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.