indicate that the creek is not ephemeral. Shallow flowing water (approximately 0.5 to 2 inch deep) and ponding (up to 7 inches deep) was observed during the site visit conducted on June 1, 2016. According to climate data recorded at the nearby San Jose International Airport, only 0.32 inch of precipitation occurred in the region during the month of May, and no precipitation was recorded in the region within 10 days of the site visit. The last rainfall event in the project vicinity was recorded on May 21 (0.05 inch of precipitation recorded).4 The presence of flowing water and ponding in the absence of a recent rain event indicates that the creek is not ephemeral. for development adjacent to streams. The Town Council adopted a resolution implementing the G&S at their meeting of February 20, 2007. 3 The terms "creek" and "stream" are used interchangeably in this document. Photo 1: Flowing Water - June 1, 2016 Photo 2: Ponding in Creek - June 1, 2016 4 http://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/los-gatos/california/united-states/usca0641/2016/5 The finding that the creek is not ephemeral is also supported by vegetation present in portions of the creek channel and flood plain. Several plant species associated with prolonged periods of soil moisture (i.e., wetland indicators) were observed, including clustered dock (Rumex conglomeratus), tall sedge (Cyperus eragrostis), and spreading rush (Juncus patens); all three of these species have a wetland indicator status of "facultative wetland" (FACW), indicating that they have a 67%-99% probability of occurring in wetlands. While these facultative wetland species are not dominant along the stream or floodplain, such species would not be expected to occur in an ephemeral stream because water does not persist for long enough to support these species. Upstream of the project site (upstream of 25 Highland Avenue), several willows, including both arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) and red-willow (Salix laevigata) occur in the creek floodplain. These riparian tree species, which are also FACW species, require moist soils, and/or a high water table, and also would not occur along an ephemeral drainage. Further, indicators of prolonged periods of flowing water were observed, including water-stained leaves and drift deposits. Additionally, the stream is shown as a dashed "blue-line" watercourse on the USGS topographic map; ephemeral streams are not mapped on USGS topographic maps and a dashed "blue-line" is used to indicate an intermittent stream. Photo 3: Willow Upstream of Project Site Photo 4: Drift Deposits Given that flowing water was present at the time of the site visit, that some wetland-associated vegetation occurs in the creek corridor, that riparian tree species occur upstream of the project site, that water-stained leaves and drift deposits are present, and that the creek is shown on the USGS topographic map, the creek does not meet the definition of being ephemeral. Alternatively, the creek is accurately described as being intermittent. This finding is supported by the biological study conducted by Wood Biological Consulting in their January 2008 report.5 As described on p. 2 of the Wood report, "the unnamed tributary to Los Gatos Creek is presumed to be a second or third order intermittent stream". As currently proposed, the project includes minimum setbacks ranging from about 7 feet for the driveway to about 12 feet for the house. Proposed decks and stairways have further reduced setbacks. These setbacks do not comply with the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams adopted by the Town of Los Gatos, which require a setback on a large lot of 25 feet for a non-ephemeral or non-structurally engineered stream. Other Biological Resources Issues As currently proposed, the project will require the removal of numerous trees. Several of the trees to be removed are near the creek bank and the tree roots extend into the creek bank. The removal of these trees could destabilize the creek bank and result in erosion and sedimentation into the creek; this potential impact, which could degrade sensitive creek habitats, is not addressed in the 2010 CEQA document being used for the project. The removal of these trees would also reduce canopy cover and shade over the creek and compromise wildlife habitat; this potential impact is also not addressed in the 2010 CEQA document being used for the project. The 2010 CEQA document being used for the project also does not address potential indirect impacts to wildlife and sensitive creek habitats from increased light and glare. For example, given the proximity of the proposed home and driveway to the creek, new light sources would be introduced to the creek, which would detract from the habitat value of the adjacent creek zone and deter wildlife use. Finally, the proposed project includes the removal of numerous trees, including one particularly large oak tree (of compromised health) with numerous cavities. This tree could be used as a roost by bats, including special-status bats species such as pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus); potential impacts to roosting bats are not addressed in the 2010 CEQA document being used for the project. Please feel free to contact me with any questions regarding this memo. Sincerely, Josh Phillips 5 Wood Biological Consulting, January 28, 2008, Riparian Habitat Assessment and Biological Peer Review, 19 Highland Avenue, Los Gatos, prepared for Geier and Geier Consulting. JOSHUA PHILLIPS, PRINCIPAL BIOLOGIST EDUCATION Master of Environmental Science and Management, Ecology Emphasis, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1999 Bachelor of Science in Environmental Biology and Management, U.C. Davis, 1995 PERMITS Federal Endangered Species Permit (TE-086595-0) for listed vernal pool branchiopods (i.e., fairy shrimp and tadpole shrimp) EMPLOYMENT HISTORY Pacific Biology Principal Biologist 2006 - present Impact Sciences, Inc. Senior Biologist 2000 - 2006 East Bay Municipal Utilities District Fisheries Technician 1999-2000 National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis Knowledge-Base Engineer 1998-1999 PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY Mr. Phillips is the owner and Principal Biologist of Pacific Biology. His background combines a strong technical knowledge of California’s plants and wildlife with a comprehensive understanding of the environmental planning process, including expertise in CEQA, the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and the California Fish and Game Code. He has managed and participated in large-scale projects involving complex biological issues throughout northern and southern California. Mr. Phillips has extensive experience conducting special-status species surveys, habitat evaluations, wetland delineations, vegetation mapping, mitigation design, and biological permitting. He holds a Section 10(a)(1)(A) recovery permit to conduct surveys for federally-listed vernal pool branchiopods (i.e., fairy and tadpole shrimp) and also regularly conducts surveys for California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, western burrowing owl, western spadefoot, western pond turtle, nesting birds, and rare plants. Mr. Phillips has extensive experience analyzing the effects of development projects on biological resources and has prepared numerous biological resource chapters of EIRs and Initial Studies, Biological Assessments for Section 7 Consultations, Biological Constraints Evaluations, and Biological Resources Due Diligence Reports. Mr. Phillips has worked on projects for the Alameda County Public Works Agency, Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Caltrans, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, U.C. Santa Cruz, San Francisco Department of Public Works, Marin Municipal Water District, East Bay Municipal Utility District, Golden Gate Transportation District, and the cities of Hercules, Pinole, Richmond, San Pablo, Lafayette, King City, Fremont, Mountain View, Menlo Park, San Rafael, Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley, Capitola, San Jose, Watsonville, Calistoga, Los Angeles, and others. Mr. Phillips has extensive knowledge of the use and applications of GIS and GPS. He regularly uses these tools to map plant communities, identify the locations of special-status species relative to a project site, analyze wildlife movement corridors, delineate wetlands, identify suitable mitigation/restoration sites, and prepare supporting figures for technical reports. SELECTED EXPERIENCE Soulajule Spillway Repair Project, Marin County. Prepared a biological habitat evaluation report for the Soulajule Spillway Repair Project on behalf of the Marin Municipal Water District. The report was submitted to the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) during the required biological permitting process (i.e., Section 7, 1600, 404). Based on the presence of suitable habitat and known occurrences in the project area, three federally-listed wildlife species were identified as having potential to occur on the project site, including California red-legged frog, Coho salmon, and steelhead. Other special- status wildlife species also potentially occurring included foothill-yellow legged frog, western pond turtle, Tomales roach, pallid bat, and yellow warbler. The report included avoidance measures to protect special- status species and other sensitive biological resources. The report was accepted by the agencies as written and all biological permits were issued for the project. Pacific Biology provided biological monitoring services during construction activities and conducted the required preconstruction clearance surveys. Newhall Ranch Landmark Village and Mission Village Biota Reports, Los Angeles County. Served as the primary author of the Biota Reports for the Newhall Ranch Landmark Village and Mission Village projects. The Landmark Village and Mission Village project sites are 900 acres and 1,200 acres in size, respectively. Both project sites are located within Significant Ecological Area (SEA) 23, which was identified by the Los Angeles Planning Department in consideration of the biological resource values associated with the Santa Clara River. The reports were prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Los Angeles County Significant Ecological Area Technical Advisory Committee (SEATAC) and analyzed potential project-related impacts to state and federally-listed plant and wildlife species (i.e., San Fernando spineflower, arroyo toad, unarmored threespine stickleback, least Bell’s vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher), other plant and wildlife species considered to be of special-status under CEQA, jurisdictional resources and sensitive habitats, wildlife movement corridors, and the overall biological functions and values of the Santa Clara River and associated riparian habitats. Attended SEATAC hearings for both projects and prepared responses to comments received on the documents. Sun City Tehama Specific Plan EIR, Tehama County. Prepared the biological resources section of the EIR. The 3,474-acre project site contains large expanses of grassland and blue oak woodland habitat. Focused surveys were conducted for special-status plant species, vernal pool fairy/tadpole shrimp, California red- legged frog, western spadefoot, western pond turtle, burrowing owl, and valley elderberry longhorn beetle. The results of these surveys, as well as the results of a jurisdictional delineation and a fisheries and aquatic resources evaluation, were incorporated into the biological resources section of the EIR. Developed mitigation measures to address project impacts. Patterson Ranch Specific Plan EIR, Alameda County. The 400-acre project site is located in the City of Fremont. Prepared the biological resources section of the EIR and conducted the associated biological surveys, including protocol surveys for California red-legged frog and burrowing owl. Worked closely with the City of Fremont in developing mitigation measures that achieved the goals of the project while protecting sensitive biological resources within an open space area. Responses were prepared to all public and agency comments and the EIR was approved in 2010. Mission Creek Restoration Project, Alameda County. On behalf of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Pacific Biology prepared the BA for the project. Pacific Biology also oversaw the preparation of the wetland delineation, wetland mitigation and monitoring plan (MMP), wetland permitting (i.e., Section 404, 401, 1600), and Initial Study/Negative Declaration. Key issues included potential impacts to California red-legged frog Patterson Pass Road Safety Improvement Project, Alameda County. On behalf of the Alameda County Public Works Agency, Pacific Biology prepared the Natural Environmental Study (NES) and the Biological Assessment (BA). This was the first Public Works project subject to the East Alameda County Conservation Strategy, and the mitigation strategy was designed to comply with the requirements of that document. The USFWS agreed with the findings and mitigation presented in the BA and issued a Biological Opinion in accordance with the requirements of Section 7 of the federal ESA. An application for an Incidental Take Permit from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) was also prepared and that permit will be issued. Pacific Biology also oversaw the preparation of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and secured mitigation lands for the project. Key issues included potential impacts to California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, San Joaquin kit fox, Alameda whipsnake, and burrowing owls. Redwood City Ferry Terminal Project, San Mateo County. The project includes the construction of a ferry terminal and associated structures at the Port of Redwood City. Prepared the biological constraints analysis and will prepare the biological resources section of the EIR/EIS (upon refunding of the project by the state). Key biological issues evaluated included potential impacts to tidal marsh habitat and associated special-status wildlife species (e.g., salt marsh harvest mouse, California clapper rail, California black rail) and disturbance to harbor seals. Hercules Intermodal Terminal Project, Contra Costa County. Prepared the Administrative Draft Biological Resources section of the EIR/EIS as part of the team lead by Impact Sciences. As proposed at the time, the project included the construction of a ferry terminal, train passenger platform, bus terminal, and associated infrastructure along the bay front in Hercules. Pacific Biology managed the preparation of the associated biological resources studies, including a jurisdictional wetland delineation, fisheries evaluation, and protocol surveys for vernal pool branchiopods (i.e., fairy and tadpole shrimp), clapper and black rail, and burrowing owls. Pacific Biology's work on the project ended due to a change in the prime consultant leading the project (i.e., Impact Sciences was replaced by ICF), and because ICF has an in-house biological resources team. Hercules New Town Center Project, Contra Costa County. Pacific Biology provided assistance to the City of Hercules Redevelopment Agency in creating a strategy to obtain natural resources permits for the New Town Center project. As proposed at the time, the project would result in the fill of over 1-acre of jurisdictional wetlands in which California red-legged frog were documented. Therefore, an individual permit is required under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act, as well as consultation under Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act. Pacific Biology developed a permitting strategy that included conducting updated protocol surveys for red-legged frogs, evaluating the feasibility and expected cost of creating mitigation habitat on city-owned parcels, conducting a cost benefit analysis of creating mitigation habitat versus purchasing mitigation credits, and early coordination with the regulatory agencies. Tesla Road, Greenville Road, and Mountain House Road Pavement Rehabilitation Projects, Alameda County. On behalf of Caltrans and the Alameda County Public Works Agency, three separate NES documents were prepared. Key biological issues included potential impacts to California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, San Joaquin kit fox, and nesting birds. Avoidance and minimization measures were provided to ensure that there would be no effect on federally-listed species. Storm Water Channel Zone 3A, Line A Silt Removal Project, Alameda County. On behalf of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Pacific Biology prepared the BA for the project. The project site includes aquatic habitat within Old Alameda Creek and associated brackish and tidal marshes. The proposed action is to excavate accumulated sediments from the flood plain in order to restore the design flood flow and to improve the flood protection of adjacent properties. Key issues included potential impacts to salt marsh harvest mouse and steelhead. Damon Slough Desilting Project, Alameda County. The proposed desilting area is located in the portion of Damon Slough adjacent to and downstream of the Oakland Coliseum. Prepared the Biological Assessment (BA) on behalf of the Alameda County Public Works Agency. Key issues included potential impacts to California clapper rail and green sturgeon. Laguna Creek (Zone 6 Line E) Flood Damage Reduction Project, Alameda County. On behalf of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Pacific Biology prepared the BA for the project. Pacific Biology also oversaw the preparation of the wetland delineation, and is currently overseeing the preparation of the wetland mitigation and monitoring plan and permit applications for the project (i.e., Section 404, 401, 1600). Key issues evaluated included potential impacts California clapper rail, steelhead, and California tiger salamander. Devils Gulch Water Quality Improvement Project, Marin County. On behalf of the Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD), Pacific Biology prepared the biological habitat evaluation report and the biological resources section of the Initial Study. Devils Gulch supports Coho salmon and steelhead, and California red- legged frog, foothill yellow-legged frog, and western pond turtle also have potential to occur. Appropriate avoidance measures were developed to protect these species during construction activities. Pacific Biology also oversaw focused rare plant surveys. Golden Gate Bridge Physical Suicide Deterrent System Project NES, San Francisco and Marin Counties. Prepared the NES on behalf of Caltrans and the Golden Gate Bridge Transportation District. Issues evaluated included potential harm to migrating birds due to collisions or entanglement with the barrier and potential impacts to sensitive biological resources (e.g., Mission blue butterfly) bordering staging areas in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. Oakland Central Estuary Waterfront Specific Plan Project, Alameda County. The project includes the preparation of a Specific Plan for the 428-acre Central Estuary waterfront area and the preparation of the EIR. Prepared the Biological Evaluation Report that describes the biological resources present, identifies areas containing sensitive biological resources that should be considered in development of the Specific Plan, and identifies anticipated biological permit requirements. Lifemark Master Land Use Plan, San Mateo County. Prepared a Biological Resources Constraints and Opportunities Evaluation for use in development of the Lifemark Master Land Use Plan. The evaluation was conducted to identify portions of the 505-acre Sky Lawn property that contain or could contain sensitive biological resources. The identification of these areas during the preliminary planning stages allowed biologically sensitive areas to be avoided or otherwise considered in development plans, as well as to identify areas that focused biological surveys would be required. Key biological issues included potential habitat for federally-listed wildlife species (i.e., California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake, bay checkerspot butterfly), native grasslands, and jurisdictional wetlands. The analysis included conducting a series of field surveys, including focused rare plant surveys and habitat/plant community mapping. All collected data was compiled in a GIS database. The findings of the analysis were used in designing an environmentally sensitive land use plan. The report served as the basis of the biological resources section of the Initial Study prepared by San Mateo County. Foothill and Mines Road Drainage Inlet Structure Replacement Project, East Alameda County. At the request of the Alameda County Public Works Agency, Pacific Biology was brought onto the project to revise the BA prepared by another consultant (due to comments received from the USFWS on that document). The BA was revised to meet the requirements of the East Alameda County Conservation Strategy and the USFWS issued a BO for the project. An application for an Incidental Take Permit from the CDFW was also prepared and that permit will be issued. Pacific Biology also oversaw the preparation of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and secured mitigation lands for the project. Key issues included potential impacts to California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, San Joaquin kit fox, Alameda whipsnake, and burrowing owls. Caltrans Sonoma 116 Pavement Overlay Project, Sonoma County. The work was completed as part of a statewide on-call biological services contract with Caltrans. The Natural Environmental Study (NES) Report analyzed impacts to biological resources resulting from the proposed widening of SR 116 between Cotati and Sebastopol. Organized and participated in focused special-status plant surveys, California tiger salamander (CTS) larval surveys, a jurisdictional wetland delineation, and tree survey. Mapped all suitable CTS habitat within and bordering the project boundaries, prepared Biological Assessments (consistent with the federal Endangered Species Act) for CTS, steelhead, and California freshwater shrimp, and maintained a GIS database of all collected data. Coordinated with the USFWS regarding potential impacts to federally-listed species. U.C. Santa Cruz Ranch View Terrace and McHenry Library EIRs, Santa Cruz County. Prepared the biological resources EIR chapters for the Ranch View Terrace and McHenry Library projects at U.C. Santa Cruz. Issues included indirect impacts to seeps and associated special-status plant species, the effect of altered surface runoff on special-status cave dwelling invertebrates, and potential impacts to the federally- listed Ohlone tiger beetle and California red-legged frog. Mitigation measures were developed to address all project-related impacts to biological resources and responses were prepared for all public comments on the biological resources chapter of the Draft EIR. SR 101 Implementation Plan, Santa Clara County. The study area included the portion of SR 101 from just west of Airport Parkway to just east of Coyote Creek, as well as surrounding industrial and commercial areas. The evaluation served to identify areas that contain sensitive biological resources. All habitats were generally characterized, the potential occurrence of special-status plant and wildlife species was evaluated, and sensitive and jurisdictional habitats (e.g., riparian habitat, wetlands) were identified. Recommendations were made regarding sensitive biological resources that should be avoided and future biological studies that should be conducted. Helios Energy Research Facility and Computational Research Facility EIRs, Alameda County. Both project sites are located on the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory campus. Prepared the biological resources sections of both documents and responded to public comments. Key issues included potential impacts to the federally-listed Alameda whipsnake and to jurisdictional wetlands. Pelandale/McHenry Specific Plan EIR, Stanislaus County. Prepared the biological resources section of the EIR. The 85-acre Specific Plan site is located in the City of Modesto and contains undeveloped land bordered by urban uses. Protocol surveys for nesting burrowing owls were conducted and the site’s value as Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat was evaluated. Mitigation measures were developed to address all project- related impacts to biological resources. Lower Pinole Creek Demonstration Project, Contra Costa County. Managed and participated in the jurisdictional wetland delineation, rare plant surveys, and plant communities mapping. Prepared the biological resources section of the Initial Study. Issues evaluated included potential impacts to California red- legged frog, California clapper rail, California black rail, steelhead, salt marsh harvest mouse, and western pond turtle. Conducted the required biological monitoring for state and federally listed species and nesting birds. Pinole Creek Steelhead Habitat Mapping, Contra Costa County. Prepared the Lower Pinole Creek Steelhead Assessment for the Contra Costa RCD. The project was undertaken to assess the quality of fisheries habitat in lower Pinole Creek and its potential to support steelhead. The study area included the portion of Pinole Creek from Highway I-80 upstream to the Pinole City limit (approximately 2.6 miles upstream). The assessment was coordinated with a parallel assessment conducted by the EBMUD in the upper part of the Pinole Creek watershed. Centennial Specific Plan Draft Biota Report, Los Angeles County. Assisted in the preparation of the Draft Biota Report for the 12,000-acre Centennial Specific Plan project site located on Tejon Ranch. The report incorporated the results of focused surveys for rare plants, burrowing owl, California red-legged frog, western pond turtle, Tehachapi slender salamander, yellow-blotched salamander, and small mammals. All resources on the project site under the jurisdiction of the ACOE and/or CDFG were delineated. The report also included an in depth study of wildlife movement pathways (including the use of trail/infrared cameras) and the project site’s role as part of a regional wildlife movement corridor. Polo Ranch EIR, Santa Cruz County. Prepared the biological resources section of the EIR. The 114-acre project site is located in Scotts Valley and contains populations of two federally Endangered plant species (i.e., Scotts Valley spineflower and Scotts Valley polygonum), as well as other special-status plant species. A review was conducted of the biological documentation prepared for the site between 1998 and 2003, and the adequacy of the documentation was evaluated. Responses were prepared to public comments. Bean Creek Estates Mitigated Negative Declaration, Santa Cruz County. Prepared the biological resources section of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Three federally-listed species occur on the project site, including Mount Hermon June beetle, Santa Cruz wallflower, and Ben Lomond spineflower. The document was written to be consistent with the anticipated requirements of a pending Habitat Conservation Plan. Incorporated/designed mitigation measures to protect and manage for federally-listed species within a designated open space area. 100 Mayfield EIR, Santa Clara County. Prepared the biological resources chapter of the EIR. The project site is located in an urban location, partially within both the City of Mountain View and City of Palo Alto. Worked with the project arborist in identifying the relative preservation priority of Heritage trees and tree groups. Other issues evaluated included use of the trees by nesting and migrating birds. Responses were prepared for all public comments on the biological resources chapter of the Draft EIR. Capitola Expansion and Renovation EIR, Santa Cruz County. Prepared the biological resources chapter of the EIR. The site borders Soquel Creek and associated riparian habitats. Issues evaluated included potential impacts to steelhead, California red-legged frog, and western pond turtle. Mitigation measures were developed to address all project-related impacts to biological resources and responses were prepared for all public comments on the biological resources chapter of the Draft EIR. Monarch Village EIR, Santa Cruz County. Prepared the biological resources chapter of the EIR. The project site is located in Santa Cruz, adjacent to Moore Creek. Issues evaluated included potential impacts to adjacent riparian habitat and associated special-status wildlife species, including California red-legged frog and western pond turtle. Indirect impacts resulting from increased human and domestic animal presence near the creek zone were also evaluated. Mitigation measures were developed to address all project-related impacts to biological resources and responses were prepared for all public comments on the biological resources chapter of the Draft EIR. Riverwalk and Del Rio Hills Projects, Solano County. Prepared the biological resources sections of both EIRs. The Riverwalk project site is approximately 240-acres and the Del Rio Hills project site is approximately 480-acres. Key biological resources issues included the loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat, the fill of jurisdictional wetlands, and indirect impacts associated with increased human presence and increased light and glare. Mitigation measures were developed to reduce all project-related impacts to a less than significant level. Flying J Truck Stop, Fairfield, Solano County. Prepared the biological resources section of the EIR. Key biological issues included the loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat and potential impacts to burrowing owls. Mitigation measures were developed to reduce all project-related impacts to a less than significant level. Phoenix Lake Road Pipeline Seismic Reliability Project, Marin County. Prepared a Biological Assessment (BA) on behalf of the Marin Municipal Water District. The BA was provided to the USFWS as part of the Section 7 Consultation conducted for the project. Key issues included potential impacts to steelhead, Coho salmon, northern spotted owl, and California red-legged frog. Watsonville Home Depot EIR, Santa Cruz County. Prepared the biological resources chapter of the EIR. Key issues evaluated included potential direct and indirect impacts to riparian habitat and associated special- status wildlife species, and the potential loss of Santa Cruz tarplant (a state-listed species). North County Corridor Project, Stanislaus County. Three road alignments were evaluated that span a length of approximately 26 miles between Highway 99 near Salida to Highway 120 just east of Oakdale. The biological evaluation served to characterize onsite habitats, provide a preliminary evaluation of the potential for special-status plant and wildlife species and sensitive habitats to occur, and to identify any biological constraints that could necessitate modifying the location of the alignments. Ohlone College 2012 Facilities Master Plan Project EIR, Alameda County. Prepared the biological resources section of the EIR and responded to public comments. Key issues evaluated included potential impacts to special-status bird species and roosting bats. Mitigation measures were developed to reduce all potential impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level. Ohlone College Photovoltaic Solar Energy System Project, Alameda County. Prepared Biological Habitat Evaluation Reports for solar installation sites on the Newark and Fremont Campuses. The evaluations were conducted to identify and characterize onsite and surrounding habitats and land uses, to identify any sensitive or jurisdictional habitats present, to assess the potential of the onsite habitats to support special- status plant and wildlife species, and to evaluate potential project-related impacts to sensitive biological resources. Evergreen Valley College 2025 Facilities Master Plan EIR, Santa Clara College. Prepared the biological resources section of the EIR and responded to public comments. Key issues evaluated included potential impacts to burrowing owl, white-tailed kite, Cooper's hawk, and roosting bats. Mitigation measures were developed to reduce all potential impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level. Foothill College Master Plan EIR, Santa Clara County. Prepared the biological resources chapter of the Master Plan EIR. The campus is bisected by Adobe Creek and is located in an area of sparse development. Primary issues included impacts to a riparian corridor and associated special-status wildlife species and the loss of burrowing owl habitat. Mitigation measures were developed to address all project-related impacts to biological resources and responses were prepared for all public comments on the biological resources chapter of the draft EIR. California State University (CSU) East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan EIR, Alameda County. Prepared the biological resources section of the EIR and responded to public comments. Key issues evaluated included potential impacts to special-status plants, burrowing owl, white-tailed kite, Cooper's hawk, peregrine falcon, and roosting bats. Mitigation measures were developed to reduce all potential impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level. Subsequent work was conducted for the Campus to protect peregrine falcons during building demolition activities. PG&E Valve Lot Relocation Project, Solano County. Prepared the Biological Evaluation Report and assisted in the preparation of the Caltrans NES. The project included the relocation of a PG&E valve lot and installation of new gas pipelines connecting the existing pipeline system to the new valve lot. Key issues evaluated included potential impacts to California red-legged frog, Swainson's hawk foraging habitat, and jurisdictional wetlands. *Additional project profiles available upon request JAKE H. SCHWEITZER, Senior Ecologist/GIS Specialist EDUCATION B.A. Physical Geography (concentration in ecology and geographic information science), University of California, Berkeley, 1995. Recipient of Lucille McClish Oberlander Award “for Outstanding Achievement in Physical Geography.” EMPLOYMENT HISTORY Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting (VNLC) Senior Ecologist/GIS Specialist 2003 - present Wetlands and Water Resources Wetland Ecologist/GIS Specialist Consultant 2001 - 2005 U.C. Berkeley College of Natural Resources, CAMFER Lab Ecologist/GIS Specialist Research Assistant 2000 - 2001 Applied Geographics GIS Technical Manager 1997 - 2000 City of Oakland, Measure I Emergency Response System GIS Technician 1996 - 1997 U.C. Berkeley Map Library Assistant Librarian 1993 - 1996 PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY Mr. Schweitzer combines 13 years of experience as a professional vegetation and wetland ecologist with over 18 years of experience in cartography and geographic information science (GIS, remote sensing/image analysis, and GPS technology). His ecological focus has been in botanical and wetland sciences. He holds federal and state permits to survey for listed fairy shrimp, California red-legged frog, and California tiger salamander and is certified in the vegetation mapping techniques developed by the California Native Plant Society and California Department of Fish and Wildlife. He has conducted surveys and produced vegetation and wetland maps at various scales for numerous projects throughout California. Mr. Schweitzer has been a docent for the past nine years at the East Bay Regional Park Botanic Garden, teaching native California plant ecology to the public. Mr. Schweitzer has applied his skills to a wide array of projects, from surveying and modeling threats posed by Sudden Oak Death Syndrome, to performing large-scale botanical and aquatic wildlife surveys, to designing habitat restoration projects. He has served as lead field ecologist and GIS specialist for many of VNLC’s regional conservation and land use projects from the Bay Area to the San Joaquin Valley and Sierra Nevada Foothills. He has most recently led survey and mapping efforts at the 8,000-acre Walker Ridge Proposed Wind Energy Site (Colusa and Lake Counties), the 1,600-acre Tres Vaqueros Wind Energy Site (Contra Costa County), the 1,300-acre Calabazas Creek Open Space Preserve (Sonoma County), and the 16,000-acre Rancho Arroyo Seco Land Use and Mitigation Bank Project (Western Amador County). He is currently overseeing a federally funded project involving the propagation and reintroduction of the critically endangered large-flowered fiddleneck (Amsinckia grandiflora) into its historic range, and is also managing a project involving surveys and mapping biological resources on private ranchlands throughout California’s Central Coast Ranges. REPRESENTATIVE PROJECT EXPERIENCE SELECTED BOTANICAL AND AQUATIC RESOURCE SURVEYS Calabazas Creek Open Space Preserve Biological Resource Surveys (Sonoma County, CA). Senior ecologist and project manager. Conducting and managing various biological surveys in support of a comprehensive management plan for this 1,300-acre open space preserve for the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District. The Preserve encompasses oak woodland, mixed evergreen forest, chaparral, riparian forest, seasonal wetland, and grassland habitats. On-going site surveys include special-status plant surveys, plant community mapping, noxious weed mapping, sudden oak death occurrence mapping, encroaching Douglas fir mapping, California freshwater shrimp surveys, amphibian surveys, and jurisdictional wetland delineation. Results to date include the documentation of four special-status plant species and four special- status animal species. (VNLC, April 2013 - Present) Walker Ridge Botanical Resource Surveys (Colusa and Lake Counties, CA). Senior botanist and project manager. Conducted special-status plant surveys and plant community mapping on 8,100 acres of Bureau of Land Management property along the border of Colusa and Lake Counties. Surveys were conducted to assess the potential effects of installing wind turbines along the crest of the Ridge. The project site encompasses extensive serpentinite rock outcroppings which support several sensitive plant communities and numerous special-status plant taxa. Provided a complete botanical resources report, including a floristic inventory as well as documentation and mapping of sensitive botanical resources and plant communities. (VNLC, 2010 - 2011) Rancho Arroyo Seco Sensitive Biological Resource Surveys (Amador County, CA). Senior ecologist and field surveys manager. On-going surveys are focused on locating and mapping special-status plants, amphibians, wetland habitats, and aquatic invertebrates on 16,000-acre ranch. The land owner is interested in documenting all sensitive biological resources on the ranch. The site is situated within a transitional zone between grassland and oak woodlands and includes extensive Ione Manzanita Chaparral habitat. Providing documentation and mapping of all sensitive botanical and aquatic wildlife resources. (VNLC, 2007 - Present) Concord Naval Weapons Station (CNWS) Botanical Surveys (Contra Costa County, CA). Senior botanist and project manager. Conducted botanical and reconnaissance-level wetland surveys on over 5,000 acres of the “Inland Area” of the CNWS, which is in the process of being transferred to private entities and converted to a mix of development and open space. Provided a complete botanical resources report, including a floristic inventory as well as documentation and mapping of sensitive botanical resources, noxious weeds, and plant communities to be included in EIR for the project. (VNLC, 2008) Tres Vaqueros Repower Project (Contra Costa County, CA). Senior botanist and project manager. Conducted botanical and reconnaissance-level wetland and wildlife surveys on over 1,300-acre project site near Altamont Pass, where additional wind turbines are proposed to be added to this important wind resource area. Provided complete floristic inventory, list of sensitive botanical and wildlife resources, and habitat map to be included in the CEQA process. (VNLC, 2008 - 2011) Sears Point Property Restoration and Management Plan Project (Sonoma County, CA). Ecologist, surveyor and spatial analyst. Conducted surveys and analyses of watersheds and aquatic wildlife habitats and assisted in the development of an upland and seasonal wetland habitat management plan for this 2,300-acre conservation easement. The site extends from Sears Point to the margin of San Pablo Bay in southeastern Sonoma County, California. The management plan is focused on the conservation and enhancement of grasslands, riparian woodlands, vernal pools, and seasonal creeks, and the control of invasive species, including bullfrogs and noxious weeds. (VNLC, 2005 - 2006) Caltrans ‘Madera Pools’ In-house Mitigation Bank Project (Madera County, CA). Ecologist, surveyor, and spatial analyst. Conducted botanical and wetland boundary surveys for biological assessment report, and delineated vernal pools and swales for creation, enhancement and restoration according to historic ecological conditions. Developed detailed wetland design specifications. This 200-acre project site represents an in-house mitigation bank for Caltrans in the San Joaquin Valley service area. (VNLC, 2003 - 2009) Integrated Regional Wetland Monitoring (SF Bay Estuary, CA). Ecologist, surveyor and spatial analyst. Analyzed conditions of natural and restored wetlands, pared according to local environmental setting, from the western delta to San Pablo Bay. This on-going study for CalFed seeks to understand and document ecological differences between relatively undisturbed and restored wetland environments in the San Francisco Bay Delta region, in order to provide additional guidance in future wetland restoration projects. (Wetlands and Water Resources, 2003 - 2005) Triangle Marsh Tidal Wetland Enhancement (Marin County, CA). Ecologist, surveyor and landscape model designer. Analyzed existing conditions and built models of restoration alternatives of this small tidal wetland enhancement project sponsored by the Marin Audubon Society. Involved in planning and implementation of channel excavation, berm construction and public access platform. (Wetlands and Water Resources, 2003 - 2005) 19 Highland Avenue Page 10 Creek and CEQA Comments June 1, 2016 10 Attachment B: Wood Biological Consulting January 28, 2008 report January 28, 2008 Geier & Geier Consulting, Inc. P.O. Box 5054 Berkeley, CA 94705-5054 RE: Riparian Habitat Assessment and Biological Peer Review, 19 Highland Avenue, Los Gatos Dear Fritz: Enclosed please find a map showing what I consider to be the outer limits of the riparian zone for the 1-acre Orphan property located at 19 Highland Avenue in the Town of Los Gatos. This letter presents (1) a characterization of the conditions on site, (2) a discussion of the environmental and biological significance of the riparian zone, (3) a discussion of the limits of the riparian zone, (4) a determination of appropriate riparian setbacks, and (5) a discussion of the regulatory authority over creeks and riparian habitats. Also included is a brief peer review of the biotic constraints analysis prepared by H.T. Harvey & Associates (1997). This analysis is based on a single reconnaissance-level site inspection of the subject property performed on January 3, 2008, and a review of the proposed site plan and tree inventory plan. During the present survey, only the portion of the property south of the creek channel was surveyed; the south-facing slope at the northwestern corner of the property was not analyzed. 1. Site Characterization of the Highland Avenue Property The Highland Avenue property consists of a narrow parcel situated along an unnamed natural surface tributary to Los Gatos Creek. The parcel is bordered by Highland Avenue to the south and the water course to the north; the western end of the parcel extends up the hillside on the opposite side of the creek from the road. Single-family residences border the property to the north and west, with an undeveloped hillside to the south and a continuation of the open drainage upstream to the east. WOOD BIOLOGICAL CONSULTING 65 Alta Hill Way Walnut Creek, CA 94595 Tel: (925) 899-1282 Fax: (925) 939-4026 e-mail: wood-biological@mindspring.com z Page 2 January 28, 2008 The subject property is situated in a narrow valley or side drainage at between 60 and 100 feet in elevation. An incised, meandering stream channel, flowing from east to west extends along the northern edge of the valley floor. The parcel has a relatively short but steep bank on the south side, extending downward from Highland Avenue to an abandoned but presumably historic flood terrace. The flood terrace is as little as 16 feet to as much as 45 feet wide between the toe of the slope and the south bank of the creek channel. The subject property is heavily wooded, supporting a dense canopy of mature native trees dominated by California bay (Umbellularia californica) and coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). Other native trees present on site are California buckeye (Aesculus californica) and blue oak (Quercus douglasii). A cluster of non-native blue gum trees (Eucalyptus globulus) is present at the western end of the property, and a single blue gum is present at the upstream (eastern) end of the site. The understory, particularly on the north-facing slope below Highland Avenue, is dominated by the non-native herbaceous species periwinkle (Vinca major). The site does not support any wetland or riparian vegetation, i.e., plant species typically associated with or restricted to aquatic environments (see definitions in Section 3, below). All of the native tree species present are commonly associated with upland settings and are not dependent on the presence of an elevated ground water table. A tree inventory of the subject property was prepared for the applicant (see the attached Sheet T-2). The tree inventory shows the location of all trees on a topographic map and summarizes the species, size and condition for each tree on site. The unnamed tributary to Los Gatos Creek is presumed to be a second or third order intermittent stream. Downstream of the property, the stream course is directed into a concrete-lined channel, which ultimately drains into a buried culvert. The low-gradient stream enters the property from the east at approximately 72 feet in elevation and exits the site in the west at 60 feet in elevation, traversing approximately 320 feet. The banks of the creek channel are incised, scoured, and show some evidence of bank failure especially in the meanders. On site, the channel varies in width at the scour line from 3 to 5 feet, with widths at top of bank ranging from 6 to 11 feet. The stream is shown as a “blue-line” water course on the USGS topographic map and the channel qualifies as a waters of the U.S. and a waters of the State, subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act (as administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers1 [USACE] and the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board2 [RWQCB]) and the California Fish and Game Code3 (as administered by the California Department of Fish and Game [CDFG]), respectively. Although on site the stream course on site is unimproved, supporting natural meanders, riffles and pools with a sandy/gravelly substrate with cobbles, it is not known to support 1 Pursuant to Section 404 2 Pursuant to Section 401 3 Pursuant to Section 1600, et seq. z Page 3 January 28, 2008 native fish populations. The stream course empties into a buried culvert running beneath the Town of Los Gatos and is not day-lighted until reaching Los Gatos Creek, approximately 2.5 miles downstream of the subject property. Based on an assessment of existing tree locations and canopy dimensions in relation to the creek channel, and an evaluation of site topography, the outward edge of the riparian zone was delimited (see the attached figure). This line roughly corresponds to the toe of the south slope and is based on a presumed influence of specific trees on the historic flood terrace and hence the active creek channel. The rationale for this determination is described in Section 3, below. 2. Environmental and Biological Significance of the Riparian Zone Riparian vegetation plays a crucial role in stabilizing the cross-section geometry in alluvial rivers and streams (Mount 1995). Intertwined roots of woody plants physically hold the soil together, resisting lateral forces of surface flows that would erode the channel banks. The canopy of trees, shrubs and vines intercept raindrops, lessening the force with which they strike the surface of the ground. Removal of forest canopy in riparian areas increases runoff rates and velocities, decreases infiltration and groundwater recharge, leads to erosion and sedimentation, and increases water turbidity, among other effects. The riparian zone is at the interface between upland and wetland or aquatic systems. Biologically, healthy riparian zones are species diverse, highly productive environments, providing structural diversity, breeding and foraging opportunities for a wide host of organisms. In California, 25 percent of mammal, 80 percent of amphibian, and 40 percent of reptiles are limited to or dependent on riparian habitats, and over 135 species of California birds depend on or prefer riparian habitats. (Sorenson 1989). Of the 3,011 plant and animal species in California that are considered rare, 728 (24.2 percent) occur in riparian, wetland or other aquatic habitats. It is estimated that as much as 89 percent of the extent of riparian areas in California have been lost or degraded since colonization (Noss and Peters 1995). Riparian vegetation is particularly critical for the support and maintenance of native fisheries. Tree canopies shade the surface of flowing streams, keeping water temperatures low. Riparian vegetation preserves water quality by restricting erosion and sedimentation. Tree roots stabilize channel banks and contribute to the formation of riffles and pools, which are essential for breeding, feeding, and over-summering. Riparian vegetation also slows the movement of water downstream and through the soil profile, resulting in its gradual release into stream channels, prolonging the availability of surface water into the dry summer season. Large woody debris creates hiding spaces for frye and adult fish, and leaf litter promotes invertebrate populations, an essential food source for fish species. z Page 4 January 28, 2008 In their publication User Manual: Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams, the Santa Clara Valley Water Resources Protection Collaborative (SCVWRPC 2006) emphasizes the vital role of riparian vegetation in “maintaining stream stability, providing valuable wildlife habitat, and moderating downstream flooding4”, as well as regulating water quality by filtering pollutants from stormwater, such as oil and grease from roadways, fertilizer runoff from lawns, and excess sediments from upstream. Specifically, the stream-side environment supports riparian vegetation and the functions riparian vegetation provides. Riparian vegetation benefits terrestrial species, as well as semi-aquatic amphibians and reptiles and fish. Such habitat functions include: • Sediment stabilization: provided by riparian trees, shrubs, and grasses. • Shading and water temperature moderation: provided by mature riparian shrubs and trees. • Overhanging escape cover: provided by shrubs and grasses near the stream edge. • Coarse particulate organic matter: organic material dropping into the stream in the form of leaves, insects, etc., that provide input for aquatic food webs. • Bird breeding and foraging habitat: provided by mature native riparian species, such as cottonwoods and willows, oaks, other trees, shrubs, forbs, grasses, and the streambank itself. • Foraging, refugia, aestivation, and breeding habitat for semi-aquatic amphibian and reptile species: provided by low vegetation, rocks, downed materials, and the streambanks itself. • Foraging, breeding, hibernacula, and dispersal habitat for mammals: provided by the riparian vegetation and the streambanks substrate. 3. Defining the Limits of the Riparian Zone As defined by the SCVWRPC (2006), the term riparian5 generally means: 1) On, or pertaining to, the banks of a stream. 2) Pertaining to the banks and other adjacent, terrestrial (as opposed to aquatic) environs of freshwater bodies, watercourses, and surface-emergent aquifers (e.g., springs, seeps, oases), whose imported waters provide soil moisture significantly in excess of that otherwise available through local precipitation – soil moisture to potentially support a mesic vegetation distinguishable from that of the adjacent more xeric upland. The SCVWRPC defines riparian vegetation6 as: 4 page 4.3 5 page 11.4 6 page 11.5 z Page 5 January 28, 2008 2) Vegetation growing on or near the banks of a stream or other body of water on soils that exhibit some wetness characteristics during some portion of the growing season. 3) Vegetation that occurs along watercourse, and is structurally or floristically distinct from nearby, non streamside vegetation. 4) Riparian vegetation is terrestrial vegetation that grows beside rivers, streams, and other freshwater bodies and that depends on these water sources for soil moisture greater than would otherwise be available from local precipitation. Trees and shrubs native to the Santa Clara Valley and eastern foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains characteristic of riparian habitats include alder (Alnus spp.), willows (Salix spp.), cottonwood (Populus spp.), dogwood (Cornus spp.), box elder (Acer negunda var. californica), California sycamore (Platanus racemosa), and Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), among others. The mapping of riparian vegetation on a given property is a relatively simple task that can be achieved by identifying the riparian plant species associated with a particular watercourse and delimiting the canopy edge on an aerial photograph or topographic map. However, for projects regulated under the California Lake and Streambed Alteration Program7, the CDFG routinely extends its jurisdiction to include upland species when growing adjacent to water courses. Species normally associated with upland habitats such as oaks (Quercus spp.), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), and California bay (Umbellularia californica), among others, may be regarded as riparian if such trees exert an ecological influence on the aquatic environment of the stream course. Although no typical riparian habitat is present on the subject property, the rationale for determining the limits of the riparian zone, as shown on the attached figure, is based on the following limits claimed by the CDFG (see Section 5, below), as currently applied pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code8. These limits are generally applied to the outer edge of the dripline of native trees whose canopies extend over the tops of bank of a regulated stream course. A tree need not be rooted within a creek channel to be considered part of the riparian zone. For example, in areas where there is a continuous canopy of native trees extending beyond the top of bank, the CDFG will assume that they contribute to the habitat values for fish and wildlife species that occupy, or could occupy the channel (CDFG Warden N. Kozicki, pers. comm. to M. Wood, 2004; CDFG Environmental Specialist D. Johnston, pers. comm. to M. Wood, 2007). Specifically, riparian trees provide shade and contribute woody and leaf debris on the channel banks, thereby enhancing wildlife habitat values. 4. Determining Appropriate Riparian Setbacks or Buffers 7 California Fish and Game Code, Section 1600, et. seq. 8 §1600, et seq. z Page 6 January 28, 2008 Background The CDFG requires a Streambed Alteration Agreement (see Section 5, below) for any modifications to a creek channel below the top of bank. When authorization for modifications to a stream channel from the CDFG is required, the agency’s permit will typically include conditions intended to preserve the integrity of the creek and its associated riparian habitats. A standard condition of most CDFG permits is the designation of a setback or buffer between the top of bank or outer edge of riparian habitat, whichever is greater, and the closest edge of pavement, structures, or actively used yards or playfields. Even without the need for a permit, the CDFG may comment on the CEQA document and make similar recommendations to the lead agency. Riparian setbacks, as routinely specified by the CDFG, may vary from as little as 10 feet to as much as 100 feet or more from the top of bank or outward edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is greater. The actual setback width is based on habitat values, size of watershed, connectivity to open space lands upstream and/or downstream, wildlife usage (as a corridor), and presence of federally or State-listed endangered, threatened, rare or candidate species. For intensively developed creeksides in urban or suburban settings where there is limited or no function as a significant wildlife corridor, riparian setbacks of as little as 10 feet may be considered adequate from the perspective of the resource agencies. This was the case recently for another project in the Town of Los Gatos 9. For projects not regulated under the Lake and Streambed Alteration Program, i.e., would not result in any impacts below the top of bank of a waters of the State, the creek setback guidelines described by the SCVWRPC (2006) should be conformed to. In most cases, creek setbacks as prescribed by the CDFG and SCVWRPC will be comparable. As defined by the SCVWRPC (2006), a riparian buffer is: Land next to a stream or river that is vegetated, usually with trees and shrubs, that serves as a protective filter for streams. A buffer helps to stabilize stream banks from washing away and to reduce the impact of upland sources of pollution by trapping, filtering, and converting sediments, nutrients, and other chemicals. In addition, a buffer helps supply food, cover, and thermal protection to fish and other wildlife. Riparian buffers can be 300 feet wide or 20 feet wide; it depends on the stream and the land around the stream. In addition to the critical role buffer zones play in protecting the biological values of riparian vegetation and stream habitats, they are also important in providing long-term protection of property and structures from flooding and erosion. According to the SCVWRPC (2006), setbacks for purposes of slope stability are typically measured from the top of bank and vary depending on geomorphic and hydrologic conditions of the 9 15881 Linda Avenue and 15950 Stephanie Lane, September 2007 z Page 7 January 28, 2008 stream, streambank characteristics such as composition and height, potential for instability or erosion, structure loading, and other environmental considerations10. The SCVWRPC (2006) recommends minimum “slope stability protection areas”, measured from top of bank, ranging from as wide as 25 feet for unarmored streams to as little as 10 feet for ephemeral streams. Assessment of Subject Property The subject property does not support riparian vegetation as defined by the SCVWRPC (2006). However, the woodland vegetation on the property is regarded as having an ecological influence on the stream channel by providing wildlife habitat and preserving water quality. The removal of trees and development within the riparian zone, as shown on the attached figure, would therefore be regarded as having an adverse effect on the stream environment. However, since no impacts to the creek channel below the top of bank will occur, only local approvals will be required for this project. Therefore, setbacks and compensation for impacts woodland within the riparian zone are at the discretion of the lead agency. Based on the condition and local context of the creek channel and riparian habitat at the Highland Avenue property, establishment of a 25 foot-wide setback between the top of bank and any permanent structures is consistent with the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Stream (SCVWRPC 2006) as well as standard requirements of the CDFG. In addition, establishment of a 10 foot-wide setback between the top of bank and paved surfaces are also consistent with regional and state guidelines, provided appropriate construction and post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) are designed, implemented and maintained. The Town of Los Gatos’ Tree Protection Ordinance11 specifies that a permit is required for the removal of any tree with a diameter of four inches or greater located on a vacant lot or undeveloped property12. As a condition of issuance of a tree removal permit, the Director of Community Development shall require that two or more replacement trees be planted, based on an assessment of the canopy width of the trees to be removed13. Replacement trees are to be planted on the subject property. However, if replacement trees cannot be reasonably placed on the subject property, the value of the trees to be removed shall be paid to the Town Forest Fund to add or replace trees on public property. This requirement is consistent with standard permit conditions issued by the CDFG and RWQCB for projects of this nature and sites similar to the subject property. As additional compensation for the removal of trees within the riparian zone, the setback should area should be vegetated with appropriate native species, as approved by a qualified habitat restorationist or vegetation ecologist. The objective of such a habitat 10 page 3.5 11 Ordinance 2114, Ch. 29, Div. 2, Sec. 29.10.0950 – 29.10.0985 12 Sec. 29.10.0960(6) 13 Sec. 29.10.0985 z Page 8 January 28, 2008 restoration effort is to replace the sediment and pollutant filtering and wildlife habitat functions of the lost trees, and to improve stability of the creek channel banks. The Town should define monitoring requirements and specific performance criteria to determine the success of the tree planting and riparian vegetation efforts. A draft Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement was issued by the CDFG for development of the subject property on December 8, 2003 (CDFG Notification No. 16000-2003-5246-3). Incorporation of the mitigation measures outlined above are consistent with the permit conditions outlined in the draft agreement; they are also consistent with the Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams (SCVWRPC 2006) and are expected to address the concerns of the RWQCB. 5. Regulatory Authority Over Creeks and Riparian Habitats United States Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972 Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 regulates activities that result in the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. The USACE has the principal authority to regulate discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States. Under the CWA, the USACE does not regulate the removal of riparian vegetation, per se. However, if a project involves any work in a creek channel below the Ordinary High Water line, which generally corresponds to the two-year flow line, a permit would be required. If a permit from the USACE is required, they can be expected to place conditions on impacts to riparian vegetation, which could include impact avoidance or minimization, and compensatory mitigation in the form of native tree plantings. California Department of Fish and Game Streambed Alteration – Section 1600 Series Permit The CDFG administers Sections 1600-1607 of the California Fish and Game Code. These sections address any project that will “(1) divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow or the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake designated by the department [the CDFG] in which there is at any time an existing fish or wildlife resource or from which these resources derive benefit, (2) use materials from the streambeds designated by the department, or (3) result in the disposal or deposition of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass in to any river, stream, or lake designated by the department”14. The extent of CDFG jurisdiction is usually bounded by the tops-of-bank or the outermost edges of adjacent riparian vegetation. 14 Section 1601, available on line at www.dfg.ca.gov/1600/ z Page 9 January 28, 2008 Regional Water Quality Control Board Section 401 of the Clean Water Act of 1972 The RWQCB has authority over projects that could result in adverse effects on waters of the state and wetlands, including isolated wetlands not falling under USACE jurisdiction. The RWQCB typically requires mitigation for permanent effects on all wetlands or waters of the State15, based on area as well as linear measurements. A condition of the nationwide permit or individual permit is compliance with Section 401 of the CWA. Pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and USEPA Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, an applicant for a federal permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge into navigable waters must provide a certification from the RWQCB that such discharge will comply with the state water quality standards16. The RWQCB’s policy of no net loss of wetlands typically requires mitigation for all impacts on wetlands before it will issue a water quality certification or waiver. Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act17, the RWQCB is authorized to regulate the discharge of waste that could affect the quality of the State’s waters. “Waste” is broadly defined by the Porter-Cologne Act to include “sewage and any and all other waste substances, liquid, solid, gaseous, or radioactive, associated with human habitation, or of human or animal origin, or from any producing, manufacturing, or processing operation of whatever nature….”18. Concentrated silt or sediment associated with human habitation and harmful to the aquatic environment is “waste” under this section. In addition, the California Attorney General has interpreted this definition to include extraction of sand, gravel or other minerals from a streambed, because it may cause an increase in turbidity and silt in the waters of the stream downstream from the operations. Therefore, even if a federal permit (i.e., a Nationwide Permit for the USACE) is not required, any activity that would result in a discharge of waste which could affect the quality of waters of the State, submittal of a Report of Waste Discharge (ROWD) must be filed with the RWQCB.. When reviewing applications, the RWQCB focuses on ensuring that projects do not adversely affect the “beneficial uses” associated with waters of the state. Generally, the RWQCB defines beneficial uses to include all of the resources, services and qualities of 15 Waters of the State are defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” California Water Code §13050(e). These include nearly every and all surface or ground water in the state, or tributaries thereto, and include drainage features outside USACE jurisdiction, e.g., dry and ephemeral/seasonal stream beds and channels, etc., isolated wetlands, e.g., vernal pools, seeps, springs and other groundwater-supplied wetlands, etc., and storm drains and flood control channels. 16 23 CCR 3830 et seq. 17 Cal. Water Code §§13000-14920 18 Cal. Water Code §13050 z Page 10 January 28, 2008 aquatic ecosystems and underground aquifers that benefit the state of California. Numerous beneficial uses have been identified, including agricultural supply, wildlife habitat, recreation, groundwater recharge, and municipal and domestic water supply. In most cases, the RWQCB seeks to protect these beneficial uses by requiring the integration water quality control measures into projects that will result in discharge into waters of the state. For most construction projects, RWQCB requires the use of construction and post-construction best management practices (BMPs). In the case of constructing new impervious surfaces, incorporation of BMPs such as detention ponds, grassy swales, sand filters, modified roof drains, and other features, will speed project approval from RWQCB. Development setbacks from creek are also favored by RWQCB as they often lead to less creek-related impacts in the future. Proper integration of these and other features into project design will greatly decrease the necessary negotiation with RWQCB and speed the project approval process. Local Approvals Because the project would not have any direct impacts below the top of bank and would not impact any regulated habitats, i.e., wetlands or riparian habitat, it would not be regulated by the USACE19, CDFG20, or RWQCB21. Since there is no permitting nexus, these agencies could only comment on the project through the CEQA process, leaving it to the discretion of the lead agency to incorporate their concerns into any conditions of approval. Because the Town has adopted the Guidelines and Standards proposed by the SCVWRPC (2006), the anticipated conditions of approval are expected to satisfy the concerns of federal and State regulatory agencies. 6. Other Biotic Constraints An analysis of biotic constraints at the subject property was prepared by H.T. Harvey & Associates (1997). The analysis accurately describes the current conditions of the site. I ran a search of the current California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB 2007) to see if additional special-status species have been recorded in the project vicinity and for which additional analysis is warranted. Although additional special-status species have indeed been recorded in the project region, based on an evaluation of the subject property, no additional analysis for special-status species is warranted. One animal worth mentioning is steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus). The Central California coast Evolutionarily Significant Unit of this subspecies is listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. Surveys conducted in Los Gatos Creek in 1995 revealed no positive findings for steelhead although steelhead were found there in 1998 and 2001 (Leidy et al. 2005). Although the stream course on the subject property could be considered to provide marginally suitable habitat for steelhead, given the intermittent nature of the surface flows and, more significantly, the extent of undergrounding of the channel 19 Pursuant to Clean Water Act, Section 404 20 Pursuant to California Fish and Game Code, Section 1600, et seq. 21 Pursuant to Clean Water Act, Section 401 z Page 11 January 28, 2008 connecting with Los Gatos Creek, the potential for steelhead runs to occur here is extremely low. I hope this assists you and the Town in evaluating this project and making a determination regarding the appropriate creek setbacks. If I can be of further assistance, please don’t hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Michael Wood Enclosures: 19 Highland Avenue Riparian Boundary Map LITERATURE CITED California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). 2007. Data Base Print-out for Los Gatos, San Jose West, San Jose East, Santa Teresa Hills, Castle Rock Ridge, and Cupertino USGS 7.5’ Quadrangles. RareFind 3.1.0. California Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Division. Sacramento, California. Information dated December 31, 2007. H.T. Harvey & Associates. 1997. Biotic Constraints Analysis, No. 19 Highland Avenue, Los Gatos, California. Unpublished technical report prepared by Angelo Orphan, Santa Clara, California. November 10. Leidy, R.A., G.S. Becker, and B.N. Harvey. 2005. Historic Distribution and Current Status for Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Streams of the San Francisco Estuary, California. Center for Ecosystem Management and Restoration, Oakland, California. Mount, J.F. 1995. California Rivers and Streams: the Confluence between Fluvial Process and Land Use. Univ. of Calif. Press, Berkeley, California. 359 pp. Noss, R. F., and R. L. Peters. 1995. Endangered Ecosystems: A Status Report on America's Vanishing Habitat and Wildlife. Defenders of Wildlife. Washington, DC. Santa Clara Valley Water Resources Protection Collaborative (SCVWRPC). 2005. Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams. Santa Clara Valley Water Resources Protection Collaborative. Revised July 2006. Available online at http://www.valleywater.org/media/pdf/Creekwise/Guidelines_chapters/Title%20page %20and%20aknowledgements.pdf z Page 12 January 28, 2008 Sorenson, J. 1989. Managing Wildlife Associations within Riparian Systems. In: Proceedings of the California Riparian Systems Conference; Protection, Management, and Restoration for the 1990s; 1988 September 22-24; Davis, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-110. Berkeley, CA; Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Forest Service, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. 544 pp. 19 Highland Avenue Page 11 Creek and CEQA Comments June 1, 2016 11 Richard Grassetti Qualifications GRASSETTI ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 7008 BRISTOL DRIVE, BERKELEY CALIFORNIA 94705 PH/FAX: 510 849-2354 A. INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRM Grassetti Environmental Consulting (GECo) is a specialty environmental planning firm with expertise in environmental assessment, CEQA/NEPA compliance analyses, third party review, CEQA project management, and preparation of geologic and water resource studies. The firm focuses on working with clients towards full disclosure of environmental impacts and development of practical mitigation measures for those impacts. Our working ethic is to efficiently ensure full compliance with CEQA/NEPA regulations and guidelines while minimizing duplicative studies and regulatory confusion. We are proficient in preparing responsive environmental documentation for technically complex projects, and can provide our clients with a working understanding of the appropriate level of effort needed to comply with applicable environmental regulations. We also have expertise in preparing peer reviews of CEQA and NEPA documents, and have earned the respect of project proponents and critics alike. We strive to provide our clients with a level of personal service not generally found in larger firms. The firm’s Principal, Mr. Richard Grassetti, has 30 years of experience preparing and reviewing environmental documents throughout California. Mr. Grassetti has worked on over 250 environmental impact reports, initial studies, environmental assessments, and environmental impact statements. He has substantial expertise reviewing environmental assessments for regulatory compliance and technical adequacy, has conducted over 50 peer reviews of NEPA and CEQA documents, and has testified as an expert witness regarding CEQA adequacy issues. He also has prepared various other environmental analyses including environmental constraint assessments and feasibility studies. Mr. Grassetti has experience in both technical analysis and project management for environmental impact assessments of many types of projects including industrial development, power generation projects, airports, waste management and pollution control projects, mixed use urban development, residential projects, recreation/resort developments, planning studies, transportation improvements, and other infrastructure development. GECo works with a group of affiliated environmental professionals on a regular basis. This collaboration provides our clients with a broad range of expertise, without the overhead burden of a large consulting firm. Our goal is to provide our clients with personalized service tailored to their specific needs. Each individual included on a GECo project team is a highly experienced, senior-level professional with extensive experience working for both public- and private-sector clients. Our services range from initial project scoping through project implementation and monitoring. Our staff and affiliates are highly qualified to assist clients in negotiating the maze of environmental compliance regulations. Through these reciprocal working arrangements, we offer technical experts of the highest caliber at modest cost. Our combined skills and experience offer a complete range of environmental assessment services. GECo provides a variety of services in preparation and review of environmental documents and issues. A sampling of our services is provided below. References are available on request. GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 2 • Preparation and Expert Review and Critique of CEQA and NEPA Documents: GECo prepares all types of documents required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), including Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, Environmental Assessments, Environmental Impact Reports, and Environmental Impact Statements. In addition, we offer objective review and critique services for these documents. • Consultant and Project Management Services: GECo can assist your efforts in providing and managing teams of technical consultants for review or preparation of CEQA, NEPA, and other environmental documents. Our experience with local experts and in consultant management can assure quality, cost, and schedule control. • Preparation and Expert Review of Technical Studies: GECo and our affiliated experts provide technical analyses and technical peer reviews. In addition to our in-house capabilities, we have established long-term affiliations with a broad range of technical subcontractors for preparation of specific technical reviews including toxics, air quality, noise, cultural resources, water quality, biological resources, hydrology and geology. • Permitting and Processing: GECo provides assistance in environmental and land use permitting. We can assist attorneys in understanding and completing the permit process in compliance with CEQA, NEPA, Department of Fish and Game, Corps of Engineers, BCDC, and other state, local, and regional agency requirements. • Expert Witness Services: GECo’s Principal, Mr. Richard Grassetti has been accepted as an expert witness in the California Courts, and provides expert witness services in CEQA and NEPA compliance cases. In addition, through our network of subconsultants, we can provide appropriate expert witnesses on a variety of other technical issues. • Land Use Planning: GECo provides assistance with land use planning issues. We have a thorough understanding of California planning law and the practical aspects of its implementation. This allows us to assist our clients in the land use planning process. We typically assist attorneys in the “hands-on” aspects of implementing California planning law. • Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting: GECo has extensive experience reviewing and preparing Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs pursuant to CEQA requirements. We can work with you to develop a format and content that satisfies both your client’s needs and CEQA requirements. GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 3 B. REPRESENTATIVE PROJECT EXPERIENCE CEQA/NEPA COMPLIANCE SEMINARS Mr. Grassetti has conducted numerous CEQA and NEPA compliance seminars for entities including: • San Francisco County Transportation Authority • West Bay Sanitary District • North Coast Resource Management, Inc. • Tetra Tech Inc. • Impact Sciences Inc. • Northwest Environmental Training Center (over 10 workshops) • California State University East Bay (15 years teaching Environmental Impact Assessment) PREPARATION OF CEQA/NEPA DOCUMENTS City of Richmond Development Project Initial Studies. GECo prepared CEQA Initial Studies for three proposed urban development projects in the City of Richmond, CA. These included two multi-family infil development projects and one large (600,000 sq ft.) logistics center. Major issues included traffic, air quality, noise, and historic resources. Client; City of Richmond Planning Department. Bolinas Lagoon Open Space Preserve, Invasive Spartina Management Project Initial Study. The Marin County Open Space District proposed a long-term management plan to control invasive Spartina species in Bolinas Lagoon. The project includes the continued use of hand-pulling/digging, tarping, and pruning stems and flowers, and would add treatment with aquatic herbicide. Regular follow-up monitoring would continue to assure eradication of invasive Spartina from the lagoon. Major issues included biological resources and water quality. Client: Marin County Open Space District. Kent Island Restoration at Bolinas Lagoon Joint Environmental Assessment (EA) and Initial Study (IS). The Marin County Open Space District proposed to restore Kent Island through removal of non-native vegetation from the island and facilitating the natural regeneration of native vegetation, with limited planting. Removal of invasive vegetation was accomplished primarily through salt-water irrigation and manual removal techniques. Major issues included biological resources and water quality. The EA was for the US Army Corps of Engineers permit, and the IS was prepared for the Marin County Open Space District. Client: Marin County Open Space District. Sonoma Creek Marsh Joint Environmental Assessment (EA) and Initial Study (IS). GECo prepared a joint IS/EA for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (San Francisco Bay Region) and the US Fish and Wildlife Service for a plan to enhance tidal marshes and reduce mosquito production in a 300-acre marsh at the mouth of GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 4 Sonoma Creek. Major issues included biological resources, water quality, and vector control. Client: Wetlands and Water Resources and Audubon Society. Prospect Island Tidal Wetland Restoration Project Environmental Impact Report. GECo is providing CEQA technical support and internal expert review for an EIR on restoration of approximately 1500 acres of flooded lands in the northern Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta. Major issues include biological resources, water quality, and changes to hydrology. Client: Stillwater Sciences (for California Department of Water Resources). Upper Putah Creek Restoration Project Program EIR. Mr. Grassetti is managing preparation of a Program Environmental Impact Report on restoration of approximately 21 linear miles of stream channel of Putah Creek, near Davis, CA. Major issues include biological resources, water quality, and land use compatibility. Lead Agency: Solano County Water Agency; Client: Wetlands and Water Resources, for the Putah Creek Conservancy. High Speed Rail EIRs Visual Impacts Assessment. GECo prepared the cumulative impacts assessments for visual impacts for two EIRs on segments of the proposed California High Speed Rail project. Client: WKA Associates. Patterson Pass Road Safety Improvement Project. GECo prepared an Initial Study/Negative declaration for the widening of a portion of Patterson Pass Road in eastern Alameda County. Major issues were biological resources and hydrology. Client: Pacific Biology/Alameda County Public Works Agency. Forward Landfill Expansion Project EIR. GECo is preparing an EIR for a 170-acre expansion of the Forward Landfill in San Joaquin County. This is the third EIR that GECO and its Principal, Richard Grassetti, has prepared for this landfill over a period of 15 years. Major issues include air quality, health and safety, biological resources, and traffic. Client: San Joaquin County Community Development Department. Salt River Ecosystem Restoration Project EIR. GECo prepared an Environmental Impact Report for the restoration of a large area of former marsh and open channel near Ferndale in Humboldt County. The project includes creation of a new seven-mile-long river channel and a 400-acre wetland restoration. Major issues include biological resources, land use, hydrology/flooding, and construction impacts (noise, air quality, traffic.). Client: Humboldt County Resource Conservation District. Aramburu Island Shoreline Protection and Ecological Enhancement Project Initial Study. GECo prepared an Initial Study for a proposal by the Audubon Society to stabilize the shoreline and improve bird and seal habitat on the 34-acre Aramburu Island site in Marin County. Major issues include biological resources, hydrology/flooding, and construction impacts. Client: Wetlands and Water Resources. GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 5 San Francisco PUC WSIP Projects. GECo assisted in the preparation of the San Francisco Public Utility Commission’s Water Supply Improvement Project Program EIR, as well as two other CEQA documents for smaller projects under that program. Major issues include hydrology, water supply, and fisheries. Client: Water Resources Engineering/Orion Associates. Parsons Slough Project CEQA Review: GECo prepared an expanded Initial Study for a tidal sill (dam) project to reduce scour in Parsons Slough, an arm of the ecologically sensitive Elkhorn Slough. Major issues included fisheries, marine mammals, water quality, aesthetics, and construction issues (noise). Client: Vinnedge Consulting/Elkhorn Slough National Estuary Reserve. Hamilton Wetlands/Todds Road CEQA Review. GECo prepared the CEQA Initial Study for an alternative access road for truck traffic to the Hamilton Wetlands Restoration Project to reduce the project’s potential noise impacts. Major issues included noise, biological resources, and cultural resources. Client: California State Coastal Conservancy. San Francisco Bay Water Trail Program EIR. GECo assisted in the preparation of the EIR for a “water trail” for small non-motorized boats throughout San Francisco Bay. The project involves designation of 115 access sites as well as policies for stewardship and education. Major issues include disturbance of birds, marine mammals, water quality, historic resources, and wetlands. Client: California State Coastal Conservancy. Dutch Slough Restoration Project/Oakley Community Park EIR. GECo prepared the EIR for a 1400-acre wetland restoration and 80-acre community park on former diked lands in Oakley. Major issues include fisheries, water quality, historic architectural resources, and wetlands. Client: California State Coastal Conservancy. Vineyard RV Park Expansion Initial Study. GECo prepared the Initial Study for an expansion of a mobile home park in Solano County near Vacaville. Major issues included flooding, biological resources, and traffic. Client: Vineyard RV Park. Pinole Creek Restoration Project Initial Study. GECo prepared the CEQA Initial Study for a 2.5-mile long creek restoration project in the City of Pinole. Major issues included biological resources, flooding, and water quality. Client: City of Pinole. Knobcone Subdivision Initial Study. GECo prepared an Initial Study for a 5-unit subdivision in Richmond. Major issues include geologic hazards and biological resources. Client: City of Richmond. Baxter Creek Restoration Project CEQA Consulting. GECo assisted City of El Cerrito staff in the preparation of an Initial Study for the proposed Baxter Creek Restoration Project. Client: City of El Cerrito. GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 6 West of Fairview Subdivision Supplemental EIR. GECo prepared a Supplemental EIR for a 700-unit residential development in Hollister. Major issues include traffic, biology, and utility services. Client: City of Hollister. American Canyon Initial Studies. GECo prepared two initial studies for commercial and warehouse projects in the City of American Canyon. Major issues include traffic, biological resources, and geology. Client: City of American Canyon. Fallon Villages CEQA Consulting. GECo prepared draft EIR sections end provided CEQA guidance for an 1100-acre planned development in Dublin. Major issues included land use, traffic, traffic, and biological resources. Client: Braddock and Logan Services Pelandale-McHenry Specific Plan. GECo prepared the Specific Plan for an 80-acre residential/commercial development in Modesto. Major issues included land use, traffic, and provision of adequate infrastructure. Client: Meritage Homes Monte Cresta Roadway Extension Initial Study. GECo is preparing an Initial Study/Negative Declaration for a roadway extension in San Juan Hills area of the City of Belmont. Major issues included slope stability and growth inducement. Client: City of Belmont Bethel Island Water Supply Project. GECo prepared and Initial Study for a proposed new water supply system for the community of Bethel Island in Contra Costa County. Major issues included growth inducement, archaeological resources, and biological resources. Client: Bethel Island Municipal Improvement District. San Francisco Bay Estuary Invasive Spartina Control Project EIR/EIS and Addendum. GECo prepared the programmatic EIR/EIS on a plan to control invasive cordgrasses throughout the San Francisco Bay. Major issues included endangered species, visual resources, water quality, and human health and safety. GECo subsequently prepared an addendum for the addition of a new herbicide to the Spartina Control Program. Client: California State Coastal Conservancy. Aptos Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project Initial Study. GECo prepared an Initial Study for the replacement of a storm-damaged sanitary sewer pipeline in Santa Cruz County. Major issues included cultural resources and biological resources. Client: Harris and Associates. Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Supplemental EIR. GECo prepared a Supplemental EIR for an 1100-acre mixed-use project in the City of Dublin. Major issues included traffic, biological resources, public services, noise, and air quality. Clients: Shea Homes and Braddock and Logan Services. Consolidated Forward Landfill Project EIR Update. GECo prepared an EIR for the expansion and consolidation of the Forward Landfill and the Austin Road Landfill near GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 7 Stockton, CA. Major issues include toxics, water quality, traffic, biological resources, and air quality. Client: San Joaquin County Community Development Department. Pleasanton IKEA Initial Study. GECo prepared a Draft Initial Study for a proposed new 300,000 sq. ft. IKEA store in Pleasanton. Major issues included biology, traffic, and visual resources. Client: IKEA Corporation. Central Contra Costa Household Hazardous Waste Facility Studies: GECo assisted Central Contra Costa Sanitary District staff in the preparation of a Planning Study and subsequent CEQA Initial Study on feasibility, siting, and environmental issues associated with the development of a Household Hazardous Waste collection program and facility in Central Contra Costa County. Client: Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. Southwest Richmond Flood Control Project IS. GECo prepared the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for a proposed flood control project in the City of Richmond. Client: City of Richmond. Wickland Oil Martinez Tank Farm Expansion Project EIR Management. GECo served as an extension of City of Martinez Planning Department staff to manage all aspects of the preparation of the CEQA review for a 2,000,000-barrel expansion at Wickland's Martinez oil storage terminal. We prepared the NOP, RFP, assisted in consultant selection, and managed the consultant preparing the EIR on this project. Client: City of Martinez. Austin Road Landfill Expansion Project EIR Update. GECo prepared an Initial Study and Supplemental EIR updating a 1994 EIR for the expansion of the Austin Road Landfill near Stockton, CA. Major issues include water quality, traffic, biological resources, and air quality. Client: San Joaquin County Community Development Department. Wayside Road Sewer Expansion Initial Study. GECo prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for a proposed new sewer system in the Wayside Road area of Portola Valley. Client: West Bay Sanitary District Los Trancos Woods Sewer Expansion Initial Study. GECo prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for a proposed new sewer system in the Los Trancos Woods area of Portola Valley. Client: West Bay Sanitary District Arastradero Road Sewer Expansion Initial Study. GECo prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for a proposed new sewer system in the Arastradero Road area of Portola Valley. Client: West Bay Sanitary District Lower Orinda Pumping Station Initial Study/Negative Declaration. GECo prepared an Initial Study/Negative Declaration for renovating or relocating a wastewater pumping plant in Orinda, CA. Client: Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 8 Shell Martinez Breakout Tanks Project Initial Study. GECo prepared an Initial Study for two proposed new wastewater storage tanks at Shell's Martinez Manufacturing Complex. Major issues included air quality, odors, and visual impacts. Client: City of Martinez. Shell Martinez Biotreater Facility Initial Study. GECo prepared the Initial Study/Negative Declaration for a proposed new biotreater facility for Shell's Martinez Manufacturing Complex wastewater treatment plant. Major issues included water quality, wetlands, growth-inducement, and cumulative impacts. Client: City of Martinez. Vallejo Solar Power Plant Initial Study. GECo prepared a CEQA Initial Study/Negative declaration for a proposed photovoltaic array intended to power a water pumping plant in the City of Vallejo. Major issues included land use compatibility and visual quality. Client: City of Vallejo. Ranch on Silver Creek CEQA Consulting. GECo prepared the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and other CEQA compliance tasks for a large residential/golf course project in San Jose. Client: Sycamore Associates. Morgan Hill Ranch Initial Study Analyses. GECo prepared the Hydrology, Geology, and Hazardous Materials analyses for the Morgan Hill Ranch Mixed Use Project Initial Study. Client: Wagstaff and Associates. East Bay MUD Water Conservation Study. GECo conducted the field portion of a major water conservation survey for the East Bay MUD service area. Client: Water Resource Engineering. East Bay MUD Pipeline CEQA Analyses. GECo prepared technical analyses for two EIRs regarding proposed new East Bay MUD pipeline in Sacramento, San Joaquin, and Calaveras Counties. Client: Uribe & Associates. Sunnyvale Landfill Power Plant CEQA Initial Study. GECo prepared an Initial Study for a proposed landfill gas-fueled power plant at the Sunnyvale Landfill in Santa Clara County. Recommendations for mitigation and further environmental review were prepared. Client: 3E Engineering. Fremont Redevelopment Project Hydrologic Analysis. GECo prepared the hydrology section for an environmental impact report for four redevelopment projects in Fremont. Client: Wagstaff and Associates. Ostrom Road Landfill Hydrologic Analysis. GECo prepared the hydrology section for an environmental impact report on the proposed vertical expansion of an existing Class II landfill in Yuba County. Client: ESA Associates. Pinole Portion of the Bay Trail Hydrologic, Geologic, and CEQA QA/QC Analyses. GECo prepared the hydrologic and geologic analyses for a CEQA Initial Study on a GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 9 half-mile segment of the Bay Trail in the City of Pinole. GECo also provided CEQA process consulting services on this project. Client: Placemakers. Kennedy Park Master Plan Hydrologic and CEQA QA/QC Analyses. GECo prepared the hydrologic analyses for an environmental impact report on a proposed park master plan in the City of Napa. Client: Placemakers. U.S. Navy Bay Area Base Closure and Re-Use Environmental Studies. GECo assisted in the NEPA/CEQA review process for US Navy Base Closures and Re-Use for the San Francisco Bay Area. Work tasks include CEQA compliance overview, internal peer review, quality control reviews, and preparation of technical analyses. Specific projects are summarized below: Mare Island Naval Shipyard EIR/EIS Studies. GECo prepared the hydrology section of the EIR/EIS on the shipyard closure and reuse program, conducted a peer review of the geology section, and conducted QA/QC review of the entire EIR/EIS. Client: Tetra Tech, Inc. Oak Knoll Naval Medical Center EIR/EIS Studies. GECo conducted CEQA/NEPA quality control and peer reviews of the EIS/EIR for disposal and reuse of the Oak Knoll Naval Medical Center EIS/EIR in the City of Oakland. Client: Tetra Tech, Inc. NAS Alameda EIR/EIS Studies. GECo prepared the hydrology section of EIR/EIS on reuse of the Naval Air Station, conducted a peer review of the geology section, and conducted QA/QC review of the entire EIR/EIS. Client: Tetra Tech, Inc. Naval Station Treasure Island EIR/EIS Studies. GECo prepared the hydrology section of the EIR/EIS on reuse of Naval Station Treasure Island, conducted a peer review of the geology section, and conducted QA/QC review of the entire EIR/EIS. Client: Tetra Tech, Inc. Hunters Point Naval Shipyard EIR/EIS. GECo assisted in the responses to comments and peer review of the EIR/EIS for the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in San Francisco. Client: Uribe and Associates. Naval Fuel Depot Point Molate. GECo conducted overall internal peer reviews of several drafts of the EIR/EIS for reuse of the former Naval Fuel Depot Point Molate in Richmond, CA. In addition, we prepared the Noise, Socioeconomics, and Cultural Resources sections of the EIS/EIR. Client: Uribe and Associates. GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 10 CEQA/NEPA PEER REVIEWAND EXPERT WITNESS CONSULTING PROJECTS US Bureau of Land Management, Clark, Lincoln, and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project Draft EIS Peer Review. On behalf of a Native American group, GECo worked with a team of technical experts and attorneys to conduct a peer review and develop comments on an EIS for a project that would involve a number of wellfields and a 300+ mile pipeline to extract water from northeastern Nevada and deliver it to the Las Vegas area. Major issues included hydrology, biological resources, water supply, air quality, environmental justice, and cultural resources. The GECo team prepared a 110-page comment letter for the BLM’s consideration. Client: Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation. Finger Avenue Subdivision EIR Review. GECo conducted an intensive peer review of an EIR on a 10-unit residential development in Redwood City, CA. Client: Finger Avenue Pride Committee Jackson State Forest CEQA Review. GECo prepared a detailed analysis of the CEQA adequacy of the California Department of Forestry’s EIR on a new management plan for the 40,000 acre Jackson State Forest. Major issues included forestry practices, water quality, and biological resources. Client: Dharma Cloud Foundation Los Angeles Airport Arrival Enhancement Project Environmental Assessment NEPA Peer Review. GECo prepared a peer review and expert declarations regarding the adequacy of the NEPA Environmental Assessment for rerouting of flight paths for aircraft arriving at Los Angeles International Airport. Major issues included adequacy of assessment of noise effects on traditional cultural practices of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians. Client: Law Offices of Alexander & Karshmer. St Mary’s College High School Master Plan Peer Reviews. GECo conducted peer reviews of two Initial Studies for proposed expansions of a high school. Major issues included noise and traffic. Client: Peralta Perk Neighborhood Association. Lawson’s Landing EIR Peer Review. GECo conducted detailed per reviews of numerous CEQA documents for the proposed master plan for the Lawson’s Landing mobile home park and campground in Marin County. Client: Environmental Action Committee of West Marin. Coaches Field Initial Study Peer Reviews. GECo conducted two peer reviews of the CEQA documentation for proposed lighted ballfield and park projects in the City of Piedmont. GECo’s review resulted in the original Initial Study being withdrawn and an EIR being prepared. Client: Private Party. Metropolitan Oakland International Airport Development Plan Environmental Impact Report CEQA Review. GECo performed a critical review and assisted in the preparation of comments and ultimately successful litigation regarding the proposed expansion of Metropolitan Oakland International Airport. Major issues included noise, cumulative impacts, and alternatives selection/analyses. Client: Law Office of John Shordike. GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 11 San Francisco International Airport Environmental Liaison Office Consulting. GECO conducted internal peer review for environmental studies being prepared for SFIA’s proposed runway expansion. Client: LSA Associates, Inc. El Cerrito Lumber Yard CEQA Peer Review. GECo conducted an internal peer review for an Initial Study on a controversial parcel in the City of El Cerrito. Client: City of El Cerrito. Sausalito Marina CEQA Critique. GECo prepared a peer review and critique of an EIR for a proposed new marina in Sausalito. Client: Confidential Sausalito Police and Fire Station CEQA Critique. GECo prepared a peer review and critique of an EIR for a proposed new public safety building in Sausalito. Client: Confidential Napa Verison Tower CEQA Critique. GECo conducted a peer review and critique for a cellular telephone tower in the City of Napa. Client: Confidential. Morongo Mining Projects Environmental Reviews. GECo provided CEQA, NEPA, and technical consulting to the Morongo Band of Mission Indians regarding two aggregate mines adjacent to their reservation in Riverside County, CA. Client: Law Office of Alexander & Karshmer. Napa Skateboard Park Peer Review. GECo conducted a peer review and critique for a neighborhood association on a proposed skateboard park in the City of Napa. Client: Confidential. Headwaters Forest Project EIR/EIS Review. GECo conducted an expert review of the CEQA and NEPA adequacy and technical validity of EIR/EIS on the Headwaters Forest Habitat Conservation Plan, Sustained Yield Plan, and land purchase. Clients: Environmental Law Foundation; Environmental Protection and Information Center, and Sierra Club. Global Photon Fiber-Optic Cable EIR Peer Review. GECo assisted in a third-party peer review of an EIR on a proposed offshore fiber-optics cable. Client: Tetra Tech, Inc., and California State Lands Commission. Coachella Valley Water Management Plan CEQA Peer Review. GECo assisted a consortium of Coachella Valley Indian Tribes in reviewing CEQA documents on the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan. Client: Consortium of Coachella Valley Tribes. Salton Sea Enhanced Evaporation System Initial Study/Environmental Assessment Peer Review. GECo reviewed the draft IS/EA for a spray project to evaporate excess return flow water from the Salton Sea. Client: Morongo Band of Mission Indians. Santa Rosa Home Depot CEQA Peer Review: GECo conducted a peer review and provided expert testimony regarding the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report and GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 12 associated technical studies for a proposed Home Depot shopping center in Santa Rosa. Client: Redwood Empire Merchants Association. Mitsubishi Mine CEQA Litigation Review. GECo conducted a review of legal briefs regarding the adequacy of CEQA analyses for a proposed mine expansion in San Bernardino County. Client: Law Offices of Thomas Mauriello. Alamo Gate Permitting Review. GECo performed a critical review and prepared expert testimony and correspondence regarding the adequacy of CEQA and land use permitting and studies for a proposed gate on Las Trampas Road, which would preclude vehicular access to a regional park staging area. Client: Las Trampas Trails Advocates. Cambria Condominiums Environmental and Planning Review. GECo prepared expert reviews of the potential environmental effects and Local Coastal Plan compliance of a proposed condominium development in Cambria, San Luis Obispo County. Client: Law Office of Vern Kalshan. Mariposa County Planning Policy Reviews. GECo conducted a review of proposed alterations to the Mariposa County General Plan for CEQA compliance. Client: Dr. Barton Brown. Gregory Canyon Landfill Environmental Processing Review. GECo was retained to review the environmental permitting and CEQA analyses for the proposed Gregory Canyon Landfill in northern San Diego County. Procedural issues include landfill siting requirements and CEQA process compliance. Technical issues include cultural resources, hydrology, endangered species, traffic, and health and safety. Client: Law Offices of Alexander & Karshmer and Pala Band of Mission Indians. Otay Ranch Development CEQA Review. GECo prepared an expert review of the Environmental Impact Report for the 23,000-acre Otay Ranch project in San Diego County in connection with ongoing litigation. Major issues were CEQA compliance, compliance with the California planning process, biological impacts, cumulative impacts, and alternatives. Client: Law Offices of Charles Stevens Crandall. Punta Estrella Chip Mill Environmental Report Compliance Review. GECo prepared a review of a proponent’s environmental report for a proposed wood chip mill in Costa Rica to determine compliance of documentation with U.S. environmental standards and policies. Major compliance issues included US Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act standards, NEPA standards, and adequacy of overall impacts analysis. Client: Scientific Certification Systems. Carroll Canyon Burn Facility CEQA Compliance Review. GECo prepared a CEQA process review for a proposed Negative Declaration on a planned contaminated-earth burning facility in the City of San Diego. Client: Law Offices of William Mackersie. Monterey Bay Marine Lab CEQA Compliance Review: GECo assisted attorneys in review of a CEQA Negative Declaration, NEPA Environmental Assessment, and associated GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 13 documents for the relocation of the Monterey Bay Marine Laboratory. Issues included the effectiveness of mitigation to cultural and biological resources, the appropriateness of the Negative Declaration versus an EIR, and other CEQA issues. Client: Law Offices of Alexander & Karshmer. Monterey Ground Water Ordinances CEQA Compliance Review. GECo provided expert CEQA consulting services to attorneys regarding the appropriateness of Monterey County's CEQA processing of proposed ground water ordinances. Client: Salinas Valley Water Coalition. Jamestown Whistlestop CEQA Adequacy Review. GECo performed an expert review and assisted in successful litigation regarding an Initial Study for a proposed mini mall in Jamestown, Tuolumne County. Client: Law Offices of Thomas Mauriello. Sunrise Hills Environmental Impact Report Peer Review. GECo performed a critical review of the applicability of the EIR for a proposed 200-unit residential development in Sonora, Tuolumne County. Major issues include grading, erosion, water quality, biological impacts, and visual quality. Client: Sylva Corporation. Sonora Crossroads Shopping Center Environmental Impact Report Review. GECo performed a review of an EIR for a major new shopping center in Sonora, Tuolumne County. Major issues included geologic and hydrologic impacts. Findings were presented to the Sonora City Council, and pre-litigation assistance was provided. Client: Citizens for Well Planned Development. Blue Oaks Residential Development CEQA Studies Review and Critique. GECo performed several tasks related to a proposed residential development in western Tuolumne County. Tasks included review of County CEQA procedure, review of Initial Study, review of Draft EIR, and coordination with attorneys. Client: Western Tuolumne County Citizens Action Group. Yosemite Junction Project CEQA Review. GECo prepared a review and critique of a proposed Negative Declaration for a 40-unit outlet mall in Tuolumne County, California. The Negative Declaration was subsequently denied and the project application rescinded. Client: Sylva Corporation. Sonora Mining Corporation CEQA Review/Expert Witness Services. GECo conducted a review and critique of CEQA compliance for the proposed expansion of Sonora Mining Corporation's Jamestown Gold Mine in Tuolumne County, California. Client: Law Office of Alexander Henson. Save Our Forests and Rangelands Expert Review and Witness Services. GECo provided expert review, consulting services, and expert witness testimony on CEQA issues for a successful legal challenge to an EIR and Area Plan for 200,000 acres in the Central Mountain Sub-region of San Diego County. Client: Law Offices of Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Specthrie, & Lerach. GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 14 GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 15 E. CLIENT REFERENCES Please feel free to contact the following client references with respect to GECo qualifications and experience: Maxene Spellman Program Manager California State Coastal Conservancy 1330 Broadway, 13th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 286-1015 Valerie Geier Principal Geier and Geier Consulting P.O. Box 5054 Berkeley, CA 94705 (510) 644-2535 Tom Mauriello Law Offices of Thomas Mauriello 501 North El Camino Real, Suite 220 San Clemente, California 92672-4889 Telephone: 949-366-4135 GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 16 Richard Grassetti PRINCIPAL Expertise • CEQA/NEPA Environmental Assessment • Project Management • Geologic and Hydrologic Analysis Principal Professional Mr. Grassetti is an environmental planner with 30 years Responsibilities of experience in environmental impact analysis, project management, and regulatory compliance. He is a recognized expert on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) processes, and has served as an expert witness on CEQA and planning issues. Mr. Grassetti regularly conducts peer review and QC/QA for all types of environmental impact analyses, and works frequently with public agencies, citizens groups, and applicants. He has managed the preparation of over 50 CEQA and NEPA documents, as well as numerous local agency planning and permitting documents. Mr. Grassetti has prepared over 200 hydrologic, geologic, and other technical analyses for CEQA and NEPA documents. He has analyzed the environmental impacts of a wide range of projects including infrastructure improvements, ecological restoration projects, waste management projects, mixed-use development, energy development, residential projects, and recreational facilities throughout the western U.S. Mr. Grassetti also has prepared numerous peer reviews of CEQA and NEPA documents for agencies, applicants, Native American tribes, and citizens groups. In addition to his consulting practice, Mr. Grassetti regularly conducts professional training workshops on CEQA and NEPA compliance, and was a lecturer at California State University, East Bay, where he taught courses on environmental impact assessment for 15 years. Professional Services • Management and preparation of all types of environmental impact assessment and documentation for public agencies, applicants, citizens groups, and attorneys • Peer review of environmental documents for technical adequacy and regulatory compliance • Expert witness services • Assisting clients in CEQA and NEPA process compliance GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 17 • Preparation of hydrologic and geologic analyses for EIRs and EISs • Preparation of project feasibility, opportunities, and constraints analyses, and mitigation monitoring and reporting plans Education University of Oregon, Eugene, Department of Geography, M.A., Geography (Emphasis on Fluvial Geomorphology and Water Resources Planning), 1981. University of California, Berkeley, Department of Geography, B.A., Physical Geography, 1978. Professional 1992-Present Principal, GECo Environmental Experience Consulting, Berkeley, CA 1994-Present Adjunct Professor, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, California State University, Hayward, CA 1988-1992 Environmental Group Co-Manager/ Senior Project Manager, LSA Associates, Inc. Richmond, CA 1987-1988 Independent Environmental Consultant, Berkeley, CA 1986-1987 Environmental/Urban Planner, City of Richmond, CA 1982-1986 Senior Technical Associate - Hydrology and Geology - Environmental Science Associates, Inc. San Francisco, CA 1979-1981 Graduate Teaching Fellow, Department of Geography, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 1978 Intern, California Division of Mines and Geology, San Francisco, CA Professional Member and Past Chapter Director, Association of Affiliations and Environmental Professionals, San Francisco Bay Chapter Certifications Member, International Association for Impact Assessment GECO QUALIFICATIONS Page 18 Publications and Presentations Grassetti, R. Round Up The Usual Suspects: Common Deficiencies in US and California Environmental Impact assessments. Paper Presented at International Association for Impact Assessment Conference, Vancouver, Canada. May 2004. Grassetti, R. Understanding Environmental Impact Assessment – A Layperson’s Guide to Environmental Impact Documents and Processes. (in press). Grassetti, R. Developing a Citizens Handbook for Impact Assessment. Paper Presented at International Association for Impact Assessment Conference, Marrakech, Morocco. June 2003 Grassetti, R. CEQA and Sustainability. Paper Presented at Association of Environmental Professionals Conference, Palm Springs, California. April 2002. Grassetti, R. and M. Kent. Certifying Green Development, an Incentive-Based Application of Environmental Impact Assessment. Paper Presented at International Association for Impact Assessment Conference, Cartagena, Colombia. May 2001 Grassetti, Richard. Report from the Headwaters: Promises and Failures of Strategic Environmental Assessment in Preserving California’s Ancient Redwoods. Paper Presented at International Association for Impact Assessment Conference, Glasgow, Scotland. June 1999. Grassetti, R. A., N. Dennis, and R. Odland. An Analytical Framework for Sustainable Development in EIA in the USA. Paper Presented at International Association for Impact Assessment Conference, Christchurch, New Zealand. April 1998. Grassetti, R. A. Ethics, Public Policy, and the Environmental Professional. Presentation at the Association of Environmental Professionals Annual Conference, San Diego. May 1992. Grassetti, R. A. Regulation and Development of Urban Area Wetlands in the United States: The San Francisco Bay Area Case Study. Water Quality Bulletin, United Nations/World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Surface and Ground Water Quality. April 1989. Grassetti, R. A. Cumulative Impacts Analysis, An Overview. Journal of Pesticide Reform. Fall 1986. 1986, 1987. Guest Lecturer, Environmental Studies Program, University of California, Berkeley.