Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.3 SupplementalIRECENE® February 26, 2011 MAR 0 2 2011 Dear LAH Planning Commission and City Council, TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS As a homeowner on Baleri Ranch Road, I/we object to construction of a pedestrian bridge at the corner of Baleri Ranch Road and the removal of 2 corner trees. We support an alternative non -impacting residential and environmental 2B pedestrian pathway along either shoulder of Page Mill Road. Our objections are based on numerous grounds : The proposed bridge construction and increased pedestrian traffic along the creek is environmentally degrading to "Corridor Dwellers" and the seasonal trail route of deer to low laying creek water. The narrow creek trail between Baleri Ranch and'Berry Hill is the only safe un -fragmented passage to and fi-om the surrounding hills. Further human encroachment and added noise on the narrow creek trail could cause does and fawns to bound across the creek into Page Mill Road. This would create a hazard for drivers and deer alike. Among the nesters, burrowers and amphibians, the Matadero Creek wildlife movement corridor is home to several conservation species. One of a number of indigenous species cited in the Enviromnental Report is the protected CRF California red -legged frog. In addition to environmental objections, increased pedestrian traffic is a safety concern to our homeowners. Secluding pedestrians behind our properties is a safety concern. The neighborhood has had a number of robberies and vandalisms to date. Finally, there are aesthetic and noise objections. A second bridge, removal of 2 coiner trees, construction and resulting greater exposure to the sounds and sights of Page Mill Road's automobiles, cyclists and pedestrian traffic is not in our homeowner's best interest. Signed Signed : -�{-- Address : .1 y � r; o 3rt_(c, r 1 k R_Cr 12 t ci Los Rl4a K1/(s, (.'y Q`(alz Page 1 of 6 Victoria Ortland RECMD— From: ECioffi@icorally.com Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 10:50 PM MAR 0 2 2011 To: Debbie Pedro Cc: Richard Chiu TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS Subject: Page Mill Pedestrian Plan Importance: High Attachments: Baled Ranch Road Initial Study Objections.pdf; Baleri Ranch Road - Formal Letter of Objection.pdf Debbie and Richard, We have reviewed the Biological Resources Assessment Dated January 2011 and the Negative Declaration and Initial Study Dated February 2011. We believe that the Biological Resources Assessment and the Negative Declaration and Initial Study based on a late winter November 29th and December 7th site survey is both incomplete and incorrect. In addition, proposed mitigation is insufficient and limited only to construction phases. Mitigation does not include planning for the increase impact of noise and foot traffic upon the limited narrow sensitive ecosystem. We strongly believe that the proposed pedestrian/equestrian pathway is environmentally damaging and dangerous to wildlife and human safety. A complete, more seasonally appropriate, environmental report impact study is required. 1. Impact of degradation and increased pedestrian use of this creek trail and proposed pedestrian/equestrian bridge to "Corridor Dwellers", including threatened special status species, through this very narrow riparian corridor has not been taken into consideration. According to the site survey, the Federal and State Threatened California Red -legged Frog "has been detected in Matadero Creek, adjacent to the trail alignment'. In addition, 1 special status species was also found in the trail alignment. 4 special status and 8 watch list species were noted to have potential presence. 3 other Federally and/or State high priority species have been detected within the region. A variety of species may not have been seasonally detected. The summer serenade of frogs, swooping bats, and trail rabbits and the presence of owls, hawks, woodpeckers, other birds and aquatics utilizing the creek water and wooded canopy ecosystem is evident on a daily basis. 2. Movement of Passage Corridor species through this important un -fragmented narrow trail and water source area has not been given correct consideration. Seasonal herds and nocturnal hunting sounds along the narrow passage corridor are frequently seen and heard. 3. One rare plant community was identified within Matadero Creek and 2 special status plant species have potential within the project area. As plants were not in bloom during the winter site visit, all plant life may not have been identified. 4. Residential aesthetic and safety concerns including noise, crime, fire, and vehicular and wildlife accidents due to increased pedestrian use of the narrow creek trail and proposed pedestrian/equestrian bridge has not been taken into consideration. Initial Study findings in question and a formal Letter of Objection are attached. History - It is my understanding that Santa Clara County approved Stanford's GUP General Use Permit on December 12, 2000 allowing Stanford 5 million square feet of development over ten years predicated on a recreational trail realignment plan of the Page Mill Road S1 trail and Portola Valley C1 trail. Stanford's GUP deadline without an allowable 2 -yr extension is December 31, 2011. The committed completion date of this project funded by $1.19M from Stanford is also December 31, 2011. Stanford development could be restricted until such time that the requirements are met. It is also my understanding, that residents in Portola Valley suffered conservation and residential concerns regarding similar studies or lack thereof by Stanford and BKF Environmental Planning. 3/2/2011 Page 2 of 6 I have attached (under separate cover) the GUP Supplemental SEIR General Plan and Recreation Element Sections C -PR 23 to C-PR29.1, Strategic Objective and Policy Codes PR -TS 2.1, 2.A and 2.13 recognizing the rights of property owners in terms of privacy and security, the need for safety and provisioned services and environmental protection requirements away from riparian corridors and other sensitive ecosystems. I have also reviewed the approved Resolution of the City Council Lands of Long prepared by BKF engineers of a new pedestrian and equestrian easement and vacating the existing easement on February 17, 2011. The approved easement facilitates equestrian use over the proposed bridge. I have a few questions concerning this. 1. How did this trail alteration and dedication of 2,536 square feet of sensitive conservation area take place without the completion of the Initial Study, environmental considerations and neighbor homeowner feedback ? 2. The stated 70' pedestrian and equestrian bridge is 2x the overall length of the Baled Ranch Road bridge. Is this a typo ? If this is indeed correct, what bridge height will be required to span such a long length to meet the 100 year flood requirement ? What sound deadening devices have been put in place to mitigate equestrian and pedestrian foot noise on the bridge to mitigate disturbance to the creek dwelling habitat ? 3. How will equestrians transverse to and from the down hill trail to the pedestrian/equestrian bridge ? Will they ride to and from the down hill trail along side of vehicles driving across Baled's narrow 2 -way bridge or will cut diagonally across Baled Ranch bridge to get to the pedestrian/equestrian bridge at the corner ? If so, what will prevent vehicular and equestrian accidents ? 4. Will the Baled end of the existing trail from Berry Hill cease to exist ? If not, what will prevent pedestrians from using the existing trail end and crossing the vehicular bridge rather then utilizing the pedestrian bridge ? 5. What will prevent pedestrians from using the shoulder of Page Mill, the most direct and driest pathway, from Arastradero Point A to Arastradero Point B ? The Town's General Plan Pathway Element policy 2.1 states "....Roadside paths shall be separated from the roadway pavement by landscape buffering and shall meander, where possible." I would argue that "meander where possible" does not apply to sensitive ecosystems, wildlife passages and residential concerns nor does it preclude a non -impacting pedestrian trail with landscape buffering along Page Mill Road and a pedestrian creek crossing along side of the existing Page Mill Road creek crossing. Lastly, please advise as to what other options have been proposed that would not impact the narrow sensitive creek ecosystem, wildlife passage and homeowner concerns ? Sincerely, Edwina M. Ciof i "Debbie Pedro" <dpedro@losaitoshills.ca.gov> To <EC iofri@icoral ly.com> 02/25/2011 04:21 PM cc "Richard Chiu" <rchiu@losaltoshills.ca.gov> Subject RE: Page Mill Pedestrian Plan Dear Mrs. Cioffi, Thank you for taking the time to write to us about your concerns regarding this project. Your comments will be included in the staff report for Planning Commission and City Council consideration. Please see my response to your questions below. Debbie 3/2/2011 Page 3 of 6 Debbie Pedro, AICP, LEED AP Planning Director Town of Los Altos Hills Phone: (650) 947-2517 dpedro@losaltoshills.ca.gov From: ECioffi@icorally.com [mailto:ECioffi a,icorally.com]. Sent: Thursday, February 24, 20113:03 AM To: Debbie Pedro Cc: ECioffina_,icorally.com Subject: Page Mill Pedestrian Plan Importance: High Debbie, I walked the area this evening and frankly the logic of this plan escapes me. After long contemplation, I feel that this plan would not only be impacting to the safety of local residents, but has serious environmental impact as well. Being very familiar with the area, I challenge the environmental study as incomplete. These are my perspectives after living next to the creek for almost 20 years, not as someone looking at a paper map or doing a fly -by environmental study. Residential Perspective - Let's take an imaginary walk from both directions. We are walking from the park -n -ride toward the PM/A intersection (toward Portola). When you get to the Page Mill Matadero Creek underpass, you can A.) simply walk straight on dry flat land along Page Mill Road to the PM/A intersection or B.) fork left away from Page Mill through the wooded and often muddy creekside along the back of Harnett's and Long's property, then take a right to cross over a pedestrian bridge to get to the PM/A intersection. Why didn't the town just route pedestrian traffic straight along Page Mill Road? Why send people on an often muddy loop out of their way to walk behind our properties ? There is already an existing path with an easement located behind Harnett's property. The proposal is to restore the path to Town standards. Building a new path adjacent to Page Mill Road is not consistent with the Town's General Plan Pathway Element policy 2.1 which states "....Roadside paths shall be separated from the roadway pavement by landscape buffering and shall meander, where possible." That particular section of the road is narrow, close to vehicular traffic, and a potential safety hazard, particularly for equestrians. Coming from Arastradero (from Portola)... no one will bother to weave onto this bridge, travel along the wooded back of the properties only to loop back to Page Mill to get to the corner of Arastradero (toward Los Altos). Pedestrians and cyclists coming from Arastradero will simply turn left onto Page Mill instead of traversing a bridge and an out of the way dirt path. One thing that the bridge will provide is a spotlit access right at the corner of Arastradero and Page Mill to invite strangers to travel behind the Long and Harnett properties and to all the rear yards of the homes between Berry Hill and Baleri Ranch Rd. A number of the homes along this trail have been easily cased and burglarized. Why not provide a small bridge next to the existing Page Mill underpass, preserve the environment, and keep public traffic safely away from the homes ? By the way, are these trails going to be paved ? As an fyi... You can't cycle on our thorn ridden dirt trails without replacing your tubes and/or tires the next day. Anyone in the neighborhood with children will tell you that. Joggers NEVER run on the often water -rutted banks. As to pedestrians, the creekside is muddy a good part of the year. Unless you enjoy wet hay and mud caked on your shoes, the hard walking surface next to the road is preferred. 3/2/2011 Page 4 of 6 The bike lanes adjacent to the roadways will be paved but the pedestrian/equestrian trails will be constructed according to the Town's Type 2B Roadside Path requirements including: • 5 -feet width with 2 -feet wide shoulders where possible • Surface, 6 -inches of Stevens Creek Quarry Crusher Fines • 2 -inch x 6 -inch wood headers where necessary Environmental Perspective - I never mentioned, that the main pedestrian on these trails are deer. Each year, when the hills and upper creeks run dry, deer and their young gallop at full speed down the right side of the creek until they hit our secluded low lying creek water. Picture that the deer have nothing left but a narrow wooded corridor a few feet wide with high fences to the right and a creek and noisy road to the left. Deer bound down the trail to Baleri Ranch at full speed, (occasionally slowing to eat our bushes), then bound at full speed across Baleri to the Long's side of the trail to reach the last remaining water. The area between Baleri Ranch and the bottom of Berry Hill is the bottom of a huge water bowl so to speak. Baleri Ranch is completely encircled by hills and therefore has the lowest elevation and highest water table in the area. Because of this, the remaining creek water here can last well into summer. This is why swarms of bugs and mosquitos often exist along this part of the trail. Poison oak also flourishes along this part of the trail. This is also why the creekside and creekbed here remains so muddy for most of the year and why local residents do not use the trails. Each year, the last remaining water in the entire hill area west of the 280 is in the creekbed behind the Harnett's, the Long's and our property.This is where you intend to invite pedestrians to travel. After the Harnett's, the creek crosses over to the other side of Page Mill Road. I've watched the deer in amazement year after year, like clockwork. Most often, the trail is a one way deer boulevard. They gallop down the trail on the right side of the creek to the last remaining water. In 20 years, I have not seen a deer cross the busy Page Mill intersection or lay hit by a car. After they reach water, they circle back up into the hills through the Berry Hill trail system behind the Barnett's. We also have a nice little rabbit population thriving along the creek as well. I told you about our chasing poachers who park on Baleri and fire at deer coming down the trail from their car windows. We have called the sheriffs dept on several occasions over the years. The sheriffs have periodically cited signs of poachers further up in the hills as well. We have called vector control about the mosquitoes. Last summer, as I recall, larvae eating fish were introduced to the creek to curb the mosquitoes. Surely, deer, rabbits, other animals and insects depend on this quiet, peaceful and secluded area for access to the last available water of the season. Will deer begin to run across Page Mill Road at Baleri Ranch Road and get hit by cars when you further invade this narrow creekside corridor and important water supply with pedestrians and cyclists ? If disturbed, there will be no where else to access water except across Page Mill Road. I would be happy to speak to the environmentalist involved and Stanford if necessary as to how important it is to not disturb this narrow trail corridor in any way. For your review, I have attached the Initial Study and Biological Resources Assessment for this project prepared per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The documents contain detailed analysis of the project's potential environmental impacts and recommended mitigation measures. Please advise. Sincerely, Edwina Cioffi 14250 Baleri Ranch Road Los Altos Hills, Ca. 94022 Tel 650-949-1234 Edwina M. Cioffi President / CEO ICO RALLY / ESCO Components Tel 650-856-9900 x 240 Fax 650-856-9928 3/2/2011 "Debbie Pedro" <dpedro@los�ltoshills ca gov> To <ECioffi(a?icorally.com> 02/23/201105:20 PM cc Subject RE: Widening of Arastradero from Baled to Purissima Hi Mrs. Cioffi, Page 5 of 6 It was a pleasure speaking with you today. Per our phone conversation, please find attached the site plan showing the bridge location behind the Long's house. The resolution is not the best as it was scanned. The original file is too large to send (18MB). Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Debbie Debbie Pedro, AICP, LEED AP Planning Director Town of Los Altos Hills Phone: (650) 947-2517 dpedro losaltoshills.ca.gov From: ECioffi _ icorally.com [mailto:ECioff a,icorally.coml Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 10:45 AM To: Debbie Pedro Subject: Widening of Arastradero from Baleri to Purissima Ms. Debbie Pedro, Is there a model of the proposed one mile Page Mill and Arastradero road widening, retaining walls and pedestrian Creek bridge ? Will there be future plans to extend the project beyond one mile ? Adjacent homes may have concerns about this project. Residents are more often seen enjoying a walk on their paved neighborhood street then combing through the woody and sometimes muddy, buggy and dusty dirt trails along their backyards. Sometimes an entire year will go by before we see someone using the trail. That is, if we don't count the robbers casing our homes from the trails and utilizing them for discreet access points into our cul-de-sacs. Homes adjacent or close to the pathway system have been exposed to continuos robberies. These crimes are especially dangerous because many have occurred while residents were at home. To date, 30% of the homes on Baleri Ranch Road as well as homes on neighboring cul-de-sacs have been robbed or vandalized. Another concern is the noise impact to homes adjacent to Page Mill. Widening the road will lessen the noise screen between homes and traffic. This will impact home values of some of the homes along the widening. 3/2/2011 Page 6 of 6 Unfortunately, without seeing a model and understanding the positive aspects of the project, adjacent homeowners cannot ascertain the benefits. Personally, I wish the town would concentrate more on the safety of residents and unreliable utilities that fail during the mildest storm. I have failed to see the costly preoccupation with this pathway system nonsense for years. There is plenty of local open space for outdoor enthusiasts to explore that are far more enjoyable than walking along our back yards. Frankly, two patrol cars, camera surveillance at key LAH entrance points or a crime watch program would do more for the entire community than building retaining walls and pedestrian bridges for a little used pathway system. Anyone ever notice the overgrown weeds and occasional trash in the center divide entering LAH on Page Mill Road ? Do we really care more about maintaining a seldom used pathway system over our streets and public safety ? Sincerely, Edwina Cioffi 14250 Baleri Ranch Road Los Altos Hills, Ca 94022 Tel 650-949-1234 [attachment "LAH Stanford Trail Biological Resources Assessment.pdf 'deleted by Edwina Cioffi/icorally] [attachment "LAH Stanford Trail Initial Study final draft.pdf 'deleted by Edwina Cioffi/icorally] 3/2/2011 MAR 0 2 2011 INITIAL STUDY -LOS AUI'OS HILLS/STANI'ORD TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING The project site is comprised of approximately one lineal mile of trail and bicycle path improvements located off Page Mill Road and Arastradero Road along Matadero Creek near the intersection with the 1- 280 freeway. The project site is currently developed. with asphaltic concrete (AC) road surfaces, existing bike lanes and both improved and unimproved trails along the length of the project site. The site is surrounded by residential development, property owned by Santa Clara Valley Water District north of Baleri Ranch Road, Caltrans right of way and a Park and Ride lot at the intersection of Arastradero and Page Mill Roads (Santa Clara County maintained), and the I-280 freeway. OTHER AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) Construction of the bridge and trails within the Matadero Creek corridor would require a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game and permits from the Santa Clara Valley Water District. Removal of trees within the County road right-of-way would be subject to requirements of the Santa Clara County Department of Roads and Airports for tree removal. Construction of the bike lanes would require an encroachment permit from the Santa Clara County Department of Roads and Airports, and Caltrans District 4. USE OF THE INITIAL STUDY This Initial Study will be used to obtain a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the project, which determines that with the implementation of the mitigation measures identified, that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment. 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: FLBRUARY 2011 Aesthetics Agriculture Resources X Air Quality X Biological Resources X Cultural Resources Geology/Soils X Greenhouse Gases Hazards & Hazardous Materials X Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance FLBRUARY 2011 INITIAL STUDY — Los ALTOS HILLS/STANFORD TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DETERMINATION: (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD AGENCY) On the basis of this initial evaluation: Debbie Pedro AICP, LEED AP, Planning Director, Los Altos Hills Date FEBRUARY 2011 I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT RE -PORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions I or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Debbie Pedro AICP, LEED AP, Planning Director, Los Altos Hills Date FEBRUARY 2011 INITIAL STUDY — LOS ALTOS HILLS/STANr0RD TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Issues: DISCUSSION: W rcitc' JiG�! zyf C3 td rc w ca. t s l { +"C ' �czc?1 e j n to r sec. 'to ni ie r r�tavn,1 O Cel sl jIue re , r1 e tC... The project entails development of trails and bike lanes with associated site Improvements including an approximately 70 foot long free -span pedestrian bridge and an approximately 445 foot long (maximum eight foot high) retaining wall located within existing Town pedestrian and equestrian trail easements. Several trees would be removed from the area south of Arastradero Road to accommodate the retaining wall and bike lane improvements. These trees include three Eucalyptus trees, nine Coast live oak trees, and one Peruvian Pepper tree. None of the trees proposed for removal are considered heritage oak trees as defined by Town Municipal Code regulations. Three large eucalyptus trees that are visible from I-280 would be removed. However these trees are not protected by Town Code regulations and are not visually prominent or distinctive trees. Two of these eucalyptus trees, identified as tree #21 and #22, appear to straddle the Town and County boundary line and may be subject to County tree removal requirements. Three young coast live oak trees, in the vicinity of two of the eucalyptus trees, have recently been planted and appear to have established themselves. Over the next several years these oak trees will mature and contribute to the aesthetic quality of this stretch of roadway. The majority of trees in the project site would remain. As proposed the project meets all Town Municipal Code requirements for construction and is in conformance with all General Plan policies. The project would have a less than significant impact and would not substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site or surroundings. MITIGATION: None required. FEBRUARY 2011 9 M Potentially Significant Impact Unless Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Potentially Mitigation Significant No Significant Incorporated Impact Impact Impact 1. Aesthetics - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not X limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which X would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? DISCUSSION: W rcitc' JiG�! zyf C3 td rc w ca. t s l { +"C ' �czc?1 e j n to r sec. 'to ni ie r r�tavn,1 O Cel sl jIue re , r1 e tC... The project entails development of trails and bike lanes with associated site Improvements including an approximately 70 foot long free -span pedestrian bridge and an approximately 445 foot long (maximum eight foot high) retaining wall located within existing Town pedestrian and equestrian trail easements. Several trees would be removed from the area south of Arastradero Road to accommodate the retaining wall and bike lane improvements. These trees include three Eucalyptus trees, nine Coast live oak trees, and one Peruvian Pepper tree. None of the trees proposed for removal are considered heritage oak trees as defined by Town Municipal Code regulations. Three large eucalyptus trees that are visible from I-280 would be removed. However these trees are not protected by Town Code regulations and are not visually prominent or distinctive trees. Two of these eucalyptus trees, identified as tree #21 and #22, appear to straddle the Town and County boundary line and may be subject to County tree removal requirements. Three young coast live oak trees, in the vicinity of two of the eucalyptus trees, have recently been planted and appear to have established themselves. Over the next several years these oak trees will mature and contribute to the aesthetic quality of this stretch of roadway. The majority of trees in the project site would remain. As proposed the project meets all Town Municipal Code requirements for construction and is in conformance with all General Plan policies. The project would have a less than significant impact and would not substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site or surroundings. MITIGATION: None required. FEBRUARY 2011 9 M INITIAL STUDY —LOS ALTOS HILLS/STANFORD TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DISCUSSION The project site is within an existing urban area zoned for residential and related uses. The site is not classified a prime farmland, under Williamson Act contract, or designated as forest land. The project site area is not presently utilized for any agricultural purposes. Development of the proposed project would cause no impact to agricultural resources. MITIGATION: None required. Potentially Significant Potentially Impact Unless Less'rhan Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2. Agriculture Resources - Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland X of Statewide importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps X prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and X Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a X Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, X due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? X DISCUSSION The project site is within an existing urban area zoned for residential and related uses. The site is not classified a prime farmland, under Williamson Act contract, or designated as forest land. The project site area is not presently utilized for any agricultural purposes. Development of the proposed project would cause no impact to agricultural resources. MITIGATION: None required. FEBRUARY 2011 10 Potentially Significant Potentially Impact Unless Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incor orated impact Impact 3. Air Quality - Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially X to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any X criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under ail 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 X concentrations? FEBRUARY 2011 10 INITIAL STUDY — LOS ALTOS HILLS/STANFORD TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DISCUSSION The project area is located within the Town of Los Altos Hills and borders Page Mill Road and Arastradero Road. The trail alignment is bordered by existing roadways, open lots, residential properties and Matadero Creek along its western section. The trail alignment parallels Arastradero Road and Highway 280 on the east, and Page Mill Road and Matadero Creek on the west. The Town is located in the foothills on the eastern flank of the Santa Cruz_ Mountains, and consists of flat to moderately steep topography. Annual rainfall for the Town of Los Altos Hills averages 13.5 inches per year. The most prominent water feature in the vicinity of the project is Matadero Creek. Matadero Creek is a perennial creek that emanates from the foothills to the west and flows through the Town of Los Altos Hills and the City of Palo Alto before entering San Francisco Bay. Other water bodies in the area include Felt Lake FEBRUARY 2011 12 M BE Potentially Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Less'rhan Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act 4. Biological Resources - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through X 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 , X other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected X wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native X resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? DISCUSSION The project area is located within the Town of Los Altos Hills and borders Page Mill Road and Arastradero Road. The trail alignment is bordered by existing roadways, open lots, residential properties and Matadero Creek along its western section. The trail alignment parallels Arastradero Road and Highway 280 on the east, and Page Mill Road and Matadero Creek on the west. The Town is located in the foothills on the eastern flank of the Santa Cruz_ Mountains, and consists of flat to moderately steep topography. Annual rainfall for the Town of Los Altos Hills averages 13.5 inches per year. The most prominent water feature in the vicinity of the project is Matadero Creek. Matadero Creek is a perennial creek that emanates from the foothills to the west and flows through the Town of Los Altos Hills and the City of Palo Alto before entering San Francisco Bay. Other water bodies in the area include Felt Lake FEBRUARY 2011 12 M BE INITIAL STUDY — LOS ALTOS HILLS/STANFORD TRAIL, IMPROVEMENT" PROJECT BIO -22 Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent pollutants, construction materials or debris from entering the creek and storm drains shall be installed prior to the initiation of work and properly maintained. For further clarification refer to Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation Measure HYD -5. Invasive Plant Species The following measure is recommended to avoid impacts from introduced invasive plant species: MITIGATION: BIO -23 The project proponent shall avoid planting ornamental species reported by the California Invasive Plant Council to have the potential to be invasive. Species on this list shall be prohibited from use in landscaping. DISCUSSION The project site is located on Arastradero and Page Mill Roads near the intersection of Page Mill Road and the 1-280 freeway. Matadero Creek flows through the project site and residential development surrounds the project site. Proposed surface improvements will be located in both disturbed and undisturbed areas. There is typically a higher potential for encountering archaeological resources in areas adjacent to a creek. Although the extent of surface disturbance at the site would be minimal, the potential for such resources cannot be completely eliminated due to the site's proximity to the Matadero Creek corridor. Therefore, the impacts of construction are considered potentially significant and the following mitigation measures will be required: MITIGATION: CUL -i In the event that archaeological traces are encountered, all construction within a 50 -meter radius of the find will be halted, the Planning Director will be notified, and an archaeologist will be retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations. CUL - 21f human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified. The Coroner will determine whether or not the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his authority, he will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, who shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native Americans. FEBRUARY 2011 29 Potentially Significant Potentially lmpaet Unless Less Than issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 5. Cultural Resources - Would theproject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in. the significance of a X historical resource as defined in 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to 15061.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries? DISCUSSION The project site is located on Arastradero and Page Mill Roads near the intersection of Page Mill Road and the 1-280 freeway. Matadero Creek flows through the project site and residential development surrounds the project site. Proposed surface improvements will be located in both disturbed and undisturbed areas. There is typically a higher potential for encountering archaeological resources in areas adjacent to a creek. Although the extent of surface disturbance at the site would be minimal, the potential for such resources cannot be completely eliminated due to the site's proximity to the Matadero Creek corridor. Therefore, the impacts of construction are considered potentially significant and the following mitigation measures will be required: MITIGATION: CUL -i In the event that archaeological traces are encountered, all construction within a 50 -meter radius of the find will be halted, the Planning Director will be notified, and an archaeologist will be retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations. CUL - 21f human remains are discovered, the Santa Clara County Coroner will be notified. The Coroner will determine whether or not the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his authority, he will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, who shall attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native Americans. FEBRUARY 2011 29 INITIAL STUDY — LOS ALTOS HILLS/STANFORD TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DISCUSSION'- lj r l ca i rt e }c ;- -� ra ►" r ,t Y or 6 t`,� C i The project site is not located in the vicinity of an air strip and will not include the routine transport or release of hazardous materials, and will not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan. Since the site is mostly undeveloped, the potential for encountering hazardous materials during project construction would be low. Construction of the project will include roadway paving, retaining wall construction, and installation of Stevens Creek Quarry Crusher Fines on tails and may involve the temporary use and transport of potentially hazardous materials. Standard safety conditions and compliance with local and State ordinances concerning the use and transport of toxic substances and use of hazardous materials FEBRUARY 2011 33 Potentially Sieniticant Potentially Impact Unless Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation significant No Impact incorporated Impact Impact 8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment X through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment X through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely X hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of X 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, X 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 X 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 X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? DISCUSSION'- lj r l ca i rt e }c ;- -� ra ►" r ,t Y or 6 t`,� C i The project site is not located in the vicinity of an air strip and will not include the routine transport or release of hazardous materials, and will not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan. Since the site is mostly undeveloped, the potential for encountering hazardous materials during project construction would be low. Construction of the project will include roadway paving, retaining wall construction, and installation of Stevens Creek Quarry Crusher Fines on tails and may involve the temporary use and transport of potentially hazardous materials. Standard safety conditions and compliance with local and State ordinances concerning the use and transport of toxic substances and use of hazardous materials FEBRUARY 2011 33 INITIAL STUDY — LOS ALTOS HILLS/STANFORD TRAiL IvtPROVEA'IENT PROJECT related to construction of the project will ensure that any potential public health risks would be less than S��l11fCQ)2t. MITIGATION: None required. FEBRUARY 2011 34 P i �> Potentially Significant Potentially Impact Unless Less'rhan Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant vGtigation Significant No Impact Ineor orated Impact Impact 9. Hydrology and Water Quality - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge X requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site X or area, 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 X or area, 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 X capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures, which X would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, X injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X FEBRUARY 2011 34 P i �> INITIAL STUDY — LOS ALTOS I-IILLS/STANFORD TRAiL iMPROVE\9BN"17 PROJECT maintained to sufficiently maintain all liquid and concrete wastes generated by washout operations. iv. Once concrete wastes are washed into the designated area and allowed to harden, the concrete shall be broken up, removed and properly disposed of. DISCUSSION 00nC1Vt voA i oc n. 4 �t3..��, �, �' Iry � 6-0-,? . The Los Altos Hills General Plan designates the areas within the project site as "Residential" with an "Open Space Conservation" overlay. Surrounding land uses include residential development, property owned by Santa Clara Valley Water District north of Baled Ranch Road, Caltrans right of way and a Park and Ride lot at the intersection of Arastradero Road and Page Mill Road, and the 1-280 freeway. The Los Altos Hills General Plan does not identify any habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans that apply to the project site. Based on the scope of the proposed project and surrounding uses, the proposed project will not physically divide an established community or conflict with any special policies. Based on the scope of the proposed project, site location and surrounding uses it is anticipated that the project would have no impact on land use or conflict with any specific plan, habitat conservation or natural community conservation plan. MITIGATION: None required. FEBRUARY 2011 37 N Potentially Significant Potentially Impact Unless Less l'han Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) significant Mitigation significant No Impact Incorporated impact Impact 10. Land Use and Planning - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or , X 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, X natural community conservation plan? DISCUSSION 00nC1Vt voA i oc n. 4 �t3..��, �, �' Iry � 6-0-,? . The Los Altos Hills General Plan designates the areas within the project site as "Residential" with an "Open Space Conservation" overlay. Surrounding land uses include residential development, property owned by Santa Clara Valley Water District north of Baled Ranch Road, Caltrans right of way and a Park and Ride lot at the intersection of Arastradero Road and Page Mill Road, and the 1-280 freeway. The Los Altos Hills General Plan does not identify any habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans that apply to the project site. Based on the scope of the proposed project and surrounding uses, the proposed project will not physically divide an established community or conflict with any special policies. Based on the scope of the proposed project, site location and surrounding uses it is anticipated that the project would have no impact on land use or conflict with any specific plan, habitat conservation or natural community conservation plan. MITIGATION: None required. FEBRUARY 2011 37 N INITIAL S"rUDY — LOS At: rOS I-ilLLS/ST'ANF'ORD TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT" DISCUSSION The Los Altos Hills General Plan does not identify any regionally or locally -important mineral resources on the project site or in its vicinity. The project will not result in significant grading or excavation. There will be little to no disturbance of mineral resources. Therefore the project would have no im/)act on mineral resources. MITIGATION: None required. Potentially Significant Potentially Impact Unless Less'l'han Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 11. Mineral Resources - Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral X resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan'? X DISCUSSION The Los Altos Hills General Plan does not identify any regionally or locally -important mineral resources on the project site or in its vicinity. The project will not result in significant grading or excavation. There will be little to no disturbance of mineral resources. Therefore the project would have no im/)act on mineral resources. MITIGATION: None required. t -i � t, l� c"`1 r� f 1-�- c7_..� --i- � � 5 d �f'_. Yl �' t ! t'+�-�1C'►� � z FEBRUARY 2011 38 Potentially Significant Potentially Impact Unless Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation significant No Impact Incorporated Impact lm act 12. Noise - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in X excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in X the project vicinity above levels existing without the f �/ project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient �/ X noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing - without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or. X 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? t -i � t, l� c"`1 r� f 1-�- c7_..� --i- � � 5 d �f'_. Yl �' t ! t'+�-�1C'►� � z FEBRUARY 2011 38 INITIAL STUDY — LOS ALTOS HILLS/STANi-ORD TRAIL, IMPROVEMENT PROJLur project would be consistent with the goals and policies of the Open Space and Conservation Element of the Town's General Plan. Therefore potential impacts will be kept at a less than significant level. MITIGATION: None required. DISCUSSION 'DI s r U W- \ 0 cid _C �. � n "r L, ra rrict� t l e The proposed project includes trail improvements, bike lanes and bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements along Arastradero and Page Mill Roads. The project will encourage greater use of non - motorized travel along this corridor by addressing key safety concerns. The proposed improvements include the following: 0 +U IMINE• In u -f :- Pedestrian crossings at the south and east portions of the intersection of Baleri Ranch and Page Mill Roads. `r installation of a pathway and pedestrian bridge north of Baleri Ranch Road. FEBRUARY 2011 41 Potentially Significant Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Less Than Significant No Impact Incorporated__ im act Impact 16. Transportation/Traffic - Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy X establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management X program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns. including either an X 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., fir' `� X sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible e uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programsX �� '/ regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? DISCUSSION 'DI s r U W- \ 0 cid _C �. � n "r L, ra rrict� t l e The proposed project includes trail improvements, bike lanes and bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements along Arastradero and Page Mill Roads. The project will encourage greater use of non - motorized travel along this corridor by addressing key safety concerns. The proposed improvements include the following: 0 +U IMINE• In u -f :- Pedestrian crossings at the south and east portions of the intersection of Baleri Ranch and Page Mill Roads. `r installation of a pathway and pedestrian bridge north of Baleri Ranch Road. FEBRUARY 2011 41 INITIAL STUDY — LOS ALTOS HILLS/STANFORD TRAIL IMPROVGML'NT PRO.IECT DISCUSSION The project will not require the construction of new utilities or necessitate new service demands. Therefore the project will have no impact to utilities, sewer and water or storm water treatment systems. MITIGATION: None required. Potentially S igni l icant Potentially Impact Unless Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Im act Impact t) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate the projects solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X regulations related to solid waste? I t ` � f i DISCUSSION The project will not require the construction of new utilities or necessitate new service demands. Therefore the project will have no impact to utilities, sewer and water or storm water treatment systems. MITIGATION: None required. Through review of the proposed project the Town of Los Altos Hills finds that there are no potentially significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures as recommended. The mitigation measures provided in this Initial Study demonstrate that the proposed project does not have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, reduce the habitat or cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce or restrict the number or the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The proposed project includes development of new and resurfaced trails, a 55 foot long free span FEBRUARY 2011 43 Potentially significant Potentially Impact Unless Less Than Issues (and Supporting information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Inco orated Impact Impact 18. Mandatory Findings of Significance - a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the qualityX of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population I t ` � f i to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or o{fir restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal �5 or eliminate important examples of the major periods of �a 1 tnc-M-I'CECX4 California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually X limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will�r�,''�}'�S t X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either l \J$ directly or indirectly? Through review of the proposed project the Town of Los Altos Hills finds that there are no potentially significant impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures as recommended. The mitigation measures provided in this Initial Study demonstrate that the proposed project does not have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, reduce the habitat or cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce or restrict the number or the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The proposed project includes development of new and resurfaced trails, a 55 foot long free span FEBRUARY 2011 43 J ENVIRONNfENTAL SETTING IMPACTS AND MITIGATION biEASti�ENED 4,1 LAND USE, PLANS AND POLICIES MAR 0 2 2011 Parks and Recreation Element The Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan addresses three types of areas and ^1A�I OF LOS ALTOS HILLS facilities that can contribute both to meeting future recreation demand and to maintainint County's natural resources and beauty: Regional Parks and Public Open Space Lands, Trails, and Scenic Highways. The following Trails Master Plan strategies are applicable to this project: Strategv #1 : Plan for trails; Strategy #2: Balance recreation and other public trail needs, environmental, and landowner concerns; Strategy #3: Implement the planned trail network; Strategy 94: Adequately operate and maintain trails; Strategy #5: Not applicable; and Strategy #6: Facilitate interjurisdictional coordination. According to the General Plan, trails in Santa Clara County serve the following roles: outdoor recreational; transportation; education; public health and physical well-being; social and economic well-being; and alternative emergency access and egress. The General Plan Parks and Recreation Element includes the following relevant policies: C -PR 20: A countywide system of trails offering a variety of user experiences should be provided that includes: trails within and between parks and other publicly owned open space lands; trails that provide access from the urban area to these lands; trails that connect to trails of neighboring counties; trails that connect to transit facilities; trails that give the public environmentally superior alternative transportation routes and methods; trails that close strategic gaps in non -motorized transportation routes; trails that offer opportunity for maintaining personal health; trails that offer opportunities for outdoor education and recreation; and trails that could serve as emergency evacuation routes. C -PR 20.1: Trail access should be provided for a range of user capabilities and needs in a manner consistent with State and Federal regulations. C -PR 20.2: Trails should be established along historically significant trail routes, whenever feasible. C -PR 21.1: Trails should be routed along scenic roads where such routing is feasible. =— C -PR 23: Trail routes shall be located, designed and developed with sensitivity to their potential environmental, recreational, and other impacts on adjacent lands and private property. C -PR 24: Trails shall be located to recognize the resources and hazards of the areas they traverse, and to be protective of sensitive habitat areas such as wetlands and riparian corridors and other areas where sensitive species may be adversely affected. C -PR 27.1: The County shall coordinate with landowners whose property may be affected by proposed trails identified on the Countywide Trails Master Plan Map to include the Supplement to the Stanford University Community Plan/ 4.1-3 ESA 1202493 General Use Permit EIR and the Santa Clara County Countywide Trails Master Plan Update SEIR 4. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES 4.1 LAND USE. PLANS AND POLICIES landowner's interests and concerns related to trail implementation when detail design and management plans are prepared. —�, C -PR 28.1: Information shall be made available to landowners from whom trail easement dedications may be required or requested concerning laws that limit landowner liability. _C-PR28.3: In coordination with the County Parks and Recreation Department, cities, public entities, organizations, and private citizens should be encouraged to implement the trails plan where practical and feasible. C -PR 29.1: Trails shall be considered as development projects when on private land. C -PR 30: Trails shall be temporarily closed when conditions become unsafe or environmental resources are severely impacted. Such conditions could include soil erosion, flooding, fire hazard, environmental damage, or failure to follow the specific trail management plan. C -PR 30.1: Levels -of --use and types -of -use on trails shall be controlled to avoid unsafe use conditions or severe environmental degradation. C -PR 30.2: The County Parks and Recreation Department shall provide adequate ongoing maintenance of its trail system. C -PR 31: Use of motorized vehicles on trails shall be prohibited, except for wheelchairs, maintenance, and emergency vehicles. C -PR 32: All trails should be marked. Signed information should be provided to encourage responsible trail use. Appropriate markers should be established along historically significant trail routes. C -PR 33: Maps and trail guides should be made available to the public to increase awareness of existing public trails. C -PR 33.3: Trail planning, acquisition, development, and management of trail routes shown on the Countywide Trails Master Plan Map should be coordinated among the various local, regional, state and federal agencies which provide trails or funding for trails. Land Use Elentent When the County of Santa. Clara Board of Supervisors adopted the Stanford Community Plan in December 2000, the Santa Clara County General Plan's land use designation for the Stanford University campus (Alfajor Educational and Institutional Uses) was superceded by a Board of Supervisors resolution that amended the General Plan and replaced Part 4, Section "S," and policies R -LU 64 through R -LU 69. The three proposed trail alignments are now mostly located in areas that are either designated as Open Space and Field Research (OS/f) or Special Conservation Areas (SCA). Previously, the predominant General Plan land use designation for this area was Stanford University Lands — Academic Reserve and Open Space, which applied "to lands outside of the campus area which currently have an open space character or use, or low intensity academic uses." Supplement to the Stanford University Community Plan/ 4.1-4 GSA 1202493 General Use Permit EiR and the Santa Clara County Countywide Trails Master Plan Update SEiR 4. ENVIRONMENTAL SIrrING, IMPACI-S, AND MCf1GATION AIEASL'RES 4.1 LAND USE, PLANS AND POLICIES Policies of the amended General Plan, contained within the Stanford Community Plan, are more thoroughly discussed below, under Stanford University Community Plan (Amendment to the Santa Clara County General Plan). Santa Clara County Countywide Trails Master Plan Update (Amendment to the General Plan) The 1995 Santa Clara Counq, Countylnide Trails Master Plan Update provides the County's trails route map and policies for a countywide system that has been part of the County's General Plan since 1930. (A copy of this map is included in Section 3, Project Description, as Figure 3- 1.) The intent of the Plan's policies is to "direct the County as it incrementally implements the plan while adhering to these five beliefs: • to build a realistic trail system that effectively meets the needs of County residents; • to respect private property rights through due process in the detail planning and design of trails; • to provide responsible trail management; inform the trail user that the idea of "shared -use" includes respecting adjacent land uses; • to accept responsibility for any liability arising from the public's use of County trails; and • to implement trails involving private property only when the landowner is a willing participant in the process. The Countywide Trails Master Plan Update Map designates the conceptually presented S 1 alignment as a proposed key sub -regional trail route within other public lands such as parks, wildlife refuges, open space preserves, flood control projects; it also identifies the S1: Matadero Creek/Page Mill Trail (Scenic Road — Partial). A sub -regional trail is defined by the Master Plan Update as a trail that provides regional recreation and transportation benefits by providing continuity between cities and convenient, long-distance trail loop opportunities that link two or more Regional Trails.1 The Master Plan Update contains several relevant objectives and "policy codes," a few of which are listed below. Additional detail pertaining to the Santa Clara County Countywide Trails J11faster Plan Update is available in the Santa Clara County Countywide Trails lLlaster Plan Update SEIR. -- Strategy Objective: Ensure that trails planning accommodates public recreation and other needs while_r_eeognizinatbe ri htg< s of private propett owners, the need for safety. and the reguiretnentsofenvironlental prQteGkinl. L Regional Trails are those that are of National. State, or regional recreation significance and extend beyond the borders of Santa Clara County. Supplement to the Stanford University Community Plan/ 4.1-5 ESA 1302493 General Use Permit EIR and the Santa Clara County Countywide Trails Master Plan Update SEIR 4. F.NVIRONIMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS, AND \LITIGATION MEASURES 4.1 LAND USE, PLANS AND POLICIES --: `Policv Code PR -TS 2.1: Trail routes shall be located, designed and developed with sensitivity to their potential environmental, recreational, and other impacts on adjacent `rands and.private6propei•ty. _, Policy Code PR -TS (i) 2.A: During trail design, notify and coordinate with affected landowners to incorporate measures into trail design and related management policies to accommodate the -,privacy, security and liability concerns of the landowner. Such measures could include, but are not limited to: Tencing or ba'� rrier plant- µ`ng that iscourages trespassing; signage; scheduling of maintenance; patrol scheduling; and indemnity agreements to protect the landowner and affected landowners from liability for injuries to trail users. (lmplementors: County, Cities, (Mid -Peninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD), Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (SCCOSA).) Policy Code PR -TS (i) 2.13: Prior to developing any trail route for public use, prepare design and management plans that ensure provision of services necessary to provide for the safety andmsupport of trail users and affected landowners, and respond to the uniq>ie safety and use concerns associated with highway safety, traffic operations, public transit, and businesses such as quality water source development, intensive agriculture, grazing, mining, railroads, and defense research and testing industries. (See Design and Management Guidelines.) (implementors: County, Cities, MROSD, SCCOSA.) Stanford University Community Plan (Amendment to the Santa Clara County General Plan) The Stanford University Community.Plan, adopted by the Board of Supervisors in December 2000, replaced policies of the Santa Clara County General Plan as they applied to Stanford lands located within the jurisdictional boundary of the County. The Community Plan amended the General Plan as described above. Its primary purpose is to guide future use and development of Stanford lands in a manner that incorporates key General Plan principles of compact urban development, open space preservation, and resource conservation. The Community Plan attempts to achieve an appropriate balance between the reasonable expectations of the University to use and develop its land with the interests of the public to responsibly manage such growth. According to the Community Plan, it "builds upon the basic strategies and policy framework for each element of the General Plan" (p. ii) and it is therefore organized similarly to the General Plan. Land Use The Community Plan includes two new land use designations that apply to the project area: Special Conservation Area (SCA) and Open Space and Field Research (OS/FR). The Open Space and Field Research designation applies to undeveloped lands outside the Academic Growth Boundary. These lands are important for their environmental resources, academic value, and for their role in creating an open space setting for the campus and the region (SCP -LU 23). They also serve as a resource for field research and research -related activities dependent on the Supplement to the Stanford University Community Plan/ 4.1-6 ESA r 202493 General Use Permit EIR and the Santa Clara County Countywide Trails Master Plan Update SEIR