Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.2T. - 5 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS MILLS August 6, 2009 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND TENTATIVE MAP FOR A THREE -LOT SUBDIVISION: LANDS OF HOUSTON-HENSLEY, 27575 PURISSIMA ROAD. FILE #216 -08 -IS -TM -ND -GD FROM: David Keyon, Associate Planner APPROVED BY: Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission: 1) Review, make comments, and forward a recommendation that, based on the Initial Study, the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program in Attachment #3; and 2) Forward a recommendation that the City Council approve the requested Tentative Map, based on the findings in Attachment #2 and subject to the conditions of approval in Attachment #1 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS The following discretionary actions by the City Council are required for approval of the subdivision: 1. Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. 2. Approval of the Tentative Map. The Planning Commission's actions are recommendations to the City Council. TENTATIVE MAP REVIEW In order to approve a subdivision, the Planning Commission must determine that the project is consistent with the General Plan, Subdivision and Zoning Regulations, and that none of the findings for denial can be made, as specified in Section 66474 of the State Subdivision Map Act. Staff has prepared findings for approval of the project (Attachment 92). Comments on the Tentative Map have been received from the Town Geotechnical Consultant, the Town Engineer, Santa Clara County Fire Department, the Environmental Design Committee, and the Pathways Committee; and are attached for the Planning Commission's review. Neighboring property owners within 500 feet of the site have been notified of the public hearing. Item 3.2 f, T Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting approval of a three -lot subdivision on a property of 3.29 gross acres at the terminus of Samuel Lane, between Purissima Road and Canario Way. The property is currently developed with one single-family residence at the northwest corner. Existing conditions With the exception of the existing residence, the site is undeveloped and consists primarily of open grazing land and woodland. Deer Creek bisects the site, running in a concrete -lined channel from the northwest corner adjacent to the terminus of Samuel Lane to the southern property line. The site is gently sloped, with an average slope of 5.9%. There are 84 trees on the site, including 30 oak trees (26 of which meet the definition of "Heritage Oak" per Los Altos Hills Municipal Code Section 12-2.101). Surrounding land uses include one and two-story single-family residences on lots of one acre or more to the north, east, and south, and Purissima Road and Highway 280 to the west. Existing Development Table Proposed Development Table Existing Yu`.liazht•- 1 6.74% 1.011 1.011 15,165 5.9% 3.29 3.19 3.29 49,440 19,776 Site 3 4.37% 1.027 1.027 15,405 6,162 Proposed Development Table Lot Design and Building Sites Parcel 1 is proposed to be 1.011 net acres with an average slope of 6.74% and frontage along Purissima Road. The configuration of this lot has been designed to preserve the existing residence while accommodating a fire engine turnaround at the terminus of Samuel Lane. The eaves on the eastern and southern side of the house will be removed so the house will comply with the 30' setback from the new property lines. Most of the Yu`.liazht•- 1 6.74% 1.011 1.011 15,165 6,066 2 7.25% 1.069 1.069 16,035 6,414 3 4.37% 1.027 1.027 15,405 6,162 Lot Design and Building Sites Parcel 1 is proposed to be 1.011 net acres with an average slope of 6.74% and frontage along Purissima Road. The configuration of this lot has been designed to preserve the existing residence while accommodating a fire engine turnaround at the terminus of Samuel Lane. The eaves on the eastern and southern side of the house will be removed so the house will comply with the 30' setback from the new property lines. Most of the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 3 site will be dedicated as an open space easement as Deer Creek runs through the center of the proposed parcel. Parcel 2 is proposed to be 1.069 net acres with an average slope of 7.25% and access from a common access corridor (shared with Parcel 3) from Samuel Lane. Parcel 3 is proposed to be 1.027 net acres with an average slope of 4.37% and access from a common access corridor (shared with Parcel 2) from Samuel Lane. Approximately half the site is proposed to be dedicated as an open space easement. The submitted plans (sheet 4) show a 160 -foot diameter building circle on each lot, demonstrating that each contains a viable building site. All parcels are moderately sloped toward Deer Creek. Plan sheet 3 shows conceptual building sites and location for a possible storm drain detention systems on each lot. All parcels will be subject to the Site Development Review process when new residences are proposed. Property HistoN According to records on file with the Town, the existing residence was constructed in 1962. No significant development has been approved since. Access and Traffic Circulation All three lots are proposed to maintain access from Samuel Lane, a dead-end road currently serving three parcels to the north of the project site. Samuel Lane is a public road dedicated in 1996 for the Lands of Lindy subdivision (PM 679-M-46). Per Los Altos Hills Subdivision Code Section 9-1.703(f), cul-de-sac right-of-ways (such as Samuel Lane) must terminate in a turnaround area with a minimum radius of 50'. In lieu of a 50' diameter cul-de-sac, the applicant proposes a fire engine turnaround with 14' of surrounding right-of-way at the terminus of Samuel Lane. This turnaround configuration has been reviewed and approved by both the Fire Department and Town Engineering as it provides adequate area for a turnaround and meets the intent of the Subdivision Code. Ingress and Egress for Parcels 2 and 3 A 25' wide corridor access with a 14' wide shared driveway is proposed from Samuel Lane to Parcels 2 and 3. Per Section 9-1.605 of the Los Altos Hills Subdivision Code, a corridor or panhandle shall not be less than 25' in width, with shared driveways encouraged to minimize grading and paving on site. It is Town policy to require a minimum width of 35' for an ingress/egress easement serving two lots. Sufficient frontage and space exists on Parcel 2 to construct a seperate driveway that would run adjacent to the driveway to Parcel 3, but to reduce paving on site the applicant proposes to construct a shared driveway within a 25' wide corridor access. Staff Report to the Planning Coininission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 4 However, the provision of a 35' wide access corridor for the proposed land division, combined with the constraints on the site (such as the presence of Deer Creek and heavily wooded areas at the western portion of the site and the retention of the existing residence in its current location on Parcel 1), would preclude a three -lot land division. Tree Removal The Town's Subdivision Code section 9-1.607 stipulates that trees greater than 20" in circumference should not be removed unless they are diseased, dead, or the removal is to facilitate the locating of public and/or private roadways, the placement of structures within the proposed rights-of-way, or for the rough grading of driveways and/or parking areas. Three (3) trees are proposed to be removed to facilitate the construction of subdivision improvements, including one dead redwood (tree # 7), a 13.8" diameter sycamore (tree # 68), and a 10" diameter persimmon (tree #70). The removal of other trees on site will be addressed at the Site Development review stage for the construction of the proposed dwellings. An arborist report was prepared for the site by McClenahan Consulting, dated March 4, 2008 (Attachment 9), which contains recommendations for tree protection measures during construction of the subdivision improvements and residences. Open Space Easement An Open Space Easement of 1.054 acres is proposed on Parcels 1 and 3, encompassing all areas to the west of Deer Creek between the creek and Purissima Road, and all areas within the 25' creek protection setback to the east of Deer Creek. This easement will protect an area of riparian vegetation adjacent to Deer Creek, including ten (10) Heritage Oaks, and a heavily wooded area at the southwest corner of the site. This easement will also provide a vegetative buffer between the sites of the proposed residences and both Purissima Road and Highway 280. Utilities The new parcels will be served by sewer via extensions to an existing sewer lateral beneath Samuel Lane and along the northern boundary of the project site. Water supply will be provided by Purissima Hills Water District through extensions to the existing line underneath Samuel Lane. The water line from Purissima Road to the existing residence will be abandoned. PG&E will provide gas and electric services underground, within the 25' wide access corridor to Parcels 2 and 3. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 5 Geotechnical Review The Town's Geotechnical Consultant, Cotton, Shires and Associates have reviewed the proposed Tentative Map and Geotechnical Investigation provided by the applicant and prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. dated March 27, 2008. Cotton, Shires and Associates, in their letter dated September 12, 2008, concurred with the project geotechnical consultant that adequate site investigation has been completed to support the geotechnical feasibility of the proposed subdivision. Site constraints exist such as potential for strong seismic ground shaking, highly expansive clay soils, and the potential for liquefaction. The existing constraints will be explored -fiuther and mitigated in conjunction with site specific designs. Cotton, Shires and Associates recommend approval of the Tentative Map with requirements for additional investigation at the time of future residential development of all Parcels. (Conditions #1, 2, 3) Drainage All proposed parcels naturally drain toward Deer Creek and will be required to maintain the existing flow patterns, using surface flow designs whenever possible. No construction is proposed at this time, other than utility improvements, installation of the pathway and widening of the roadway along the property frontage. COMMITTEE REVIEW Subdivision Committee The Subdivision Committee comprised of Commissioner Hartpootlian, the Planning Director, and Planning and Engineering staff convened on June 30, 2009 to review and discuss the subdivision proposal. Pursuant to Section 9-1.509 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code, property owners within 500 feet of the site were notified of the hearing. A summary of the discussion at the Subdivision Committee meeting is provided on the fact sheet and hearing report (Attachments #6 and 7). Environmental Design and Protection Committee The Environmental Design and Protection Committee reviewed the project and had no comments (Attachment 8). Pathways Committee The Pathways Committee recommends that the applicant restore the existing pathway along Purissima Road to type 1113 standards. 1( Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 6 Open Space Committee The Open Space Committee reviewed the proposed Open Space Easement and supports the proposed location as the easement will protect Deer Creek and surrounding riparian vegetation. Neighbor Comments Staff has received no comments from neighbors. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program have been prepared for the project. A Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in the.Town Crier on July 22, 2009. The notice was also submitted to the Santa Clara County Clerks Office for a 20 day public review period which began on July 22, 2009 and will end on August 11, 2009. The Planning Commission may make comments on both the Environmental Documents and the Tentative Map. The Mitigated Negative Declaration must be adopted by the City Council before approving the Tentative Map. In order to recommend adoption, the Commission must find that all potentially significant environmental effects are addressed through the proposed mitigation measures. Recommended mitigation measures include the dedication of an open space easement along Deer Creek, a pre -construction survey by qualified ornithologist to identify potential white-tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, and raptor nests on site, adherence to the project arborist's recommendations and tree protection during construction, tree mitigation plantings, and observation of State and County requirements for handling archaeological remains and artifacts if found. CONCLUSION Based on the Initial Study, staff has concluded that the proposed project, as mitigated, will not have a significant effect on the environment. The Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies specific mitigation measures and establishes a Mitigation Monitoring Program to ensure that any potential significant environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study are mitigated. Staff has also concluded that, as documented in the recommended findings of approval, the proposed subdivision is in compliance with the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance, and would allow development to occur that meets the provisions of the Zoning and Site Development Ordinances. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 7 The proposed Tentative Map complies with all Town Codes and Policies. ATTACHMENTS 1. Recommended conditions of approval 2. Recommended findings for approval of the subdivision 3. Initial study, mitigated negative declaration, and mitigation monitoring program 4. Review letter from Cotton, Shires, and Associates, dated 9/12/08 5. Santa Clara County Fire Department comments, dated 5/8/09 6. Subdivision Committee hearing fact sheet, dated 6/30/09 7. Subdivision Committee hearing report, dated 6/30/09 8. Environmental Design and Protection Committee comments, dated 9/8/08 9. Arborist report by McClenahan Consulting, dated March 4, 2008 10. Biological Evaluation by Live Oak Associates, Inc., dated 5/22/08 11. Tentative Map plan set (Commission only) Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 8 ATTACHMENT 1 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR THE TENTATIVE MAP FOR A THREE -LOT SUBDIVISION OF A 3.29 ACRE PARCEL LANDS OF HOUSTON-HENSLEY, 27575 PURISSIMA ROAD File #216 -08 -IS -ND -TM -GD GEOTECHNICAL/EARTHWORK 1. Lot Specific Geotechnical Evaluations - The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall evaluate lot -specific development plans, update and supplement geotechnical recommendations for proposed improvements (as needed) and consider additional subsurface investigation, if warranted to address specific development plans. The consultant shall prepare geotechnical design criteria specific to the proposed construction of improvements on individual lots. The results of these investigations shall be presented in a report and submitted to the Town for technical review prior to acceptance of documents for building permit plan -check. 2. Geotechnical Plan Review - The applicant's geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project building and grading plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements and design parameters for foundations) to ensure that their recommendations have been properly incorporated. The results of the geotechnical plan review shall be summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer along with documents for building permit plan -check. 3. Geotechnical Field Inspection - The geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of the project construction. The inspections shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for foundations and retaining walls prior to the placement of steel and concrete. The results of these inspections and the as -built conditions of the project shall be described by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the Town Engineer for review prior to final (granting of occupancy) project approval. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 9 LAND AND EASEMENT DEDICATION 4. The applicant shall relocate or abandon existing public utility easements and grant new public utility easements where needed to all utility companies for utility construction and maintenance, including but not limited to: SBC Telephone Company, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Comcast Cable Television, and Purissima Hills Water District. The dedications shall all be completed in conjunction with Final Map approval, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 5. The property owner shall dedicate right-of-way for the turnaround at the terminus of Samuel Lane, encompassing a Santa Clara County Fire approved turnaround and additional area to provide at least 14' of right-of-way surrounding the turnaround. The property owner shall provide legal description and plat exhibits that are prepared by a registered civil engineer or a licensed land surveyor and the Town shall prepare the dedication document. The dedication document, including the approved exhibits, shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and returned to the Town prior to recording of the Final Map. 6. The property owner shall grant an open space easement to the Town over the portion of the site encompassing all areas south and west of Deer Creek (between Deer Creek and Purissima Road), and all areas to the north and east of Deer Creek within the 25' creek protection setback. This easement shall be contiguous with the existing open space easement on 27581 Samuel Lane. The property owner shall provide legal description and plat exhibits that are prepared by a registered civil engineer or a licensed land surveyor and the Town shall prepare the grant document. The grant document, including the approved exhibits, shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and returned to the Town prior to recording of the Final Map. Ey1PROVEMENTS 7. A grading plan which includes an erosion control plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer as part of the subdivision improvement plans. This plan shall confonn to all standards adopted by the Town of Los Altos Hills and shall comply with all appropriate requirements of the Town's NPDES Permit relative to grading and sediment erosion control including but not limited to: a) restricting grading during the moratorium from October 15 to April 15 except with prior written approval from the Town Engineer; b) protecting all finished graded slopes from erosion using such techniques as hillside benching, erosion control matting and/or hydroseeding; c) protecting downstream storm drainage inlets from sedimentation; d) appropriate use of sediment rolls to retain sediment on the project site; e) any other suitable measures outlined in the ABAG Manual of Standards. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 10 8. At such time as development on the new parcels is proposed, the applicant shall submit a detailed drainage improvement plan for review and approval by the Engineering Department. The drainage improvements must be designed to mitigate drainage impacts based on 10 -year storm flow calculations. Peak discharge shall not exceed the existing pre -development peak discharge value of the property. Detention storage must be incorporated into the project to reduce the predicted peak discharge to the pre -development value. The applicant's engineer shall provide data and peak discharge hydrologic model(s) utilized, as well as, the calculations of the peak discharge value prior and post development. 9. Any increase runoff resulting from the improvement of the subdivision shall be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer. Detailed plans and drainage calculations shall be submitted to the Town for review and approval as part of the Subdivision Improvement Plans. 10. All lots within the subdivision shall be connected to the public water system to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Purissima Hills Water District. Services shall be installed to the property lines or be bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map. An encroachment permit shall be required to be issued by the Public Works Department for all work proposed within the public right of way. Any necessary fees shall be paid prior to the recordation of the Final Map. 11. All existing and proposed utilities located within the subdivision that serve the subdivision shall be placed underground, in accordance with Subdivision Ordinance, Sec. 9-1.1105. Cable television, gas, electric, and telephone services, to the property lines are included in this requirement. Plans for the location of all such utilities are to be included in the improvement plans for the subdivision. Improvements shall be installed- or bonded for prior to recordation of the Final Map. 12. All lots within the subdivision shall be connected to the public sanitary sewer system. An encroachment permit must be obtained from the Public Works Department for all work proposed within the public right of way. Services shall be installed to the property lines or bonded for prior to the recordation of the Final Map. 13. The owner shall improve the existing pathway along Purissima Road to type HB standard, prior to recordation of the Final Map. 14. A grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the subdivider for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to issuance of any permits for subdivision improvements. The grading/construction operation plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian safety on Samuel Lane; storage of construction materials; placement of sanitary facilities; parking for construction vehicles; and parking for construction X. if Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 11 personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Los Altos Garbage Company for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits 15. Improvement plans for the subdivision shall be submitted for review and approval by the Town Engineer prior to commencement of improvement work. These plans shall conform to all standards adopted by the Town of Los Altos Hills. 16. All subdivision conditions of approval and subdivision improvements shall be constructed and approved by the Town Engineer prior to submittal of any site development or building permit applications. 17. Any, and all, wells on the property shall be shown on the Improvement Plans, shall be properly registered with Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) or shall be abandoned, capped in accordance with the SCVWD standards. PLANNING AND ZONING 18. Payment of park and recreation dedication fees and all other applicable fees shall be required prior to recordation of the Final Map. The park and recreation dedication fees shall be provided in accordance with sections 9.1.1403 and 9.1.1404 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. 19. The applicant shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by construction of the subdivision improvements to pathways, private driveways and public and private roadways prior to final acceptance of the subdivision by the Town. The applicant shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways and pathways prior to recordation of the Final Map. 20. Prior to beginning any grading or construction operations, all heritage oak trees and trees deemed significant by the Site Development Authority shall be fenced at the dripline; and shall be of material and structure to clearly delineate that dripline. Town staff must inspect the fencing and trees to be fenced prior to starting grading or construction. The fence must remain in place throughout the course of construction. No storage of equipment, vehicles or debris shall be allowed within the driplines. All large and heritage trees shall be retained to the greatest extent feasible. Any proposed removal of heritage trees is subject to public hearing. 21. The applicant shall implement tree protection measures including tree protection fencing and mulching as recommended by McClenahan Consulting in their report dated March 4, 2008. o Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 12 22. The applicant shall install 2 trees of at least five (5) gallon size to replace the 13.8" sycamore to be removed as part of the subdivision proposal. A planting plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval, prior to plant installation. All planting shall be complete, prior to recordation of Final Map. 23. Upon discovering or unearthing any possible burial site as evidenced by human skeletal remains or artifacts, the person making such discovery shall immediately notify the County of Santa Clara Coroner and no further disturbance of the site may be made except as authorized by the County Coordinator of Indian Affairs. This shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the County Coroner's Office and the Planning Director, as may be necessary during the construction of the subdivision improvements or individual lot development. 24. The addresses for the two additional parcels shall be assigned and approved by the Town as required by the Santa Clara County Fire Department and in accordance with Town policies. 25. The new residences on Parcels 2 and 3 shown on the Tentative Map Conceptual Development Plan are conceptual only, and no approval of any residence is indicated by approval of the Tentative Map. Site development applications for the new residences shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. 26. Any portions of the existing residence (including eaves) on Parcel 1 that encroach into the setbacks from the new property lines shall be removed prior to recordation of the Final Map. 27. Within 30 -days prior to start of construction of the subdivision improvements, a qualified ornithologist must conduce a pre -construction survey for white-tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, and raptor nests in all trees within 250 feet of the proposed ground disturbance. The results of this survey, with any recommendations (such. as construction buffers), shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the start of construction. 28. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Town of Los Altos Hills and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the Town of Los Altos Hills or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the project to the extent such actions are brought within the time period required by Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable law; provided, however, that the Applicant's duty to so defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be subject to the Town's promptly notifying the Applicant of any said claim, action, or proceeding and the Town's full cooperation in the defense of such actions or proceedings. X Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 13 FIRE DEPARTMENT 29. Fire protection improvements, including installation of any required hydrants, shall be constructed as requested by Santa Clara County Fire Department. Improvements shall be constructed and ready for use prior to the recordation of the Final Map, or shall be bonded for. Approved access to each parcel shall be installed prior to commencement of any construction on that lot. 30. The applicant shall install an approved fire apparatus roadway with a minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum circulating radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside and a maximum slope of 15%. Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications A-1. 31. Plans for new residences shall be reviewed and approved by the Santa Clara County Fire Department at the time of site development permit application. Conditions that may be applied at that time include, but are not limited to, providing an acceptable water supply based on the size of the new residences, providing an emergency vehicle turnaround, placement of property address signs that are clearly visible from the right-of-way, and providing an approved access system if the lots are fenced and gated. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Lands of Houston -Hensley August 6, 2009 Page 14 ATTACHMENT 2 RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR A TENTATIVE MAP FOR A THREE LOT SUBDIVISION LANDS OF HOUSTON-HENSLEY, 27575 PURISSIMA ROAD File #216 -08 -IS -ND -TM -GD 1. The subdivision as proposed would create three (3) lots: Parcel 1 is 1.011 net acres with an average slope of 6.74%, Parcel 2 is 1.069 net acres with an average slope of 7.25%, and Parcel 3 is 1.027 net acres with a slope of 4.37%. Each parcel would provide a viable building site. In this and all other respects, the lots conform to the Los Altos Hills Subdivision Ordinance. 2. The proposed subdivision would create three lots that would meet the General Plan guidelines for land with an average slope of less than 10 percent, and in all other respects will be consistent with the General Plan. 3. Access to the proposed lots will be provided from Samuel Lane, a public road. Adequate services including water, gas and electric, telephone, fire protection and police protection are available to serve the subdivision as described in the staff report and the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. 4. All lots as proposed on the Tentative Map are physically suitable for the proposed future development. The Town Geotechnical Consultant has commented that concerns can be addressed by adherence to the Project Geotechnical Report and conditions of approval for the project. It has been determined that each of the proposed lots contains a suitable building site, and that the proposed density is consistent with the General Plan. 5. All potentially significant environmental effects can be reduced to a level of insignificance as mitigated in the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or to substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 6. The Town Engineer has reviewed the project and has determined that the design of the subdivision and the improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. Attachment 3 Exhibit "A" Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 M'TIAL STUDY AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION In accordance with the policies regarding implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, this document, combined with the attached supporting data, constitutes the initial study and, subsequently the Negative Declaration on the subject project. The initial study portion provides the basis for the determination of whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If it was determined that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, an Environmental Impact Report would be prepared which focuses on the areas of concern identified by this initial study. If it was determined that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment, it would be eligible for a Negative Declaration. If it is determined that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, however, the significant effects of the project have been reduced to a less - than -significant level because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project applicant, then the project would be eligible for a Mitigated Negative Declaration. It is found the project would not have a significant effect on the environment, therefore this document and its attachments constitute a Negative Declaration. 1. Project 'Title: Lands of Houston -Hensley Subdivision (3 lots, file # 216 -08 -IS -TM -ND -GD) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Town of Los Altos Hills, 26379 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, California 94022 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Debbie Pedro, Planning Director (650) 941-7222 Initial Study prepared by: David Keyon, Associate Planner (650) 941-7222 4. Project Location: 27575 Purissima Road (APN: 175-43-011) 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Jerry Houston, 15962 Grandview Ave, Monte Sereno, CA 95030 6. General Plan Designation: R (Residential) 7. Zoning: R -A (Residential -Agricultural) Description of Project: The property owner requests a subdivision of a 3.29 gross acre lot into 3 parcels (Parcel 1: 1.011 net acres, Parcel 2: 1.069 net acres, and Parcel 3: 1.027 net acres). The properly is currently developed with a single -story residence, patio areas, and a driveway from Samuel Lane at the northern end of the property. Access to Parcels 2 and 3 will be via a 25' wide z corridor access from Samuel Lane. All lots will be connected to the existing sanitary sewer line along Samuel Lane. All existing and new utility lines will be placed underground. 9 Surrounding sand Uses and Setting: The project site is surrounded by single-family residences on lots of at least one -acre in size to the north, east, and west, and the Town of Los Altos Hills maintenance yard and the Junipero Serra Freeway (I-280) to the west. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: Santa Clara County Fire Department 2 11. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ® Aesthetics [] Agriculture Resources ® Air Quality Biological Resources Q Cultural Resources Geology /Soils Hazards & Hazardous ® Hydrology / Water Quality ® Land Use / Planning Materials ® Mineral Resources Noise ® Population / Housing ® Public Services ® Recreation ® Transportation/Traffic ® Utilities / Service Systems ® Mandatory Findings of Significance This Initial study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Information and conclusions in the Initial Study are based upon staff research and the Town's General Plan and Municipal Code. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or " potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signature: � Date: % ' 2 y- c)9 Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ® ® ® Ri b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The proposed project is not situated on a scenic vista or within the vicinity of a state scenic highway. Aesthetic impacts due to site grading and residential buildings are expected to be mitigable when new residences are built. At the time of any proposed development all projects will be evaluated for aesthetic impacts such as structure height, size, setbacks, grading, fencing, tree preservation, and landscaping. Furthermore, the Town has established standards for screening and lighting of all new residential dwelling projects and their associated landscaping and lighting plans are reviewed at publicly noticed hearings. MITIGATION: None II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use? The proposed subdivision will have no foreseeable impact on Agricultural Resources. The site is not and has not been used as agricultural land. III. AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Ll Ll El Santa Clara County is currently a non -attainment basin for ozone thresholds but achieves an attainment level for carbon monoxide emissions. The net increase of two developable properties is not a considerable cumulative impact. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as ® ® ® Q defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or ® ® ® Z migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological ® El resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or ® Q state habitat conservation plan? 5 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation UVOACT: The site is bisected by Deer Creek, which runs through the southwestern portion of the property. The creek channel is rock lined but is surrounded by riparian vegetation. The applicant submitted a Biological Evaluation by Live Oak Assocaites, Inc_, dated May 22, 2008, which includes a survey of potential wildlife habitat for Threatened and Endangered species. Four special status species may occur regularly on the project site: the California red -legged frog, western pond turtle, white-tailed kite, and loggerhead shrike. The California red -legged from and western pond turtle may occur within the aquatic habitat around Deer Creek, while the white-tailed kite and loggerhead shrike may utilize trees on site for breeding. The proposed subdivision and improvements will not directly impact the riparian area encompassing Deer Creek, as all development will occur to the north and east of the creek. An arborist report was prepared for the site by McClenahan Consulting, dated March 4, 2008. This report mentions that eighteen (18) trees are proposed for removal. However, under the current lot configuration and subdivision improvements, only six (6) trees are proposed to be removed, including one dead redwood (tree # 7), three Eucalyptus trees (tree #'s 66, 73, and 81), a 13.8" diameter sycamore (tree # 68), and a 10" diamter persimmon (tree #70). The removal of other trees on site will be addressed at the Site Development review stage for the construction of the proposed dwellings. MITIGATION: The following are recommended conditions of approval for the proposed subdivision: 1) An open space easement will be dedicated encompassing all areas south and west of Deer Creek, and all areas to the north and east of Deer Creek within 25 feet of the top of bank. Development activities will be prohibited within this easement. 2) Per the Biological Evaluation by Live Oak Assocaites, Inc. (dated May 22, 2008), prior to start of construction, a qualified ornithologist must conduct a pre -construction survey for white-tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, and raptor nests in all trees within 250 feet of the proposed ground disturbance within 30 -days of the start of construction, with the establishment of construction buffers, if necessary. 3) The 13.8" diameter sycamore at the location of the proposed fire engine turnaround shall be replaced at a ratio of 2:1 with trees no smaller than five- (5) gallon size. No replacement trees will be required for the removal of the dead redwood (tree # 7), or any eucalyptus trees removed per Section 12-2.802(8) of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. 4) Tree preservation measures, including protective fencing and mulching, must be implemented for the remaining trees on site as recommended by McClenahan Consulting in their report dated March 4, 2008. 5) Additional landscape mitigation will occur at the time of site development of the individual lots. The Town's Site Development Process requires that all new residences be screened. The proposed screening for any new residence must be reviewed at a publicly noticed hearing after buildings are framed. n Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical EJ resource as defined in'15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to ' 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? INAPACT: The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will have no foreseeable impact on .Cultural Resources as defined in Title 14; Chapter 3; Article 5; Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act. The site does not contain a listed historical building and no known archeological resources exist on the subject property. However, if any artifacts or human remains are discovered during any future grading or construction onsite, work in the vicinity of the find shall stop immediately until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the site and determine the significance of the find per the mitigation measure described below. NMIGATION: Conditions of project approval require that upon discovering or unearthing any possible burial site as evidenced by human skeletal remains or artifacts, the person making such discovery shall immediately notify the County of Santa Clara Coroner and no further disturbance of the site may be made except as authorized by the County Coordinator of Indian Affairs. W. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would ® ® ® V materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or proposed school? or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous collapse? materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the public or the environment? Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such property? a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the available for the disposal of wastewater? ® ® �✓ project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the The property is not located within an earthquake fault or landslide zone. Proposed residential development will be subject to additional, more design specific geotechnical evaluation at the time of Site Development review. VIL HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS —Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through El LJ reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous ® ® ® V materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the ® ® ® �✓ project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted ® ® ® Z emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or ® ® ® Z death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 8 U of 3' Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant - Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development does not produce a hazard or hazardous waste and will. have no foreseeable impact related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The site is not located in an identified location according to CA Government Code 65962.5. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WA'T'ER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ® ® ® FO b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially ® ® ® Q with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, ® ® E including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, ® ® FO including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ® ® ® Z g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a ® ® I federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or ® ® ® Q death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 0 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will have no immitigable impact on Hydrology and Water Quality as defined in this section. All proposed parcels naturally drain toward Deer Creek and will be required to maintain the existing flow patterns, using surface flow designs whenever possible. No construction is proposed at this time, other than utility improvements, installation of the pathway and widening of the roadway along the property frontage. The Town Engineer will require a drainage improvement plan to be submitted prior to construction of any future site development. Drainage improvements must be designed to mitigate drainage impacts based on 10 -year storm flow calculations. At such time as development on the new parcels is proposed, the applicant shall submit a detailed grading, erosion control, and drainage improvement plan. for review and approval by the Engineering Department. The drainage improvements must be designed to mitigate drainage impacts based on 10 -year storm flow calculations. Peak discharge shall not exceed the existing pre -development peak discharge value of the property. Detention storage must be incorporated into the project to reduce the predicted peak discharge to the pre -development value. The applicant's engineer shall provide data and peak discharge hydrologic model(s) utilized, as well as, the calculations of the peak discharge value prior and post development. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not physically divide a community. The project complies with the Los Altos Hills General Plan and Subdivision Code. X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that ® ® ® FO would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other laud use plan? The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not result in a loss of mineral resources. The project is not located in an area known for valued minerals. XI. NOISE -- Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of 10 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or® ® ® M applicable standards of other agencies? example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne ® ® ® Q✓ vibration or groundborne noise levels? Ll u construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the ® ® ® f 1 L� I project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels Ll J in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a proj ect located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? D For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will be regulated by the Town's established noise standards. Interim construction noise levels associated with subdivision improvements and future site development will likely periodically exceed 60dB(A) but can be held to less than significant by adherence to Town standards for hours of construction. Once development is complete, day to day living will produce noises such as vehicles and air conditioning units. These types of noises are typical of a residential neighborhood. Further, the Town requires new residences, swimming pools, pool equipment, and air conditioners to demonstrate compliance with Town Noise standards. No immitigable or new types of noise impacts are anticipated. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the Ll u construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not have a significant impact on population or housing. 11 3 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Ll 0 U 10 Police protection? Schools? Parks? ® U z Other public facilities? ® E ® z The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not have a foreseeable impact on any public service or facility. XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not have a foreseeable impact on recreation facilities. The Town's Parks and Recreation Department will collect an in lieu fee prior to recordation of the Final Map. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the ® ® ® z existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service ® ® ® z standard established by the county congestion management agency for 12 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? Ll J Ll ® Q Regional Water Quality Control Board? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting 13 alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? The subdivision will result in approximately 10-12 additional trips per day, per unit. The increase in traffic on Samuel Lane will be minimal and is not anticipated to create traffic congestion on existing local roadways. XVI. UTIILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ® ® ® Q Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater ® ® ® z treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from ® U existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 13 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation The proposed subdivision and anticipated residential development will not have a foreseeable impact on utility and service systems. Water supply will be provided by Purissima Hills Water District. All parcels will be connected to the sanitary sewer system. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but ® ® L cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects'of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause ® ® ® R1 substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The proposed project, as mitigated, will not result in a negative impact to the environment, wildlife, plant or historical resource. The project does not have any foreseeable cumulative or unmitigated impacts as defined in this Initial Study. Sources: 1. Project Plans 2. Los Altos Hills General Plan 3_ Los Altos Hills Municipal Code 4. Assessor's Maps, Office of County Assessor, Santa Clara County, 2006-2007 5. State Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program 6. BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines: Assessing the Air Quality Impacts of Projects and Plans, December 1999 7. State Department Fish and Game CNDDP Map 8. Santa Clara Valley Water District Map 9. Geotechnical and Seismic Hazard Zones Map of Los Altos Hills, Cotton Shires and Associates, Dec -2004 10. DTSC Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites List, California Environmental Protection Agency 11. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map, Los Altos Hills, January 2, 1980 12. Sanitary Sewer Map, Town of Los Altos Hills Engineering Department 13. Santa Clara County Municipal Code Chapter II Indian Burial Grounds (Title B Division B-6) 14. Geologic and Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Terrasearch, Inc., March 27, 2008 15. Cotton & Shires Assoc. Peer Review Letter, September 12, 2008 16. Tree survey, McClenahan Consulting, March 4, 2008 17. Biological Evaluation, Live Oak Associates, Inc., May 22, 2008 18. CEQA Guidelines, 2007 14 MITIGATION MEASURES KgCI.,IDED TIS THE PROJECT TO AVOID POTENTIALLY SIG I[FICAN T EFFECTS: 1. An open space easement will be dedicated encompassing all areas south and west of Deer Creek, and all areas to the north and east of Deer Creek within 25 feet of the top of bank. Development activities will be prohibited within this easement. 2. Per the Biological Evaluation by Live Oak Associates, Inc. (dated May 22, 2008), prior to start of construction, a qualified ornithologist must conduct a pre -construction survey for white-tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, and raptor nests in all trees within 250 feet of the proposed ground disturbance within 30 -days of the start of construction, with the establishment of construction buffers, if necessary. The results of this survey, and any recommendations, must be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the start of construction. 3. The 13.8" diameter sycamore at the location of the proposed fire engine turnaround shall be replaced at a ratio of 2:1 with trees no smaller than five- (5) gallon size. No replacement trees will be required for the removal of the dead redwood, eucalyptus trees, and trees less than 20" in circumference. 4. Tree preservation measures, including protective fencing and mulching, must be implemented for the remaining trees on site as recommended by McClenahan Consulting in their report dated March 4, 2008. ) Additional landscape mitigation will occur at the time of site development of the individual lots. 5. A conditions of project approval will require that upon discovering or unearthing any possible burial site as evidenced by human skeletal remains or artifacts, the person making such discovery shall immediately notify the County of Santa Clara Coroner and no further disturbance of the site may be made except as authorized by the County Coordinator of Indian Affairs. 15 Attachment 4 COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS September 12, 2008 L0248 TO: Brian Froelich Assistant Planner TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California 94022 SUBJECT: Geotechnical Peer Review E- i- ousto /Her,-_ le. 'I'l, ns T ot #216 -08 -IS -TM -ND -GD 27575 Prussia Road At your request, we have completed a geotechnical peer review of permit applications for the subject project using: . Geotechnical Engineering Investigation (report) prepared by Terrasearch, dated March 27, 2008; and a Tenative Map (1 sheet, 30 scaf'e) prepared by TS Civil Engineering Inc., dated August 15, 2008.. In addition, we have reviewed pertinent maps and reports from our office files and completed a recent site inspection. DISCUSSION We understand that the subject property will be subdivided into three lots. Access to the property is provided by a proposed paved street extending from Samuel Lane. Necessary grading for construction of the private street appear to be minor. An existing house and garage in proposed Parcel 1 are assumed to be removed. SITE CONDITIONS The subject property is characterized by' valley floor, alluvial flood plain topography. The channel of Deer Creek crosses the southern portion of the property Northern California Office Central California Office 330 Village Lane 6417 Dogtown Road Los Gatos, CA 95030-7218 San Andreas, CA 95249-9640 (408) 354-5542 e Fax (408) 354-1852 (209) 736-4252 o Fax (209) 736-1212 e-mail: losgatos@cottonshires.com www.cottonshires.com e-mail: cottonshires@starband.net Brian Froelich September 12, 2008 Page 2 L0248 and has been incised approximately 4-8 feet into the alluvial soils. The creekbanks are near vertical and are lined with concrete and rock. South of Deer Creek, the topography is flat to gently sloped (approximately 0 to 5 percent inclination). Northeast of Deer Creek, the topography is gentle to moderately steep (approximately 5 to 15 percent inclination). Evidence suggestive of expansive surficial soil was noted including desiccation cracks within the eastern portion of the property. Natural drainage at the site consists of sheetflow toward the west intercepted by swales and drainage pipes that lead to Deer Creek. A seep was observed in the southwestern portion of the property on the south side of Deer Creek. Seasonally shallow groundwater conditions are likely present across portions of the property. An area of ponding surface water was noted in the central portion of the property northeast of the existing residence. According to the Town Geologic Map, the subject property is underlain, at u2pti�f by v.•.:ai�he,—ed bedr l'" k materilz is of the Santa Mala Foril.ailon (l.e., COngiWlterate, sandstone, and potentially expansive claystone). Based on our review of the exploratory boring logs presented in the referenced report, it appears that weathered sandstone, conglomerate and claystone bedrock materials were encountered at depth and were overlain by younger alluvial deposits (interbedded sand, silt, gravel and clay). The nearest traces of the potentially active Monta Vista and Berrocal faults are mapped approximately 800 feet and 5,150 feet southwest and south of the subject property, respectively. Additionally, the active San Andreas fault is located approximately 3.3 miles southwest of the site. Local alluvial deposits have been identified by the Project Geotechnical Consultant to contain lenses of saturated silty sand that may liquefy during periods of strong seismic gro-und shaking. Shallow liquefaction near creekbanks can be associated with a type of ground failure termed 'lateral spreading' (creek banks fail into adjacent creek channels). CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED ACTION Proposed project construction is constrained by potential liquefaction, associated potential lateral spreading/ sloughing of creekbanks, ongoing fluvial erosion and lateral channel migration, expansive soil conditions, and anticipated seismic ground shaking. Potential seasonally shallow groundwater conditions could constrain basement construction or result in the need for special basement design. We understand that the potential for flooding across the property will be addressed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer and any appropriate flood mitigation measures will be employed. The Project Geotechnical Consultant has concluded that potentially liquefiable earth materials are present at depths of 15 to 20 feet beneath the site that may result in up to 1 inch of liquefaction -induced settlement at the ground surface and differential settlement of approximately 3/2 inch across the site. The consultant indicates that the 25 - COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. Brian Froelich September 12, 2008 Page 3 L0248 foot building setback from the creek should be sufficient to mitigate the potential for lurching or lateral spreading associated with the steep creekbanks. Terrasearch recommends use of pier and grade beam or structural mat foundations provided that liquefaction -induced settlements are included in the design. Geotechnical design issues related to potential basement construction are not covered in the referenced report. We do not have geotechnical objections to the proposed subdivision layout given adequate evaluation and any appropriate mitigation, of potential flooding constraints. The Project Geotechnical Consultant should evaluate the current Tentative Map and submit a formal plan review letter confirming the geotechnical feasibility of proposed residential building sites. It should be understood that the geotechnical feasibility and design measures needed for potential future basements has not yet been determined. We have one question regarding final foundation design parameters that should be sati cit' illy adil essed prior .to' issuat ce of building periud&s for new residences on individual parcels. We rch ecommend geotechnical approval of the Tentative Map application with the following conditions: 1. Geotechnical Plan Review — The Project Geotechnical Consultant should evaluate the current Tentative Map, verify the geotechnical feasibility of all delineated new house sites, and confirm that project design is in conformance with recommended geotechnical design criteria Appropriate documentation to address the above should be submitted to the Town prior to action on the Tentative Map. 2. Pier Foundation Option — If structural mat foundations are not to be utilized for future residences, then design parameters for the alternative pier and grade beam design should be clarified. Current geotechnical design recommendations indicate that foundation piers should extend a minimum. of 10 feet into competent native soils or engineered fill. The consultant should clarify the depth interval anticipated to contain competent native =oils. The bearing depth for beg-inn;ng ,,pier support should be specified. We understand that potentially liquefiable materials between 15 to 20 feet would not be consistent with this category. Appropriate documentation to address the above should be submitted to the Town for review by the Town Geotechnical Consultant prior to acceptance of documents for the building permit plan -check phase for individual residences. COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. Brian Froelich Page 4 LIMITATIONS September 12, 2008 L0248 This geotechnical peer review has been performed to provide technical advice to assist the Town with discretionary permit decisions. Our services have been limited to review of the documents previously identified, and a visual review of the property. Our opinions and conclusions are made in accordance with generally accepted principles and practices of the geotechnical profession. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties, either expressed or implied. TS:DTS:JI'-':kc) Respectfully submitted, COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TOWN GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT Ted Sayre Principal Engineering Geologist CEG 1795 David T. Schrier Principal Geotechnical Engineer GE 2334 COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. FiAE DEPARTMENT SANTA CLARA COUNTY �� ® - FIRE � 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818 2Q�g couaresrsseavIoe (408) 378-4010 e (408) 378-9342 (fax) e www.sccft ?1 f LI9'G% BLDG PERMIT NUMBER DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS FILE NUMBER CODE/SEC. CFC Sec 508.3, per Appendix B and C CFC Sec. 501� SHEET NO. REQUIREMENT Attaclunent 5 fw Internationally Accredited Agency 09 1003 216 -09 -IS -TM -ND -GD Proposal to create a Mot subdivision. One existing single-family residence on Parcel #1 is proposed to be demolished, and 3 new two-story single-family residences of aprox. 6,000+ square feet will be constructed. Review of this Developmental proposal is limited to acceptability of site access and water supply as they pertain to fire department operations, and shall not be construed as a substitute for formal plan review to determine compliance with adopted model codes. Prior to performing any work the applicant shall make application to, and -receive from, the Building Department all applicable construction permits. Wildland-Urban Interface: This project is located within the designated Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. The building construction shall comply with the provisions of California Building Code (CBC) Chapter 7A. Note that vegetation clearance shall be in compliance with CBC Section 701A.3.2.4 prior to project final approval. Check with the Planning Department for related landscape plan requirements. Required Fire Flow: The fire flow for this project is 1,750 gpm at 20 psi residual pressure. The adjusted fire flow is available from area water mains and fire hydrant(s) which are not spaced at the required spacing. Contact the Purissima Hills Water Co. to determine their procedure for installing hydrants with the required fire flow and spaced at the required spacing. See comments #8 and #9 Fire Apparatus (Engine) Access Roads Required: Provide access roadways with a paved all weather surface, a minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum circulating turning radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside, and a maximum slope of 1570. For installation guide lines refer to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet A-1. City PLANS SPECS NEW RMDL AS OCCUPANCY CONST. TYPE ApplicantName DATE PAGE LAH ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ R-3 V -B 4/23/2009 1 OF 4 SECJFLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIPTION BY 2 story unknwn Residential Development Harding, Doug NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION SUBDIVISION 27575 Purissima Rd Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Serving Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Saratoga .� p � Emission FIRE DEPARTMENT SANTA. CLARA COUNTY FIRE J 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818 CCURiESY 6 SERVICE (408) 378-4010 e (408) 378-9342 (fax) © www.sccfd.org Internationally Accredited Agency PLAN REVIEW NUMBER 0 9 1003 BLDG PERMIT NUMBER DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS -ODE/SEC. I SHEET I NO. I REQUIREMENT ;C Sec. 'C Sec. -C Sec. FC Sec. FC Sec. )8.3, per ppC dix B FILENUMBER 216 -08 -IS -TM -ND -GD Fire Department (Engine) Roadway Turn -around Reauired: Provide an approved fire department engine roadway turnaround with a minimum radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specification sheet A-1. Cul -De -Sac Diameters shall be no less than 72 feet. Fire Apparatus (Engine)Access Driveway Required: Provide an access driveway with a paved all weather surface, a minimum unobstructed width of XX feet, vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, minimum circulating turning radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside, and a maximum slope of 1570. Installations shall conform to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet D-1. Fire Department (Engine) Driveway Turn -around Required: Provide an approved fire department engine driveway turnaround with a minimum radius of 36 feet outside and 23 feet inside. Installations shall conform with Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications D-1. Timingof f Required Roadway Installations: Required access roads, up through first lift of asphalt, shall be installed and accepted by the Fire Department prior to the start of combustible construction. During construction, emergency access roads shall be maintained clear and unimpeded. Note that building permit issuance may be withheld until installations are completed. Temporary access roads may be approved on a case by case basis. 8 Public Fire Hydrant(s) Required: Provide public fire hydrant(s) at location(s) to be determined jointly by the Fire Department and the Purissima Hills Water Company. Maximum hydrant spacing shall be 500 feet, with a minimum single City PLANS SPECS NEW RMDL AS OCCUPANCY CONST. TYPE ApplicantName DATE PAGE AH ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ R-3 V -B 4/23/2009 2 4 OF =C./FLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIPTION BY story unknwn Residential Development Harding, Doug JAME OF PROJECT LOCATION SUBDIVISION 27575 Purissima Rd Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Serving Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Saratoga E5T�19Cr'_� RhE DEPARTMENT SANTA CLARA COUNTY 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818 (408) 378-4010 o (408) 378-9342 (fax) e www.sccfd.org DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS CODEISEC. I SHEET I NO.I REQUIREMENT CFC Sec. 501 f�reroacio"' Internationally Accredited Agency PLAN REVIEW NUMBER 0 9 1003 BLDG PERMIT NUMBER FILENUMBER 216 -08 -IS -TM -ND -GD hydrant flow of 1,750 GPM at 20 psi, residual. If area fire hydrants exist, reflect their location on the civil drawings included with the building permit submittal. Required fees to be paid ASAP to prevent engineering delays. Timing of Required Water SuI2121y Installations: Installations of required fire service(s) and fire hydrant(s) shall be tested and accepted by the Fire Department, prior to the start of framing or delivery of bulk combustible materials. Building permit issuance may be withheld until required installations are completed, tested, and accepted. NOTE: Current Codes, as adopted and amended by Los Altos Hills, require a fire sprinkler system be installed in most buildings. Contact this office for further informaton and review the Los Altos Hill Municipal Code. Water service for this proposed development must be designed to provide sufficient water supply for fire protection requirements, in addition to any other domestic and landscaping needs. NOTE: Requirements for construction of any proposed buildings will be provided at time of submittal of construction plans, and will be based on Codes and Standards in effect at time of application for Development and Construction Permits. City PLANS SPECS NEW RMDL AS OCCUPANCY CONST. TYPE ApplicantName DATE PAGE LAH N ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ R-3 V -B 4/23/2009 3 OF 4 SEC./FLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIPTION BY 2 story ur knwn Residential Development Harding, Doug NAME OF PROJECT LOCATION SUBDIVISION 27575 Purissima Rd Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Serving Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Saratoga FlIkE DEPARTMENT 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032-1818 (408) 378-4010 0 (408) 378-9342 (fax) o www.sccfd.org DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMENTS �ODEJSEC. F SHEET ND. REQUIREMENT iC Sec.505 I C Gomm�ssio� O r `g r l �. - t� rerna ' ona Internationally Accredited Agency PLAN REVIEW NUMBER 0 9 1003 BLDG PERMIT NUMBER FILENUMBER 216 -08 -9S -TM -ND -G® Premises Identification: Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all Zew and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible =rom the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their Background. To prevent plan review and inspection delays, the above noted Developmental Review Conditions shall be addressed as "notes" on all pending and future plan submittals and any referenced diagrams to be reproduced onto the future plan submittal. City PLANS SPECS NEW RMDL AS OCCUPANCY CONST. TYPE ApplirantNarne DATE PAGE ,AH ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1 V -B 4/23/2009 4 OF 4 iEC.JFLOOR AREA LOAD DESCRIPTION BY story unknwn I Residential Development Harding, Doug ECT SUBDIVISION 27575 Purissima Rd Organized as the Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District Seruing Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Saratoga } Town Of Los Altos Dills Subdivision Committee Hearing Fact Sheet Project Description: Three Lot Subdivision File Number: 216 -08 -IS -ND -TM -GD Site Address: 27575 Purissima Road Owner(s): Jerry Houston and Scott Hensley Staff Planner: David Keyon, Associate Planner Site Data Gross Lot Area: 3.29 acres Average Slope: 5.9% Lot Unit Factor: 3.296 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TABLE June 30, 2009 Attachment 6 ;��' � y �' P S` (('�� 'Y�.w�y � � } � �•v�Q ,.,� � '� � 'ro ' 1��^ "Z" CP 24 os- ,�, ''�,"s '� �. � y"���`���bJ�'�}h�'�..✓� �F.Y"��� � ���YT'�"��`'"a ,��"�y, vX.:��� lE.�����4SP� I`��ryy',R'�p�'3'4"R'""'� �I VI - 1 1 6.74% 1.011 1.011 15,165 6,066 2 7.25% 1.069 1.069 16,035 6,414 3 4.37% 1.027 1.027 15,405 6,162 Grading: Minimal grading for driveways and underground utilities. Sewer/Septic: Extend sewer line along Samuel Lane and connect all three (3) parcels to the Palo Alto Sewer Basin. Environmental Design Committee Comments: No obvious issues. Pathway Committee Comments: Restore existing path along Purissima Road to type IIB standards. Open Space Committee: Open space easement proposed along Deer Creek and at the southwestern corner of property. Fire Department Comments: Extension of Samuel Lane must be an all weather surface, with a minimum width of 20 feet. Fire Engine Roadway Turnaround required at the end of Samuel Lane per specifications in sheet A-1 of the Fire Department Standard Details and Specification Sheet. Geotechnical Comments: Approval recommended with conditions. Utility Company Comments: No issues. y Attachment 7 Town Of Los Alt®s Dills June 30, 2009 Subdivision Committee Hearing Report Attendance: Debbie Pedro (Planning Director), David Keyon (Planning), John Chau (Engineering), John Harpootlian (PC), Terence Szewczyk (project applicant), Jerry Houston (owner) Environmental Design Committee Comments: None. Commissioner Harpootlian Comments: None. Neighbor Comments: None Issues: Tree removal -no heritage oaks proposed to be removed. Conditions of Approval Added: None. Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director Date 4 lq'b� .5 �� 5 v Attachment 8 Environmental resign and Protection Committee New Residence//Remodel Evaluation Reviewed by: W Applicant Dame Address ab -]S Site impact/lightiaig/noise: Creeks, drainage, easements: Existing Vegetation: Significant issues/comments: n Date vglog Attachment 9 RECEIVE: AUG 15 N08 1OVgN OF LOSS ALTOS HILLS Submitted To: TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon 1776 Technology Drive San Jose, CA 95110 Project Location: 27575 Purissima Road Los Altos Hills, CA Submitted By: McCLENAHAN CONSULTING, LLC John H. McClenahan ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, WE -14768 member, American Society of Consulting Arborists March 4, 2008 ©Copyright McCLENAHAN CONSULTING, LLC 2008 McClenahan Consulting, LLC Arboriculturists Since 1911 1 Arastradero Road, Portola Valley, CA 94028-8012 Telephone (650) 326-8781 Fax (650) 854-1267 www.spmcclenahan.com March 4, 2008 TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon 1776 Technology Drive San Jose, CA 95110 RE: 27575 Purissima Road Los Altos Hills, CA Assignment As requested, I performed a visual inspection of 84 trees to determine: Species Size ® Condition ® Tree Protection Zone © Disposition with respect to retention based on Conceptual Site Plan Provide general Tree Preservation Guidelines Background This site is currently used as a residence with some orchard trees and farm equipmeht seen throughout the property. Plans include subdividing the lot into three parcels with: three single family residences. The Conceptual Site Development Plan dated December 10, 2007 was utilized for purposes of locating trees and describing impacts. Any changes to this plan will certainly modify the impacts and disposition of trees in this report. Therefore, further arborist evaluation may be required by the town or county. . Numerous trees around the perimeter and outside the lot lines were not include in thiE:; report and should not be impacted by development. Summary Due to poor condition and structural weakness two trees "it;1 acid .53) are recommended for removal. Numerous other trees on site are over mature and did not rate well in condition. These trees will need to be monitored and cared for from now and throughout site development to enhance prognosis. Any grading or excavation to occur within Tree Protection Zones must be accomplished by hand digging to a depth of at least 30 -inches. A qualified arborist should supervise the cutting of an.y roots greater than one inch in diameter. Irrigation recommendations should be implemented for the non oak species on site as directed in the attached Tree Preservation Guidelines. 5EE TRE -E REIioVgL PLA �J DA-rEp 7 (z�d� TS Civil Engineering Attention: [fir. Steve Kenyon Page 2 Methodology No root crown exploration, climbing or plant tissue analysis was performed as part of this survey. In determining Tree Condition several factors have been considered which include: ' Rate of growth over several seasons; Structural decays or weaknesses; Presence of disease or insects; and Life expectancy. The following guide for interpretation of Tree Condition as related to Life Expectancy is submitted for your information. 0 - 5 Years = Poor 5 - 10 Years = Poor to Fair 10 - 15 Years = Fair 15 - 20 Years = Fair to Good 20 + Years = Good Tree Description/Observation 1 Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) Diameter: 35.5" Height: 50' Spread: 50' Condition: Fair Location: Parcel 1 Entry Observation: Foliar canopy exhibits a moderate accumulation of deadwood. Bifurcation at 9 -feet creates an inherent structural defect. Minor decay and western sycamore borer damage is visible on root crown. The TPZ is 15 -feet. Proposed drive is 5 -feet from the trunk. Recommendation/Disposition: Move drive as far from trunk as feasible. Any excavation or grading within TPZ must The accomplished by hand digging. 2 Coast live oak Diameter: 30.5" Height: 50' Spread: 40' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan in proposed drive Observation: Tree grows to a slight phototropic lean and the canopy is one sided. Old damage from western sycamore borer visible on low trunk. Recommendation/Disposition: RETAIN TS Civil Engineering Attention: fair• Steve Kenyon Page 3 3 Coast live oak Diameter: 27.6" Height: 40' Spread: 40' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan in proposed drive Observation: Tree grows to a slight phototropic lean and the canopy is one sided. Old damage from western sycamore borer visible on low trunk. Recommendation/Disposition: BETA I N 4 Valley oak (Quercus lobafa) Diameter: 33.4" Height: 55' Spread: 50' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan in proposed garage Observation: Tree was dormant during inspection. Canopy is one sided and grows to a phototropic lean. Garage and drive encompass 80 percent of root environment. Recommendation/Disposition: SETA U4 5 Coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) Diameter: 30.0" Height: 85' Spread: 30' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits a moderate accumulation of deadwood. Creek and existing garage create a limited root environment. The TPZ is 14 -feet. Proposed garage will use the same footprint as existing. Recommendation/Disposition: Any excavation or grading within TPZ must be accomplished by hand digging. Initiate! supplemental irrigation. 6 Hollyleaf cherry (Prunus ilicifolia) Diameter: 7.7" Low Branching Height: 20' Spread: 20' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan adjacent to existing garage. Observation: Foliar canopy exhibits a minor accumulation of deadwood. Resembles live oak but isnot a quercus sp. Recommendation/Disposition: RETAIN TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 4 7 Coast redwood Diameter: 18.8" Height: 60' Spread: 10' Condition: Dead Location: On Plan Observation: Dead tree. Recommendation/Disposition: Recommend removal. 8 Coast redwood Diameter: 20.5" Height: 50' Spread: 18' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Foliage is typical of the species with some branch dieback. The TPZ is 10 -feet. No impacts anticipated within TPZ. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 9 Coast redwood Diameter: 39.1" Low Branching Height: 65' Spread: 30' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Foliage is typical of the species. Co dominant leaders at 4 -feet create an inherent structural defect. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 18 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 10 Coast redwood Diameter: 38.5" Height: 85' Spread: 32' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Foliage is typical of the species. Creek is 3 -feet from trunk. The TPZ is 18 -feet. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 18 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 5 11 Valley oak Diameter: 35.5, 19.1" Multi Trunk Height: 60' Spread: 55' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Although tree was dormant during inspection, canopy exhibits significant dieback. Scaffold limbs and second trunk exhibit weak attachments. No impact anticipated within TPZ of 20 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 12 Coast live oak Diameter: 9.1, 8.5" Multi Trunk Height: 20' Spread: 30' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Tree is adjacent to 11 and grows to exaggerated southerly lean. Canopy is sparse with dieback. No impact anticipated within TPZ of 9 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 13 Coast live oak Diameter: 30.0" Height: 45' Spread: 50' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Foliar canopy exhibits dieback and a heavy accumulation of deadwood. Bifurcation at 9 - feet. The TPZ is 15 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 14 Italian stone pine (Pinus pinea) Diameter: 33.0" Low Branching Height: 45' Spread: 40' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Low branching growth habit creates an inherent structural defect. Grows to a southerly lean with ground upheaval on north side. Canopy exhibits heavy interior deadwood. No impact anticipated within TPZ of 15 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 6 15 Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica) Diameter: 9.3" Height: 30' Spread: 18' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits a moderate accumulation of deadwood. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 6 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 16 Coast live oak Diameter: 37.0" Height: 40' Spread: 40' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Foliage is typical of the species with a minor accumulation of deadwood. Broken stubs indicate a history of limb failure. Creek is 6 -feet to the east. Bifurcation at 15 -feet. Nd impact anticipated within TPZ of 16 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 17 Valley oak Diameter: 24.5" Height: 40' Spread: 40' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Tree was dormant during inspection. Canopy is one sided and grows to a phototropic; lean. Ten -inch dead snag is on north side of trunk. Narrow scaffold limb attachments: Located on top of creek wall. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 14 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 18 Valley oak Diameter: 28.0" Height: 50' Spread: 45' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Tree was dormant during inspection. Narrow scaffold limb attachements. Located on top of creek wall. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 14 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 7 19 Elderberry (Sambucus mexicana) Diameter: 7.8, 11.6, 8.8" Multi Trunk Height: 15' Spread: 35' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits significant dieback. Root crown exhibits extensive decay. Minor impacts anticipated within TPZ of 10 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 20 Valley oak Diameter: 11.0" Height: 35' Spread: 30' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Tree was dormant during inspection. Grows to northerly phototropic lean. No impact:; anticipated within TPZ of 5 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 21 Valley oak Diameter: 33.6" Height: 45' Spread: 45' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits a moderate accumulation of deadwood. Bifurcation at 10 -feet creates an inherent structural defect. Proposed fire truck turnaround is outside TPZ of 15 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 22 Coast live oak Diameter: 34.2" Height: 35' Spread: 50' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits a moderate accumulation of deadwood and rodent nest. Scaffold limbs exhibit narrow attachments. Fire truck turnaround is outside the TPZ of 15 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. TS Civil Engineering Attention: fil'ir. Steve Kenyon Page 8 23 Coast live oak Diameter: 14.5, 10.5" Low Branching Height: 30' Spread: 20' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Foliar canopy is outcompeted by larger overlapping oaks. Provides perimeter screening. Minor impacts anticipated during site clean up within TPZ of 12 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 24 Coast live oak Diameter: 14.2, 25.3" Low Branching Height: 30' Spread: 35' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Foliar canopy exhibits a moderate accumulation of deadwood. Low -branching growth habit creates an inherent structural defect. Minor impacts anticipated during site clean up within TPZ of 16 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 25 Coast redwood Diameter: 19.3" Height: 45' Spread: 18' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan in proposed fire turnaround Observation: Foliar canopy exhibits dieback and symptoms of water stress. Recommendation/Disposition: IZETA i W " 26 Pin oak (Quercus palustris) Diameter: 8.5" Height: 17' Spread: 18' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Tree was dormant during inspection. Grading impacts cannot be assessed accurately as of conceptual site plan. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ of 6 -feet. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 9 27 Coast redwood Diameter: 12.8, 17.8" Multi Trunk Height: 45' Spread: 25' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Foliar canopy exhibits dieback and symptoms of water stress. Grading impacts may occur within TPZ of 15 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 28 Coast redwood Diameter: 13.4, 12.9" Multi Trunk Height: 40' Spread: 18' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Foliar canopy exhibits dieback and symptoms of water stress. Minimal impacts anticipated within TPZ of 12 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 29 Coast redwood Diameter: 23.7, 23.9" Multi Trunk Height: 55' Spread: 35' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Minor deadwood visible in canopy. Multi trunk growth habit creates an inherent structural defect. Minimal impacts anticipated within TPZ of 20 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 30 Coast live oak Diameter: 28.8" Height: 35' Spread: 50' Condition: Good Location: On Plan Observation: Foliar canopy branches to the ground. Interior deadwood is visible. TPZ is the driplin% or 25 -feet. Minimal impacts are anticipated within TPZ. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 10 31 Coast live oak Diameter: 25.0" Height: 40' Spread: 40' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy competes with adjacent treees for light. Grows to a slight lean. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 13 -feet. RecommendationlDisposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 32 Coast redwood Diameter: 26.1, 18.8" Height: 50' Spread: 28' Condition: Good -101" Location: On Plan Observation: Multi trunk growth habit creates an inherent structural defect. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 20 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 33 Jeffrey Pine (Pinus jeffreyi) Diameter: 13.1" Height: 35' Spread: 15' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits significant dieback of low limbs. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 6 - feet. RecommendationlDisposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation /fertilization recommendations. 34 Coast live oak Diameter: 25.5" Low Branching Height: 45' Spread: 45' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits interior deadwood and rodent nests. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 12 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 11 35 Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) Diameter: 21.8" Height: 45' Spread: 28' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy is very sparse with branch dieback. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 10 feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 36 Incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens) Diameter: 9.9" Height: 20' Spread: 9' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits minor accumulation of deadwood. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 37 Incense cedar Diameter: 9.8" Height: 18' Spread: 8' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits minor accumulation of deadwood. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 38 Scotch pine (Pinus sylvestris) Diameter: 7.2, 10.5, 8.6, 7.0" Multi Trunk Height: 20' Spread: 30' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Foliar canopy exhibits a moderate accumulation of deadwood. Multi trunk growth habit creates an inherent defect. Recommendation/Disposition: RETA i N TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 12 39 Incense cedar Diameter: 8.0" Height: 18' Spread: 6' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Sparse canopy is attributed to competition from larger pine. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 40 Monterey pine Diameter: -25.2" Height: 55' Spread: 40' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation:. Foliar canopy is slightly sparse with a moderate accumulation of deadwood. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 41 Incense cedar Diameter: 6.2" Height: 20' Spread: 8' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Sparse canopy is attributed to competition from larger pine. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 42 Scotch pine Diameter: 11.9" Height: 16' Spread: 18' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy grows to phototropic lean. Deadwood observed in canopy. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 13 43 Monterey pine Diameter: 25.5" Height: 60' Spread: 40' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy is sparse with branch dieback and appears drought stressed. No impact is anticipated within TPZ of 13 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 44 Coast live oak Diameter: 10.7" Height: 35' Spread: 25' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Foliage is typical of the species. Grows to a slight lean. Narrow scaffold limb attachments. No impacts anticipated from preliminary design. However, property line fencing could impact tree. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 5 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 45 Coast redwood Diameter: 16.9, 15.5" Height: 40' Spread: 25' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy dieback is likely caused by water stress and canker disease. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 15 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 46 Monterey pine Diameter: 20.3" Height: 40' Spread: 35' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Dieback of canopy and water stress. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 10 -feet. RecommendationlDisposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. TS Civil Engineering Attention: flair. Steve Benyon Page 14 47 Monterey pine Diameter: 21.5" Height: 40' Spread: 30' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Large limb dieback and drought stress observed in canopy. Grows to irregular lean. No impact anticipated within TPZ of 10 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 48 Monterey pine Diameter: 29.2" Height: 55' Spread: 35' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Large limb dieback and drought stress observed in canopy. Recommendation/Disposition: --RE-rA 114 49 Atlas cedar (Cedrus atlantica) Diameter: 19.3" Height: 40' Spread: 25' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits a heavy accumulation of deadwood. Minimal impact anticipated within TPZ of 10 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 50 Coast redwood Diameter: 17.6, 10.0" Height: 35' Spread: 15' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits extensive dieback. Minimal impact anticipated within TPZ of 12 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 15 51 Valley oak Diameter: 17.2° Height: 40' Spread: 40' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Tree was dormant during inspection. Scaffold Iimbs exhibit narrow attachments. Bud development appears normal. Minimal impacts anticipated in TPZ of 9 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 52 Coast redwood Diameter: 20.4" Height: 38' Spread: 20' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Foliage is typical of the species. Previously topped. Minimal impact anticipated within: TPZ of 10 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 53 Coast redwood Diameter: 20.6" Height: 15' Spread: 15' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy topped at 12 -feet. Decay visible between buttress roots. Recommendation/Disposition: Recommend removal. 54 Coast redwood Diameter: 29.5" Height: 20' Spread: 25' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy topped at 20 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 16 55 Gray pine (Pinus sabiniana) Diameter: 24.0" Low Branching Height: 38' Spread: 35' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits extensive dieback. Low branching growth habit creates an inherent structural defect. Minor impacts anticipated within TPZ of 12 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 56 Coast redwood Diameter: 15.6, 17.5, 18.1" Multi Trunk Height: 38' Spread: 25' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits branch dieback. Minor impacts anticipated within TPZ of 20 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 57 Monterey pine Diameter: 32.7" Height: 55' Spread: 50' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits symptoms of drought stress and branch dieback. Minor impacts anticipated within TPZ of 15 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 58 English walnut (Juglans regia) Diameter: 10.8" Height: 18' Spread: 18' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Tree was dormant during inspection. Bud development appeared normal. Sapsucker injury observed on limbs. Decay and wood pecker holes observed at tops. Recommendation/Disposition: TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 17 59 Atlas cedar Diameter: 11.7" Height: 40' Spread: 18' Condition: Fair Location: Observation: Canopy is outcompeted by larger pine. Top grows to a slight tean. Proposed drivewal.y 5 - feet from trunk will impact less than 25 percent of root environment. The TPZ is 5 -feet Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 60 Coast live oak Diameter: 13.9" Height: 30' Spread: 20' Condition: Good Location: On Plan " Observation: Foliage is typical of the species. Proposed driveway will impact less than 25 percent. f root environment. The TPZ is 6 -feet. 61 Olive (Olea europaea) Diameter: 8.8, 9.4, 8.5" Height: 15' Spread: 25' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits heavy interior deadwood. Label indicates planted in 1961. Proposed. driveway will impact 50 percent of root environment. TPZ is 11 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: 62 Chinese pistache (Pistacia chinensis) Diameter: 16.8" Height: 25 Spread: 25' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Tree was dormant during inspection. Canopy previously topped/pollarded at 16 -feet.: Recommendation/Disposition: TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 18 63 Giant sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) Diameter: 11.0" Height: 35' Spread: 14' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Foliar canopy exhibits symptoms of drought stress. Minimal impacts anticipated withii'al TPZ of 6 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 64 O I ive Diameter: 8.5" Height: 12' Spread: 15' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits heavy interior deadwood. Minor impacts anticipated within TPZ of 5-'. feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 65 Atlas cedar Diameter: 12.7, 9.5, 18.7, 8.9, 9.6, 11.2" Multi Trunk Height: 75' Spread: 35' Condition: Fair Location: On Pian Observation: Canopy exhibits interior deadwood. Scaffold limbs exhibit narrow attachments. Propclsed driveway 11 -feet from the tree will impact approximately 25 percent of lateral root environment. The TPZ is 20 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 66 Sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) Diameter: 12.9" Height: 20' Spread: 12' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy topped at 20 -feet. Impacts anticipated to 30 percent of root zone from propo:3ed driveway grading. The TPZ is 6 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 19 67 Coast live oak Diameter: 6.3" Height: 20' Spread: 10' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Foliage is stunted and chlorotic in spots. Tree is located in driveway easement and will be impacted by driveway grading. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 68 Sycamore (Platanus racemosa) Diameter: 13.8" Height: 25' Spread: 25' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Topped at 25 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Proposed for removal. (driveway) 69 Southern magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora) Diameter: 6.8" Height: 15' Spread: 15' Condition: Poor Location: On Plan Observation: Foliage is chloroic. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 5 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 70 Persimmon (Diospyros kaki) Diameter: 10.0" Height: 13' Spread: 13' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy recently pruned back. Minimal impacts anticipated within TPZ of 5 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 20 71 Persimmon Diameter: 6.9" Height: 9' Spread: 9' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan ; Observation: Canopy recently pruned back. Recommendation/Disposition: 72 Coast redwood Diameter: 10.2" Height: 25' Spread: 10' Condition: Good Location: Observation: Foliage is typical of the species. No impacts anticipated within TPZ of 6 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 73 Sweet gum Diameter: 15.5" Height: 27' Spread: 20' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Topped at 27 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Proposed for removal. C ` 74 Pin oak Diameter: 9.2" Height: 13' Spread: 14' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Topped at 13 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: I TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 21 75 Coast hive oak Diameter: 5.7" Height: 17' Spread: 9' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Foliage is typical of the species. Grows 1 -foot from existing foundation. Protect durini.J existing home demolition. May be requested for removal. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Demolition contractor will have to protect tree. 76 Giant sequoia Diameter: 34.2" Height: 55' Spread: 30' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Canopy exhibits a heavy accumulation of interior deadwood. Located in proposed driveway and is proposed for removal. Recommendation/Disposition: Relocate driveway to preserve this tree. 77 Pin oak Diameter: 18.9" Height: 50' Spread: 38' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Previously topped at 20 -feet. Regrowth from topping cuts is weakly attached. Located in proposed driveway. Recommendation/Disposition: 78 Pin oak Diameter: 20.1" Height: 45' Spread: 35' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Regrowth from topping cuts at 15 -feet is weakly attached. Minor impacts anticipated; within TPZ of 10 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. TS Civil Engineering Attention: liar. Steve Kenyon Page 22 79 Persimmon Diameter: 4.9, 4.9, 4.1, 5.2" Height: 18' Spread: 15' Condition: Poor to Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Previously topped at 9 -feet. Minor impact anticipated within TPZ of 8 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. Implement irrigation recommendations. 80 Holly oak (Quercus ilex) Diameter: 14.3" Height: 30' Spread: 25' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Tops are slightly sparse. Proposed new drive is outside TPZ of 6 -feet. Recommeridation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 81 Sweet gum Diameter: 9.5" Height: 20' Spread: 9' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Topped or pollarded canopy. In proposed driveway. Recommendation/Disposition: Proposed for removal. 82 Coast live oak Diameter: 18.0" Height: 30' Spread: 22' Condition: Fair to Good Location: On Plan Observation: Foliage is typical of the species. Grows to a slight lean toward creek. Existing dirt road is within TPZ of 9 -feet. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mira Steve Kenyon Page 23 83 California buckeye (Aesculus californica) Diameter: 13.6° Height: 25' Spread: 18' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Previously topped to clear larger oak. No adverse impacts anticipated. Tree is listed as dead on plan but is alive. Recommendation/Disposition: Contact project arborist at least 72 hours prior to any work within TPZ. 34 Coast live oak Diameter: 26.1" Height: 45' Spread: 45' Condition: Fair Location: On Plan Observation: Foliar canopy is slightly sparse with a moderate accumulation of deadwood. Retaining wall and raised planter create a poor root environment. A small wall was installed 1-fr.Dot from trunk to prevent the fill from direct contact with the trunk. Tree will be impacted I;)y construction and site demolition and grading. Recommendation/Disposition: A qualified arborist should review the grading to occur within TPZ of 12 -feet to the trCink. Any grading within TPZ must be accomplished by hand digging. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 24 Tree Preservation and Protection Plan In providing recommendations for tree preservation, we recognize that injury to trees;as a result of construction include mechanical injuries to trunks, roots and branches, and injury as a result of changes that occur in the growing environment. To minimize these injuries, we recommend grading operations encroach no closer than five times the trunk diameter, (i.e. 30" diameter tree x 5=150" distance). At this distance, buttress/anchoring roots would be preserved and minimal injury to the functional root, area would be anticipated. Should encroachment within the area become necessary, hand digging is mandatory. Barricades Prior to initiation of construction activity, temporary barricades should be installed ar6und all trees in the construction area. Six-foot high, chain link fences are to be mounted on steel posts, driven 2 feet into the ground, at no more than 10 -foot spacing. The fencE;s shall enclose the entire area under the dripline of the trees or as close to the dripline; area as practical. These barricades will be placed around individual trees and/or grdups of trees as the existing environment dictates. The temporary barricades will serve to protect trunks, roots and branches from mechanical injuries, will inhibit stockpiling of construction materials or debris within tie sensitive 'dripline' areas and will prevent soil compaction from increased vehicular/pedestrian traffic. No storage of material, topsoil, vehicles or equipment shell be permitted within the tree enclosure area. The ground around the tree canopy shall not be altered. These barricades should remain in place until final inspection of the building permit, except for work specifically required in the approved plans to be done under the trees to be protected. Designated areas beyond the driplines of any trees should be provided for construction materials and on site parking. Root Pruning (if necessary) During and upon completion of any trenching/grading operation within a tree's dripline, should any roots greater than one inch (1 ") in diameter be damaged, broken or sevei`ed, root pruning to include flush cutting and sealing of exposed roots should be accomplished under the supervision of a qualified Arborist to minimize root deterioration beyond the soil line within twenty-four (24) hours. Pruning Pruning of the foliar canopies to include removal of deadwood is recommended and should be initiated prior to construction operations. Such pruning will provide any necessary construction clearance, will lessen the likelihood or potential for limb breakage, reduce 'windsail' effect and provide an environment suitable for healthy and vigorous growth. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 25 Fertilization A program of fertilization by means of deep root soil injection is recommended with applications in spring and summer for those trees to be impacted by construction. Such fertilization will serve to stimulate feeder root development, offset shock/stress as related to construction and/or environmental factors, encourage vigor, alleviate soil compaction and compensate for any encroachment of natural feeding root areas. Inception of this fertilizing program is recommended prior to the initiation of construction activity. Irrigation A supplemental irrigation program is recommended for the conifers and fruit trees an`d should be accomplished at regular three to four week intervals during the period of Nlay 1St through October 31St. Irrigation is to be applied at or about the 'dripline' in an am6unt sufficient to supply approximately fifteen (15) gallons of water for each inch in trunk diameter. Irrigation can be provided by means of a soil needle, 'soaker' or permeable hose. When using 'soaker' or permeable hoses, water is to be run at low pressure, avoiding runoff/puddling, allowing the needed moisture to penetrate the soil to feeder root de�'ths. Mulch Mulching with wood chips (maximum depth 3") within tree environments (outer foliar perimeter) will lessen moisture evaporation from soil, protect and encourage adventil`ious roots and minimize possible soil compaction. Inspection Periodic inspections by the Site Arborist are recommended during construction activities, particularly as trees are impacted by trenching/grading operations. Inspections at approximate four (4) week intervals would be sufficient to assess and monitor the effectiveness of the Tree Preservation Plan and to provide recommendations for any additional care or treatment. All written material appearing herein constitutes original and unpublished work of the Arborist and may not be duplicated, used or disclosed without written consent of the' Arborist. TS Civil Engineering Attention: Mr. Steve Kenyon Page 26 We thank you for this opportunity to be of assistance in your tree preservation concerns. Should you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance in these concerns, kindly contact our office at any time. Very truly yours, McCLE7hn C INSULT , LLC 'L,By: H. McClenah�n ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, WE -14768 member, American Society of Consulting Arborists JHMc: pm cClenahan Consulting, LLC Arboriculturists Since 1911 1 Arastradero Road, Portola Valley, CA 94028-8012 Telephone (650) 326-8781 Fax (650) 854-1267 wwwspmcclenahan.com ARBORIST ®9SCL®SURE STATEMENT Arborists are tree specialists who use their education, knowledge, training; and experience to examine trees, recommend measures to enhance the beauty and hbalth of trees, and attempt to reduce the risk of living near trees. Clients may chooEle to accept or disregard the recommendations of the arborist, or seek additional advice. Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree. Trees are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below ground. Arborists cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances, or for a specified perie)d of time. Likewise, remedial treatments, like a medicine, cannot be guaranteed. Treatment, pruning, and removal of trees may involve considerations beyond the scope of the arborist's services such as property boundaries, property ownership; site lines, disputes between neighbors, landlord -tenant matters, etc. Arborists cannot take such issues into account unless complete and accurate information is given tO the arborist. The person hiring the arborist accepts full responsibility for authorizincl the recommended treatment or remedial measures. Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled. To live near a tree is to accept some degree of risk. The only way to eliminate all risks is to eliminate all tre6S. Arborist: �.� . ohn H. McClenahan Date: March 4, 2008 MR an Ecological Consulting Firm SAMUEL LANE PROJECT LANDS OF SWA®TSON� 27575 PURISSIMA ROAD LOS ALTOS MILLS, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION LIVE OAK ASSOCIATES, INC. Rick Hopkins, Ph.D., Principal Melissa Denena, M.S., Director of Ecological Services For: Terry Szewczyk TS CIVIL ENGINEERING 1776 Technology Drive San Jose, CA 95110 May 22, 2008 Attachment 10 RECEIVED AUG 15 2000 t� of LOS ALTOS MILLS Project Number: 1197-01 San Jose: 6840 Via del Ore, Suite 220 e San Jose, CA 95119 4 Phone: (408) 224-8300 a Fax: (408) 224-1411 OakhUrst: P.O. Box 2697 . 39930 Sierra Way, Suite B e Oakhurst, CA 93644 a Phone: (559) 642-4880 o F -ax: (559) 642-4883 Bakersfield: 3200 Stockdaie Hig ivay, M10-293 o Bakersfield, CA 93311 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLEOF CONTENTS......................................................... ...................................................... 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................. 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS....................................................................................................... 5 2.1 BIOTIC HABITATS AND LAND USES ....................... . 8 2. 1.1 Ruderal ................................... 10 2.1.2 Developed/Landscaped..................................................................... ...........................10 2.1.3 Aquatic Habitat............................................................................................................. 2.2 SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS AND ANIMALS .......................................................... 2.3 THREATENED, ENDANGERED OR SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS AND ANIMALS THAT DESERVE FURTHER DISCUSSION.................................................................... 20 2.3.1 California Red -Legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii). Federal listing status: 20 Threatened; State listing status: None ...................................... 2.3.2 Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata). Federal listing status: None; State listing status: Species of SpecialConcern ................................................... ....................... 2.4 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS.................................................................... 3.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS....................................................................... 25 3.1 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA.............................................................................................. 26 3.2 RELEVANT GOALS, POLICIES, AND LAWS ...................................................... 26 3.2.1 Threatened and Endangered Species..................................................................•-- ........ 27 3.2.2 Migratory Birds .............:................ ............................................................ .. 3.2.3 Birds of Prey................................................................................ 27 3.2.4 Wetlands and Other "Jurisdictional Waters"................................................................ 28 3.2.5 Local Ordinances and/or Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs).................................... 3.3 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS ................................................ 3.3.1 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Plants ..................................................... 29 29 3.3.2 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Animals............................................................... 3.3.3 Disturbance to Waters of the United States or Riparian Habitats .............. 31 3.3.4 Loss of Habitat for Native Wildlife............................................................................... 3.3.5 Interference with the Movement of Native Wildlife ............................ 3.3.6 Degradation of Water Quality in Seasonal Drainages, Stock Ponds and Down.stream .. 32 Waters............................................................................... ...................................... 3.3.7 Local Ordinances and/or Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs)..................................... 32 LITERATURECITED.................................................................................. . 37 PERSONALCOMMUNICATION...................................................................................... 0 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 1.0 INTRODUCTION Live Oak Associates, Inc. (LOA), has prepared the following report describing the biotic resources of the Lands of Swanson Property, and evaluates likely impacts to these resources resulting from future site development. The site (also referred to as the study area) is located at 27575 Purissima Road and at the terminus of Samuel Lane in the Town of Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California (Figure 1). The site is located in the Palo Alto U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute quadrangle in a portion of section 25, township 6 south, range 3 west. The proposed project is the extension of Samuel Lane and development of three single-family residences north of Deer Creek. This report identifies possible constraints to future site development related to sensitive biotic resources, significant biotic habitats, regional fish and wildlife movement corridors, and existing local, state, and federal natural resource protection laws regulating land use. Provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), federal Clean Water Act (CWA), state and federal endangered species acts (CESA and FESA, respectively), California Fish and Game Code, California Water Code, and local policies could greatly affect project costs, depending on the natural resources present on the site. The primary objectives of this report are as follows: Summarize all site-specific information related to existing biological resources; ® Make reasonable inferences about the biological resources that could occur on the site based on habitat suitability and the proximity of the site to a species' known range; v Summarize all state and federal natural resource protection laws that may be relevant to possible future site development; ® Identify and discuss biological resource issues specific to the site that could constrain future development; and 1 Live Oak Associates, Inc. C) Cr W O CO O O O C 3 miles 0 3 miles Vicinity Map y.Y. ect location M '9 See Site Location site i AG Ff�f r ~! ;traject ¢�b� ��' -� a i -OF O Zai t F �F W F i iv10NTA�lF ii STEVENS GREEK 0 3 miles Vicinity Map y.Y. ect location M Live Oak Associates, Inc. Samuel Lane Site / Vicinity Map Date Project # Figure # 519108 1197-01 1 '9 See Site Location Map (above) San Jose i Live Oak Associates, Inc. Samuel Lane Site / Vicinity Map Date Project # Figure # 519108 1197-01 1 Identify potential avoidance and mitigation options that could significantly reduce the magnitude of any likely impacts to biological resources associated with future site development. Natural resource issues related to the aforementioned state and federal laws have been identified in past planning studies conducted in and around the Town of Los Altos Hills, and it is reasonable to presume that such issues could be relevant to the subject property examined in this report. For example, a number of state and federally listed animals, as well as other special status animal species (i.e., candidate species for listing and California species of special concern), have been documented within the region of the project site. Such species include state and/or federally listed species such as the California red -legged frog, California protected species such as the white-tailed kite, and California species of special concern such as the western pond turtle and loggerhead shrike. This report evaluates the site's suitability for these and other species. CEQA is also concerned with project impacts on wildlife movement corridors, fish and wildlife habitat, and jurisdictional wetlands, as well as project compliance with special ordinances and state laws protecting regionally sensitive biotic resources, and approved habitat conservation plans. Therefore, this report addresses the relevance of each of these issues to eventual site development. The impact analysis, as discussed in Section 3.0 of this report, is based on the known and potential biotic resources of the study area described in Section 2.0 of this report. Sources of information used in the preparation of this analysis included: (1) the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFG 2008); (2) the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2001); (3) State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California (CDFG 2008); (4) numerous planning documents and biological studies for projects in the area, many of which have been prepared by LOA; and (5) manuals and references related to plants and animals of the San Francisco Bay Area. c Live Oak Associates, Inc. LOA ecologists Melissa Denena conducted field surveys of the site on December 5, 2007 and May 9, 2008. These surveys consisted of walking throughout the site in order to provide a thorough visual inspection of site conditions. Plant and animals observed were 'identified and noted. Information gathered in the field was used to identify plant communities and characterize the botanical and wildlife resources occurring on the site and in the region. 4 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS The study area is located within the Town of Los Altos Hills in northwestern Santa Clara County, California. The property's address is 27575 Purissima Road, which is located east of Highway 280, between Page Mill Road and El Monte Avenue. The site supports an existing single-family residence and associated structures. The majority of the property has been disturbed or altered from the years of usage by the residents. However, a rock lined reach of Deer Creek as well as other waters flow through the southern portion of the property. An aerial photograph of the site is shown in Figure 3. Elevations of the site range from approximately 280 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) to 300 feet NGVD (approximately 85 to 90 meters). The soils of the site are not covered by the two soils surveys for Santa Clara County (MRCS 1968 and 1974). However, the soils appear to be consistent with the typical, common soils of the area based on the vegetation present. Sensitive soils, such as serpentine soils, appear to be absent from the site. Annual precipitation in the general vicinity of Santa Clara County is approximately 14 to 25 inches, almost 85% of which falls between the months of October and April. Virtually all precipitation falls in the form of rain. Stormwater runoff readily infiltrates into the soils of the site, but when field capacity has been reached, water collects in Deer Creek and the other waters. The site is surrounded by low density single-family residences with a large amount of land being retained as open space. 2.1 BIOTIC HABITATS AND LAND }USES Three categories of biotic habitats and land uses have been identified for the project site. For purposes of this report, these have been defined as ruderal, developed/landscaped, and aquatic habitat (Figure 4). R Live Oak Associates, Inc. %''�'r t r 1'° 1 t " E; +}n • r� i Y: D 'b ar+-2¢i -�'ry ,cFg ler a5 I'v bl JS :N(3' F bay ? 1� i a qrPP�� ly i ; •.t •iy ! tt t }, , f::}x'i �I ��2 1 §t ,1� �(?iQ h �' Vt �; p,% :; t ♦ rw 1�' � q \�gi! as Oa st xrA p�r,h 1: npry u' i f3 t1 liT. F 7 J }ql ' • h(L rl ye {td C 1sC fa < rq4 4: ""•"1�- i t o '^ r ,� L t` r r4l,i rrr r 1t_r �kA q,yr rk'r ,• L jr; rf Illt d r 253 o 1;�� i' Sq fS t o s r:, ri � J��l, J'{ tr ark "•� u t� a�. ' f } sy '" r ., et y. i �J: i t� 1_ •s s: � d-�cir�i •+ttli t * 3s'iA t(rt�fl�a bl. rr3 t;,, , it ,r 4 •e•. Yi�'xgt h� },It*5 1$ '� _ .'.t # o- e Ir+j :;, ,'1 a�}i; 1� 2Ftt";c �'a", y.+,''lii.� i ''�'"t.. - i ¢ t�•' Itl" ry .,��1 � �" S. - _ ' ...r "'"�:z^:,5. r' Ira'7�"¢ v•Jk � .. �r}} irt`'trr r }�L��A°i'^ t.:>5Sr'N4 `,q : .E Yet v,: y a+l }fi�t t"i;�151,JJ - ..•�.:,;F'xi�'rt4ir : tt �' :r(' ej�!v t i+, `;.4s� -.) 1y, i �A %. 4 .}:.} ,,;a: ' }7vMf k. ur 1 41r'x,r�P\n _._ Epr . r�i�{ �Ai itk al. � x;i vy: a! h J'q'.: ILy+�P h� , S a. M1•� ! � I � •. `� � 1, f 'Cy� -� .� i iA - 3 , ! i '�' ty�r tp ~{x r xt a Ilt �,, ��.., iit\ `, ,n h w a � k(, i '"i 'vr• `alts rr tr U �4 � `Y , �u yf+_t }i tri }; ?r'•a ! rtk `"• U�', 1r oM C 1 I +y..- r 7 FM t t. v {I 4• .�a a., . d� ( W sPf �,'y i .. sI l7,r' t1 s« �.;�a; °. ` " t}t. �t yprt r "y.f 4.'l.-"t{,t,irt �'rl".µ <., �'-�^i I� v"�'� 4L'e'-. •�i,}{}zA ,yjs�.Nax r. SA ili.�rr -tib' 4 '}C t 'r Ir�-r"i z ii ,§ r +` rr �r •F11yt: e t5y, r ri 1 i7ii w 4 e'Yj Ilpr 1 y� y y i rq Nv :i'r. yyr e i n%r f' ri i nJyt; n.l IFtg�11 1. dw +,r'aL� Ji Jt} tti a ; x 4 q it s Y +x, �.': u ,,, {k x..t? "r ,tl �' .FX:r• ' `V" '�,t ,!}t^•"2 -'•( r }5\t , Lt yl r: r!r. R t p i iF p. k:: sir �, ,•d,t V , rt ''mtr.VP }a.. �.l }, y il3x Y' 1 1 • ,,a2 tt t. .3 q, - 1! ; :� • ilei y ,t.xtij,.GL,:.,HtY :'I •:.v� k. t'N ':� <1 1� i ,k„r 1 1 !h11,1 •'% d. ., t. R .,�u i , s t� � - ,�h,�. r• �'jt r=ay ,� �?� ,t� M:t :i.,�Er „t k I , . t�.•�, e� r'.c sa .t x,�,,a ih �a , { ! lt�r,,. r•i.k5;I:1}; ,,_'. ._w �r. . ..,..:, ,I,I .t.,.rt �u`: .. l} ,1�:„,.4w , ?ti,:.;y".1.fi,:.i.alrlin,.,:�.9,,,-+,.g.,, • rt��-nf,4 - �;hn 10, .. S.:l+y . xlf�.x1q,r,'r. , i;i!: _�, 'r. . ,6ar. rh, 1".3+�+',J.,l,:k,`"�=., �dyt2*.,t?. ,. }q..v�h,T.rr�, a,?!.T". '��.+,.t,,,.r, ."d.:,ra5�. .r« ."F' -;'-u 4 • ." tlrf-W�f•i1v.'i�, ,•,, . �I:7Isk1 %`, ,��r5wa,:. ... ,y^ ,, s I +, .'� Xw€! „ '�;a. �. 1i 4 arC rn � �a t� i^,�' ,„ t ,.,, ,sc;•.,.. t'{l�J�;i�•o- t,, .,s. + .. ,>� s t:' 6 i4 � , S. .1,.:.q' K'.. ,ikt:,. 1M v>'' S r ,ia +,r=: ts3t -.;, a .y - - kt�'ri x "�u •.. r♦,. x'j; "wr9, s ; il, 7, a,..rf , .} . , ,,. tm t li;¢ l.. at r r,. , t .i .^A.s q, 1-a i� t + 4;. n,ii:. y� J �, }q c,t, ,. - t. �,,.. r'1, ,,rr t " S:.#a ° N*: ✓, ' a"K.. iii. ,Xrrt�t `" Cr'': `i..,..,pw. +• �•''.,y {1 .t i .s'u: ;+�.q. I1?;_,.p K A', ,pt^I'4 ,4..:, ,. r..a..,,. " ,'j.,.1.•. -t IJ s. iJ`.y ��r.. . 1. t t. . S S 1, ? •, {}'::tt, .` .., i' a,N � .Yo- [ - ' r r�;, l r'r�-li~*7��.�1 v:' � --il . 1: p � � ,, Ca ,r..;.x .,4.,.. ,.xIC. '„r P o.. ,. •.._ _ ,. ., , -a.cI.> y76 � fu ..!- E y, ,.'2., .Y f ,,,A: •7M., ` r! '§M'4K,.y tit. v a �,�T,.. :l: n♦-+.:'..- � , >„ w e,I • •� 1J .w .c "i _.. ,� a t spy a,$., k[ ,d.. 1T ,.k•. .-i.0}',,r'}�a+f tt . ,.; s+ ,a }}. N:rt :._n_ va,.•?,.,t i< '7:IC y .5.. .I,, tlt zs-,{itr.5. •�'. r• •tr,r. s+v t � -Cr, i.. a ,u,!' 'S� , ;:r+ i. s �r, i ,.; a/ 1 , o a:", 'r a :.;, t fi , �. , .:1 l :aa ` ' ° . 4 ,:1°,..,✓✓' %�."i �:, t :v,.., ..;. .�:ll(- :� '� y, l +'€'.. ••• ,.�:, 2C i;)'i ?It ' �i�;t., a: `2:w�y � i �1!} lE ,X. ..t,; ,. dv, ix. .n.,,.r ,,,;,-,!; . f r�rlf.ir.: �. ,"u•._ !.C,' hb.1 k.;4.... r'.. .} ,v. t rn S,'4iY.!; ,;... ,:F 'r(r''.nx. F� 1!r`.yr ..lr g, 51:,' c+ r. :F. tt �tJ • e. t.i.tt a ,, ,�" .a.. r ,. 9 f } -.t'}IPr -_I f 3wh t'r'A.'a->.}". 1. :2r "r< t :Ytt? �_..'k•larY 4� hk: ,N,S.� ;ilp,r 'H 11 T45' �,; 5' s 4 t.,s t �y ,.,,�,5 h!`t},t: ,.. ,`';.. ' . '• ..* �.�,� %',. r,S,.t}er \ k ..1 .i--,. ...+,. wl J. .t -T.. ,•7LJ' _r+a " a -s v trt. ,J i~1 Y. ,I e,+' r4 ut1 J ). .,h"Y„.,..Ns., ilk }is• v,'�''iR OL 61 p f.M n3 r,�'.,;t, ,i '.,1+ •, i : x! tr...�r••• "'. „pn. s yt., t (}. ia” w . t �I•:�}.:{ti u,� i;y... „s,.'s�'""ir ;•:�... zvf r.- t�F�`, r ,i!`..�r, . t., .. tt .N��`i, �.-. r. �i � 1PiR 1�v, r .:a �' tj, hllI +91 ul� ��+' r t „,, '�^ '�$tfbf� ti ; ;.;4'r}"' :t • ` , � 4 t 4��SPm ;I 'Yn�', e. 14e, '" -- iv J:" Iv.,. , , &�',- btu, V7 r ..5.-�\ 3: .. rr •� M f N•., }k'n 'rC, tt,l ,F , w i 11 y :: rL. ,y. •..,�� . 't t , r .t, r+ �{ it + y L`! -. rl�v.. �'tq a �.,.J•4 ! ..);3 5 d ae r rC- t `'-.. �S "..#= t t +r H,:c �• t� i rnkrt ; h•{�lr YGc{. c )trait x.,�i t ,.='�Jj . it re:v.=' .+.,, • . ;: .. , ,. , . ,.,,.; , t, -1s k fF' G4111 ;m, U.. } yse3, ,s: .s. ,., rn`ll t: "y.�4, ` uk., �_ i1'."` FJ �I, ^s.,Y +ar_ , aC is. , f KJ,o'i`i, :�. 'Fli '."1 �'1 • ,:'N ^ .:v".�u, ^. +i 1."+h ii t.l � F ^J',� ..I....{... S. A,,, .�Y..•LY`{ i k • ,ti.f. Y}'�,. t`��i`-.F 1tt'F _', i. r:, ..f r _.;.�Tr,r-tcs:.- '�s; ♦ _ .i"iRr ~<i t �;r r 4 x,f, l; t, �,w, F t .tl . t nyA 9c l ,,.ry„l• aP:„" l di, i, �} _ 1 J S t R .f.,� � .: �t �+. f -. ,, 'fr'=' y r n �k: r.... s y 11Y', a: F��.t~1rT r, ,, ^`.l1 k,. L an ,.I , `.M�... , ,.r,:: :,' Y' .) iy>; ,.t-: n •i.la: k rtY.F.^4"•_, Ycy"r,4,..:-,.,-.:Y a :,F`1 a' .(.,. ,�t ih•:f•"d -\rl tS�i .,, ,: • 1. a+ . ii c., .. .. •,. p' ,,. ..... r .;, C�iF- I� i. 1 a: •4k r i e, is -i...,. .:.tt,:,.,. .. S. ,, .v Snt �.�f hV , ...:: �.: �e t..r). �:5'b b 4 j�'i � i{,.. �t 1.5. �Y,ai 4i „ � p r., �n: ,. h .. '."•tl.: � r�'.� x:. a t s.�i ,... ,'J.. .4. 4dA5-:.,F� I p9} ," ur r.. ,r � ,.:r.. �-I p�cl� (•. i . ...Jr - 4 -!, • -Ly, .'stet 1 � }tl �, f* w:,�i'^= 4^kVf J°; !,r i.i 1„t. ry+ pI 'v},. } ,ti: .11' ': `:r h L, ,.Tj:. k t,,. .; i, 'LI .,r ,(, ♦u�`t, i,b.:r,,. .j... .a k .:,w .. �,t.. .:.i , "i i �i. .,., .-1r t:^ ... r FQ:-r t. ,:.,:, ,>1:,t i..J(r, : ,.,1. {,1. r�,.i. "k.:-r,."T' t '1., :;�, _-•a,- Yd �'... ti.'Jf .A3tn � „• •.,» .:a +&. �f :. �{{..,,». ., i .}„}a',1e�ai.. .. .-. r..,k. .'-: ,'�y...�+' :?ryi,x � `t. t q...k:(�" xt:", ��y,�auY t,,.,l v.xl Ifi, J tv1 P,Yi , ,•. yu.,, a, t } ::.: ' �,t t t nrr. C t \.,, t ,.I ♦ w r 3 , i r: '- -:.,:, ;l ,R+ i,'lF_ J• ,I, falw, I,r C :•fg yr,, kl, ;.. 7 J.1 ,; .41.+ t..J.Yr: :t ,.i,,x 41. •:;� ) Jv,:.+ti. ♦ °V`f ,L i{ xSa �t.l r id f' 'tkS•, ,.. 6., .7n ?a, `�,l"'}-,.•1'�"?Iq@• I .;.. .t • , , .,,iA�i ..,, a' I JI:, '\,:'.. S• i. ;(Ya^y A„+�,r :...: r , .5 /r. ,j ., 5,,. , 5 , u .-,�. j r t � (, ., ,} f fit, • � �....�1. { E,; , +,1. Ra dh•, -,i 1!:' �'?n ,:i tl ln.+4 ,.!\ti �^'•,+ .,..,,. 1•a . �,�. :i I.', y ..;s. F. 5 ,.., �. 1 to �::�,� "hr .:i" .. Jr...1� ., nl, r$. 1: tl!�,.. f4 ir. � tt ,7. ,t .: li `� i.t .v f�.},1.. i.r�. t 1 n+i., - i'.f �� .: `rr �1 �"• �.N.R -�5:" •'4 v,1,1 r� „r.�i�., ., ,.,.":. rCa:,.l.., +Ji.,-,.�.•:�,ac ,,.li.. .y4.}*}, � a ,r�..f,..".,•,t.`y5...: rl :O.o .zty,..� `',`r.l. ,t",..nes l.. 'ry��l,ns�,r.- `+, ars,. :S s"r~,•r,,3ro�!P� 'ntrp t -..3.. Mltt.anyd • ..;Y'r,r,,,N C. �: • . f ,1 4 3 ,•. ,, ;7 '1 I, ...!, ,° 1'1;'• i^c.. -+G* .+ ya' • p•L;'t t Jf JCyyy�1r51t¢; ehq 1 fi Il. - sYl Y A.Y, �Ji y, •7, .. y�, t. 'r ng", N:` r �`t it I}utfi+%Yni i�ra.. d,.� li,k t ph A} Y,t ♦•ci S?.' ii k :L-rCtka sk 3,I, }� sem. �;lxn 44 . - �, k - t:'.� 1 ,. e- }w t : �.',/ t° �. " ,< 1�'t•,..I t ,..>_I:lu '�.,.. 3>•.i ;' -• �......Y�_. .,>,e,,,,% �,�} ,.a "�4'+ ,P{t+iit• �. s`��sr,,C,i}"N�°r -fir r�[ .Nre,:f �,. ,. 2 Jl _ c•�`i7 0-1, 2� � rr- — y' G,�� Stj{attl +'`, l ? a4 +E', r, I : yr♦� v'.# p 5. & F a e i .v*,vr ,�;'.'.:1. 3. $ { 1 tSyS26�7T �a v y ♦ ••�• Y tk+� �A i r♦h (? a Uve O • AssocW �� r. 1:} t •' Srlf 1 � }3� c, � `• �A M1 flr��'1 t 1, • , ,. . , n�' .y� �� 4;' r + 10 +t�5 ft1`t^� ♦y � 1 ,,{ dk drr 14ta i ::� ' ! y[ I ,r r "r a ;, t 116• _ I ,int YarK+i I 4� •'�• ttrYSSa��1a t 1 + ;' t1',i=.i' w ? y,: t+;v ✓'r >LYa JC: { P Ir t 6 t� �,, si v lr /r iiki u + Faq a ra �4 e �,� ro i e . , •! r{ y }' at Y a { l Lane ;rit f 4 { +� >'>�vt v Xr�a •alb.-'akt�t'i1SR 1t.t¢ryY G` lh,s>kJr�'Aerial •� •. . r 'si1F ,� ♦� " • p ,Y. P•, x rl F • I y`%%//.. t�en ti.1.�57y�$ ".,iktiS'dt'v.:�S¢ G .;?'X 3�r. -,.r, y S ' Y• « >p �Sh k -. a Ar't''�It lly 4 J.' ° t r 1 » ".' •" .. .., . 1 3 ,N' W, 3 e t f'ysrt4 '�-r M1w a r, 17 _ it N LEGEND t 5 I I f:c' ` Ruderal n:.,:,�5,•?'�,_�-- -/% V� ; �Fz• t./ •-'r•h .t lIdl I ` �. 0 / TI �.1�.�i, Developed / Landscaped 13C 13 \, lC`l: CF2� S ' �� ;r ! ��' �,,.;`� ,1 ,t `� *;,,' x• Approx. locations of aquatic habitats 4 100' 0 4 100 feet _\( � d I ' '�, '" •' �, ..,,,• t \� � approximate scale Sources' The base map is provided by TS Civil Engineering Ap. �\ t I,�,' `,L, cY:v J4.osai).' % ay.�, :a. �,- ,sik�.a- •fi i.a-p•r�ar�+r. • v,av \ �'..� ` \/ -- \ \ k I y .., `�<,�. '�1s,: ' ' i'r r •�' i�bt.r. �>�. `{\�esvP `FES � � -�,! / Gi `� 14.-.�`, l`+ 1 ��15 �''�1 ��`!a `r:�j 4. Y. — :'- �. yJtv:�t'��.p, ...�PP:iF[f�,G�l'F'.418 •� •p..�. ) \ ` ` I II !`J -.:( ,5../'c a % : �'. " 9' . 1,:• : Ytr r �iFri'r�'(;f`� 5 '' I I �o' c , ;r ylY ,� 't ➢•, '}` 4• u=.'r. •,rl, ,�5t 1 � 5 �, 7� ➢ n!{l � I .,/. 4 �,, '•--'t� ILl r�, � 4.'�GY \ ri � `1,` ..,\ I, `�`� .�' � � I,, ��t J/J a rir' 1 '��.-� �;. i .1•Y� .,•Iv[ ...� l.lt•F �}. , � �`'� � 1 `'I 1 `'t !i �' , ��� ! .�'I �rcr,.{ X�551 ,�'" . vn ` .1., .• . = ;�. fr-=�.�•,._:.':,-r''� \ , \� 5. \`� \ ,-.'.-.,. 1 _ I + i7/F• S I I I' I��ou /.�t. l �,i'• 1 y- -1j.' f o• ` 5 \ �`'°�......,,�., � i,� . I �p j� ICI ,,.� .� -�— .` I. l .� 5,• \�__� �=' ' t,, 1 :� `�° i, + � � ,I � `Frn• Horn+n --� v 1,nS: i ` ) £ 41 nJ.") O Jiw?? .. •.Y.. cSr.P l J 1 \l I r.• y rC �~,- l \5 ',..... - 1 1 /I nr Pr�ti.` II ,, , S',j`'t aF.uVU , �r.'nvn�. '��'i, ra•I�r-rT lv, 5 � I '-�., f'rr''�r i� t ,� �� '.��� � I II I{ \�":Y,ajj rhe., F "1� ���. V.+;� .! V.t �rn;- \ , /I •1 1 , j` \ •t. �;r•;,;-•may / } ) All 7 7 r? • L' �L ,,�. r III. . �� ` `{ 'i; I ;a 'Dfs.•%>(< / { , t l'E ri,tfils��� A,v.�„ I<„ � �'• - li � 'I ) �.., f , l � riaJ j c�jr��--,-�•�,t��:�;'�,1 p�- C ( , ,�.. ti� � � r- } I �! ; rljj/ �1 / ! II.� d roµp��/ . t p�'� k.�,• .n:or I i J i y�&, 7i�� i!/Har. °'�e `�.._ ti .,r�j`i 1jl I I 1� t ..�',•." • LLLirrP:,: n .,• J: � !t/' , ,fr I 0 �.,�:'' � \ '.2^�"• ,r,;➢'(�;'��y_ �,---„� .,.�`�a:�tiY �H., � �`��'. � SS.1 P,IIE zs•v�''- � �— 1 t � 1 jl 11 j'p••• `(`' r 1%, �� � i.l� � is�.' YJ /r \�1 � ',�I' � ! : '1 �: Xel`i�; ,l^hLc •' `I � - .1\.- � .../IItC�itR�� ., PWE Urt \r�t,sgcl.nv: Ir7-4 ',` .SSI ....-'!o�k�� 'rte ' �P•:Ir.. ! .' DAN' . a! /, I:FCG. //:/7,i' . - •lu_[r,.,., l !'A, r 1 F_' f� •-.^� : k�.2+. '1' '. tP' � _ �'V hGlr. � J ! J�': ' �r '�iJ F /� 'l�� / i t i r •t / f I I ' y � . r'Y. ^ r rt11o1L, ' _1•'�.' .^ l-_� _� , J[ I t + ♦ I � \� .'�;:�ti': > � and �• .. _ �e:z� �.: •'irisl,rc:.1 �ex•�'l. \ ., � ! '•,F� .• Ii'� ',C� Q[S'N. .. 1fEW,P' .'I!trI GFC.. \ .i✓_ ,. �-� - ✓ �' \ y 1 'x:` ! �^�. c. �. / /yy-tT, -•.�. I�� u,. � \,. 5� � l 1 I T, ,S" / 4 ,` � � K,.V.. � •C , -./ 1,4f.P�D . i, lu•r 'ad.� � I�nS r .I� '\ m•, , r.� r' III I ,5 I v ,!',[iv?,.K,' .•,}•: �.: is 4.2••/ ` vD hit r•.i�;.a:_ '/ t ..uva ora ; [r Jv,cc" .-t �{' . 4rJ!r,w.r• ( /,• � •. 5!& `�'t,. � �,w•c . ,.,.� .,v � . v ��«:r.,�w:..�,. - ��� � -v.� �® ®de.�..®.b tmate Project AP� roxB ndary 423., %\ 1. �� °t�:r.` - -'_,>_--_�,-,..-�-., \• / J //-,'-- / `5 Live Oak Associates, Inc. `,' .�'� ` ��, \ \ �-,` •�.1i� e to n .., , � ,� � o � , � I Samuel Lane '•\ 4y, ` \ �: � „�.,�,., i J Biotic Habitats Date Project # Figure # } 1197-01 3 5/13/06 2.1.1 Ruderal A large portion of the property has been classified as ruderal. The term "ruderal" refers to areas that are periodically disturbed by anthropogenic influences. The properly has been occupied by residents for years who have mowed, introduced non-native vegetation, and actively utilized the entire property as part of their normal lives. Therefore, naturally occurring, undisturbed habitats that may have been present onsite decades ago have since been altered. Ruderal areas support low -quality habitat characterized by being dominated by non-native grasses and forbs of European origin and typically native vegetation is sparse to non-existent. In this case, there are also a number of non-native shrubs and trees within this habitat as well. Non-native herbaceous species observed include barnyard barley (Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum), slender wild oats (Avena barbata), Italian ryegrass (Lolium multijlorum), ripgut (Bromus diandrus), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), black mustard (Brassica nigra), bur clover (Medicago polymorpha), geranium (Geranium sp.), smooth cat's ears (Hypochaeris glabra), clover (Trifolium sp.), milk thistle (Silybum marianum), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), scarlet pimpernel (Anagallis arvensis), vetch (Vicia sp.), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), and California poppy (Eschscholizia californica). Trees observed in this habitat included species native to the area such as the coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus agrifolia), and redwood (Sequoia sempervirens). These trees are very mature and likely pre -date the existing development of the site. There are also a number of planted trees that are not native to the area such as the Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), Jeffery pine (Pinus jeffreyi), stone pine (Pinus pinea), and Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica). Ruderal areas can provide suitable habitat to many terrestrial vertebrates. The majority of the ruderal areas of the site do not provide suitable habitat for amphibians. However, the areas adjacent to the aquatic habitat could support a variety of amphibian species seeking refugia. Leaf litter and dense mat of herbaceous vegetation in the southern portion of the site provide a moist microclimate suitable for amphibians such as the ensatina (Ensatina eschscholtzi), arboreal salamander (Aneides lugubris), California slender salamander (Batrachoseps attenuatus), and western toad (Bufo boreas). 8 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Y Y' Reptiles could occur throughout the ruderal areas. Species such as the western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis) which was observed onsite, southern alligator lizard (Gerrhonotus multicarinatus), western rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis), gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus), and California red -sided garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis infernalis) may routinely utilize the ruderal areas of the site. A number of avian species are known to occur in the site vicinity. Species observed onsite include the northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), American robin (Turdus migratorius), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), western bluebird (Sialia mexicana), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), and black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans). Other resident birds of the area include, but are not limited to, the western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta), American crow (Corvus imparatus), and mourning dove (Zeniada macroura). A variety of raptors are attracted to this habitat by an abundance of invertebrates and small reptiles, birds and mammals. Raptors expected to be observed on the study area include red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), American kestrels (Falco sparverius) and turkey vultures (Cathartes aura). Mammals are common to ruderal areas. However, the only mammal observed onsite was a fox squirrel (Sciurus niger). California ground squirrels (Spermophilus beecheyi) and the Botta's pocket gophers (Thomomys bottae) could occur on the study site, but none were observed during the 2007 and 2008 surveys. Other small mammals likely present include the California vole (Microtus californicus), western harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis), and ornate shrew (Sorex ornatus). These small mammals attract a variety of predators, including various snakes and raptors as previously discussed, but also mammals such as coyotes (Canis latrans) and gray foxes (Urocyan cinereoargenteus). Opossums (Didelphis virginiana), raccoons (Procyon lotor), and black -tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus) also are expected to occur on the site from time to time. 0 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 2.1.2 DevelopedALandscaped The central portion of the site is developed or landscaped. The majority of this land use consists of a single-family residence with a large landscaped yard. There is, however, a detached metal garage near Deer Creek and a driveway going through the property as well. Vegetation within this area of the property consisted almost entirely of introduced species. The landscaped yard adjacent to the residence was planted as a manicured lawn. A few of the non- native herbaceous species observed in the ruderal areas were also observed scattered within the landscaped areas. Shrubs and trees scattered in the yard include species such as nandina (Nandina domestica), sycamore (Platanus sp.), magnolia (Magnolia grandii lora), and persimmon (Diospyros sp.). The wildlife species within this habitat would be somewhat limited due to the level of ongoing disturbance. Nonetheless, the species that could utilize the ruderal areas of the site, particularly the avian species, could be present within the developed/landscaped portion of the property. The residents of the property could also have domestic animals such as cats (Felis catus) and dogs (Canis familiaris) as pets. 2.1.3 Aquatic Habitat Onsite aquatic habitat consists of a rock lined reach of Deer Creek, a reach of an unnamed tributary, and a couple of seeps. All aquatic features were present in the southern portion of the property (i.e. Deer Creek and the area to the south). The unnamed tributary and seeps flow into the onsite reach of Deer Creek which in turn flows northwesterly offsite. Water was present in the onsite aquatic habitat during both the December 2007 and May 2008 field surveys. A different variety of vegetation was associated with the aquatic habitat of the site. Little to no vegetation was observed in the actual channel of Deer Creek since it has been channelized with rock walls. However a number of vines, shrubs, and trees overhang the creek. Species observed include periwinkle (Vinca major), wild strawberry (Fragaria vesca), California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), California rose (Rosa californica), Mexican elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), redwood, valley oak, box elder (Acer negundo), and 10 Live Oak Associates, Inc. California bay (Umbellularia californica). Herbaceous vegetation was observed within the unnamed tributary and seeps due to their more natural banks. Species observed include bristly ox tongue (Picris echioides), spiny sowthistle (Sonchus aspen), water parsley (Oenanthe sarmentosa), iris leaved rush (Juncus xiphioides), pampas grass (Cortaderia jubata), calla lily (Zantedeschia aethiopica), and an unidentified non-native palm. The species richness and diversity of wildlife would be higher in this area of the site due to the presence of water. The amphibians and reptiles listed as potential seeking refugia in the ruderal areas of the property would likely be present in the aquatic habitat. Similarly, the avian and mammalian species expected to occur in the other portions of the site would also utilize the aquatic habitat due to their close proximity. 2.2 SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS AND ANIMALS Several species of plants and animals within the state of California have low populations, limited distributions, or both. Such species may be considered "rare" and are vulnerable to extirpation as the state's human population grows and the habitats these species occupy are converted to agricultural and urban uses. As described more fully in Section 3.2, state and federal laws have provided the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with a mechanism for conserving and protecting the diversity of plant and animal species native to the state. A sizable number of native plants and animals have been formally designated as threatened or endangered under state and federal endangered species legislation. Others have been designated as "candidates" for such listing. Still others have been designated as "species of special concern" by the CDFG. The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) has developed its own set of lists of native plants considered rare, threatened, or endangered (CNPS 2001). Collectively, these plants and animals are referred to as "special status species." A number of special status plants and animals occur in the vicinity of the study area (Figure 4). These species, and their potential to occur in the study area, are listed in Table 1 on the following pages. Sources of information for this table included California's Wildlife, Volumes I, II, and III (Zeiner et. al 1988), California Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFG 2008), 11 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (USFWS 2008), Annual Report on the Status of California State Listed Threatened and Endangered Animals and Plants (CDFG 2008), and The California Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2001). This information was used to evaluate the potential for special status plant and animal species that occur on site. A search of published accounts for all of the relevant special status plant and animal species was conducted for the Palo Alto USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle in which the project site occurs, and for the eight surrounding quadrangles (Redwood Point, Newark, Woodside, La Honda, San Mateo, Mountain View, Mindego Hill, and Cupertino) using the California Natural Diversity Data Base Rarefind 2008. It is important to note that the CNDDB is a volunteer database; therefore, it may not contain all known or gray literature records. All species listed as occurring in these quadrangles on CNPS Lists IA, 113, 2, or 4 were also reviewed. 12 Live Oak Associates, Inc. TABLE 1. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICINITY PLANTS (adapted from CDFG 2005 and CNPS 2001) d d der the State and/or Federal Endangered Species Act Species Ltstea as Threatened or En an ere un Habitat *Occurrence in the Study Area Species Status San Mateo Thornmint FE„ CE, Occurs in serpentinite Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Acanthomintha duttonii) CNPS IB vertisol clay soils in serpentine soils is absent from the study franciscanum) relatively open areas at area. elevations of 50 to 300 meters. San Mateo Woolly Sunflower FE, CE, Serpentine cismontane Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Eriophyllum latilobum) CNPS 1B woodland at elevations of 45 serpentine soils is absent from the study to 150 meters. area. Marin Western Flax FT, CT Occurs in chaparral, valley Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Hesperolinon congestum) CNPS IB and foothill grasslands and is serpentine soils is absent from the study Santa Cruz Manzanita CLAPS 1B often associated with area. (Arctostaphylos andersonii) serpentine soils at elevations the study area Additionally, none were of 5 to 370 meters. observed during 2007 and 2008 surveys. Contra Costa Goldfields FE, Occurs in mesic areas of Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Lasthenia conjugens) CLAPS 1B valley and foothill grasslands mesic wetlands is absent from the study as well as in vernal pools at area. elevations of 0 to 470 and the study site is located below the meters. 305 meters. White -rayed Pentachaeta FE, CE, Occurs in chaparral, valley Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Pentachaeta bellidiflora) CNPS 1B and foothill grasslands and is serpentine soils is absent from the study often associated with area serpentine soils at elevations of 35 to 620 meters. L- 1'nrDr Uther s ectal srarus PLUMS Habitat *Occurrence in the Study Area Species Status Franciscan Onion CNPS 1B Cismontane woodlands, clay Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Allium peninsulare var. valley and foothill grasslands serpentine soils is absent from the study franciscanum) often on serpentine soils at area. elevations of 100 to 300 meters. Bent -flowered Fiddleneck CLAPS 1B Coastal bluff scrub, Absent. The habitat on the study site (Amsinckia lunaris) cismontane woodlands, and has been highly disturbed over the valley and foothill grasslands years, therefore suitable habitat has at elevations of 3 to 500 been deemed absent. meters. Santa Cruz Manzanita CLAPS 1B Open areas in redwood forest Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Arctostaphylos andersonii) and chaparral at elevations the study area Additionally, none were of 60 to 700 meters. observed during 2007 and 2008 surveys. Kings Mountain Manzanita CNPS 1B Broadleaved upland forest, Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Arctostaphylos regismontana) chaparral, coniferous forests the study area Additionally, none were at elevations of 305 to 730 observed during 2007 and 2008 surveys, meters. and the study site is located below the 305 meters. Alkali Milk -vetch CNPS 1B Playas, adobe clay valley Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Astragalus toner var. tener) and foothill grasslands, and the study area Additionally, the study alkali vernal pools at site is located above 60 meters. elevations of 1 to 60 meters. 13 Live Oak Associates, Inc. TABLE I. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT 'VICINITY Others ectal status eianis its ceu u UlYd U (�wac. Habitat *Occurrence in the Study Area Species Status Round -leaved Filaree CNPS 1B Cismontane woodland and Absent. The habitat on the study site (California macrophyllum) clay valley and foothill has been highly disturbed over the Iat elevations of years, therefore suitable habitat has 15 to 1200 meters. been deemed absent. Congdon's Tarplant CNPS 1B Alkaline valley and foothill Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Centromadia parryi ssp. grasslands at elevations of 1 alkaline soils is absent from the study congdonii) to 230 meters. area. Lost Thistle CNPS IA Habitat unknown, but found Absent. Determined to be absent from (Cirsium praeteriens) at elevations of 0 to 100 the study area due to the disturbed meters. nature of the site and the fact that no specimen have been observed since 1901, in which only two collections were made in Palo Alto. San Francisco Collinsia CNPS 1B Closed -cone coniferous Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Collinsia multicolor) forests and coastal scrub at the study area. elevations of 30 to 250 meters. Western Leather -wood CLAPS 1B Occurs in broadleaved Absent. Marginal habitat occurs along (Dirca occidentalis) upland forest, coniferous the onsite aquatic habitat, although none forests, chaparral, and mesic were observed during the 2007 and riparian woodlands at 2008 surveys. elevations of 50 to 395 meters. Ben Lomond Buckwheat CNPS 1B Occurs in ponderosa pine Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Eriogonum nudum ssp. decurrens) sandhills and chaparral at the study area. elevations of 50 to 800 meters. Fragrant Fritillary CNPS 1B Occurs in coastal prairie, coastal scrub, and valley and Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of serpentine soils is absent from the study (Fritillaria liliacea) foothill grasslands and is area. often associated with serpentine soils at elevations of 3 to 410 meters. Loma Pr ieta Hoita setastro CLAPS 1B Chaparral, cismontane Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Hoita Lina) woodland, and serpentine serpentine soils is absent from the study riparian woodlands at area. elevations of 30 to 860 meters. Woolly -Headed Lessingia CNPS 3 Broadleaved upland and Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Lessingia hololeuca) lower montane coniferous serpentine soils is absent from the study forests, coastal scrub, and area. clay or serpentine valley and foothill grasslands at elevations of 15 to 305 meters. Arcuate Bush Mallow CNPS 1B Chaparral at elevations of 15 Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Malacothamnus arcuatus) to 355 meters. the study area. Hall's Bush Mallow CNPS 113 Chaparral and coastal scrub Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Malacothamnus hallii) at elevations of 10 to 760 the study area. meters. 14 Live Oak Associates, Inc. TABLE 1. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICINITY Other special status plants listed by CNPS (cont) Species Status Habitat *Occurrence in the Study Area Mt. Diablo Cottonweed CNPS 3 Broadleaved upland forests, Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Micropus amphibolus) cismontane woodlands, the study area. chaparral, and rocky valley area. Steelhead FT and foothill grasslands at Absent. Steelhead have never been (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) elevations of 45 to 825 found in Deer or Matadero Creeks. A meters. massive barrier (i.e. a cement lined Robust Monardella CNPS 1B Occurs in openings of Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Monardella villosa ssp. globosa) cismontane woodlands and the study area. Additionally, the study chaparral at elevations of site is located below 185 meters. 185 to 600 meters. from reaching Deer Creek during their Dudley's Lousewort CR, CNPS Maritime chaparral, Absent. The habitat on the study site (Pedicularis dudleyi) IB cismontane woodlands, has been highly disturbed over the (Rana aurora draytonii) coniferous forests, and years, therefore suitable habitat has valley and foothill grasslands been deemed absent. at elevations of 60 to 900 However, due to the nature of the onsite meters. reach of Deer Creek being a disturbed, Hairless Popcorn Flower CNPS IA Occurs in heavy clay soils of Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Plagiobothrys glaber) alkaline meadows and in the study area_ Also, the last marshes and swamps at documented sighting was in 1954. elevations of 15 to 180 meters. Slender -Leaved Pondweed CNPS 2 Occurs in shallow, clear Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Potamogeton filiformis) water of lakes and drainage the study area. Additionally, the study channels at elevations of 300 site is located below 300 meters. to 2150 meters. Caper -fruited Tropidocarpum CNPS IA Occurs in alkaline soils in Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Tropidocarpum capparideum) hills and valleys at alkaline soils does not occur on the elevations of 1 to 455 study area. Last seen in 1957 near meters. Saratoga. ANIMALS (adapted from CDFG 2008 and USFWS 2008) 4necies Listed as Threatened or Endangered under the State and/or Federal Endankered Species Act Species Status Habitat *Occurrence in the Study Area Bay Checkerspot Butterfly FT Native grasslands on Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Euphydryas editha bayensis) serpentine soils. Host plant serpentine soils is absent from the study is Plantago erecta. area. Steelhead FT Migrate up fresh water rivers Absent. Steelhead have never been (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) or streams in the spring and found in Deer or Matadero Creeks. A spend the remainder of the massive barrier (i.e. a cement lined time in the ocean. trapezoid) is located directly downstream from the site (Launer, pers. comm.). This barrier blocks the fish from reaching Deer Creek during their spring migration. California Red -legged Frog FT, CSC Rivers, creeks and stock Possible. This species may utilize the (Rana aurora draytonii) ponds of the Sierra foothills aquatic habitat of the site, particularly and coast range, preferring Deer Creek, as a movement corridor. pools with overhanging However, due to the nature of the onsite vegetation. reach of Deer Creek being a disturbed, rock lined channel, it is not believed that frogs would reside onsite. 15 Live Oak Associates, Inc. TABLE 1. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICIli1ITY Qnariac T.icfod nc Thranfaned nr Endangered under the State and/or Federal Endangered Species Act (cont.) Species Status Habitat *Occurrence in the Study Area California Tiger Salamander FT, CSC Vernal pools and stock Absent. No suitable breeding habitat (Ambystoma californiense) ponds of central California. occurs on or adjacent to the site. San Francisco Garter Snake FE, CE Occurs in slow-moving Unlikely. The onsite aquatic habitat (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) water of emergent wetlands provides marginal habitat at best for this in the San Joaquin and lower species. Additionally, this species has Sacramento Valleys. not been documented in the vicinity of the study area. The nearest occurrences are over three miles to the northwest in Western Pond Turtle CSC Open slow-moving water of Los Trancos Creek and Lagunita by (Actinemys marmorata) rivers and creeks of central Stanford. Q1nio .Qnariac of .Qnarral ('nnrern Species Status Habitat *Occurrence in the Study Area Foothill Yellow -legged Frog CSC Found primarily in swiftly Unlikely. Deer Creek provides (Rana boylii) flowing creeks with cobble- marginal habitat at best for this species sized substrate. as the substrate of the creek is not preferable. There are also no documented occurrences of this frog in Deer or Matadero Creeks. The nearest occurrence is more than three miles to the northwest, just south of Stanford. Western Pond Turtle CSC Open slow-moving water of Possible. This species may utilize the (Actinemys marmorata) rivers and creeks of central onsite aquatic habitat. Marginally California with rocks and suitable nesting habitat is also present in logs for basking. the adjacent ruderal areas south of Deer Creek. White-tailed Kite CP Open grasslands and Possible. Suitable foraging and (Elanus caeruleus) agricultural areas throughout breeding habitat exists onsite for this central California. species. Northern Harrier CSC Frequents meadows, Unlikely. Marginal foraging and (Circus cyaneus) grasslands, open rangelands, breeding habitat exists onsite for this freshwater emergent species. wetlands; uncommon in wooded habitats. Golden Eagle CP Typically frequents rolling Unlikely. The site provides limited (Aquila chrysaetos) foothills, mountain areas, breeding habitat (in the taller trees) and sage -juniper flats and desert. foraging habitat (in the grassland). Burrowing Owl CSC Found in open, dry Unlikely. This species is not known to (Athene cunicularia) grasslands, deserts and occur in the immediate project vicinity. ruderal areas. Requires Additionally, suitable breeding habitat suitable burrows. This (i.e. ground squirrel burrows) was not species is often associated observed onsite. with California ground squirrels. Long-eared Owl CSC Frequents dense, riparian Unlikely. Breeding habitat is absent and (Asio otus) and live oak thickets near foraging habitat is marginal. Wintering meadow edges and nearby individuals may pass through the site on woodland and forest rare occasion. habitats. Breed in valley foothill hardwood up to ponderosa pine habitats. 16 Live Oak Associates, Inc. TABLE 1. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICINITY' Species V` Status Habitat *Occurrence in the Study Area Short -eared Owl CSC Frequents annual and Unlikely. Breeding habitat is absent and (Asio flammeus) perennial grasslands, foraging habitat is marginal. Wintering prairies, meadows, irrigated individuals may pass through the site on land, and saline and fresh rare occasion. emergent marshes with elevated vegetated sites for perches, roosting and nesting. Saltmarsh Common Yellowthroat CSC Coastal streams dominated Absent. Suitable habitat is absent from (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa) by willows and brackish or the study area. freshwater marshes Loggerhead Shrike CSC Nests in tall shrubs and Possible. Suitable foraging and (Lanius ludovicianus) dense trees, forages in breeding habitat exists onsite for this grasslands, marshes, and species. ruderal habitats. Tricolored Blackbird CSC Breeds near fresh water in Absent. Suitable habitat in the form of (Agelaius tricolor) dense emergent vegetation. dense emergent vegetation is absent from the study area. Black Swift CSC Migrants and transients Unlikely. Breeding habitat is absent and (Cypseloides niger) found throughout many foraging habitat is marginal. habitats of state. Individuals may pass through the site on rare occasion. Vaux's Swift CSC Migrants and transients Unlikely. Breeding habitat is absent and (Chaetura vauxi) move through the foothills of foraging habitat is marginal. the western Sierra in spring Individuals may pass through the site on and late summer. Some rare occasion. individuals breed in region. Townsend's Big -eared Bat CSC Primarily a cave -dwelling Unlikely. Marginally suitable foraging (Corynorhinus townsendii) bat that may also roost in habitat is present on the study area but buildings. Occurs in a roosting habitat is absent. variety of habitats of the state. California Mastiff Bat CSC Forages over many habitats, Unlikely. Marginally suitable foraging (Eumops perosis californicus) requires tall cliffs or habitat is present on the study area but buildings for roosting. roosting habitat is absent. The buildings of the site are not suitable for bats (i.e. the bam has a metal roof and the . residence does not support suitable crevasses). Pallid Bat CSC Grasslands, chaparral, Unlikely. Marginally suitable foraging (Antrozous pallidus) woodlands, and forests of habitat is present on the study area but California; most common in roosting habitat is absent. dry rocky open areas providing roosting opportunities. San Francisco Dusky -footed Woodrat CSC Found in hardwood forests, Unlikely. The site does not support (Neotoma fuscipes annectens) oak riparian and shrub wooded habitat preferred by this habitats. species. Additionally, no woodrat nests were observed during the 2007 and 2008 surveys. 17 Live Oak Associates, Inc. TABLE 1 LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICINITY Q ... ;- nf.Qnacial Cnnce n (rnnt ) 1.r.— — Species Status Habitat Occurrence in the Study Area American Badger CSC Found in drier open stages of Unlikely. Habitat suitable for this (Taxidea taxus) California Species of Special Concern most shrub, forest and species is marginal at best for this herbaceous habitats with species. However, due to the residential friable soils. nature of the site and surrounding parcels, this species is not expected to occur onsite. Ringtail CP Occurs in riparian and Unlikely. The trees along the aquatic (Bassariscus astutus) heavily wooded habitats near habitat of the site provide marginal water. habitat for this species. However, due to the residential nature of the site and surrounding parcels, this species is not expected to occur onsite. Present: Species observed on the sites at time of field surveys or during recent past. Possible: Species not observed on the sites, but it could occur there from time to time. Unlikely: Species not observed on the sites, and would not be expected to occur there except, perhaps, as a transient Absent: Species not observed on the sites, and precluded from occurring there because habitat requirements not met. STATUS CODES FE Federally Endangered FT Federally Threatened FPE Federally Endangered (Proposed) FC Federal Candidate CNPS California Native Plant Society Listing 1A Plants Presumed Extinct in California 1B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere 2 Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere CE California Endangered CT California Threatened CR California Rare CP California Protected CSC California Species of Special Concern 18 Plants about which we need more information — a review list Plants of limited distribution — a watch list Live Oak Associates, Inc. 2.3 THREATENED, ENDANGERED OR SPECIAL STATUS PLAINTS AND ANIMALS THAT DESERVE FURTHER DISCUSSION Most of the special status plant and animal species listed in Table 1 are either absent or may occur rarely or occasionally on site and sufficient information exists to evaluate the potential impacts the project may or may not have on them. Two of the species, the California red -legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) and western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata), have the potential to occur onsite regularly. A habitat assessment and a search of historic records were conducted to establish the likely presence or absence on the site for these species. Below are detailed discussions that include an analysis of its legal status, ecology, and the suitability of the site to support these three species. 2.3.1 California Red -Legged Frog (Rana aurora draytoni). Federal listing status: Threatened; State listing statins: Mone Life History and Ecology. This federally threatened frog is the largest native frog in California with adults attaining a length of 3.4-5.4 inches (85-138 mm) snout -to -vent length (SVL) (Jennings and Hayes 1994). On the dorsal surface, the background color varies from brown to gray to reddish -brown, normally with some dark mottling peppered around spots with light- colored centers (Stebbins 1985). The distribution of reddish pigment is highly variable, but is usually restricted to the groin and undersurfaces of the thighs, legs, and feet (Jennings and Hayes 1994). This red coloration is not diagnostic for species identification. Two distinctive, prominent folds of skin ("dorsolateral folds"), run in a complete line from the rear of the eyes to the groin. The groin has a distinctly mottled pattern of black on a light-colored background. Juvenile frogs range from 1.5-3.4 inches (40-84 mm) SVL and have the same coloration as adults except that the dorsolateral folds are normally yellow or orange colored (Stebbins 1985). This coloration is distinct even at a distance. Larval frogs range from 0.6-3.1 inches (14-80 Adult California red -legged frogs have been observed breeding from late November through early May after the onset of warm rains (Storer 1925, Jennings and Hayes 1994). Male frogs typically attract females by emitting low short calls in small mobile groups of 3-7 individuals 20 Live Oak Associates, Inc. (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Females move toward the calling groups and amplex a male. Following amplexus, the females move to chosen oviposition sites where they attach an egg mass of 2,000-6,000 moderate-sized (2.0-2.8 mm diameter) eggs to an emergent vegetation brace such as tule stalks, grasses, or willow roots located just below the water surface (Storer 1925, Livezey and Wright 1947). Once laid, the egg mass will swell with water for about 24 hours, finally reaching the size of a softball. Males usually remain at the breeding sites for several weeks after reproduction before moving to foraging habitats, while females immediately remove to foraging habitats. California red -legged frog embryos hatch about 6-14 days following fertilization. The resulting larvae (8.8-10.3 mm) require 14-28 weeks to reach metamorphosis, which usually occurs between July and September, although there are scattered observations of overwintering larvae in perennial ponds such as at the arboretum at Golden Gate Park in San Francisco (Jennings, pers. obs). Tadpoles generally metamorphose at 65-85 mm total length (Storer 1925) and the newly emerged juvenile frogs are generally 25-30 mm SVL. Larvae are thought to graze on algae, but they are rarely observed in the field because they spend most of their time concealed in submergent vegetation, algal mats or detritus (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Post -metamorphic frogs grow rapidly feeding on a wide variety of invertebrates. Males typically reach sexual maturity at 2 years and females at 3 years; however, frogs of both sexes may reach sexual maturity in a single year if resources are sufficient (Jennings, unpub. data). Conversely, frogs may take 3-4 years to reach maturity during extended periods of drought (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Based on limited field data, California red -legged frogs appear to live up to 10 years in the wild (Jennings, unpub. data). Adult frogs apparently eat a wide variety of animal prey including invertebrates, small fishes, frogs, and small mammals. California red -legged frogs have been observed in a number of aquatic and terrestrial habitats throughout their historic range. Larvae, juveniles, and adult frogs have been collected from natural lagoons, dune ponds, pools in or next to streams, streams, marshlands, sag ponds, and springs, as well as human -created stock ponds, secondary and tertiary sewage treatment ponds, wells, canals, golf course ponds, irrigation ponds, sand and gravel pits (containing water), and large reservoirs (Jennings 1988). The key to the presence of frogs in these habitats is the 21 Live Oak Associates, Inc. presence of perennial (or near perennial) water and the general lack of introduced aquatic predators such as largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus), and bluegill (L. macrochirus), crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus and Procambarus clarkii), and bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana). Potential to Occur Onsite. California red -legged frogs may utilize the onsite aquatic habitat, particularly Deer Creek, as a movement corridor. However, it is not believed that this species would breed onsite due to the overall disturbed nature of the property and the fact that the onsite reach of Deer Creek has been channelized with rock lined walls. The nearest documented occurrence of this species is approximately 1.5 mile downstream from the site in a riparian system with some grazing. Due to the connectivity of the disturbed aquatic habitats of the site to areas in the vicinity supporting more suitable breeding habitat, it is possible that individuals may move through the site from time to time. Individuals are not expected to be found in the upland areas of the site. 2.3.2 Western Pond 'Turtle (Clemmys marmorata). Federal listing status: None; State listing status: Species of Special Concern Life History and Ecology. This state species of special concern is the only native aquatic (freshwater) turtle in California and it is found in a wide variety of aquatic habitats including streams, lakes and ponds. Adult turtles are moderate-sized [4.7-8.3 inches (120-210 mm) carapace length], and are generally brown or khaki -colored (Stebbins 1985). Carapace coloration is usually a dark brown or dull yellow -olive, with or without darker streaks or vermiculations radiating from the centers of the scutes (Ernst et al. 1994, Jennings and Hayes 1994). Hatchling and first-year juvenile turtles have long tails and carapaces that are usually brown or olive in dorsal coloration, with shell lengths generally between 0.99-4.3 inches (25-110 mm). This species prefers lotic aquatic habitats with basking sites such as rocks and logs (Bury 1972). Juveniles and adults seem to remain in pond environments except when such ponds dry up, or at higher elevations when turtles may disperse into terrestrial environments to hibernate (Jennings and Hayes 1994, Bury and Holland, in press). In stream environments, juveniles and adults M Live Oak Associates, Inc. f sy show considerable variation with regards to movements and the timing of movements into terrestrial environments (Reese and Welsh 1998). The largest turtle populations have been observed in slack- or slow -water habitats, which have abundant basking sites and underwater refugia (Bury 1972). The presence of dense stands of submergent or emergent vegetation, and abundant aquatic invertebrates resources, as well as suitable nearby nesting sites and the lack of native and exotic predators, are also important components (Bury 1972, Jennings and Hayes 1994, Bury and Holland, in press). Western pond turtles often move about from pool to pool in stream situations, sometimes on a daily basis during seasons of activity (Bury 1972, Reese and Welsh 1998). Distances moved along streams can be up to 3.1 miles (5 kilometers) [Bury and Holland, in press]. These turtles also have the ability to move several miles (kilometers) if their aquatic habitat dries up, and can tolerate at least 7 days without water, or 7 days of being immersed in full strength salt water (Jennings and Hayes 1994, Bury and Holland, in press). Adult western pond turtles typically mate in late April or early May, although mating can occur year-round (Holland 1985). The nesting season is from late April to early August (Storer 1930, Rathbun et al. 1992, Jennings and Hayes 1994). Juvenile and adult western pond turtles feed largely on the same food items although juveniles feed more on smaller aquatic invertebrates (Bury 1986). These turtles are dietary generalists that are highly opportunistic (Ernst et al. 1994), and will consume almost anything that they are able to catch and overpower (Holland 1985). Western pond turtles are eaten by a wide variety of natural predators during their life span. Known predators include: bald eagles, ospreys, great blue herons, gulls, river otters, mink, raccoons, gray foxes, coyotes, black bears, introduced bullfrogs, and introduced largemouth bass (Bury 1972). Humans, especially near urban areas, also illegally collect juvenile and adult turtles. Potential to Occur Onsite. Western pond turtles may utilize the onsite aquatic habitat as a movement corridor, with a low potential of individuals breeding in the ruderal areas south of Deer Creek. Therefore, due to the suitability of the onsite aquatic habitat, western pond turtles may occur in the southern portion (i.e. Deer Creek and the area to the south) of the project site. Individuals are not expected to be found in the upland areas of the site north of Deer Creek. 23 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 2.4 XURISDICTIONAE WATERS Jurisdictional waters include rivers, creeks, and drainages with a defined bed and bank that may carry at most ephemeral flows, lakes, ponds, reservoirs, and wetlands. Such waters may be subject to the regulatory authority of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) (see Section 3.2.4 of this report for additional information). The project site supports a reach of Deer Creek, an unnamed tributary, and a couple of seeps. The onsite reach of Deer Creek is a rock lined channel that enters the site along the southeastern boundary. The unnamed tributary enters the site in the southern most comer via a culvert. The seeps are located within the ruderal area south of Deer Creek and northeast of the unnamed tributary. The unnamed tributary and seeps flow into the onsite reach of Deer Creek which in turn flows northwesterly offsite. Deer Creek is a tributary of the San Francisco Bay via Matadero Creek, Matadero Canal, and Mayfield Slough. Due to the hydrologic connectivity of the onsite aquatic habitat, all features are believed to be Waters of the United States subject to the jurisdiction of not only the USACE, but also the CDFG and RWQCB. Aquatic habitat was not present north of Deer Creek. This portion of the site consisted entirely of upland areas. 24 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 3.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS 3.1 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA General plans, area plans, and specific projects are subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of CEQA is to assess the impacts of proposed projects on the environment before they are constructed. For example, site development may require the removal of some or all of its existing vegetation. Animals associated with this vegetation could be destroyed or displaced. Animals adapted to humans, roads, buildings, pets, etc., may replace those species formerly occurring on a site. Plants and animals, which are state and/or federally listed as threatened or endangered may be destroyed or displaced. Sensitive habitats such as wetlands and riparian woodlands may be altered or destroyed. These impacts may be considered significant or not. Significant effect on the environment means "a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic interest." Specific project impacts to biological resources may be considered "significant" if they will: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; ® Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; ® Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means; Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites; ® Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; 25 Live Oak Associates, Inc. © Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Furthermore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15065 states that a project may trigger the requirement to make a "mandatory findings of significance" if "the project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory." 3.2 RELEVANT GOALS, POLICIES, AND LAWS 3.2.1 Threatened and Endangered Species State and federal "endangered species" legislation has provided the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with a mechanism for conserving and protecting plant and animal species of limited 'distribution and/or low or declining populations. Species listed as threatened or endangered under provisions of the state and federal endangered species acts, candidate species for such listing, state species of special concern, and some plants listed as endangered by the California Native Plant Society are collectively referred to as "species of special status". Permits may be required from both the CDFG and USFWS if activities associated with a proposed project will result in the "take" of a listed species. "Take" is defined by the state of California as "to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture or kill" (California Fish and Game Code, Section 86). "Take" is more broadly defined by the federal Endangered Species Act to include "harm" (16 USC, Section 1532(19), 50 CFR, Section 17.3). Furthermore, the CDFG and the USFWS are responding agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Both agencies review CEQA documents in order to determine the adequacy of their treatment of endangered species issues and to make project -specific recommendations for their conservation. 26 Live Oak Associates, Inc. R 3.2.2 Migratory Birds State and federal law also protect most bird species. The Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (FMBTA: 16 U.S.C., sec. 703, Supp. I, 1989) prohibits killing, possessing, or trading in migratory birds, except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. This act encompasses whole birds, parts of birds, and bird nests and eggs. 3.2.3 Birds of Prey Birds of prey are also protected in ' California under provisions of the State Fish and Game Code, Section 3503.5, (1992), which states that it is "unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto'. Construction disturbance during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered "taking" by the CDFG. 3.2.4 Wetlands and Other "Jurisdictional Waters" Natural drainage channels and wetlands may be considered "Waters of the United States" (hereafter referred to as "jurisdictional waters"). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regulates the filling or grading of such waters under the authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Wetland Training Institute, Inc.1990). The extent of jurisdiction within drainage channels is defined by "ordinary high water marks" on opposing channel banks. Wetlands are habitats with soils that are intermittently or permanently saturated, or inundated. The resulting anaerobic conditions select for plant species known as hydrophytes that show a high degree of fidelity to such soils. Wetlands are identified by the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils (soils saturated intermittently or permanently saturated by water), and wetland hydrology according to methodologies outlined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (USACE 1987). 27 Live Oak Associates, Inc. All activities that involve the discharge of fill into jurisdictional waters are subject to the permit requirements of the USACE (Wetland Training Institute, Inc. 1990). Such permits are typically issued on the condition that the applicant agrees to provide mitigation that result in no net loss of wetland functions or values. No permit can be issued until the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) issues a certification (or waiver of such certification) that the proposed activity will meet state water quality standards. The RWCQB is also responsible for enforcing National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, including the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit. All projects requiring federal money must also comply with Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands). The California Department of Fish and Game has jurisdiction over the bed and bank of streams according to provisions of Section 1601 and 1603 of the California Fish and Game Code (CDFG 2002). Activities that would disturb streams are regulated by the CDFG via a Streambed Alteration Agreement. Such an agreement typically stipulates that certain measures will be implemented to protect the habitat values of the stream in question. Any disturbances to large, mature trees along the jurisdictional waterways would be governed by the provisions of the CDFG or USFWS. 3.2.5 Local Ordinances and/or Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) The Town of Los Altos Hills protects heritage oaks and other heritage trees under their municipal code (Section 12-2). A heritage oak is any oak (Quercus sp.) that has a truck or multiple trunk 36 inches in circumference at four feet above the root crown. A heritage tree is any tree determined by the Town to deserve protection based on its age, size, location, visibility, historical nature, etc. If heritage oaks or other heritage trees are proposed for removal, a permit application must be submitted to the City Manager or the Site Development Committee. As part of the approval process, a condition of the permit could include the requirement to plant up to five trees for each tree removed. On April 26, 2007, the Town of Los Altos Hills adopted a Conservation Element for their General Plan that has not been comprehensively updated since 1975. This element requires that structures be set back at least 25 feet from the top of creek banks and recommends that this 28 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 6 i setback be expanded to the driplines of mature oak trees within the setback in certain cases. This element also requires open space easements to be established along creeks and riparian corridors. There are no Habitat Conservation Plans that would apply to the project site. Santa Clara County is drafting a HCP for a portion of the County, but the project site is not included in the HCP area. 3.3 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS This section of the document evaluates the proposed project as it relates to impacts to the biological resources of the site. The proposed project is the extension of Samuel Lane, the subdivision of the property into three parcels, and the development of three single-family residences. All construction will occur north of Deer Creek, with no disturbance within 25 feet of the Deer Creek top of bank. The natural resource issues specific to this project are discussed in detail below. 3.3.1 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Plants Potential Impact. Of the 27 special status plant species occurring within the project vicinity, none are expected to occur on the site (see Table 1). Therefore, it can be assumed that there will be no loss of special -status plant populations, resulting in a less than significant impact. Mitigation. None will be required. 3.3.2 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Animals Potential Impact. Twenty-four special status animal species occur, or once occurred, regionally (see Table 1). Of these, five species are assumed to be absent and 15 are unlikely to occur on the study area due to the lack of suitable onsite habitat. The remaining four species may occur on the project site more regularly. These species include the California red -legged frog, western pond turtle, white-tailed kite, and loggerhead shrike. California red -legged frogs and western pond turtles could occur within aquatic habitat of the site. There is also a small potential that western pond turtles could nest in the upland habitat south of Deer Creek; red -legged frogs are not expected to occur outside of the aquatic habitat. 29 Live Oak Associates, Inc. The proposed project will not impact the southern portion of the site. All development will occur north of the 25 -foot setback from the top of the Deer Creek bank. Therefore, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact of these two species. The white-tailed kite and loggerhead shrike may utilize the trees found throughout the site for breeding. Additionally, non -listed raptors protected by federal and state laws (see discussion in Section 3.2) could breed onsite. Construction activities could result in the abandonment of active nests or direct mortality to these birds. Impacts to active white-tailed kites, loggerhead shrikes, and non -listed raptors nests or direct mortality of individuals will be a violation of state and federal law and considered a significant adverse impact per the guidelines of CEQA. The following mitigation will be required to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation. A qualified ornithologist will conduct a pre -construction survey for white-tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, and non -listed raptor nests in all trees within 250 feet of proposed ground disturbance within 30 days of the onset of ground disturbance, if initiated during the breeding season (February 1 to August 31). These surveys will be based on the accepted protocols for the target species. If active nests were to be detected, an appropriate construction buffer would be established. Actual size of buffer would depend on species, topography, and type of construction activity that would occur in the vicinity of the nest. 3.3.3 Disturbance to Waters of the United States or Riparian Habitats Potential Impacts. The project site supports a reach of Deer Creek, an unnamed tributary, and a couple of seeps, all of which occur in the southern portion of the project site. Due to the hydrologic connectivity of the onsite aquatic habitat, all features are believed to be Waters of the United States subject to the jurisdiction of not only the USACE, but also the CDFG and RWQCB. Additionally, the trees growing along the banks of Deer Creek and the unnamed tributary are also likely to be considered riparian, subject to the jurisdiction of CDFG. The project as currently proposed will not impact any of the aquatic features. In fact, all development will occur in the northern portion of the site, greater than 25 feet from Deer Creek. The project will also avoid the removal of mature trees immediately adjacent to the aquatic features. 30 Live Oak Associates, Inc. a Based on the current project design, the proposed project will result in a less than significant impact to Waters of the United States and riparian habitats. Mitigation. None will be required. 3.3.4 Doss of Habitat for Native Wildlife Potential Impacts. The proposed project will result in the conversion of existing development and a small area of ruderal habitat into three single-family residential homes. There will be no disturbance to the southern portion of the site where aquatic habitat is present. The habitat to be disturbed provides low quality habitat to local native wildlife species due to its existing level of disturbance. Following site development, the quality of the onsite habitat will be relatively equal to what is present today. Therefore, the proposed development of the northern portion of the site will result in a less than significant impact to native wildlife in the region. Mitigation. None will be required. 3.3.5 Interference with the Movement of Dative Wildlife Potential Impacts. Assessing the importance of an area as a "movement corridor" depends on differentiating between animals' consistent use patterns. Animal movements generally can be divided into three major behavioral categories: Movements within a home range or territory. ® Movements during migration. Movements during dispersal. While no detailed study of animal movements has been conducted for the study area, knowledge of the site, its habitats, and the ecology of the species on-site permits sufficient predictions about the types of movements occurring in the region and whether proposed development will constitute a significant impact to animal movements. The onsite aquatic habitat, in particular Deer Creek, facilitates the movement of regional wildlife. However, the proposed project will not impact the movement of any wildlife species in 31 Live Oak Associates, Inc. or near the onsite aquatic habitat since all development will occur north of Deer Creek. Those species that currently use the aquatic habitat as a movement corridor are likely to do so after construction. Therefore, the proposed project is not expected to have a significant impact on corridor -type movements within the region. Mitigation. None will be required. 3.3.6 Degradation of Water Quality in Seasonal ][Drainages, Stock Pounds and Downstream Waters Potential Impacts. The proposed project will require grading, excavation, and vegetation removal, thereby resulting in the project site becoming vulnerable to sheet, rill or gully erosion. Eroded soil is generally carried as sediment in surface runoff to be deposited in natural creek beds, canals, and adjacent wetlands. The deposition of sediments and any pollutants that might be carried into sensitive aquatic habitats will be considered a potentially significant adverse environmental impact. Litigation. This project should be done during the dry season if possible so as to minimize increased sediment load into the regions waterways. Additionally, the applicant should develop an erosion control plan which should include such measures as the placement of silt fences, hay bales, etc. between the areas of work and the creek habitat to preserve the quality of the onsite aquatic features, in particular Deer Creek. The applicant must also comply with standard erosion control measures that employ best management practices (BMPs) and will likely need to develop a SWPPP per State Water Quality Control Board Stormwater Permit. F 3.3.7 Local Ordinances and/or Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) Potential Impacts. Applicable ordinances protecting biological resources of the site include the Town of Los Altos Hills heritage oak and other heritage tree ordinances and the General Plan Conservation Element protecting waterways. If heritage oaks or other heritage trees are proposed for removal, a permit application must be submitted to the City Manager or the Site Development Committee. As part of the approval process, a condition of the permit could 32 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 4- r include the requirement to plant up to five trees for each tree removed. In an effort to conserve the Town's waterways, a 25 -foot setback is required from the top of creek banks. Mitigation. None will be required as long as the applicant is in compliance with the Town of Los Altos Hills tree ordinances and creek setback policy. 33 Live Oak Associates, Inc. LITERATURE CITED Bury, R. B. 1972. Habits and home range of the Pacific pond turtle, Clemmys marmorata. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California at Berkeley. Bury, R. B. 1986. Feeding ecology of the turtle, Clemmys marmorata. Journal of Herpetology, 20(4):515-521. Bury, R. B., and D. C. Holland. (in press). Clemmys marmorata (Baird and Girard 1852). Conservation of Freshwater Turtles, 2. California Department of Fish and Game. 2002. California fish and game code. Gould Publications. Binghamton, NY. California Department of Fish and Game. 2008. Annual report on the status of California state listed threatened and endangered animals and plants. The Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA. California Department of Fish and Game. 2008. California natural diversity database. The Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA. California Native Plant Society. 2001. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee, David. P. Tibor, Convening Editor. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA. Ernst, C. H., J. E. Lovich, and R. W. Barbour. 1994. Turtles of the United States and Canada. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London. Gorsen, Maureen F. 1998. The new and improved CEQA guidelines revisions: important guidance for controversial issues. Holland, D. C. 1985. An ecological and quantitative study of the western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata) in San Luis Obispo County, California. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Fresno State University, Fresno, California. Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary description of the terrestrial natural communities of California. Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA. 156 pp. Jennings, M. R. 1988. Natural history and decline of native ranids in California. Pages 61-72 In: H. F. De Lisle, P. R. Brown, B. Kaufman, and B. McGurty (editors). Proceedings of the Conference On California Herpetology. Southwestern Herpetologists Society, Special Publication (4):1-143. Jennings, M. R., and M. P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and reptile species of special concern in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division, Rancho Cordova, California. iii+255 p. 34 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Livezey, R. L., and A. H. Wright. 1947. A synoptic key to the salientian eggs of the United States. The American Midland Naturalist, 37(1):179-222. Mayer, Kenneth E. and William F. Laudenslayer, Jr. Ed. 1988. A guide to wildlife habitats of California. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Sacramento, CA. 166 pp. Natural Resource Conservation Service. 1968. Soil survey of Santa Clara Area, California. USDA. Natural Resource Conservation Service. 1974. Soil survey of Santa Clara Area, Eastern Part, California. USDA. Rathbun, G. B., N. Siepel, and D. C. Holland. 1992. Nesting behavior and movements of western pond turtles (Clemmys marmorata). The Southwestern Naturalist, 37(3):319- 324. Reese, D. A., and H. H. Welsh, Jr. 1998. Habitat use by western pond turtles in the Trinity River, California. Journal of Wildlife Management, 62(3):242-253. Sawyer, John O. and Todd Keeler -Wolf. 1995. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA. Stebbins, R. C. 1985. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Second edition, revised. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. xiv+336 p. Storer, T. I. 1925. A synopsis of the amphibia of California. University of California Publications in Zoology, 27:1-1-342. Storer, T. I. 1930. Notes on the range and life -history of the Pacific fresh -water turtle, Clemmys narmorata. University of California Publications in Zoology, 35(5):429-441. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Department of the Army. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants. Wetland Training Insitute, Inc. 1990. Federal Wetland Regulation Reference Manual. B.N. Goode and R.J. Pierce (eds.) WTI 90-1. 281pp. Zeiner, David C., William F. Laudenslayer, Kenneth E. Mayer and Marshal White. Ed. 1988. California's wildlife, volume I, amphibians and reptiles. Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. 272 pp. Zeiner, David C., William F. Laudenslayer, Kenneth E. Mayer and Marshal White. Ed. 1988. California's wildlife, volume II, birds. Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. 731 pp. 35 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Zeiner, David C., William F. Laudenslayer, Kenneth E. Mayer and Marshal White. Ed. 1988. California's wildlife, volume III, mammals. Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. 407 pp. 36 Live Oak Associates, Inc. I PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS Launer, Alan. May 14, 2003. Conservation Biologist, UA and Planning Office, Biologic Sciences Department, Stanford University. (650) 725-1854. 37 Live Oak Associates, Inc.