The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3.2Item 3.2 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS March 1, 2012 Staff Report to the Planning Commission RE: LANDS OF WADHWANI, RED ORCHID, BLUE ORCHID, AND PEFLEY (APPLICANT: ROMESH WADHWANI), 26170, 26238, AND 26240 W. FREMONT ROAD, 261.69 MAURER LANE; (FILE # 163-11, 239-11, 234-11 SD -GD -IS -ND -VAR, 235 -11 -EP). A SITE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR THE BARRON CREEK CHANNEL FLOOD CONTROL AND REALIGNMENT PROJECT INCLUDING A NEW DRIVEWAY ACCESS FOR 26238 FREMONT ROAD AND SETBACK VARIANCE FOR PATHS AND BRIDGE CROSSINGS. FROM: Cynthia Richardson, Consulting Planner C:' APPROVED BY: Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director-�R RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission: 1. Forward a recommendation that, based on the Initial Study, the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program in Attachments #1 and #2; and 2. Forward a recommendation to the City Council to approve the three requested Site Development permits for the flood control and realignment project, based on the environmental document and subject to the conditions of approval (Attachment #3) and mitigation measures as shown in the Initial Study; and 3. Deny the requested variance to locate three 8' wide bridges and paths within the 30 foot property line setback, based on the findings of denial in Attachment #4. BACKGROUND Barron Creek is one of the major creeks that flow through the Town of Los Altos Hills. Maintaining the creek corridor is important to the proper flow of the creek. Currently, there are willow trees located within the bed of the creek which collect debris and block the normal flow of water. The creek has also become full of weeds and silt, obstructing the flow of water. On June 2, 2011, Public Works/Engineering staff proposed to undertake the Barron Creek maintenance project to mitigate flood hazards. At that time, Dr. Wadhwani, owner of the three affected parcels, requested that the Town defer the maintenance project and allow him to submit an application for realignment and maintenance of Barron Creek. The project requires approval from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Unites States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) once the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document is approved. CEQA requires Planning Commission Lands of Wadhwani, Red Orchid, Blue Orchid, and Pefley March 1, 2012 Page 2 of 5 analysis of impacts to the area based on the proposed project. A Biological Evaluation was prepared by Live Oak Associates dated January 3, 2012. The information was used to evaluate biological concerns stemming from the project and is included as an attachment to the Initial Study. Dr. Wadhwani has voluntarily agreed to maintain the new realigned creek once it is complete. Condition # 25 requires a storm drain maintenance agreement be in place prior to the commencement of construction. DISCUSSION The existing creek channel has historically been modified from its original location and has been constructed with man-made materials. The existing channel is lined with rip rap that is significantly overgrown with non-native vegetation. This vegetation has also aided in the siltation of the creek bed causing ponding of water and resulting in inadequate channel size for the 100 year storm event. The City Engineer has determined that there is an increasing risk that flooding and property damage will occur due to siltation, vegetation and tree growth within the creek. The applicant is proposing to restore the entire length of the creek to a natural setting with native materials to compensate for the flood control and realignment project. Four creek crossings are proposed to span the new channel from top -of -bank to top -of -bank. One crossing is for a common driveway and is proposed to be 12 feet wide and three other pathway bridges are proposed to be 8 feet wide. An existing fence on the Wadhwani property is proposed to be relocated to the west of its current location, with portions of the new fence to be located on the Blue Orchid and Red Orchid properties. A new driveway access point off of Fremont Road is proposed for the Red Orchid property and will serve as a common driveway to the Wadhwani property via a bridge crossing. Flood Control and Creek Realignment The realignment will consist of approximately 350 linear feet of the creek being moved approximately 40 feet to the west. Impacts to trees and wetland vegetation will occur and mitigation will be imposed. Forty-two willow trees will be removed which are located below the top of the creek bank. Twenty-one trees are to be removed that are located above the top of the creek bank. Mitigation measures require tree replacement on site at a 1:1 ratio for trees below the top of bank within the riparian habitat of Barron Creek and a 2:1 ratio for those above the top of bank (see Biologic Resource Mitigation Measures 3 and 4). To meet this requirement, the applicant is proposing forty-two trees to be planted within the reconstructed storm drain easement and forty-two additional trees to be planted outside the storm drain easement on the three properties (see sheet 3 and 23 in the project plan set). Above ground utilities will be undergrounded and relocated to a new ingress/egress easement located along the driveways on the western side of the properties. The existing sewer line will not be relocated or altered. Planning Commission Lands of Wadhwani, Red Orchid, Blue Orchid, and Pefley March 1, 2012 Page 3 of 5 Barron Creek is above ground on these three properties and is approximately 600 linear feet long. Approximately 350 feet will be realigned and 250 feet will be restored and remain in the same location. Approximately 660 tons of rip rap will be removed from the existing man-made channel and an additional 130 cubic yards of soil will be imported for the project. The Engineering Department has reviewed the hydraulic report submitted by the applicant and verified that the new creek channel is designed to accommodate the 100 year flood event. Staff has also reviewed the project plans, found the project to be consistent with Town requirements and has recommended approval with conditions. Site Improvements (Driveway, Fence, Paths, and Bridges) New Drivewav Access The Site Development Ordinance Section 10-2.1102(h) limits driveways within ten (10) feet of any property line except as necessary for site access and common driveways. The applicant is requesting that a common driveway be allowed from the Wadhwani property via a bridge crossing to the Red Orchid Property. The driveway would then exit the Red Orchid property onto Fremont Road. Condition #6 has been included to restrict additional access points along the west property line of the Red Orchid property. Fence Pursuant to Section 10-2.702(e) of the Site Development Code (Attachment #8), structures shall be setback a minimum of 25' from the top of all creek banks. The .code section allows the Planning Commission to approve lesser structural setbacks without requiring variance findings. The existing wrought iron fence on the Wadhwani property is approximately 5' to 10' away from the current top of bank. The applicant is requesting to relocate the fence to be 15' away from the proposed realigned channel. The consulting biologist supports this request because the proposed revegetation for the channel realignment will provide increased riparian habitat function and value over the channel's existing condition and will not be affected by the proposed fence. Variance for Paths and Bridges Four creek crossings are proposed to span the new channel from top -of -bank to top -of - bank. One crossing is for a common driveway and is proposed to be 12 feet wide and three other bridges are proposed to be 8 feet wide. Two 8' wide bridges are proposed on the Blue Orchid property and one 8' wide bridge is proposed on the Red Orchid property. 8' wide paths are proposed for all 3 crossings to connect the paths to the Wadhwani property. The proposed 8' wide paths and bridges require variance approval because only 4' wide paths are allowed to be located within the property line setback. The bridges and paths could be reduced.in width to 4 feet and be allowed within the setbacks. The applicant has provided variance findings and graphic illustrations in support of a variance Planning Commission Lands of Wadhwani, Red Orchid, Blue Orchid, and Pefley March 1, 2012 Page 4 of 5 (Attachment #5). Per Municipal Code Section 10-1.1007(2)(b), specific findings must be made in the positive for the project to be approved (Attachment 9). Staff is not in support of the variance because the paths and bridges can be reduced to four feet to conform to the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, staff has prepared findings for denial of the request (Attachment 94). COMMITTEE REVIEW The Environmental Design and Protection Committee reviewed the project on 12-12-11 and saw no problems with the project (Attachment #6). The Open Space Committee met with staff and the applicants on 12-15-11 and noted a number of positive improvements to the creek with the project (Attachment #7). However they did have four concerns as follows: 1) The Committee questioned if they could place an Open Space easement over the creek. The Town Attorney has informed staff that an Open Space easement could be imposed either at this time or as part of a future site development permit for the Red and Blue Orchid properties. It is recommended that an open space easement be required when future site development permits are requested for the subject properties. 2) The Committee suggested eliminating the hardscape/boulders within the creek. The applicant has designed the new creek channel so that there are only three locations that have boulders which are used for erosion control purposes. These locations are necessary at the bend of the creek and at the bridge crossings where bends occur. 3) The Committee noted that the proposed bridge crossings would increase paved areas within the riparian corridor. The project biologist discussed the four proposed bridge crossings in the biological report and confirmed that they would not be considered an environmental impact. 4) The Committee would like assurances that the channel's capacity will be sufficient. The applicant has submitted a Hydraulic Analysis of the new alignment; the Town has reviewed the document and finds that the proposed improvements are adequate to carry the 100 year flood event similar to existing condition. CEOA STATUS 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. The review period for the Negative Declaration began on February 1, 2012 and ends on March 1, 1012. The Mitigated Negative Declaration must be adopted by the City Council before approving the project. In order to recommend adoption, the Planning Commission Lands of Wadhwani, Red Orchid, Blue Orchid, and Pefley March 1, 2012 Page 5 of 5 Commission must find that all potential significant environmental effects are addressed through the proposed mitigation measures. PUBLIC COMMENTS As of this date, no comments from the public have been received. ATTACHMENTS 1. Initial Study 2. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan with attachments 3. Conditions of approval 4. Variance Findings for denial prepared by staff 5. Variance Findings for approval prepared by applicant dated 2/23/12 6. Environmental Design and Protection Committee continents dated 12/12/11 7. Open Space Committee comments dated 12/19/11 8. Municipal Code Section 10-2.702(e) 9. Municipal Code Section 10-1.1007(2)(b) Variance Findings 10. Project plans Attachment 1 TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT TITLE: Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project PREPARED BY: Town of Los Altos Hills Cynthia Richardson, Planning Consultant 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 (650)941-7222 NAME AND ADDRESS OF PROJECT SPONSOR: Dr. Romesh and Kathleen Wadhwani, 26170 W. Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94024 LOCATION OF PROJECT: 26170, 26238, 26240 W. Fremont Road and 26169 Maurer Lane Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 APN#175-35-036, 175-35-014, 175-35-002,175-35-028 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of flood control measures to allow for continuous, unobstructed flow of water within Barron creek. The realignment, maintenance and revegetation of this 600 foot length of Barron Creek is located in the Town of Los Altos Hills. The existing creek channel has historically been modified from its original location and has been constructed with man-made materials. The existing channel is lined with rip rap that is significantly overgrown with non- native vegetation. This vegetation has also aided in the siltation of the creekbed causing ponding of water and resulting in inadequate channel size for the 100 year storm event. The City Engineer has determined that there is an immediate and increasing risk that flooding and property damage will occur due to siltation, vegetation and tree growth within the creek. Additionally, willow trees are located directly in front of the outfall structure at the upstream portion of the creek. Flooding in this area could cause damage to adjacent properties which have been developed with single family homes. The realignment will consist of approximately 350 linear feet of the creek being moved approximately 40 feet to the west. Impacts to trees and wetland vegetation will occur and mitigation will be imposed. Proposed restoration and maintenance activities will include the removal of nineteen willow trees and the existing non-native, invasive vegetation within the upstream portion of the project site, which is not proposed for realignment. The removal of this vegetation will help to keep the channel clear of debris, maintain an unobstructed flow of water, and limit the exposure to flooding. Forty- two willow trees will be removed and will be replaced with new Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project January 26, 2012 Page 2 of 7 vegetation. An additional twenty one trees will be removed for the proposed driveway access and pathways. The project proposes to replant 84 trees on the three properties. The entire length of the creek will then be restored to a natural setting with native materials to compensate for the flood control and realignment project. Four creek crossings are proposed to span the new channel from top -of -bank to top - of -bank. One crossing is for a common driveway and is proposed to be 12 feet wide and three others are proposed to be 8 feet wide and will need variances to allow walkways and bridges wider than 4 feet to be located within the property line setback. Above ground utilities will be undergrounded and relocated to a new ingress/egress easement located along the driveways on the western side of the properties. The existing sewer line will not be relocated or altered. The existing Wadhwani estate fence will be relocated westward towards the channel realignment as well. FINDING: The Town of Los Altos Hills has completed a review of the proposed project, and on the basis of the attached Initial Study, has determined that the project, as mitigated, will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. MITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT TO AVOID POTENTIALLY SIGNICIANT EFFECTS: Aesthetic Measure 1: A revegetation plan shall be prepared and implemented to compensate for the loss of approximately forty-two willow trees and 21 other various trees required for removal due to the new driveway and pathways. For trees occurring within the riparian habitat of Barron Creek which are being removed, a minimum 1:1 replacement -to -removal ratio along the upper banks of the same reach of the creek where the willows are being removed is required. For the trees being removed outside of the riparian habitat a minimum of 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio shall be used. For all trees located near the construction, tree protection measures shall be installed around the drip -line prior to construction and throughout the construction phase of the project. Biologic Resource Measure 1: Trees and other structures (i.e., birdhouses) planned for removal shall be removed during the non -breeding season (September 1 through January 31). If it is not possible to avoid tree removal during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre - disturbance survey for tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds in all trees and other structures planned for removal and immediately adjacent to the disturbance zone no more than 30 days from the onset of the removal activities, if such disturbance will occur during the breeding season. If nesting raptors and migratory birds are detected on the site during the survey, a suitable activity -free buffer shall be established around all active nests. The precise dimension of the buffer (up to 250 feet) would be determined at that time and may vary depending on location and species. Buffers shall remain in place for the duration of the breeding season or until it has been confirmed by a qualified biologist that all chicks have fledged and are independent of their parents. Pre - disturbance surveys during the non -breeding season are not necessary for tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds, as they are expected to abandon their roosts during disturbance activities. Implementation of the above measure would mitigate impacts to tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds to a less -than -significant level. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project January 26, 2012 Page 3 of 7 Biologic Resource Measure 2: A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre -construction survey of the bat boxes for bats within 30 days prior to the onset of ground disturbance, if such disturbance will occur during the roosting season (March 1 through August 31). If active maternity roosts are detected during the survey, then a construction -free buffer shall be established around all active roosts. The buffer radius would be established at the time work is to be carried out and would be determined by the extent and duration of construction activities scheduled to occur as well as the location of any roosts at that time. An onsite biological monitor would be necessary during construction. when construction activities would be performed near these features during the roosting season. The monitor would have authority to issue a cease and desist order if construction activities disturb any bat roosts. If demolition of the bat boxes is to occur, then pre -demolition bat surveys shall be conducted to determine if special status bat species are present. If no bats are observed to be roosting in the boxes, then no further action would be required, and dismantling of the boxes can proceed. However, if bats are found to be roosting on the site, the project proponents shall exclude bats prior to dismantling to ensure no harm or take would occur to any special status bats as a result of demolition activities. Dismantling of the boxes shall occur after August 31 and before March 1 to avoid interfering with an active nursery. If a non -breeding bat colony is found in the boxes, the individuals shall be safely evicted under the direction of a qualified bat biologist through a "partial dismantle" process, whereby the roosting area is opened to allow air flow through and sunlight into the structure, making it unsuitable habitat and undesirable for the bats to return to the site. Full dismantling shall then follow no later than the following day (i.e., there shall be no less than one night between initial disturbance for airflow and the demolition). This action shall allow bats to leave during the night, thus increasing their chances of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation during daylight hours. Biologic Resource Measure 3: Due to the nature of the proposed project activities, full avoidance of jurisdictional waters and sensitive habitats on the site is not possible. Therefore, the project proponent shall implement minimization and compensation measures to reduce impacts to jurisdictional waters and sensitive habitats to a less -than -significant level. Minimization. Because full avoidance is not possible, actions shall be taken to minimize impacts to aquatic and riparian habitats. Measures taken during construction activities shall include placing construction fencing around the aquatic features or riparian areas to be preserved to .ensure that construction activities do not inadvertently impact these areas. Any proposed future lighting on the property (e.g., footpath lighting) shall be designed to minimise light and glare impacts to the riparian corridor. To the maximum extent practicable, light sources shall not be visible from riparian areas and shall not illuminate riparian areas or cause glare on the opposite side of the channel (e.g., to neighboring properties). Additionally, with the exception of the willows to be removed at the upstream end of the channel, proposed realignment activities shall be designed and situated to avoid the loss of trees within and adjacent to the channel to the maximum extent practicable. The Town's creek protection ordinance requires all structures to be set back a minimum of 25 ft. from the top of bank of all creeks. The existing Wadhwani estate fence is located within approximately 10 ft. of the top of bank along the east side of the channel. The proposed revegetation for the channel realignment will provide increased riparian habitat function and value over the channel's existing condition. Therefore, rather than conforming strictly with the Town's creek protection ordinance, the new estate fence shall be set back in a manner that accommodates the intended function and value of the channel revegetation plan. This includes a minimum Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project January 26, 2012 Page 4of7 setback of 15 ft. from the center of any planted riparian trees or 15 ft. from the top of bank of the realigned channel, whichever is greater. Compensation. An onsite revegetation plan has been developed to compensate for temporary impacts to 0.12 acres of wetlands occurring within the channel and the loss of the approximately forty-two willows and other riparian trees. A formal tree survey shall be completed to determine the actual number of trees to be removed. It is expected that all compensation measures can be accommodated within the proposed channel alignment, as the channel is proposed to be planted with native wetland vegetation. If the new channel alignment cannot fully accommodate the compensation measures, then offsite restoration would be necessary. Compensation measures shall include: Creation of at least 0.12 acres of wetlands within the channel. Replacement of all willows removed from anywhere below the top of bank along the existing channel alignment at a minimum 1:1 replacement -to -removal ratio. Replacement of the nineteen willows removed from the upstream end of the channel shall occur along the upper banks of this same reach of the creek. The willows occurring in the creek were originally planted as pole cuttings and occurred as natural recruits. Because they have become a nuisance by obstructing the flow of water through the channel, the Town has indicated its desire to have these trees removed. Therefore, the recommended replacement -to - removal ratio for willow impacts as described above was developed with the Town and through informal conversations with the USACE and CDFG (Paula Gill, pers. comm., February 2011; Dave Johnston, pers. comm., February 2011). This mitigation is consistent with the requirements of these regulatory agencies. To the maximum extent practicable, removed trees shall be replaced with like species. Due to the flow obstructions created by the existing willows and the project's objective to prevent future obstructions, other riparian tree species (e.g., coast live oaks and California sycamores) may be substituted in consultation with a qualified biologist. Replacement of all other native riparian trees (i.e., riparian trees occurring beyond the top of bank) at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio as agreed upon with USACE and CDFG. To the maximum extent practicable, removed trees shall be replaced with like species. Reseeding or replanting of riparian or wetland vegetation (i.e., a combination of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation) along the channel benches and banks. These measures shall be implemented according to a site-specific revegetation plan that would be prepared, for agency review. This mitigation plan would need to be approved by the responsible agency prior to the start of project activities. The revegetation plan shall: 1. Designate suitable replanting areas. 2. Describe the methods by which the revegetation will occur, including species to be planted and plant installation guidelines. 3. Develop a timetable for implementation of the plan. 4. Outline a monitoring methodology and establish appropriate performance criteria. 5. Describe remedial measures to be performed in the event that initial revegetation measures are unsuccessful in meeting the performance criteria. 6. Describe site maintenance activities to follow revegetation activities. These may include weed control, irrigation, and control of herbivory. Compliance with Regulatory Agency Requirements. The applicant shall also comply with all state and federal regulations related to work that will impact jurisdictional waters occurring on the site, which includes Barron Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project January 26, 2012 Page 5 of 7 Creek and may also include the wetland patch abutting the creek, should it be regulated by the agencies. This may require obtaining a Section 404 Clean Water Act permit from the USACE, Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, and Section 1600 Stream Alteration Agreement from the CDFG prior to initiating any realignment and maintenance activities, if deemed necessary. Permit conditions typically require a mitigation plan outlining compensatory measures for impacts to all jurisdictional features. As such, while impacts to the abutting wetland would not be considered significant and, therefore, would not require mitigation under CEQA, a small amount of additional mitigation may be required by the agencies for impacts to the abutting wetland in order to comply with their permit conditions. It is expected that the agencies would seek mitigation in the form of onsite wetland creation or enhancement. The project proposes to plant the channel of the new alignment with wetland vegetation. This would accommodate both temporary impacts to wetlands occurring within the existing channel and permanent impacts to the wetland patch abutting the creek. Biologic Resource Measure 4: For mitigation measures related to the removal of trees within the riparian habitat of Barron Creek, refer to Biologic Resource Measure 3. The following measures are recommended for trees 66curring outside of the riparian habitat. Tree removal shall occur pursuant to relevant Town ordinances, including securing a tree removal permit and complying with the permit conditions. All trees to be removed shall be replaced onsite at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio (two trees planted for each tree removed). A monitoring plan for the replacement trees shall be developed and submitted to the Town during the permit process. The basic components of the monitoring plan shall consist of final success criteria, specific performance criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, monitoring schedule, contingency/remedial measures, and reporting requirements. For trees to be retained, impacts to any retained trees during the construction and operation phases of the project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level by conforming to the following guidelines. These measures shall remain in place for the duration of construction activities at the project site: • The project proponent shall retain a consulting arborist prior to any ground disturbance activities. The consulting arborist would develop a tree -protection plan outlining specific procedures to ensure that retained trees are protected during the construction phase. • Prior to any ground disturbance activities, fencing shall be installed around the drip -line of all retained trees occurring within the development envelope, and the fencing shall remain in place throughout the construction phase of the project._ The type of fencing to be utilized would be at the direction of the consulting arborist. • Any limb or root pruning to be conducted on retained trees shall be approved and supervised by the consulting arborist and shall follow best management practices developed by the International Society of Arboriculture. • Supplemental irrigation to retained trees shall be applied as determined by the consulting arborist. • If any of the retained trees are damaged during the construction phase, they shall be evaluated at the earliest possible time by the consulting arborist so that appropriate measures can be identified and implemented by the applicant. Cultural Resource Measure 1: 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. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project January 26, 2012 Page 6 of 7 Hydrology and Water Quality Measurel: The new creek channel and bridges shall be designed and construct4ed to meet the 100 year flood event. Land Use and Planning Measure 1: The Planning Commission shall review and approve the proposed new common driveway which crosses from the existing driveway on the Wadhwani property (26170 W. Fremont Road) onto the Red Orchid Property (26238 W. Fremont Road). An easement shall be recorded on the Red Orchid property allowing the ingress -egress and stipulating that no other driveway access will be granted on this property. Land Use and Planning Measure 2: A variance must be obtained from the Planning Commission to allow walkways and bridges greater than 4 feet wide to be located within the property line setbacks on the Wadhwani property (26170 W. Fremont Road), Red Orchid property (26238 W. Fremont Road) and Blue Orchid property (26240 W. Fremont Road). If the variance is not granted then the walkways and bridges must be reduced to no greater than 4 feet wide. Noise Measure 1: Noise generating construction activities shall be limited to Monday through Saturday between the hours of 8:00 am and 5:30 pm. No heavy noise generating equipment is allowed to be used on Saturdays and no construction is allowed on Sundays or holidays as noted per Chapter 7, Sec.5-7-01 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director Date TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS Circulated on: 2_L I / ( 2— Adopted on: INITIAL STUDY Initial Study Checklist & References Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project 261709 26238 & 26240 Fremont Road 26169 Maurer Lane Project No. 163-11, 234-11, 239 -11 -SD -IS -ND -VAR 235 -11 -EP Town of Los Altos Hills -Planning Department 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Attachment 2 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 2 of 47 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 on the subject project. This initial study provides the basis for the determination of whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If it is determined that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, an environmental impact report will be prepared which focuses on the area of concern identified by this initial study. If it is determined that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment, it is 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 be the project applicant, then the project would be eligible for a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project 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, AICP, Planning Director (650) 941-7222. 4. Initial Study prepared by: Cynthia Richardson, Consulting Planner Project Location: The project site is located on the south side of West Fremont Road in a drainage easement along the property lines of 26170, 26238 & 26240 West Fremont Road and along the rear property line of 26169 Maurer Lane, Los Altos Hills, CA 94022, APN#'s 175-35-036, 175-35-002, 175-35-014 and 175-35-028. 6. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Dr. Romesh and Kathleen Wadhwani, 26170 West Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 7. General Plan Designation: R -Residential 8. Zoning: R -A (Residential -Agricultural) Description of Project: The proposed project consists of flood control measures to allow for continuous, unobstructed flow of water within Barron creek. The realignment, maintenance and revegetation of this 600 foot length of Barron Creek is located in the Town of Los Altos Hills. The existing creek channel has historically been modified from its original location and has been constructed with man-made materials. The existing channel is lined with rip rap that is significantly overgrown with non-native vegetation. This vegetation has also aided in the siltation of the creekbed causing ponding of water Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 3 of 47 and resulting in inadequate channel size for the 100 year storm event. The City Engineer has determined that there is an immediate and increasing risk that flooding and property damage will occur due to siltation, vegetation and tree growth within the creek. Additionally, willow trees are located directly in front of the outfall structure at the upstream portion of the creek. Flooding in this area could cause damage to adjacent properties which have been developed with single family homes. The realignment will consist of approximately 350 linear feet of the creek being moved approximately 40 feet to the west. Impacts to trees and wetland vegetation will occur and mitigation will be imposed. Proposed restoration and maintenance activities will include the removal of nineteen willow trees and the existing non-native, invasive vegetation within the upstream portion of the project site, which is not proposed for realignment. The removal of this vegetation will help to keep the channel clear of debris, maintain an unobstructed flow of water, and limit the exposure to flooding. Forty-two willow trees will be removed and will be replaced with new vegetation. An additional twenty one trees will be removed for the proposed driveway access and pathways. The project proposes to replant 84 trees on the three properties. The. entire length of the creek will then be restored to a natural setting with native materials to compensate for the flood control and realignment project. Four creek crossings are proposed to span the new channel from top -of -bank to top -of -bank. One crossing is for a common driveway and is proposed to be 12 feet wide and three others are proposed to be 8 feet wide and will need variances to allow walkways and bridges wider than 4 feet to be located within the property line setback. Above ground utilities will be undergrounded and relocated to a new ingress/egress easement located along the driveways on the western side of the properties. The existing sewer line will not be relocated or altered. The existing Wadhwani estate fence will be relocated westward towards the channel realignment as well. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Surrounding land uses include one and two story single-family residences with minimum lot size of'I acre. This portion of Barron Creek runs through private properties (both underground and above ground) where in some cases it is located within storm drain easements. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), PT&T, ATT, PG&E. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 4 of 47 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 ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Hydrology / Water Quality Materials QLand Use / Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic Q 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 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 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, 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 effectin 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: ( Z (o ( L Debbie Pedro, AICP, Planning Director L:01 101 0 0 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 5 of 47 i'a�` i ". ''c 'z,� ;a' rty s d r„v h%* w%' x x ! ' �, . �' s,,s r- 3 sl+. b^, i ��5,r, +v a bk Yb 3 Y , *•`i S i 3113i'` xtA'� dy,J'i f "r- .1 94` "4.f' { #''}d A (.i f Than d «z 'n'i l n �T � c , P...t ly N e&,t-_ t. ,` 's Less Tuan' > , Mis P a . �, S�gmficant � �. S �ticant Nnlm act � + ��' I. AESTHETICS — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a ❑ ❑ ❑ Q scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock ❑ ❑ ❑ Q outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual ❑ ❑ Q ❑ character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light ❑ ❑ ❑ Q or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? DISCUSSION: The proposed project is situated along side property lines, adjacent to five properties which maintain single family residences. The Los Altos Hills General Plan identifies important vistas, historic sites, and scenic highways within the Town. None of these resources listed in the General Plan will be significantly impacted by the proposal. The existing rock lined channel is man-made. The new proposal will return this creek area to a natural looking setting and improve the visual aesthetic of the channel. Aesthetic impacts due to the realignment of the creek channel (moving the north -south portion of the creek channel approximately 40 feet to the west) and tree removal will be limited to the immediate area. The removal and replacement of the approximately forty-two willow trees will have some visual impact to the adjacent neighbors opening up views between properties. The impact will be temporary until the newly planted replacement trees are mature. In addition, 21 trees will be removed to accommodate the new driveway bridge crossing and pathways. These trees are all located beyond the top of bank and will be replanted at a 2:1 ratio. No Heritage trees will be removed. Therefore there is little or no long term visual impact. One additional driveway will be installed on 26238 W. Fremont Road (Red Orchid) establishing access onto Fremont Road. No Heritage trees will be removed for construction of this new driveway therefore there is little or no long term visual impact. MITIGATION: Aesthetic Measure 1: A revegetation plan shall be prepared and implemented to compensate for the loss of approximately forty-two willow trees and 21 other various trees required for removal due to the new driveway and pathways. For trees occurring within the riparian habitat of Barron Creek which are being removed, a minimum 1:1 replacement -to -removal ratio along the upper banks of the same reach of the creek where the willows are being removed is required. For the trees being removed outside of the riparian habitat a minimum of 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio shall be used. For all trees located near the construction, tree protection measures shall be installed around the drip -line prior to construction and throughout the construction phase of the project. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 6 of 47 Sources: 1,4,5,6,18 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 7 of 47 em �F'�fi��'a V gzr4yir _,y�v,,.y !1 rs i "' _ 4� a § �" �i,e, �4 'WY ? *sr w1�- 'q x k.."r N"y� 'KS"iE d Y 'Ttt" f {�.' .�N"144" L3 J 3„ t..�3 i h y 4( i� 'S FS"S'' e` 4GjS - }ro. �- - 5�,�,'a q �t `t�" ', ''� f -j - " S +µ s t�, ,,, £ v� "11' �yC +." e �"AZtF"5a. h x 'S T K ?, hi. ��yx'Ps.ys y`G '�;}`i " ,f, Z A ?`� f S D c 5 Pofenhall t ,r{+�4 Y i LeS. � ihaQ �f`" 'Les --sr h sr�.^" ]�'7P _t 'Smficant w� .tom tom i LessThan E } "' '+§�q``"'s,.: r`gi1 v.fi ✓Fs^�, ^x „�.�.y �i fi ,paw a ^�`i.-a�7�Qi11Ci�Qt ,7 �4^. Y .A �.PHI 1Tllu aaLon i ��s �i1CQ �+_r,F� 4,. Tmp_ act t r � �5' f � �U[atIOQr II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES— Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the ❑ ❑ ❑ Q 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? DISCUSSION: The proposed project will have no foreseeable impact on Agricultural Resources. The site is not used as agricultural land. AMIGATION: None Source: 9 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 8 of 47 '3� i"• "� Y z 7r?r �{,�y' ja"t''"+N t ;� �'' �. A F1 T ,y y, ¢ #i 1� 's. - i v$ }i '� WS'a�'i ' S 1" r k^ 0" �� Less+Than # Potenhaltyx s Less Than t , �S�gm#`icant with x No Im -� S mticanf act zap r 1 hgahnn , Imgaci , 'corporation 3 wr.n_ III. AIR QUALITY — Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of ❑ ❑ ❑ Q the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air ❑ ❑ ❑ Q 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ ❑ Q substantial number of people? DISCUSSION: According to Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) CEQA thresholds, a project that generates more than 54 pounds per day of reactive organic gas (ROG), nitrogen oxide (NOx), or fine particulate matter (PM2.5); or 82 pounds per day of course particulate matter (PM10) would be considered to have a significant impact on regional air quality. A tractor and a front loader will be used to remove the 660 tons of rip rap material, excavate the new creek channel and aid in the removal of the trees and silted materials and to re -grade the creek corridor. Dust causing activities would be temporary and will occur during grading and construction activities. With mitigation during the grading activities, this project would have a less than significant impact on regional air quality. MITIGATION: Air Quality Measure 1: Dust control measures shall be implemented during construction as follows: • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. • During grading operations graded areas shall be watered on a continuous basis. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track -out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. Source: 10 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 9 of 47 �FL+L k )'} tRS �a'r�"t '1-�Y ealitt,� i '� any species identified as a candidate, Jit- Y5'ii-.S' ❑ ❑ Q 3$ F dNa Potentially regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by �, Sign cant' Less,l hau prat s S miicant with Se nd:cant riparian habitat or other sensitive natural Mitigat►on ❑ r plans, policies, regulations or by the act California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by 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, ❑ ❑ ❑ Q 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 ❑ Q ❑ ❑ 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 defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act ❑ Q (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal ❑ ❑ pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native ❑ Q ❑ ❑ resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, ❑ Q ❑ ❑ such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? t) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural El El Q Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? DISCUSSION: A Biological Evaluation was prepared by Live Oak Associates dated December 29, 2011. Live Oak Associates conducted an investigation of the biological resources of the properties located off of West Fremont Road in the town of Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California. The proposed flood control Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 10 of 47 project consists of the realignment and maintenance of a portion of Barron Creek in the Town of Los Altos Hills. Of the 600 linear feet of man made creek, 200 linear feet (east -west portion) and 50 linear feet (north -south portion) will be cleaned for flood control purposes and restoration, 350 linear feet will be relocated 40 feet west of the current creek and the entire length will be replanted and returned to a natural setting.__Vegetation_will_.be planted on the -upland side- slopes to the. top of bank to minimise erosion The vegetation root systems will provide stability in the long term once the coconut fiber blanket biodegrades. Planting at the top of bank will provide the opportunity for overstory/canopy to develop. The channel will be planted with native wetland vegetation. Four creek crossings are proposed in the realigned area and are to span the new channel from top -of -bank to top -of -bank. Because they are design elements for the new alignment, they would not be considered an impact to waters of the U.S. The existing north -south portion of the man-made channel will be realigned and will result in temporary impacts to approximately 350 linear feet and 0.12 acres of wetland channel within Barron Creek Approximately twenty-two willow trees and one redwood tree will be removed at the downstream end of the channel to accommodate the realignment. The placement of fill within wetlands, within the existing channel, is to accommodate the realignment and would be considered a significant impact and will also require mitigation measures. Impacts to trees and wetland vegetation will occur and Biologic Resource Measures 3 and 4 will mitigate the impacts to a less than significant level. The east -west upstream portion of the creek and a short segment at the lower end of the creek, which are not proposed for realignment, will undergo maintenance activities that will include the removal of approximately nineteen willow trees and non-native, existing invasive vegetation. The removal of this vegetation will help to keep the channel clear of debris and to maintain an unobstructed flow of water. The implementation of Biologic Resource Measures 3 and 4 will mitigate the impacts to a less than significant level. The remaining site disturbance, from removal of the existing utility poles and undergrounding of power lines along the driveway on the site's western boundary, would be temporary in nature. Any vegetation disturbed in these areas is expected to rapidly recruit to cover areas left barren as a result of trenching activities. A formal wetland delineation of the site was completed in August 2010. USACE issued their jurisdictional determination in March 2011 at which time they claimed jurisdiction over the reach of the creek occurring onsite. The creek is also subject to the jurisdiction of the CDFG up to the top of bank or the edge of the associated riparian vegetation, whichever is greater. The project occurs within jurisdictional waters governed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and subject to Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQB) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) regulations. The removal of the nineteen willow trees within the channel bed will result in temporary disturbance to approximately 200 linear feet of waters of the U.S. Vegetation is expected to naturally recruit from surrounding areas to cover the areas left barren. With implementation of Biologic Resource Mitigation 3, the replacement of trees on a 1:1 ratio within the riparian habitat of Barron Creek and 2:1 for trees occurring outside of the riparian habitat will mitigate to a less than significant level. In addition to the creek channel, potential wetlands are present on the site in the form of approximately 0.05 acres (2,219 sq. ft.) of hydrophytic vegetation along the southern fenceline adjacent to the upstream end of the proposed realignment. This feature appears to have formed as a result of runoff from an adjacent compost pile and from a small pipe directing runoff from surrounding areas toward the creek. A formal wetland delineation was completed by LOA on December 14, 2011, and will be submitted to the USACE for verification to determine if this area meets the USACE's technical criteria for wetlands. Due to the time of year that this survey was conducted, not all wetland features were visible and, therefore, this area did not meet all of the USACE's technical criteria. However, it is believed that because a majority of the criteria were met despite the survey timing, this area will be considered a wetland by the USACE. If so, then it is likely that the USACE will claim jurisdiction over this feature on the basis that it abuts Barron Creek, a known water of the U.S. This feature would also be regulated by the RWQCB, but it is unlikely the CDFG would exert jurisdiction. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 11 of 47 Channel realignment would permanently impact approximately 400 sq. ft. of the abutting wetland. According to the Biological Evaluation impacts to the abutting wetland patch would be considered minimal due to the small size of the area being affected and, therefore, be considered a less than significant impact. In addition Mitigation Measure #3 will more than compensate for the loss of the abutting wetland area. The Town of Los Altos Hills Municipal Code Section 10-2.501 requires drainage systems to be an inconspicuous design and to minimise erosion and sedimentation by using vegetative ground cover. The proposed design which includes a coconut fiber blanket will provide stability to the upland side slopes of the creek in the short term. The new revegetation plan will be implemented using native riparian plantings along with new willow cuttings which will create a visually improved and more natural setting to this portion of Barron Creek. The root systems will provide stability in the long term once the coconut fiber blanket biodegrades. Planting at the top of bank will provide the opportunity for overstory canopy to develop. The presence of invasive, non-native plant species in the riparian corridor has an adverse effect on native vegetation and reduces the hydrologic function and wildlife value. The maintenance of the creek and the removal of the existing rip rap and the construction of the new channel will return this reach of Barron Creek into a healthy riparian corridor. Twenty special status animal species occur, or once occurred, regionally. With the exception of the white- tailed kite and yellow warbler, all of these species are absent from or unlikely to occur on the site due to unsuitable habitat conditions. Proposed channel maintenance activities would have no effect on these species or their breeding success because there is little or no likelihood that they are present in the area. White-tailed kites and yellow warblers may utilize the site for nesting. Filling of the channel would, at. most, result in a very small temporary reduction of foraging and/or breeding habitat available regionally The temporary loss of foraging or nesting habitat for these species would only last for the duration of construction and would be concurrent with construction of the new channel alignment. The new channel alignment will be planted with native trees, shrubs and herbaceous vegetation, providing a net overall increase in foraging and nesting habitat. Therefore, the temporary loss of habitat would be considered less than significant. The timing of project activities could also result in harm or injury to tree -nesting raptors, migratory birds, and bats shall they occur on the site in the future prior to the onset of ground disturbance. This project may result in the temporary loss of foraging or nesting habitat for these species but would be considered less than significant with mitigation. Proposed Biologic Mitigation #1 and #2 will reduce the impact to less than significant. Because this reach of Barron Creek has been manipulated, is isolated from other riparian habitat due to the up and downstream reaches of the creek being underground, and lacks structural and floral diversity, it does not provide as high a habitat value as other, more natural riparian habitats. 11NlMIC"4o 0OWF Biologic Resource Measure 1: Trees and other structures (i.e., birdhouses) planned for removal shall be removed during the non -breeding season (September 1 through January 31). If it is not possible to avoid tree removal during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre -disturbance survey for tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds in all trees and other structures planned for removal and immediately adjacent to the disturbance zone no more than 30 days from the onset of the removal activities, if such disturbance will occur during the breeding season. If nesting raptors and migratory birds are detected on the site during the survey, a suitable activity -free buffer shall be established around all active nests. The precise dimension of the buffer (up to 250 feet) would be determined at that time and may vary depending on location and species. Buffers shall remain in place for the duration of the breeding season or until it has been confirmed by a qualified biologist that all chicks have fledged and are independent of their parents. Pre -disturbance surveys during the non -breeding season are not necessary for tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds, as they are expected to abandon their roosts during disturbance Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 12 of 47 activities. Implementation of the above measure would mitigate impacts to tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds to a less -than -significant level. Biologic Resource Measure 2: A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre -construction survey of the bat boxes for bats within 30 days prior to the onset of ground disturbance, if such disturbance will occur during the roosting season (March 1 through August 31). If active maternity roosts are detected during the survey, then a construction -free buffer shall be established around all active roosts. The buffer radius would be established at the time work is to be carried out and would be determined by the extent and duration of construction activities scheduled to occur as well as the location of any roosts at that time. An onsite biological monitor would be necessary during construction when construction activities would be performed near these features during the roosting season. The monitor would have authority to issue a cease and desist order if construction activities disturb any bat roosts. If demolition of the bat boxes is to occur, then pre -demolition bat surveys shall be conducted to determine if special status bat species are present. If no bats are observed to be roosting in the boxes, then no further action would be required, and dismantling of the boxes can proceed. However, if bats are found to be roosting on the site, the project proponents shall exclude bats prior to dismantling to ensure no harm or take would occur to any special status bats as a result of demolition activities. Dismantling of the boxes shall occur after August 31 and before March 1 to avoid interfering with an active nursery. If a non -breeding bat colony is found in the boxes, the individuals shall be safely evicted under the direction of a qualified bat biologist through a "partial dismantle" process, whereby the roosting area is opened to allow air flow through and sunlight into the structure, making it unsuitable habitat and undesirable for the bats to return to the site. Full dismantling shall then follow no later than the following day (i.e., there shall be no less than one night between initial disturbance for airflow and the demolition). This action shall allow bats to leave during the night, thus increasing their chances of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation during daylight hours. By implementing the above mitigation, impacts to bats would be reduced to a less than significant level. Biologic Resource Measure 3: Due to the nature of the proposed project activities, full avoidance of jurisdictional waters and sensitive habitats on the site is not possible. Therefore, the project proponent shall implement minimization and compensation measures to reduce impacts to jurisdictional waters and sensitive habitats to a less -than -significant level. Minimization. Because full avoidance is not possible, actions shall be taken to minimize impacts to aquatic and riparian habitats. Measures taken during construction activities shall include placing construction fencing around the aquatic features or riparian areas to be preserved to ensure that construction activities do not inadvertently impact these areas. Any proposed future lighting on the property (e.g., footpath lighting) shall be designed to minimise light and glare impacts to the riparian corridor. To the maximum extent practicable, light sources shall not be visible from riparian areas and shall not illuminate riparian areas or cause glare on the opposite side of the channel (e.g., to neighboring properties). Additionally, with the exception of the willows to be removed at the upstream end of the channel, proposed realignment activities will be designed and situated to avoid the loss of trees within and adjacent to the channel to the maximum extent practicable. The Town's creek protection ordinance requires all structures to be set back a minimum of 25 ft. from the top of bank of all creeks. The existing Wadhwani estate fence is located within approximately 10 ft. of the top of bank along the east side of the channel. The proposed revegetation for the channel realignment will provide increased riparian habitat function and value over the channel's existing condition. Therefore, rather than conforming strictly with the Town's creek protection ordinance, the new estate fence shall be set back in a manner that accommodates the intended function and value of the channel revegetation plan. This includes a minimum setback of 15 ft. from the center of any planted riparian trees or 15 ft. from the top of bank of the realigned channel, whichever is greater. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 13 of 47 Compensation. An onsite revegetation plan has been developed to compensate for temporary impacts to 0.12 acres of wetlands occurring within the channel and the loss of the approximately forty-two willows and other riparian trees. A formal tree survey shall be completed to determine the actual number of trees to be removed. It is expected that all compensation measures can be accommodated within the proposed channel alignment, as the channel is proposed to be planted with native wetland vegetation. If the new channel alignment cannot fully accommodate the compensation measures, then offsite restoration would be necessary. Compensation measures shall include: Creation of at least 0.12 acres of wetlands within the channel. Replacement of all willows removed from anywhere below the top of bank along the existing channel alignment at a minimum 1:1 replacement -to -removal ratio. Replacement of the nineteen willows removed from the upstream end of the channel shall occur along the upper banks of this same reach of the creek The willows occurring in the creek were originally planted as pole cuttings and occurred as natural recruits. Because they have become a nuisance by obstructing the flow of water through the channel, the Town has indicated its desire to have these trees removed. Therefore, the recommended replacement -to -removal ratio for willow impacts as described above was developed with the Town and through informal conversations with the USACE and CDFG (Paula Gill, pers. comm., February 2011; Dave Johnston, pers. comm., February 2011). This mitigation is consistent with the requirements .of these regulatory agencies. To the maximum extent practicable, removed trees shall be replaced with like species. Due to the flow obstructions created by the existing willows and the project's objective to prevent future obstructions, other riparian tree species (e.g., coast live oaks and California sycamores) may be substituted in consultation with a qualified biologist Replacement of all other native riparian trees (i.e., riparian trees occurring beyond the top of bank) at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio as agreed upon with USACE and CDFG. To the maximum extent practicable, removed trees shall be replaced with like species. Reseeding or replanting of riparian or wetland vegetation (i.e., a combination of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation) along the channel benches and banks. These measures shall be implemented according to a site-specific revegetation plan that would be prepared for agency review. This mitigation plan would need to be approved by the responsible agency prior to the start of project activities. The revegetation plan shall: 1. Designate suitable replanting areas. 2. Describe the methods by which the revegetation will occur, including species to be planted and plant installation guidelines. 3. Develop a timetable for implementation of the plan. 4. Outline a monitoring methodology and establish appropriate performance criteria. 5. Describe remedial measures to be performed in the event that initial revegetation measures are unsuccessful in meeting the performance criteria. 6. Describe site maintenance activities to follow revegetation activities. These may include weed control, irrigation, and control of herbivory. This measure will reduce impacts to waters of the U.S. and sensitive habitats to a less -than -significant level. Compliance with Regulatory Agency Requirements. The applicant shall also comply with all state and federal regulations related to work that will impact jurisdictional waters . occurring on the site, which includes Barron Creek and may also include the wetland patch abutting the creek, should it be regulated by the agencies. This may require obtaining a Section 404 Clean Water Act permit from the USACE, Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, and Section 1600 Stream Alteration Agreement from the CDFG prior to initiating any realignment and maintenance activities, if deemed necessary. Permit conditions typically require a mitigation plan outlining compensatory measures for impacts to all jurisdictional features. A small amount of additional mitigation may be required by the agencies for impacts to the abutting wetland in order to comply with their permit conditions. It is expected that the agencies would seek mitigation in the form of onsite wetland creation or enhancement The project Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 14 of 47 proposes to plant the channel of the new alignment with wetland vegetation. This would accommodate both temporary impacts to wetlands occurring within the existing channel and permanent impacts to the wetland patch abutting the creek. Biologic Resource Measure 4: For mitigation measures related to the removal of trees within the riparian habitat of Barron Creek, refer to Biologic Resource Measure 3. The following measures are recommended for trees occurring outside of the riparian habitat. Tree removal shall occur pursuant to relevant Town ordinances, including securing a tree removal permit and complying with the permit conditions. All trees to be removed shall be replaced onsite at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio (two, trees planted for each tree removed). A monitoring plan for the replacement trees shall be developed and submitted to the Town during the permit process. The basic components of the monitoring plan shall consist of final success criteria, specific performance criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, monitoring schedule, contingency/remedial measures, and reporting requirements. For trees to be retained, impacts to any retained trees during the construction and operation phases of the project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level by conforming to the following guidelines. These measures shall remain in place for the duration of construction activities at the project site: • The project proponent shall retain a consulting arborist prior to any ground disturbance activities. The consulting arborist would develop a tree -protection plan outlining specific procedures to ensure that retained trees are protected during the construction phase. • Prior to any ground disturbance activities, fencing shall be installed around the drip -line of all retained trees occurring within the development envelope, and the fencing shall remain in place throughout the construction phase of the project. The type of fencing to be utilized would be at the direction of the consulting arborist. • Any limb or root pruning to be conducted on retained trees shall be approved and supervised by the consulting arborist and shall follow best management practices developed by the International Society of Arboriculture. • Supplemental irrigation to retained trees shall be applied as determined by the consulting arborist. • If any of the retained trees are damaged during the construction phase, they shall be evaluated at the earliest possible time by the consulting arborist so that appropriate measures can be identified and implemented by the applicant. Implementation of the above mitigation measures will reduce tree impacts to a less -than -significant level. Sources: 1, 4,5,6,8,18,19,20,22 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 15 of 47 'F d ,Yj 2' 3,. }F...F �j Y<'(?2F "x 'ur "x S�'% fr S�5`. t, 2 41 V" S.Y "'°' ✓F # S"3, .iI+� 'i`': '{ i'te`a '�"4 i �+ i ti F�'' R cif.. Potentially . r 'Less Thawz" a Fain a x SIgQCaRt Imllflct. y� �srt x �r .�'1gIIlIlCBIItdv �MI�'dtioII3 NQ Impacttz ,{.�' Impact x P:LieorpdraYod1 h R JS`+"35.'vy'11 AA'a"v`' `T.� �r`Al._ .. &_,� _..x..i •, ,rtuh .. •.iX�r.{2 "� .i'zY_i✓ _Fc��". �� V. CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined ❑ ❑ Q ❑ in ' 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource ❑ ❑ Q ❑ pursuant to ' 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including E3 E3 Q E3those interred outside of formal cemeteries? DISCUSSION: The proposed Barron Creek realignment and maintenance project 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 any listed historical buildings and does not contain any known archeological resources. However, if any artifacts or human remains are discovered, 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. MITIGATION: Cultural Resource Measure 1: 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. Sources: 3,5,17 .Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 16 of 47 � �.x ,�.1�.5 m�f'.'2 � r p� k , k v t� ria h $ r k? � �i '� ?S k � Yy ✓ t -. fi �''� _ } �,� `} sk { y fti5P4 k}Y E h L 'y"y„. `'e! l Ek F k .; Y��. £ g'= . 7 t� ➢ } ] Less ThaII # £�''•-�3 NMI h I' " i § Potentially c Less Than h , r F hi E F i S1gn1f1eatIt WlYllz r "ificanY x, Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the Si nificant S Na Impact State Geologist for the area or based on other ❑ ❑ ❑ Q substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special ( 3 , Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential ❑ ® ❑ Q 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including ❑ ❑ ❑ Q liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in ❑ ❑ ❑ Q on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or ❑ ❑ ❑ Q property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ Q where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? DISCUSSION: No fault trace exists within the vicinity of the proposed project. MITIGATION: None Sources: 13,18 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 17 of 47 «a�'�i' F'- L b,l-'x'5i'G.ii ed i'£ 4T s ?afxn!m 4'gr 0 t . Mimi, y 3ilY"�.4""✓F-�LL' h.�i ' 7 y Phii' S g, r oteQt<all�'<rs ,may , a , `�k LesS IIYIL "y T r�`�t � rtir� � "��_'��"�� "�-�?i-�� 4; �� S�gn►6c�nt �- � SigwficaQtwith � ,�� , �"��i r ,i Y �� '�a�3� "Inca aratton � rp ,+�, �`, K i` taw-�`y��1- fi« hi � i C #�'y' xe3R 3��Y VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS — Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a ❑ ❑ ❑ Q significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing E3 E3 E3the emissions of greenhouse gases? 21 DISCUSSION: Greenhouse gas emissions (e.g., carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrogen dioxide) from the proposed project would include construction emissions such as mobile emissions (e.g., emissions from combustion of fossil fuels for vehicle trips to and from the site) and emissions from the construction equipment. This is a short term, temporary increase and would not constitute a significant impact. MITIGATION: None Sources: 8,18,21 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 18 of 47 'R }'ss X'm 5 C.�, x� # E :€ ax ,, Y Thanf't S ' , #4 x, P y otenhall Less Less Than_ � � r SlgnlficaQt Wltll � �r-.�-�'.' Ty: r x r r .� SignI cant r; Signtfcanta No Impact c hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, Tlnpact Impacts X �s corp n s s oratto t:, j; of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a L list of hazardous materials sites compiled t\C`e' VIII, HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, ❑ ❑ ❑ Q use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions ❑ ❑ ❑ Q involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? fl 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent ❑ ❑ ❑ Q to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 19 of 47 DISCUSSION: The proposed project 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. NMIGATION: None Sources: 14 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 20 of 47 IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- F3 RC4 Y a) Violate any water quality standards or waste ❑ ❑ ❑ Q fr}l b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge ygndicant such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer z k n s t with S a No Impact ❑ ufica 1VL anon' ' gh rcant which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been ��corparahon granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage Ao pattern of the site or area, including through the '',>c1 ❑ r., manner which would result in substantial erosion IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste ❑ ❑ ❑ Q discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere 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- ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a ❑ ❑ Q ❑ 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, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or ❑ ❑ Q ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff`? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard ❑ ❑ ❑ Q 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, ❑ ❑ ❑ Q including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 21 of 47 DISCUSSION: The project proposes to realign a 350 foot portion of the existing channel of Barron Creek The existing channel is man-made and the creek has been altered from its original location. Previously there was no defined creek channel and flooding often occurred on the adjacent lands. The existing creek channel has been undergrounded both upstream and down stream of this project site. The existing silted channel bed that is being relocated will be cleaned and reconstructed so that ponding does not occur. Until the existing channel is cleaned out, there is an increasing risk that flooding and property damage will occur due to the siltation and vegetation and tree growth within the creek and directly in front of the outfall structure at the upstream portion of the creek. The removal of the nineteen trees at the upstream end of the project will reduce the risk of flooding and property damage. The proposed channel alignment will redirect approximately 350 linear feet of the north -south portion of the channel to the west. The proposed channel geometry will incorporate a low -flow channel bottom, a 1 -foot wide bench on each side of the low -flow channel, and channel slopes above to give a channel width of 7 feet on each side of the centerline. The low flow channel will be formed using a coconut fiber type blanket and will concentrate nuisance flows to significantly reduce existing ponding water which has resulted in vector issues. The coconut fiber blanket will provide stability to the upland side slopes in the short term. The 100 -year flood event hydraulic grade line will be similar to the existing system with flows remaining in the channel to the culvert at Fremont Road. Four bridge crossings will be installed three will be 8 foot wide foot bridges and one will be 12 feet wide for the purpose of installing a driveway access. All bridges will be designed to meet the 100 year flood event. The Town's General Plan Conservation Element paragraph 307 states that "Timely removal of invasive species will preserve the quality and function of riparian areas and avoid much more expensive restoration expenses in the future." The proposed realignment and restoration plan has been designed to meet the Town Guideline and Standards for land use near streams adopted May 24, 2007 (Resolution 26-07). Specifically the new design follows Section G&S LB and 1.C. for protection of existing riparian vegetation and local native species. Appendix B 1. Riparian Corridor Protection states that native riparian vegetation may be removed if there is a threat to public health and safety including an imminent danger of induced flooding. In addition, riparian vegetation may be removed if it will improve the stream ecology or habitat. In addition Appendix LC2 Planting, states planting appropriate vegetation between top of banks is encouraged as an alternative to hardscape bank protection in locations where flood capacity is sufficient, in order to promote bank stability, improve habitat, and provide other water quality benefits. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) will be submitted to FEMA for review and approval. FEMA will comment on the proposed project because it would affect the hydrologic or hydraulic characteristics of a flooding source and thus result in the modification of the existing regulatory floodway. The Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), or the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) would be revised once approved by FEMA and additional mitigation measures might be required. MTTIGATION: Hydrology and Water Quality Measure 1: The new creek channel and bridges shall be designed and constructed to meet the 100 year flood event. None Sources: 8,12, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 22 of 47 X. LAND USE AND PLANNING -- Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q 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, ❑ 0 Q ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q conservation plan? DISCUSSION: The Towns General Plan Conservation Element discusses the importance of creeks and their riparian corridors. Healthy riparian vegetation adjacent to watercourses stabilizes stream banks, absorbs water and filters pollutants. The presence of invasive, non-native plant species in the riparian corridor has an adverse effect on native vegetation and reduces the hydrologic function and wildlife value. The removal of the existing rip rap, and the construction of a new low flow channel and the replanting of the corridor will return this section of Barron Creek into a healthy riparian corridor. The General Plan Conservation Element, Goal 1 Program 1.1 encourages at least 25 foot setback from the top of creek bank to ensure adequate protection of these valuable riparian resources. The town enforces a setback for structures to be 25 feet from the top of a creek bank, this will allow for protection of the riparian zone. The existing estate fence is located approximately 10 feet of the top of bank along the east side of the channel. The proposed revegetation for the channel will provide increased riparian habitat function over the existing condition. Therefore, rather than conforming strictly with the Town's creek protection ordinance, the new estate fence shall be set back in a manner that accommodates the intended function and value of the channel revegetation plan. This would include a minimum setback of 15 feet from the center of any planted riparian trees (i.e. 15 feet from the tree trunk) or 15 feet from the top of bank of the realigned channel, whichever provides the greater setback distance. The two vacant residential properties will maintain adequate one acre lot sizes and will retain building sites within a 160 foot diameter site circle as required by the Town. With the exception of the four creek crossings the project complies with the development standards in the Los Altos Hills General Plan Land Use Element and all applicable Town Ordinances. The realigning of the creek will have no detrimental changes to the development potential of these lots. Four creek crossings are proposed to span the new channel from top -of -bank to top -of -bank. One crossing is for a common driveway and is proposed to be 12 feet wide and three others are proposed to be 8 feet wide and will need variances to the Town's Municipal Code Section 10-1.505(a) to allow walkways and bridges wider than 4 feet to be located within the property line setback. While the impacts of the four creek crossings do not have a significant impact on the environment, the Planning Commission will need to approve the proposed variance request.. MITIGATION: I �y,4 L. . i Potendilly f s �� Less Than; s M S�gnificant�vith x Sigmfcani s ,No impact, � a 3 k Vlrttgation _ Im act' C � X. LAND USE AND PLANNING -- Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q 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, ❑ 0 Q ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q conservation plan? DISCUSSION: The Towns General Plan Conservation Element discusses the importance of creeks and their riparian corridors. Healthy riparian vegetation adjacent to watercourses stabilizes stream banks, absorbs water and filters pollutants. The presence of invasive, non-native plant species in the riparian corridor has an adverse effect on native vegetation and reduces the hydrologic function and wildlife value. The removal of the existing rip rap, and the construction of a new low flow channel and the replanting of the corridor will return this section of Barron Creek into a healthy riparian corridor. The General Plan Conservation Element, Goal 1 Program 1.1 encourages at least 25 foot setback from the top of creek bank to ensure adequate protection of these valuable riparian resources. The town enforces a setback for structures to be 25 feet from the top of a creek bank, this will allow for protection of the riparian zone. The existing estate fence is located approximately 10 feet of the top of bank along the east side of the channel. The proposed revegetation for the channel will provide increased riparian habitat function over the existing condition. Therefore, rather than conforming strictly with the Town's creek protection ordinance, the new estate fence shall be set back in a manner that accommodates the intended function and value of the channel revegetation plan. This would include a minimum setback of 15 feet from the center of any planted riparian trees (i.e. 15 feet from the tree trunk) or 15 feet from the top of bank of the realigned channel, whichever provides the greater setback distance. The two vacant residential properties will maintain adequate one acre lot sizes and will retain building sites within a 160 foot diameter site circle as required by the Town. With the exception of the four creek crossings the project complies with the development standards in the Los Altos Hills General Plan Land Use Element and all applicable Town Ordinances. The realigning of the creek will have no detrimental changes to the development potential of these lots. Four creek crossings are proposed to span the new channel from top -of -bank to top -of -bank. One crossing is for a common driveway and is proposed to be 12 feet wide and three others are proposed to be 8 feet wide and will need variances to the Town's Municipal Code Section 10-1.505(a) to allow walkways and bridges wider than 4 feet to be located within the property line setback. While the impacts of the four creek crossings do not have a significant impact on the environment, the Planning Commission will need to approve the proposed variance request.. MITIGATION: Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 23 of 47 Land Use and Planning Measure 1: The Planning Commission shall review and approve the proposed new common driveway which crosses from the existing driveway on the Wadhwani property (26170 W. Fremont Road) onto the Red Orchid Property (26238 W. Fremont Road). An easement shall be recorded on the. Red Orchid property allowing the ingress -egress and stipulating that no other driveway access will be grated on this property. Land Use and Planning Measure 2: A variance must be obtained from the Planning Commission to allow walkways and bridges greater than 4 feet wide to be located within the property line setbacks on the Wadhwani property (26170 W. Fremont Road), Red Orchid property (26238 W. Fremont Road) and Blue Orchid property (26240 W. Fremont Road). If the variance is not granted then the walkways and bridges must be reduced to no greater than 4 feet wide. Sources: 4, 5, 6 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 24 of 47 XI. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the ❑ ❑ ❑ Q region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery ❑ ❑ ❑ Q site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? DISCUSSION: The proposed realignment project will not result in a loss of mineral resources. The project is not located in an area known for valued minerals. MITIGATION: None Sources: 5,6,8,18 �. �'.. y'YC41V -y.fs h _ { 5 's ; .c#�' t? `Y & tti4 - ? '13� .. "h '!ya�Y bi L R"'I % l 7i' 5 ,4 S }'' .L'K 4 iii- }�i Fat X11 ) } h -.s' z„ ¢x`r. Poxtent►ally Th Less anri } Y sk n� Noy 3 ,Significant wrtlt "' r � MitigattoD YIm { � � k ,� .�� { s� �� ➢' { ` � Im act � , �� r{� �x act �� p� ;; � �� i z x�p x IncorporaboII a rix XI. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the ❑ ❑ ❑ Q region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery ❑ ❑ ❑ Q site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? DISCUSSION: The proposed realignment project will not result in a loss of mineral resources. The project is not located in an area known for valued minerals. MITIGATION: None Sources: 5,6,8,18 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 25 of 47 M1h }u 1 ip F tit j„ F: i i .`^ d h 4 gSiV t -.-'f Pofenhall Q ❑ ❑ applicable standards of other agencies? =« �,i� + + S�gmficaQt w►tlr `Less Thin h` ��J:g � � ani ` -� �_=� ,"�� ,� %e t <a s TlYLhgafioa> Impact `�f ,,_� � � tSi mfi" 5 �. W5 Na Impact- � X .'�"s iX ': tir•��ws,'^ r� �" 4t �A1 r �� ,, �F s`� t t m�z �ti�"�-� s,�^, �3..t �,,°��. �"�"" �' ��k .�� ,�` r� :IIICO�IOratIOQ� Im � , P .��Par..�:r,� . " � #� �"'� a groundbome noise levels? � f c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity ❑ ❑ ❑ Q XII. NOISE—Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or ❑ Q ❑ ❑ applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or ❑ ❑ Q ❑ groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity ❑ ❑ ❑ Q above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project ❑ vicinity above levels existing without the ❑ ❑ project? 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 expose ❑ people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people ❑ ❑ ❑ Q residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? DISCUSSION: The proposed project will have temporary noise generating exposures within the adjacent neighborhood. Small tractor equipment will be used to perform the grading necessary to relocate a portion of Barron Creek, to clean the upper reach of the creek bed and will be used for removal of the trees. MITIGATION: Noise Measure 1: Noise generating construction activities shall be limited to Monday through Saturday between the hours of 8:00 am and 5:30 pm. and shall not exceed allowable noise standards set forth in the Municipal Code. No heavy noise generating equipment is allowed to be used on Saturdays and no construction is allowed on Sundays or holidays as noted per Chapter 7, Sec.5-7-01 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. Sources: 5, 6,8 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 26 of 47 4} ° �. `tl c `>r 'Sy, tle`'CT r;x'U n Y+ ,5r v �' - # c'`"` 1 k 7 ,� k .ya .�k.-'` x.. t€...'..E oY2i { T Yc ✓ . .k E iRN `�I iV. 41� `is'5.,XU �xc1�f4 L`i•�.,a�• z4 x PotenhaliyK� xanLess Thant t r f r f > 6 gmfirant with No impact �x F S�gniftcant�" * g , �tigat<an { PAMA, ? �b 37c*X"r'=.a�'i�'§ Slimpcan wry ..� 6"i , tjS` �' -� xs � s�' vF^'". � -ti p, � 'S• � S _ (E. .77LC0 drll.lon �"�^.' � Laid ''�Lc*l +S' " 1k� 1.Ls':y�,,� vv -14 XM. 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ Q replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement ❑ ❑ ❑ Q housing elsewhere? DISCUSSION: The proposed project will not have a significant impact on population or housing. MMGATION: None Sources: 3,5 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 27 of 47 type d est e —€{"'��k�1: d�2-.� 'r" a fi�� -^Y,lf`I's 1 , +5 r^'�S�` "•'ra-i `z. S?'�i' l`'ShR� u°k,�s'iQF �s-'jVia' t%kS.u�f}�M'�'2'� ai w ? e a d t x �4 ''3 u- '... ,� ' , a - p4 F - ` r '+ - X ice°` 2"*#' e••j6 s3'�fx �OtCIItI3lle Y S,.' r 1 d Can �s °tII T'rC" i{ S 3 a � L I ICaIIt Wirm'' p% �. t^°y1..t-.. `k�q» '�1sfT Less T..ttan SIgRIf[CBII x'� �TQ IIII�flCtm s a �� rkr llact h� 3tIQn C ,M 'Impact Incor oration ❑ i s V' Parks? O ❑ ❑ ns� Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES— Would the project: 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? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q DISCUSSION: The proposed project will not have a foreseeable impact on any public service or facility NMGATION: None Sources: 3 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page. 28 of 47 .F^{" sr v v. r -s, �i ' tz,, �S'• 'a, tk `t t, YY�, .s i:. r ��.' y i Alj� { :-� ''�` r Y x r % e` Sq ice: a',fJA' Atilt Y f Significant wrth� Impact ,; _ Significant Sigficant ni � No Imct Impact sr, r� ka,� 9 XV. RECREATION — Would the project: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that ❑ ❑ ❑ Q 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? DISCUSSION: The proposed project will not have a foreseeable impact on recreation facilities. MITIGATION: None Sources: 5,6 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 29 of 47 :'t; .? ."Mal'u''.U�i^ux'Xd , "-. < b`� �y XzYas� rix �zY mi;'rf zh zssy ", gx ec> r ' y"�+�� ga antd. & �3X ' a.� z g �xs € ,`� �� Polenhaily •�qt� I.essxThan u Less ThaQ� gi.K r1S �. r ❑ ruffean .,{ !ti F IDs 5 i", ft s"x i'ig:Nz'.''g°. Q XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC — Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the 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 standard established by the county congestion management agency for. 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? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ ❑ Q DISCUSSION: There will be temporary increase in traffic due to the off --haul of 660 tons of rip -rap material and an import of 130 cubic yards of grading material. The project has no significant traffic impacts. MITIGATION: None Sources: 1,3,5 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 30 of 47 XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS— Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements 5'f+k�, El El ❑ ,,, �' •" �'� d !'.S d.� s,. ( `��<. �..�& z o�^f' S,p�� S� W�a` wt r water or wastewater treatment facilities or Potent►ally expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ ❑ Q construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Incorp-o�on x c) Require or result in the construction of new s a storm water drainage facilities or expansion of 0 Q ❑ ❑ existing facilities, the construction of which XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS— Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality El El ❑ Q Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ ❑ Q construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of 0 Q ❑ ❑ existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements ❑ ❑ ❑ Q 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? D Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 project' s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local ❑ ❑ ❑ Q statutes and regulations related to solid waste? DISCUSSI®N: Realignment of most of the north -south portion of the channel will result in temporary impacts to approximately 350 linear feet and 0.12 acres of wetland channel within Barron Creek and will also result in the removal of riparian trees. The new channel is to be relocated approximately 40 feet to the west in an area that has been classified as ruderal/landscaped with non-native vegetation. The area of channel alignment is flat and previously developed with structures that have since been removed. Twenty three trees will be removed in the northern portion of the project where the existing creek will be filled in. Mitigation measures have been discussed in the Biologic Resource section of this report. The placement of fill within wetlands within the existing channel to accommodate the realignment would be considered a significant impact and also requires mitigation measures as noted in the Biological Resources section. Above ground utilities will be undergrounded and relocated to a new ingress/egress easement located along the driveways on the western side of the Dronerties. The existine sewer line will not be relocated or altered. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 31 of 47 The 100 -year flood event hydraulic grade line will be similar to the existing system with flows remaining in the channel to the culvert at Fremont Road Overhead utility lines span across two properties (26240 and 26238 W. Fremont Road) and will be relocated and placed underground. Above ground utilities will be undergrounded and relocated from the eastern side of the properties to a new ingress/egress easement located along the driveways on the western side of the properties. The existing sewer line will not be relocated or altered. MITIGATION: None Sources: 1,3,8,12,16 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 32 of 47 XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE — Would the project: 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 ❑ Q ❑ ❑ 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 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 substantial adverse effects on ❑ ❑ ❑ Q human beings, either directly or indirectly? DISCUSSION: The proposed project, as mitigated, will not result in a negative impact to the environment, wildlife, plant or historical resource. Because this reach of Banton Creek has been manipulated, is isolated from other riparian habitat due to the up and downstream reaches of the creek being underground, and lacks structural and floral diversity, it does not provide as high a habitat value as other, more natural riparian habitats. Therefore it does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. This report has reviewed all impacts of this flood control and realignment project and does not have any foreseeable cumulative or unmitigated impacts as defined in this Initial Study. MITIGATION: None Sources: 1-22 S; .a -F b y Y �i� Potentially, S�gn�cant tvrth Y ! �71gQlll��nta 1, S u q3' Htca 17lQn�llCaIIt Yf ND Im 11Ct , L h i 1i fL5 Mingahon �u V`•9 $Yt...L 1 's _-FS.. •:i'� XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE — Would the project: 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 ❑ Q ❑ ❑ 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 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 substantial adverse effects on ❑ ❑ ❑ Q human beings, either directly or indirectly? DISCUSSION: The proposed project, as mitigated, will not result in a negative impact to the environment, wildlife, plant or historical resource. Because this reach of Banton Creek has been manipulated, is isolated from other riparian habitat due to the up and downstream reaches of the creek being underground, and lacks structural and floral diversity, it does not provide as high a habitat value as other, more natural riparian habitats. Therefore it does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. This report has reviewed all impacts of this flood control and realignment project and does not have any foreseeable cumulative or unmitigated impacts as defined in this Initial Study. MITIGATION: None Sources: 1-22 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 33 of 47 MITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT TO AVOID POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS: Aesthetic Measure 1: A revegetation plan shall be prepared and implemented to compensate for the loss of approximately forty-two willow trees and 21 other various trees required for removal due to the new driveway and pathways. . For trees occurring within the riparian habitat of Barron Creek which are being removed, a minimum 1:1 replacement -to -removal ratio along the upper banks of the same reach of the creek where the willows are being removed is required. For the trees being removed outside of the riparian habitat a minimum of 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio shall be used. For all trees located near the construction, tree protection measures shall be installed around the drip -line prior to construction and throughout the construction phase of.the project. Biologic Resource Measure 1: Trees and other structures (i.e., birdhouses) planned for removal shall be removed during the non -breeding season (September 1 through January 31). If it is not possible to avoid tree removal during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre -disturbance survey for tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds in all trees and other structures planned for removal and immediately adjacent to the disturbance zone no more than 30 days from the onset of the removal activities, if such disturbance will occur during the breeding season. If nesting raptors and migratory birds are detected on the site during the survey, a suitable activity -free buffer shall be established around all active nests. The precise dimension of the buffer (up to 250 feet) would be determined at that time and may vary depending on location and species. Buffers shall remain in place for the duration of the breeding season or until it has been confirmed by a qualified biologist that all chicks have fledged and are independent of their parents. Pre -disturbance surveys during the non -breeding season are not necessary for tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds, as they are expected to abandon their roosts during disturbance activities. Implementation of the above measure would mitigate impacts to tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds to a less -than -significant level. Biologic Resource Measure 2: A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre -construction survey of .the bat boxes for bats within 30 days prior to the onset of ground disturbance, if such disturbance will occur during the roosting season (March I through August 31). If active maternity roosts are detected during the survey, then a construction -free buffer shall be established around all active roosts. The buffer radius would be established at the time work is to be carried out and would be determined by the extent and duration of construction activities scheduled to occur as well as the location. of any roosts at that time. An onsite biological monitor would be necessary during construction when construction activities would be performed near these features during the roosting season. The monitor would have authority to issue a cease and desist order if construction activities disturb any bat roosts. If demolition of the bat boxes is to.occur, then pre -demolition bat surveys shall be conducted to determine if special status bat species are present. If no bats are observed to be roosting in the boxes, then no further action would be required, and dismantling of the boxes can proceed. However, if bats are found to be roosting on the site, the project proponents shall exclude bats prior to dismantling to ensure no harm or take would occur to any special status bats as a result of demolition activities. Dismantling of the boxes shall occur after August 31 and before March 1 to avoid interferingwith an active nursery. If a non -breeding bat colony is found in the boxes, the individuals shall be safely evicted .under the direction of a qualified bat biologist through a "partial dismantle" process, whereby the roosting area is opened to allow air flow through and sunlight into the structure, making it unsuitable habitat and undesirable for the bats to return to the site. Full dismantling shall then follow no later than the following day (i.e., there shall be no less than one night between initial disturbance for airflow and the demolition). This action shall allow bats to leave during the night, thus increasing their chances of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation during daylight hours. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 34 of 47 Biologic Resource Measure 3: Due to the nature of the proposed project activities, full avoidance of jurisdictional waters and sensitive habitats on the site is not possible. Therefore, the project proponent shall implement minimization and compensation measures to reduce impacts to jurisdictional waters and sensitive habitats to a less -than -significant level. Minimization. Because full avoidance is not possible, actions shall be taken to minimize impacts to aquatic and riparian habitats. Measures taken during construction activities shall include placing construction fencing around the aquatic features or riparian areas to be preserved to ensure that construction activities do not inadvertently impact these areas. Any proposed future lighting on the property (e.g., footpath lighting) shall be designed to minimize light and glare impacts to the riparian corridor. To the maximum extent practicable, light sources shall not be visible from riparian areas and shall not illuminate riparian areas or cause glare on the opposite side of the channel (e.g., to neighboring properties). Additionally, with the exception of the willows to be removed at the upstream end of the channel, proposed realignment activities shall be designed and situated to avoid the loss of trees within and adjacent to the channel to the maximum extent practicable. The Town's creek protection ordinance requires all structures to be set back a minimum of 25 ft. from the top of bank of all creeks. The existing Wadhwani estate fence is located within approximately 10 ft. of the top of bank along the east side of the channel. The proposed revegetation for the channel realignment will provide increased riparian habitat function and value over the channel's existing condition. Therefore, rather than conforming strictly with the Town's creek protection ordinance, the new estate fence shall be set back in a manner that accommodates the intended function and value of the channel revegetation plan. This includes a minimum setback of 15 ft. from the center of any planted riparian trees or 15 ft. from the top of bank of the realigned channel, whichever is greater. Compensation. An onsite revegetation plan has been developed to compensate for temporary impacts to 0.12 acres of wetlands occurring within the channel and the loss of the approximately forty-two willows and other riparian trees. A formal tree survey shall be completed to determine the actual number of trees to be removed. It is expected that all compensation measures can be accommodated within the proposed channel alignment, as the channel is proposed to be planted with native wetland vegetation. If the new channel alignment cannot fully accommodate the compensation measures, then offsite restoration would be necessary. Compensation measures shall include: Creation of at least 0.12 acres of wetlands within the channel. Replacement of all willows removed from anywhere below the top of bank along the existing channel alignment at a minimum 1:1 replacement -to -removal ratio. Replacement of the nineteen willows removed from the upstream end of the channel shall occur along the upper banks of this same reach of the creek. The willows occurring in the creek were originally planted as pole cuttings and occurred as natural recruits. Because they have become a nuisance by obstructing the flow of water through the channel, the Town has indicated its desire to have these trees removed. Therefore, the recommended replacement -to -removal ratio for willow impacts as described above was developed with the Town and through informal conversations with the USACE and CDFG (Paula Gill, pers. comm., February 2011; Dave Johnston, pers. comm., February 2011). This mitigation is consistent with the requirements of these regulatory agencies. To the maximum extent practicable, removed trees shall be replaced with like species. Due to the flow obstructions created by the existing willows and the project's objective to prevent future obstructions, other riparian tree species (e.g., coast live oaks and California sycamores) may be substituted in consultation with a qualified biologist. Replacement of all other native riparian trees (i.e., riparian trees occurring beyond the top of bank) at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio as agreed upon with USACE and CDFG. To the maximum extent practicable, removed trees shall be replaced with like species. Reseeding or replanting of riparian or wetland vegetation (i.e., a combination of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation) along the channel benches and banks. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 35 of 47 These measures shall be implemented according to a site-specific revegetation plan that would be prepared for agency review. This mitigation plan would need to be approved by the responsible agency prior to the start of project activities. The revegetation plan shall: 1. Designate suitable replanting areas. 2. Describe the methods by which the revegetation will occur, including species to be planted and plant installation guidelines. 3. Develop a timetable for implementation of the plan. 4. Outline a monitoring methodology and establish appropriate performance_ criteria. 5. Describe remedial measures to be performed in the event that initial revegetation measures are unsuccessful in meeting the performance criteria. 6. Describe site maintenance activities to follow revegetation activities. These may include weed control, irrigation, and control of herbivory. Compliance with Regulatory Agency Requirements. The applicant shall also comply with all state and federal regulations related to work that will impact jurisdictional waters occurring on the site, which includes Barron Creek and may also include the wetland patch abutting the creek, should it be regulated by the agencies. This may require obtaining a Section 404 Clean Water Act permit from the USACE, Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, and Section 1600 Stream Alteration Agreement from the CDFG prior to initiating any realignment'and maintenance activities, if deemed necessary. Permit conditions typically require a mitigation plan outlining compensatory measures for impacts to all jurisdictional features. A small amount of additional mitigation may be required by the agencies for impacts to the abutting wetland in order to comply with their permit conditions. It is expected that the agencies would seek mitigation in the form of onsite wetland creation or enhancement. The project proposes to plant the channel of the new alignment with wetland vegetation. This would accommodate both temporary impacts to wetlands occurring within the existing channel and permanent impacts to the wetland patch abutting the creek. Biologic Resource Measure 4: For mitigation measures related to the removal of trees within the riparian habitat of Barron Creek, refer to Biologic Resource Measure 3. The following measures are recommended for trees occurring outside of the riparian habitat. Tree removal shall occur pursuant to relevant Town ordinances, including securing a tree removal permit and complying with the permit conditions. All trees to be removed shall be replaced onsite at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio (two trees planted for each tree removed). A monitoring plan for the replacement trees shall be developed and submitted to the Town during the permit process. The basic components of the monitoring plan shall consist of final success criteria, specific performance criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, monitoring schedule, contingency/remedial measures, and reporting requirements. For trees to be retained, impacts to any retained trees during the construction and operation phases of the project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level by conforming to the following guidelines. These measures shall remain in place for the duration of construction activities at the project site: • The project proponent shall retain a consulting arborist prior to any ground disturbance activities. The consulting arborist would develop a tree -protection plan outlining specific procedures to ensure that retained trees are protected during the construction phase. • Prior to any ground disturbance activities, fencing shall be installed around the drip -line of all retained trees occurring within the development envelope, and the fencing shall remain in place throughout the construction phase of the project. The type of fencing to be utilized would be at the direction of the consulting arborist. • Any limb or root pruning to be conducted on retained trees shall be approved and supervised by the consulting arborist and shall follow best management practices developed by the International Society of Arboriculture. • Supplemental irrigation to retained trees shall be applied as determined by the consulting arborist. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 36 of 47 • If any of the retained trees are damaged during the construction phase, they shall be evaluated at the earliest possible time by the consulting arborist so that appropriate measures can be identified and implemented by the applicant. Cultural Resource Measure 1: 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. Hydrology and Water Quality Measure 1: The new creek channel and bridges shall be designed and constructed to meet the 100 year flood event. Land Use and Planning Measure 1: The Planning Commission shall review and approve the proposed new common driveway which crosses from the existing driveway on the Wadhwani property (26170 W. Fremont Road) onto the Red Orchid Property (26238 W. Fremont Road). An easement shall be recorded on the Red Orchid property allowing the ingress -egress and stipulating that no other driveway access will be granted on this property. Land Use and Planning Measure 2: A variance must be obtained from the Planning Commission to allow walkways and bridges greater than 4 feet wide to be located within the property line setbacks on the Wadhwani property (26170 W. Fremont Road), Red Orchid property (26238 W. Fremont Road) and Blue Orchid property (26240 W. Fremont Road). If the variance is not granted then the walkways and bridges must be reduced to no greater than 4 feet wide. Noise Measure 1: Noise generating construction activities shall be limited to Monday through Saturday between the hours of 8:00 am and 5:30 pm. No heavy noise generating equipment is allowed to be used on Saturdays and no construction is allowed on Sundays or holidays as noted per Chapter 7, Sec.5-7-01 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 37 of 47 Source List: 1. Field Inspection 2. Project Plans 3. Planner's Knowledge of the Area 4. . Los Altos Hills Land Use and Zoning Map 5. Los Altos Hills General Plan 6. Los Altos Hills Municipal Code 7. Assessor's Maps, Office of County Assessor, Santa Clara County, 2009-2010 8. Project plans prepared by Kimley-Horn Associates dated 1-3-2012and plans prepared by Tomas Klope Associates dated 12-21-2011 9. State Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program 10. BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines: Assessing the Air Quality Impacts of Projects and Plans, December 1999 11. State Department Fish and Game CNDDB Map 12. Santa Clara Valley Water District Map 13. Geotechnical and Seismic Hazard Zones Map of Los Altos Hills, Cotton Shires and Associates, December 2005 14. DTSC Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites List, California Environmental Protection Agency 15. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood insurance Rate Map, Los Altos Hills, May 18, 2009 16. Sanitary Sewer Map, Town of Los Altos Hills Engineering Department 17. Santa Clara County Municipal Code Chapter Il Indian Burial Grounds (Title B Division B-6) 18. Biological Evaluation prepared by Live Oak Associates, dated December 28, 2011. 19. Investigation of Potential Waters of the United States Barron Creek prepared by Live Oak Associates, dated December 6, 2010 20. Department of the Army letter date stamped March 29, 2011 21. CEQA Guidelines, 2011 22. Google Earth Attachments: • Biological Evaluation prepared by Live Oak Associates, dated December 28, 2011. • Investigation of Potential Waters of the United States Barron Creek prepared by Live Oak Associates, dated December 6, 2010. • Department of the Army letter date stamped March 29, 2011 Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 38 of 47 Mitigation Monitoring Program Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Proiect File # 163-119 234-119 239 -11 -SD -GD -IS -ND 235 -11 -EP Mitigation Measure Responsible Department Must Be Completed B Done 1 Aesthetic Measure 1: A revegetation Planning Prior to plan shall be prepared and implemented Department completion of to compensate for the loss of the Project. approximately forty-two willow trees and 21 other various trees required for removal due to the new driveway and pathways. . For trees occurring within the riparian habitat of Barron Creek which are being removed, a minimum 1:1 replacement -to -removal ratio along the upper banks of the same reach of the creek where the willows are being removed is required. For the trees being removed outside of the riparian habitat a minimum of 2:1 replacement - to -removal ratio shall be used. For all trees located near the construction, tree protection measures . shall be installed around the drip -line prior to construction and throughout the construction phase of the project. 2 Air Quality Measure 1: Dust Engineering On-going ontrol measures shall be implemented Department during uring construction as follows: construction. • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. • During grading operations graded areas shall be watered on a continuous basis. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off- site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track -out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 39 of 47 vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. 3 Biologic Resource Measure 1: Trees planning Prior to the start and other structures (i.e., birdhouses) Department of tree removal planned for removal shall be removed during the non -breeding season and din g (September 1 through January 31). If it activities. is not possible to avoid tree removal during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre - disturbance survey for tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds in all trees and other structures planned for removal and immediately adjacent to the disturbance zone no more than 30 days from the onset of the removal activities, if such disturbance will occur during the breeding season. If nesting raptors and migratory birds are detected on the site during the survey, a suitable activity -free buffer shall be established around all active nests. The precise dimension of the buffer (up to 250 feet) would be determined at that time and may vary depending on location and species. Buffers shall remain in place for the duration of the breeding season or until it has been confirmed by a qualified biologist that all chicks have fledged and are independent of their parents. Pre - disturbance surveys during the non - breeding season are not necessary for tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds, as they are expected to abandon their roosts during disturbance activities. Implementation of the above measure would mitigate impacts to tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds to a less -than -significant level. 4 Biologic Resource Measure 2: A planning Prior to the start qualified biologist shall conduct a pre- Department of tree removal construction survey of the bat boxes for bats within 30 days prior to the onset of and grading n g ground disturbance, if such disturbance activities. will occur during the roosting season (March 1 through August 31). If active maternity roosts are detected during the survey, then a construction -free buffer shall be established around all active roosts. The buffer radius would be established at the time work is to be Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 40 of 47 carried out and would be determined by the extent and duration of construction activities scheduled to occur as well as the location of any roosts at that time. An onsite biological monitor would be necessary during construction when construction activities would be performed near these features during the roosting season. The monitor would have authority to issue a cease and desist order if construction activities disturb any bat roosts. If demolition of the bat boxes is to occur, then pre -demolition bat surveys shall be conducted to determine if special status bat species are present. If no bats are observed to be roosting in the boxes, then no further action would be required, and dismantling of the boxes can proceed. However, if bats are found to be roosting on the site, the project proponents shall exclude bats prior to dismantling to ensure no harm or take would occur to any special status bats as a result of demolition activities. Dismantling of the . boxes shall occur after August 31 and before March 1 to avoid interfering with an active nursery. If a non -breeding bat colony is found in the boxes, the individuals shall be safely evicted under the direction of a qualified bat biologist through a "partial dismantle" process, whereby the roosting area is opened to allow air flow through and sunlight into the. structure, making it unsuitable habitat and undesirable for the bats to return to the site. Full dismantling shall then follow no later than the following day (i.e., there shall be no less than one night between initial disturbance for airflow and the demolition). This action shall allow bats to leave during the night, thus increasing their chances of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation during daylight hours. 5 Biologic Resource Measure 3: Due to Planning Prior to the start the nature of the proposed project Department of tree removal activities, full avoidance of and grading jurisdictional waters and sensitive activities. habitats on the site is not possible. Therefore, the project proponent shall implement minimization and Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 41 of 47 compensation measures to reduce impacts to jurisdictional waters and sensitive habitats to a less -than - significant level. Minimization. Because full avoidance is not possible, actions shall be taken to minimise impacts to aquatic and riparian habitats. Measures taken during construction activities shall include placing construction fencing around the aquatic features or riparian areas to be preserved to ensure that construction activities do not inadvertently impact these areas. Any proposed future lighting on the property (e.g., footpath lighting) shall be designed to minimise light and glare impacts to the riparian corridor. To the maximum extent practicable, light sources shall not be visible from riparian areas and shall not illuminate riparian areas or cause glare on the opposite side of the channel (e.g., to neighboring properties). Additionally, with the exception of the willows to be removed at the upstream end of the channel, proposed realignment activities will be designed and situated to avoid the loss of trees within and adjacent to the channel to the maximum extent practicable. The Town's creek protection ordinance requires all structures to be set back a minimum of 25 ft. from the top of bank of all creeks. The existing Wadhwani estate fence is located within approximately 10 ft. of the top of bank along the east side of the channel. The proposed revegetation for the channel realignment will provide increased riparian habitat function and value over the channel's existing condition. Therefore, rather than conforming strictly with the Town's creek protection ordinance, the new estate fence shall be set back in a manner that accommodates the intended function and value of the channel revegetation plan. This includes a minimum setback of 15 ft. from the center of any planted riparian trees or 15 ft. from the top of bank of the realigned channel, whichever is greater. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 42 of 47 Compensation. An onsite revegetation plan has been developed to compensate for temporary impacts to 0.12 acres of wetlands occurring within the channel and the loss of the approximately forty- two willows and other riparian trees. A formal tree survey shall be completed to determine the actual number of trees to be removed. It is expected that all compensation measures can be accommodated within the proposed channel alignment, as the channel is proposed to be planted with native wetland vegetation. If the new channel. alignment cannot fully accommodate the compensation measures, then offsite restoration would be necessary. Compensation measures shall include: • Creation of at least 0.12 acres of wetlands within the channel. Replacement of all willows removed from anywhere below the top of bank along the existing channel alignment at a minimum 1:1 replacement -to -removal ratio. Replacement of the nineteen willows removed from the upstream end of the channel shall occur along the upper banks of this same reach of the creek The willows occurring in the creek were originally planted as pole cuttings and occurred as natural recruits. Because they have become a nuisance by obstructing the flow of water through the channel, the Town has indicated its desire to have these trees removed. Therefore, the recommended replacement -to -removal ratio for willow impacts as described above was developed with the Town and through informal conversations with the USACE and CDFG (Paula Gill, pers. comm., February 2011; Dave Johnston, pers. comm., February 2011). This mitigation is consistent with Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 43 of 47 the requirements of these regulatory agencies. To the maximum extent practicable, removed trees shall be replaced with like species. Due to the flow obstructions created by the existing willows and the project's objective to prevent future obstructions, other riparian tree species (e.g., coast live oaks and California sycamores) may be substituted in consultation with a qualified biologist. • Replacement of all other native riparian trees (i.e., riparian trees occurring beyond the top of bank) at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to - removal ratio as agreed upon with USACE and CDFG. To the maximum extent practicable, removed trees shall be replaced with like species. • Reseeding or replanting of riparian or wetland vegetation (i.e., a combination of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation) along the channel benches and banks. These measures shall be implemented according to a site-specific revegetation plan that would be prepared for agency review. This mitigation plan would need to be approved by the responsible agency prior to the start of project activities. The revegetation plan shall: 1. Designate suitable replanting areas. 2. Describe the methods by which the revegetation will occur, including species to be planted and plant installation guidelines. 3. Develop a timetable for implementation of the plan. 4. Outline a monitoring methodology and establish appropriate performance criteria. 5. Describe remedial measures to be performed in the event that Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 44 of 47 initial revegetation measures are unsuccessful in meeting the performance criteria. 6. Describe site maintenance activities to follow revegetation activities. These may include weed control, irrigation, and control of herbivory. This measure will reduce impacts to waters of the U.S. and sensitive habitats to a less -than -significant level. Compliance with Regulatory Agency Requirements. The applicant shall also comply with all state and federal regulations related to work that will impact jurisdictional waters occurring on the site, which includes Barron Creek and may also include the wetland patch abutting the creek, should it be regulated by. the agencies. This may require obtaining a Section 404 Clean Water Act permit from the USACE, Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, and Section 1600 Stream Alteration Agreement from the CDFG prior to initiating any realignment and maintenance activities, if deemed necessary. Permit conditions typically require a mitigation plan outlining compensatory measures for impacts to all jurisdictional features. A small amount of additional mitigation may be required by the agencies for impacts to the abutting wetland in order to comply with their permit conditions. It is expected that the agencies would seek mitigation in the form of onsite wetland creation or enhancement. The project proposes to plant the channel of the new alignment with wetland vegetation. This would accommodate both temporary impacts to wetlands occurring within the existing channel and permanent impacts to the wetland patch abutting the creek. 6 Biologic Resource Measure 4: For Planning Prior to the Start mitigation measures related to the Department of tree removal removal of trees within the riparian and grading habitat of Barron Creek, refer to activities. Biologic Resource Measure 3. The following measures are recommended for trees occurring outside of the Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January26, 2012 Page 45 of 47 riparian habitat. Tree removal shall occur pursuant to relevant Town ordinances, including securing a tree removal permit and complying with the permit conditions. All trees to be removed shall be replaced onsite at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio (two trees planted for each tree removed). A monitoring plan for the replacement trees shall be developed and submitted to the Town during the permit process. The basic components of the monitoring plan shall consist of final success criteria, specific performance criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, monitoring schedule, contingency/remedial measures, and reporting requirements. For trees to be retained, impacts to any retained trees during the construction and operation phases of the project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level by conforming to the following guidelines. These measures shall remain in place for the duration of construction activities at the project site: • The project proponent shall retain a consulting arborist prior to any ground disturbance activities. The consulting arborist would develop a tree -protection plan outlining specific procedures to ensure that retained trees are protected during the construction phase. • Prior to any ground disturbance activities, fencing shall be installed around the drip -line of all retained trees occurring within the development envelope, and the fencing shall remain in place throughout the construction phase of the project. The_type of fencing to be utilized would be at the direction of the consulting arborist. • Any limb or root pruning to be conducted on retained trees Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 46 of 47 shall 'be approved and supervised by the consulting arborist and shall follow best management practices developed by the International Society of Arboriculture. • Supplemental irrigation to retained trees shall be applied as determined by the consulting arborist. If any of the retained trees are damaged during the construction phase, they shall be evaluated at the earliest possible time by the consulting arborist so that appropriate measures can be identified and implemented by the applicant. 7 Cultural Resource Measure 1: Upon Engineering On-going discovering or unearthing any possible Department during grading burial site as evidenced by human activities and skeletal remains or artifacts, the person tree removal. 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. 8 Hydrology and Water Quality Engineering On-going Measure 1: The new creek channel Department and bridges shall be designed and and Planning constructed to meet the 100 year flood event. Department 9 Land Use and Planning Measure 1: Engineering Prior to The Planning Commission shall review Department construction. and approve the proposed new common and Planning driveway which crosses from the Department existing driveway on the Wadhwani property (26170 W. Fremont Road) onto the Red Orchid Property (26238 W. Fremont Road). An easement shall be recorded on the Red Orchid property allowing the ingress -egress and stipulating that no other driveway access will be granted on this property. 10 Land Use and Planning Measure 2: Engineering Prior to City A variance must be obtained from the Department Council Planning Commission to allow and Planning Hearing walkways and bridges greater than 4 feet wide to be located within the Department property line setbacks on the Wadhwani property (26170 W. Barron Creek Channel Flood Control and Realignment Project Initial Study January 26, 2012 Page 47 of 47 Fremont Road), Red Orchid property (26238 W. Fremont Road) and Blue Orchid property (26240 W. Fremont Road). If the variance is not granted then the walkways and bridges must be reduced to no greater than 4 feet wide. 11 Noise Measure 1: Noise generating public Works On-going construction activities shall be limited Department during grading to Monday through Saturday between the hours of 8:00 am and 5:30 pm. and operations and shall not exceed allowable noise tree removal. standards set forth in the Municipal Code. No heavy noise generating equipment is allowed to be used on Saturdays and no construction is allowed on Sundays or holidays as noted per Chapter 7, Sec.5-7-01 of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code. 1. 1" 0. S . . . . . . . . T JIT 0,11h N 0 ULAT INC ars E'ological Consul Ung Firm BARRON CREED NVADMVANI CHANNEL REALIGNMENT BIOLOGICAL EVALiTATION TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, CALIFORNIA, Prepared by LIVE OAK ASSOCIATES, INC. Rick Hopkins, Ph.D., Principal and Senior Wildlife Ecologist Davinna Ohlson, M.S., Senior Project Manager and Plant/Wildlife Ecologist Melissa Denena, M.S., Wetland/Plant/Wildlife Ecologist Neal Kramer, M.S., Botanist and Certified Arborist Prepared for Town of Los Altos Hills Public Works Department Attn: Cynthia Richardson 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 January 3, 2012 PN 1534-01 San Jose: 6840 Via del Oro, Suits 220 -San Jose, CA 95119. Phone: (408) 224-8.300 *Fax. (408) 224-1411 Oakhurst:'P.O. Box 2697 0 49430 road 426, Suite C o Oakhurst, Ca. 93&44. Phone: (559) 642.4880 . Fax: (559) 642-4883 Bakersfield: 8200 Stockdale Highway, M110-293 m Bakersfield, CA 93311 RM 1584-01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Live Oak Associates, Inc., conducted an investigation of the biological resources of the Wadhwani property located off of West Fremont Road in the Town of Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California. The proposed project consists of the realignment and widening of the existing channel of Barron Creek occurring onsite by redirecting approximately 350 linear ft. of the straightened portion of the channel approximately 40 ft. to the west. This will result in impacts to trees and wetland vegetation. Approximately nineteen willows occurring in the upstream 200 ft. of the creek, which is not proposed for realignment, approximately twenty-three willows at the downstream end of the creek, and at least one tree occurring in upland habitat adjacent to the creek will be removed as part of channel maintenance activities. The site consists of Barron Creek, a small patch of wetland vegetation abutting the creek, and ruderal/landscaped areas that were formerly residences but are now parking areas for the subject property. No special status plant species are expected to occur on the site. California wildlife species of special concern that may occur on the site include the white-tailed kite and yellow warbler. The timing of project activities could also result in harm or injury to tree -nesting raptors, migratory birds, and bats, should they occur on the site in the future prior to the onset of ground disturbance. Mitigation measures have been included to reduce impacts to these species to a less -than -significant level. _...__ ._ Jurisdictional waters are present on the site in the form of Barron Creek, which was also determined to meet the USACE's technical criteria for wetlands. Barron Creek is regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Game. The wetland patch abutting the creek may also be jurisdictional and subject to regulatory authority by these agencies; a formal wetland delineation has been conducted and will be submitted to the USACE to determine its regulatory status. Permits would be required from all three agencies. These permits are usually issued on the condition that a mitigation plan is prepared. Typical mitigation measures include the creation of replacement habitat at a replacement -to -disturbance ratio determined by the agencies. The proposed project will also result in the removal of at least nineteen willows occurring within the upstream end of Barron Creek, approximately twenty-three willows along the downstream end of the creek, and at least one tree occurring in upland habitat adjacent to the creek. A formal tree survey should be completed to determine the actual number of trees to be removed. Replacement -to -removal ratios are provided to compensate for removal of these trees. The project applicant will also likely need to secure a tree removal permit from the_Town and comply with its conditions. Trees to be retained onsite should be protected pursuant to recommended tree preservation guidelines. Impacts to habitat for native wildlife, wildlife movements, and degradation of water quality in seasonal creeks, reservoirs, and downstream waters would be considered less -than -significant. i Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Channel Maintenance Biological Evaluation TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVESUMMARY.................................................................................... TABLEOF CONTENTS................................................................................................................ 1.0 INTRODUCTION...................................................... 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................ 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................. 2.1 BIOTIC HABITATS....................................................... 2. 1.1 Creek/Riparian.............................................................. 2.1.2 Wetland..........................:............................................. 2.1.3 Ruderal/Landscaped..................................................... 2.2 MOVEMENT CORRIDORS ........................................... 2.3 SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS AND ANIMALS ............................................... 6 ............................................... 6 ............................................... 9 10 10 11 12 1.4 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS....................................................................22 ................. 3.0 INTACTS AND MITIGATIONS.................................................................................... 24 3.1 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ......................................... 3.2 RELEVANT GOALS, POLICIES, AND LAWS ......................................................... 25 3.2.1 Threatened and Endangered Species........................................................................ 25 3.2.2 Migratory Birds .......................... 3.2.3 Birds of Prey......................................................................... .......... 26 .......................... 3.2.4 Bats..................................................................................... 3.2.5 Wetlands and Other Jurisdictional Waters ............................ 26 .................................... 3.2.6 Local Ordinances, Policies, and Habitat Conservation Plans ................... 28 ................ 3.3 MACTS AND MITIGATIONS SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT SITE .................... 29 3.3.1 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Plants ................................................. ........... 29 3.3.2 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Animals ............. :................................................ 3.3.3 Disturbance to Active Raptor and Migratory Bird Nests ................................ 3.3.4 Disturbance to Bat Nursery Sites ..................................................... 31 . ......................... 3.3.5 Disturbance to Waters of the United States or Riparian Habitats ............................. 32 3.3.6 Tree Removal Impacts ............................................. ............. 36 .................................. 3.3.7 Loss of Habitat for. , Native Wildlife :.......................................... ........ 38 .ldlife....................... 3.3.8 Interference with the Movement of Native Wildlife ..................... 3.3.9 Degradation of Water Quality in Seasonal Drainages, Stock Ponds, and Downstream Waters.............................................................................. .. 39 . ................................................... 3:3-IO--LocaTOrd�nances or Habitat Conservation Plans .................. ... 39 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................. 41 APPENDIX A: VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE STUDY AREA .............................................. 43 APPENDIX B: SELECTED PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE ................................................... 46 H Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Channel Maintenance Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 1.0 INTRODUCTION Live Oak Associates, Inc. (LOA), has prepared the following report, which describes the biotic resources of the Wadhwani property, including 600 linear feet of Barron Creek, located at 26170, 26238, and 26240 West Fremont Road in the Town of Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California (Figure 1), and evaluates likely impacts to these resources resulting from realignment of the channel and channel maintenance activities. The project site is located in the Palo Alto 7.5" U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle in section 25 of township 6 south, range 3 west. Site disturbance can damage or modify biotic habitats used by sensitive plant and wildlife species. In such cases, these activities may be regulated by state or federal agencies, subject to provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and/or covered by policies and ordinances of the Town of Los Altos Hills. This report addresses issues related to: 1) sensitive biotic resources occurring on the site; 2) the federal, state, and local laws regulating such resources, and 3) mitigation measures which may be required to reduce the magnitude of anticipated impacts. As such, the objectives of this report are to: - -- ---� ---Summarize aql-site-specificinfoimation ielated"fo existuig io ogic -resources; - - • Make reasonable inferences about the biological resources that could occur onsite based on habitat suitability and the proximity .of the site to a species' known range; • Summarize all state and federal natural resource protection laws that may be relevant to possible future site development; • Identify and discuss project impacts to biological resources likely to occur on the site within the content of CEQA or any state or, federal laws; and • Identify avoidance and mitigation measures that would reduce impacts to a less -than - significant level as identified by CEQA and that are generally consistent with recommendations of the resource agencies for affected biological resources. l Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation Site Location Ma hAw .4- FALC Tb Z., 0 tO Project site�-,. .9 14 s It Z, 0 tO Project site�-,. .9 s It PORTOLA. , VALLEY V mp 0 VIA 3es mil 0 3 miles appm)arrate scaie Vicinity Map *N -SiWtocatjon, Uap (zbiove) See V'c;r.it,j Map (left) r. -:- ✓IN IE; Regional7——1 -4—a Live Oak As3aciates, Barron Creek Site / Vicinity Map �aze =;roject # 1 Figure 4 PN 1584-01 The analysis of impacts, as discussed in Section 3.0 of this report, is based on the known and potential biotic resources of the site, discussed in Section 2.0. Sources of information used in the preparation of this analysis included: 1) the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFG 2011), 2) the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2011), and 3) manuals and references related to plants and animals of Santa Clara County. A reconnaissance -level field survey and formal wetland delineation of the Barron Creek channel was conducted on August 4, 2010, by LOA ecologist Davina Ohlson and LOA botanist Neal Kramer. A field survey of the remainder of the site was conducted on October 21, 2011, by Ms. Ohlson and LOA ecologist Melissa Denena. During these surveys, the principal biotic habitats of the site were identified, and the constituent plants and animals of each were noted. A formal wetland delineation of the remainder of the site was completed on December 14, 2011, by Ms. Ohlson and LOA plant ecologist Pamela Peterson. Additional site visits were made in December 2009, June 2010, and February 2011. 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project proposes to realign and widen the existing channel of Barron Creek occurring onsite. This reach of the creek is currently overgrown with non-native, invasive herbaceous vegetation in its downstream half, and debris has accumulated at the base of several willows located within the channel bed at the upstream end, obstructing the flow of water through the channel. The proposed channel alignment will redirect approximately 350 linear ft. of the straightened portion of the channel approximately 40 ft. to the west (Figure 2). The upstream, naturalized portion of the channel (approximately 200 linear ft.) will remain in its existing alignment. Approximately 680 cubic yards of rip rap will be removed from the existing channel to accommodate the realignment. The proposed channel geometry will incorporate a low -flow channel bottom, a 1 -ft. -wide bench on each side of the low -flow channel, and channel slopes above to give a channel width of 7 ft. on each side of the centerline. A coconut fiber blanket will provide stability to the upland side slopes in the short term. The 100 -year flood event hydraulic grade line will be similar to the existing system, with flows remaining in the channel to the culvert at Fremont Road. The existing Wadhwani estate fence will be relocated westward towards the channel realignment as well. Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation >� S z s :110 0 E r ! N Q rn >? Cm -r Z ..ro� f yN 2 t r � 3 c-• o� t ! t tr k i S> - MT O > w C _ - O > C > � � t ' - - _•�A� a .`�-moo IT Air yq A ♦ O .i m tD � � do �z u„ • w f U-ia Oak Ass cciates, Inc. A >� S z s :110 0 E r ! N Q rn >? Cm -r Z ..ro� f yN 2 t r � 3 c-• o� t ! t tr k i S> - MT O > w C _ - O > C > IT yq A ♦ O .i m tD � � . 1. - a. sem.. �-� �z u„ • w f U-ia Oak Ass cciates, Inc. Barron Creak Proposed Creek Alignment,;;, Project $ Figure # Source: J�9i2o1 i 11 Kimiey-rtcm and Associates, Inc PN 1584-01 No property line adjustments are expected to any of the adjoining parcels impacted by the proposed channel adjustment. The existing PG&E power poles are proposed to be relocated, and new power lines will be undergrounded within the ingress/egress easement containing the existing water, PG&E gas, and AT&T telephone utilities. The sanitary sewer utility will remain in the existing alignment, parallel to both the existing and proposed drainage channels. A number of trees are proposed for removal as part of the proposed channel realignment. Non- native, invasive herbaceous vegetation and approximately nineteen willows located within the bed at the upstream end of the channel (i.e, the area not proposed for realignment) will be removed to keep the channel clear of debris and maintain an unobstructed flow of water. At the downstream end of the channel, approximately twenty-three willows occurring along the channel and/or below the top of bank will require removal. At least one tree occurring beyond the top of bank at the downstream end will require removal as well. The entire length of the creek will then be restored to a natural setting with native materials to compensate for the flood control and realignment project. Vegetation will be planted on the upland side slopes to the top of bank to minimise erosion. The vegetation root systems w in provide stability in the long term once the coconut fiber blanket biodegrades. Planting at the top of bank will provide the opportunity for overstory/canopy to develop. The channel will be planted with native wetland vegetation. Four creek crossings are proposed to span the new channel from top -of -bank to top -of -bank. Since a majority of the grading and construction will take place during the summer months, the channel flow will be minimal to nonexistent, and bypass pumping will be used to work around any flows. 5 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation P1V 1 SR4-n 1 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS The project site is located off of West Fremont Road, across from Donelson Place, in the Town of Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California. The site is bounded by` West Fremont Road to the north, the Wadhwani residential estate to the east, a single-family residence to the south, and a paved, shared driveway to the west. Topographically, the site is relatively level at approximately 215 ft. (66 m) National Geodetic Vertical Datum. The surrounding land use is primarily residential. ' Three soil types from two soil complexes, Urban land-Cropley and Literr-Urbanland-Merbeth, were identified on the project site (Figure 3; NRCS 2010). Urban land soils are derived from disturbed and human -transported material. Cropley soils consist of alluvium derived from calcareous shale. Literr and Merbeth soils consist of old, eroded alluvium. None of these soils are considered hydric, although hydric inclusions may occur. Santa Clara County experiences a Mediterranean climate with warm, dry""summers and cool, wet winters. The average annual daytime temperature in the general vicinity of the site is 69° F. Average annual precipitation in the general vicinity of the situ is 15 inches, nearly all of which falls between November and April. Stormwater runoff infiltrates the soils of upland areas immediately adjacent to Barron Creek, but when field capacity has been reached, gravitational water drains into the creek. 2.1 BIOTIC HABITATS Three habitats and land uses were identified on the project site (Figure 4). For the purposes of this report, they have been classified as "creek/riparian," `wetland," and "ruderal/ landscaped." A list of the vascular plant species observed on the project site and selected photographs of the site are provided in Appendices A and B, respectively. 6 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation _- -�--- - LEGEND >! ras {etao1 oad a �; ,�, Unbarlar4Cmpleywpix,0m2%slpes Urvan ,an�—,;ley anpbc. 2+n 9% slcpes uerr-Urbmiand h te71 Cnp(x. 5 : 'o slCm C-rw, avc" serv'r- � x 9— kl;lo � �•- -fir _ f A Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani E.E. sciis gateprojeci Figure # X LEGEND ©.,�- oad —� Riparm (Same Creels) Wedand s # t� Ruderal I Landscaped }- �2T w . -71 41 NNN lV IN IMM sw .a;e Scale� ., • s Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani B.E. Biotic Habitats 'a -ateProjects lFigure# R 12115;201 1 2115, 011 1584-01 4 a�� •_ PN 1584-01 2.1.1 CreekMparian The project site includes a reach of Barron Creek and the immediately adjacent upland habitat along the channel banks. The creek has been channelized and straightened from its original alignment, and it enters and exits the site via culverts. The immediately upstream and downstream reaches of the creek are sited underground. This reach of Barron Creek appears to convey water perennially or for most of the year. The bed and banks of the downstream two- thirds of the channel are lined with riprap. The downstream third of the channel is largely devoid of vegetation within the channel itself and is lined with arroyo willows (Salix lasiolepis) along its upper banks. These willows were either planted as pole cuttings or occur as natural recruits within the last 10-20 years. Associated riparian vegetation, including valley oaks (Quercus lobata) and western sycamore (Platanus racemosa), occurs beyond the top of bank at this end of the channel. The middle third of the channel supports a moderately dense mixture of native and non-native herbaceous vegetation and has a small footbridge spanning its width. Native plants supported along this reach of the site include California willowherb (Epilobium ciliatum ssp. ciliatum) tall flatsedge (Cyperus eragrostis), and broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia); non-native vegetation includes Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), bristly ox -tongue (Helminthotheca echioides), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), and curly dock (Rumex crispus). Trees were absent from this portion of the channel. Upland areas along this reach of the channel immediately beyond the banks consist of ruderal, non-native vegetation such as Italian thistle, bristly ox -tongue, and ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus). The upper third of the channel has a natural bottom and banks and is shaded by arroyo willows, Pacific willows (Salix lasiandra ssp. lasiandra), and red willows (Salix laevigata) occurring in the channel bed and along the lower banks. These willows were either planted as pole cuttings or occur as natural recruits within the last 10-20 years. Debris has collected around the base of these trees. Herbaceous vegetation occurring in the channel bed is relatively sparse and includes California willowherb, water bentgrass (Agrostis viridis), and rabbitsfoot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis). Upland areas immediately adjacent to this portion of the channel consist of 9 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 landscape trees such as coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), Italian cypress (Cupressus sempemrens), liquidambar (Liquidambar styraciflua), and African sumac (Rhus lancea). Because Barron Creek has been manipulated, is isolated from other riparian habitat due to the up- and downstream reaches. of the creek being underground, and lacks structural and floral diversity, it does not provide as high a habitat value as other, more natural riparian habitats. The creek provides a source of drinking water for species occurring in the surrounding habitats and may also provide breeding habitat for amphibians and reptiles such as pacific treefrogs (Hyla regilla) and western fence lizards (Sceloporus occidentalis). -While no stick nests were observed in any of the trees, birds that could occur on the site include the western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica) and northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos). Raptors that could forage over the site include the turkey vulture (Cathartes aura) and red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). Feral house cats (Felis catus) are likely to occur on the site. Raccoons (Procyon lotor) may also forage along the creek 2.1.2 Wetland A small wetland patch is present along the southern fenceline adjacent to the upstream end of the proposed realignment and appears to:have formed as a result of runoff from an adjacent compost pile and from a small pipe directing runoff from surrounding areas toward the creek This area supported hydrophytic vegetation including tall ilatsedge (Cyperus eragrostis), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), and curly dock (Rumex crispus). Wildlife occurring in the adjacent riparian and ruderal habitats would also be expected to occur in or near this small wetland patch. 2.1.3 Ruderal/Landscaped The remainder of the site previously consisted of two single-family residences and associated landscape and natural vegetation. The structures occurring onsite were demolished in the spring or summer of 2011. These areas are now gravel parking lots withh ruderal vegetation and remnants of the prior landscape vegetation. Landscape shrubs and trees included ornamental roses (Rosa sp.), oleander (Nerium oleander), pine (Pinus sp.), cypress (Cupressus sp.), and 10 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Nadhwani Biolod cal Evaluation PN 1584-01 mulberry (Morus alba). Ruderal and non-native vegetation occurring on the site included Mediterranean barley (Hordeum marinum ssp. gussoneanum), foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), summer mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), pennyroyal (Mentha pulegium), and field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). Shrubs and trees native to the region and occurring on the site included coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak, and toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia). A small stand of coastal redwoods (Sequoia sempervirens) occurs beyond the top of bank at the downstream end of the creek near the associated riparian vegetation (section 2.1.1). Birdhouses and bat boxes remaining from the previous residences are present. A black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans) was observed in the site's ruderal habitat. Bat species such as the Mexican free -tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis) may utilize the bat boxes for roosting and may forage over this habitat for insects. Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris), along with wildlife occurring in the adjacent riparian habitat, would also be expected to occur in this area. - - 2.2 MOVEMENT CORRIDORS Many terrestrial animals need more than one biotic habitat in order to perform all of their biological activities. With increasing encroachment of humans on wildlife habitats, it has become important to establish and maintain linkages, or movement corridors, for animals to be able to access locations containing different biotic resources that are essential to maintaining their life cycles. Terrestrial animals use ridges, canyons, riparian areas, and open spaces to travel between their required habitats. The importance of an area as a movement corridor depends on the species in question and its consistent use patterns. Animal movements generally can be divided into three major behavioral categories: • Movements within a home range or territory; • Movements during migration; and • Movements during dispersal. 1.1 Live OakALssociates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 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 potentially occurring onsite permits sufficient predictions about the types of movements occurring in the region and whether or not proposed development would constitute a significant impact to animal movements. As noted in Section 2.1, wildlife species may use the site as part of their home range and dispersal movements. Barron Creek may facilitate their movements within and through the site. However, the surrounding development serves as a barrier to regional wildlife movements. Because itoriginates and terminates on the site, this reach of the creek does not serve as a wildlife movement corridor or contribute to or link pathways occurring at the regional level. 2.3 SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS AND ANEVL4LLS Several species of plants and animals within the state of California have low populations and/or limited distributions. 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, urban, and other 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 cone&' by the CDFG. The CDFG and California Native Plant Society (CLAPS) have developed their own set of lists (i.e., California Rare Plant Ranks, or CRPR) of native plants considered rare, threatened, or endangered Collectively, these plants and animals are referred to as "special status species." A number of special status plants and animals occur in the site's vicinity (Fig. 5). 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 2011), Endangered and Threatened 17 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 Wildlife and Plants (USFWS 2011), State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California (CDFG 2011), and The California Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CLAPS 2011). This information was used to evaluate the potential for special status plant and animal species that occur on the site. Figure 5 depicts the location of special status species found by the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). It is important to note that the CNDDB is a volunteer database; therefore, it may not contain all known or gray literature records. A search of published accounts for all relevant special status plant and animal species was conducted for the Palo Alto USGS 7.5" quadrangles in which the project site occurs and for the eight surrounding quadrangles (Redwood Point, Newark, Mountain View, Cupertino, Mindego Hill, La Honda, Woodside, and San Mateo) using the California Natural Diversity Data Base Rarefind (CDFG 2011). All species listed as occurring in these quadrangles on CRPR Lists IA, 1B, 2, 3, or 4 were also reviewed. Serpentine and alkaline soils are completely lacking from the site; as such, those species that are uniquely adapted to vernal pools or to serpentine or alkaline conditions are considered absent from the site. These species include the San Mateo thorn -mint (Acanthomintha duttonii), alkali mills -vetch (Astragalus tener var. tener), San Joaquin spearscale (Atriplex joaquiniana), Congdon's tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii), fountain thistle (Cirsium fontinale var. fontinale), San Mateo woolly sunflower (Eriophyllum latilobum), Hoover's button -celery (Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri), Hillsborough chocolate lily (Fritillaria biflora var. biflora), Marin western flax (Hesperolinon congestum), legenere (Legenere limosa), serpentine leptosiphon (Linanthus ambiguus), Crystal Springs lessingia (Lessingia arachnoidea), woolly- headed lessingia (Lessingia hololeuca), woodland woollythreads (Monolopia gracilens), pincushion navarretia (Navarretia myersii ssp. myersii), saline clover (Trifolium depauperatum var. hydrophilum), and caper -fruited tropidocarpum (Tropidocarpum capparideum). Other plant species occur in habitats not present in the study area (e.g., chaparral, coastal scrub, etc.) and, therefore, are also considered absent from the site. These species include Anderson's manzanita (Arctostaphylos andersonii), Montara manzanita (Arctostaphylos montaraensis), Kings Mountain manzanita (Arctostaphylos regismontana), coastal marsh mills -vetch (Astragalus 13 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 pycnostachyus var. pycnostachyus), Brewer's calandrinia (Calandrinia breweri), Oakland star - tulip (Calochortus umbellatus), San Francisco Bay spineflower (Chorizanthe cuspidata var. cuspidata), Santa Clara red ribbons (Clarkin concinna ssp. automUa), San Francisco collinsia (Collinsia multicolor), Point Reyes bird's -beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. palustris), Ben Lomond buckwheat (Eriogonum nudum var. decurrens), San Francisco wallflower (Erysimum franciscanum var. crassifolium), short -leaved evax (Hesperevax sparsiflora. var. brevifolia), coast, lily (Lilium maritimum), San Mateo tree lupine (Lupinus eximius), arcuate bush -mallow (Malacothamnus arcuatus), Hall's bush -mallow (Malacothamnus hallia), white -flowered rein orchid (Piperia candida), Choris' popcorn -flower (Plagiobothrys chorisianus var. chorisianus), hairless popcom-flower (Plagiobothrys glaber), Oregon polemonium (Polemonium carneum), and slender -leaved pondweed (Potamogeton filiformis), and California seablite (Suaeda californica). Wildlife species that would not be expected to occur on the site because the habitats necessary to support them are absent include the Bay checkerspot butterfly .(Euphydryas editha bayensis), Myrtle's silverspot (Speyeria zerene myrtleae), California black rail (Laterallus , jamaicensis coturniculus), California clapper rail (Rallus. longirostris obsoletus), western snowy plover (Charadsius alexandrinus nivosus), California least tern (Sternula antillarum brownz), saltmarsh common yellowthroat (Geothlypis tHchas sinuosa), Alameda song sparrow (Melospiza melodia pusillula), salt -marsh wandering shrew (Sorex vagrans halicoetes), and salt -marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris). 14 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation LEGEND. �� ' "`` -• t " Special status species observation yr sources: p. .. , � t'�.� ,i"'•' - ;+'� , ;' a.y .. Cdi1WrlJa Dep, of i & Game Natural Diversity Database Gai�Eortai Leger salamander. 2a �, NQ alifornia red -legged ?oitola Avt3 `dn. .. 1. ' �PCastita.r, . .i... fine Ln I)alliii Eat ro hoitry hat., qj �i . • P„rgaQct',41��lith Alt, %. F i. rorcfli:ilte busl) Tu low s � •� .� l ,F <� 6 voooi�treacuesW' Dr' ��. _ 1 „F p � `'`�1� .. o ��a0� IS�21EI,®411000 ��j. �t • �f/S S` ''�' � � � a. 7�� o' wesfem leathei ootLi d At 6nont Rd SV. f .t ��OOay.R��..,.r. • 4 r ,1; r �•. .;f./'.•� . f f f!• 1j .c I t • J . `` Live Oak Associates, Inc. �,„. •, ”""�� l.\ �� Barron Creek Wad.hil l B.E. Special -status Species 2 miles D 2 as Dale IllOject# Figure $ nNNroxinwt. Scale 11/9/2011 1 1594-01 6 Dwr IC04 n7 16 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 1-1 . • 1. Special status species that could. project PLANT -S (adapted from CDFG 2011 and CNPS2011) other�r- r r r r 'r by m m o n$dsnent fi Staiu Gen ral fra6tatdesc trorr Oavrreneeinthe y area n �6*. e'i°„•�"i'r'E v Western leatherwood CRPR SB Habitat: Broadleafed upland Unlikely. The site provides poor Dirca occidentalis forest, closed -cone habitat for this species. This species coniferous forest, chaparral, was observed in 2008 approximately cismontane woodland, 2.5 miles southwest of the site. This North Coast coniferous species has not been observed on the forest, riparian forest, and site. mesic riparian woodlands. Elevation: 50-395 meters. Blooms: January—March. Fragrant fritillary CRPR 18 Habitat: Gsmontane Absent. Upland areas of the site Fritillaria lillacea woodland, coastal prairie, provide very poor habitat for this coastal scrub, and valley and species. The site does not support foothill grasslands. Often serpentine soils. occurs on serpentinite. Elevation: 3-410 meters. Blooms: February—April. Loma Prieta hoita CRPR 16 Habitat: Chaparral, Absent. The site provides poor habitat Noita strobilina cismontane woodland, and for this species and does not support riparian woodland. Usually serpentine soils. This species was not occurs on serpentinitic or observed on the site during the August mesic soils. 2010 or October 2011 field surveys. Elevation: 30-860 meters. The only documented occurrence in Blooms: May—October. the region is from 1913 more than ten miles from the site. Davidson's bush -mallow CRPR 113 Habitat: Chaparral, Absent The site provides poor habitat Malacothamnus davidsonii cismontane woodland, for this. species. This species was not coastal scrub, and riparian observed on the site during the August woodland. 2010 or October 2011 surveys. The Elevation: 185-855 meters. most recent documented occurrence of Blooms:.June—January. this species in the region is from 1936. Robust monardella CRPR 113. Habitat: Broadleafed upland Absent. Upland areas of the site Monardella villosa ssp. globosa forest openings, chaparral provide poor habitat for this species. openings, cismontane The nearest documented occurrence of woodland, coastal scrub, this species is more than four miles and valley and foothill southeast of the site. grasslands. Elevation: 100-915 meters. Blooms: June—July. Dudley's lousewort CRPR 1B Habitat: Maritime chaparral, Absent. Upland areas of the site Pedicularis dudleyi cismontane woodland, provide poor habitat for this species. North Coast coniferous This species has not been documented forest, and valley and within five miles of the site. foothill grasslands. Elevation: 60-900 meters. Blooms: April—June. 17 -- Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 0 San Francisco tampion' 'CRPR 16 `Habifat :Coastal bluff scrub, 'Absent. Upland areas of the site Silene verecunda ssp. verecunda chaparral coastal prairie, provide poor habitat for this species. coastal scnib; and valley and The nearest documented occurrence of foothill: grasslands. Occurs this species.is from 1983 approximately on sandy soils. ten miles from the site. Elevation: 30-645 meters. BloomsMarch-lune- San Francisco owl s -clover . CRPR 18 Wabrtat Coastal prame s Absent The site provides es -poor Tnphysaria flonbunda coastal scrub, and valley and focthisspecies anddoes notsu ort Pp footfall casslands Usuall - r ri k g y• serpentmesoils The nearest occurs on'serentimte t documented occurrence ofthi; species . Elevat on10160 meters z �sfrom 1932 more than terlmiles from Blooms:'A'pnl=June' xhesrte ''` � "5 •'"` ` �r :� t . • Special•' ANIMALS (adapted from Species,tisted as Threatened1 / I I/under/ andlar,Federal Endangered I/Species �Commcn ae� aen i-narn si �ta t Genera fia �ti n 0 hence m T arEa Steelhead=central Califomia°'coast FT Migrate up freshwater Absent. Steelhead have not been DPS rivers or streams in the documented in Barron Creek. Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus spring and spend the Substantial. barriers exist between any remainder of the time in the source population and this reach'of ocean. • - Barron Creek. California tiger salamander FT, CT, CSC` Breeds in vernal pools and Absent. Breeding and aestivation Ambystoma califiorniense stock ponds'of.central habitat is absent from the site. California; adults aestivate in gressland'habitats adjacent to the breeding sites. California red -legged frog FT, CSC Rivers, creeks` and stock Absent. The reach of Barron Creek Rana draytonii ponds of the Sierra foothills occurring onsite has a shallow water and coast range, preferring depth and lacks pooling areas pools With overhanging preferred by this species'. CRLF have vegetation. not been documented along Barron Creek. San Francisco garter snake FE, CE Freshwater marshes, ponds, Absent The reach of Barron Creek Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenio and slow-moving streams, -occurring onsite has a shallow water preferring dense cover and depth and lacks the dense cover water depths of at least one preferred by this species. foot Peregrine falcon CE, CP Individuals breed on cliffs in Unlikely. Suitable breeding habitat is Falco peregrinus anatum the Sierra or in coastal absent from the site. The site would habitats; occurs in many not be considered suitable foraging habitats of the state during habitat for this species. migration and winter. 18 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 19 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation Table 1_,'Special status species that d occur irr the project ANIMALS .... '. from CDFG 2011. 1 11) :�;Iifornia Species of Special ConcerrT and Protected Species �Ic� �5t �besc pbn Occurrence �n "are` Commoc�andsclenLif►"c names atus Gyenera� 3obiz -�"�". CSC Partly shaded, shallow,,, Absent. Onsite habitat for this species Foothill yellow -legged frog Rona'boylii_ swiftly -flowing streams and' is poor. This species has not been . riffles with rocky substrate documented along Barron Creek, and in a variety of habitats. the nearest documented occurrence is more than ten miles from the site. - Western pond turtle CSC Open, slow-moving water of Absent. The reach of Barron Creek Actinemys marmorata rivers and creeks of central occurring onsite has a shallow water California with rocks and depth and lacks suitable basking areas. logs for basking. This species has not been documented along Barron Creek or within three miles of the site. White-tailed kite CP Open grasslands and Possible. Large trees on the site Elanus leucurus agricultural areas provide potential nesting habitat for throughout central this species. Foraging habitat is absent California. from the site. Northern harrier CSC Frequents meadows, Absent. Suitable breeding and foraging Circus cyaneus grasslands, open rangelands, habitat is absent from the site. freshwater emergent wetlands; uncommon in wooded habitats. Burrowing owl CSC Open, dry grasslands, Absent. Suitable breeding and foraging Athene cunicularia deserts and ruderal areas. habitat is absent from the site. Requires suitable burrows. This species is often associated with California ground squirrels. Long-eared owl CSC Frequents dense, riparian Absent. Riparian habitat on the site is Asio otus and live oak thickets near marginal and lacks the dense thickets meadow edges and nearby preferred by this species. The nearest woodland and forest documented occurrence of this species habitats. Breed in valley is from 1987 and approximately five foothill hardwood up to miles southwest of the site. ponderosa pine habitats. 19 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation nor ,—, — Table L- Special status species that could occur in the project vicinity. ANIMALS (adapted • ■ USFWS 20") California Species of Specia I Concern and Protected Species +�'1_y."rvg'.R"`�c.`"`3 1 '�'facriTf��•' _.: -.0minmomand-aenUfienames F t o G ne a[#habrtaiadescri ram — �„�•�'�{� �.„-.Pt Dccu[�eace<tn• he=study�r�ea = Short -eared owl CSC Frequents annual and Absent Suitable breeding and foraging Asio flammeus perennial grasslands, habitat is absent from the site. pairies, meadows, irrigated land, and saline and fresh emergent marshes with, elevated vegetated sites for perches, roosting and nesting. Black swift CSC Migrants and transients Unlikely. Suitable breeding and Cypseloides niger found throughout many foraging habitats are absent from the habitats of state. Breeds on site. However, this species may steep cliffs or ocean bluffs, occasionally pass through the site. or in cracks and crevasses of inland deep canyons. Vaux's swift CSC Migrants and transients Unlikely. Suitable breeding and Choetura vauxi move through the foothills foraging habitats are absent from the of the western Sierra in site. However, this species may spring and late summer. occasionally pass through the site. Breeds in coniferous forests. Yellowwarbler CSC Nests in riparian.thickets, Possible. Willows on the site provide Dendroica petechia brewsted especially in willows. Also potential, albeit limited, breeding frequents shrubby areas and habitat for this species. old fields. Tricolored blackbird CSC Breeds near fresh water, Absent Suitable breeding and foraging Agelaius tricolor primarily emergent habitat is absent from the site. The wetlands, with tall thickets. nearest documented occurrence of this Forages in nearby grassland species is from 1971 more than ten and cropland habitats. miles east of the site. Pallid bat CSC Roosts in rocky outcrops, Unlikely. The bat boxes onsite provide Antrazous pallidus cliffs, and crevices with potential roosting habitat for this access to open habitats for species. Foraging habitat is poor. The foraging. May also roost in most recent CNDDB occurrence of this caves, mines, hollow trees species in the region is from 1960. and buildings. San Francisco dusky -footed woodrat CSC Found in hardwood forests, Unlikely. The riparian habitat on the Neotoma fuscipes annectens oak riparian and shrub site lacks the dense shrub understory habitats. typically favored by this species. No woodrat nests were observed on the site. American badger CSC Found in drier open stages Absent. Suitable habitat for this Taxidea taxus of most shrub, forest and species is absent from the site. herbaceous habitats with friable soils. >Fvnl�n�tinn of /1.•.•....e....., n.. Present: Species observed on the sites at time of field surveys or during recent past. Likely: Species not observed on the site, but it may reasonably be expected to occur there on a regular basis. 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. ,)n Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 STATUS CODES FE Federally Endangered CE California Endangered FT Federally Threatened CT California Threatened FPE Federally Endangered (Proposed) CR California Rare FC. Federal Candidate CP California Protected CSC California Species of Special Concern CRPR California Rare Plant Ranking 1A Plants Presumed Extinct in California 3 Plants about which we need more 18 Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in information — a review list California and elsewhere 4 Plants of limited distribution —a watch list 2 Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere N Live OakAssociaies, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation pnr r sRa_n r 2.4 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS Jurisdictional waters include rivers, creeks, and drainages that have a defined bed and bank and that, at the very least, carry ephemeral flows. Jurisdictional waters also include 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 12.4 of this report for additional information. The reach of Barron Creek occurring onsite has been channelized and straightened from its original alignment, and it enters and exits the site via culverts. Barron Creek is presumed to be, at the very least, a seasonal watercourse, as it has been observed to convey water by LOA in December 2009, June and A �Qust 2010, and February 2011. Water sources include natural runoff upstream of the site. Additionally, several small pipes convey runoff from adjacent properties into the creek at the upstream end of the site. The channel ranges from eight to eleven ft. wide at the ordinary high water level. A formal wetland delineation of Barron Creek was completed on August 4, 2010. The USACE issued their jurisdictional determination on March 29, 2011, at which time they claimed jurisdiction over the reach of the creek occurring onsite, totaling 600 linear ft. and approximately 0.12 acres. The USACE also determined that this reach of the creek constitutes a wetland as defined by their technical criteria. The limit of USACE jurisdiction, as well as that of the RWQCB, is the ordinary high water level. The creek is also subject to the jurisdiction of the CDFG up to the top of bank or the edge of associated riparian vegetation, whichever is greater. In addition to the creek channel, potential wetlands are present on the site in the form of approximately 0.05 acres (2,219 sq. ft.) of hydrophytic vegetation along the southern fenceline adjacent to the upstream end of the proposed realignment (section 2.1.2). This feature appears to have formed as a result of runoff from an adjacent compost pile and from a small pipe directing runoff from surrounding areas toward the creek. A formal wetland delineation was completed by LOA on December 14, 2011, and will be submitted to the USACE for verification to determine if this area meets the USACE's technical criteria for wetlands. Due to the time of year that this Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 survey was conducted, not all wetland features were visible and, therefore, this area did not meet all of the USACE's technical criteria. However, it is believed that because a majority of the criteria were met despite the survey timing, this area will be considered a wetland by the USACE. If so, then it is likely that the USACE will claim jurisdiction over this feature on the basis that it abuts Barron Creek, a Down water of the U.S. This feature would also be regulated by the RWQCB, but it is unlikely the CDFG would exert jurisdiction. D Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadlnvani Bioloo cal Evaluation AAr 1 P9A /1 l 3.0 IMPACTS AND NUTIGATIONS 3.1 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA Approval of general plans, area plans, and specific projects is 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 carried out. CEQA is concerned with the significance of a proposed project's impacts. For example, a proposed development project may require the removal of some or all of a site's 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 the site. Plants and animals that 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. Whenever possible, public agencies are required to avoid or minimise environmental impacts by implementing practical alternatives or mitigation measures. According to Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines, a 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 would: • 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, of 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; 74 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 • 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; or • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Furthermore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a) 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. 1)5 Live OakAssociafes, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 3.2.2 Mia story Birds State and federal laws also protect most birds. The Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C., scc. 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, 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 Bats Section 2000 and 4150 of the California Fish and Game Code states that it unlawful to take or possess a number of species, including bats, without a license or permit as required by Section 3007. Additionally, Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations states it is unlawful to harass, herd, or drive a number of species, including bats. To harass. is defined as "an intentional act which di„urts: an animal's- normal behavior patterns, which includes, but is not limited to, breeding, feeding or sheltering." 3.2.5 Wetlands and Other Jurisdictional Waters Natural drainage channels and' adjacent wetlands may be considered "Waters of the United States" (hereafter referred to as "jurisdictional waters") subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The extent of jurisdiction has been defined in the Code of Federal Regulations but has also been subject to interpretation of the federal courts. Jurisdictional waters generally include: 16 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-a1 • All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; • All interstate waters including interstate wetlands: • All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce; • All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under the definition; Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a)(1)-(4) (i.e. the bulleted items above). As recently determined by the United States Supreme Court in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Array Corps of Engineers (the SWANCC decision), channels and wetlands isolated from other jurisdictional waters cannot be considered jurisdictional on the basis of their use, hypothetical or observed, by migratory birds. However, the U.S Supreme Court decisions Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (referred together as the Rapanos decision) impose a "significant nexus" test for federal jurisdiction over wetlands. In June 2007, the USACE and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established guidelines for applying the significant nexus standard. This standard includes 1) a case-by-case analysis of the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary or wetland to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of downstream navigable waters and 2) consideration of hydrologic and ecologic factors (EPA and USACE 2007). The USACE regulates the filling or grading of such waters under the authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 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). 17 Live OakAssociates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1 SRG-n 1 All activities that involve the discharge of fill into jurisdictional waters are subject to the permit requirements of the USACE (Wetland Training Institute, Inc. 1991). 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 filling of isolated wetlands, over which the USACE has disclaimed jurisdiction under the SWANCC decision, is regulated by the RWQCB. It is unlawful to fill isolated wetlands without filing a Notice of Intent with the RWQCB. The RWQCB 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 natural drainages according to provisions of Section 1.601 and 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code (2011). Activities that would disturb these drainages are regulated by the CDFG via a Streambed Alteration Agreement. Such an agreement typically stipulates that certain measures will be implemented which protect the habitat values of the drainage in question. 3.2.6 Local Ordinances, Policies, and Habitat Conservation Plans Tree removal. The Town's municipal code has ordinances related to the removal of trees. The municipal code defines a "heritage oak" as "any tree of the genus Quercus, including, .but not limited to, Valley Oak (Quercus lobata), California Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia), Black Oak (Quercus kello o i) and,.Blue Oak (Quercus douglasii)_ that has a trunk or multiple trunk thirty- six (3 6) inches in circumference (approximately twelve (12) inches in diameter) at a point four (4) feet above the root crown." A tree removal permit must be obtained from the Town prior to the removal or "purposeful" damage of any heritage oak The Town may require compensation measures, including, but not limited to, the planting of up to five trees for each heritage oak removed (12-2.301 through 12-2.307 of the Municipal Code). The Town also requires that a permit be obtained for the removal of public trees (Title 12 Chapter 2 of the Municipal Code) and private trees (Title 9, Chapter 1 of the Municipal Code). �8 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Bioloo cal Evaluation PN 1584-01 The Town may require compensation measures, including, but not limited to, the planting of replacement trees for each removed tree at a ratio to be specified by the Town. Creekprotection. The Town has a creek protection ordinance requiring that structures "be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from the top of bank of all creeks" (Title 10, Chapter 2 of the Municipal Code). Setbacks less than 25 ft. may be allowed upon approval by the Town's planning commission. No other local ordinances or policies are known to be applicable to the project. No known habitat conservation plans are in effect for this site. 3.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS SPECIFIC TO THE PROTECT SITE The proposed project is for the realignment and widening of the existing channel of Barron Creek occurring onsite as currently represented in plans provided by Kimley-Horn and Associates (2012). Any appreciable difference in either scope or general location of the proposed project would require an additional impact assessment to ensure that unanticipated impacts to biotic resources are not likely to occur. 3.3.1 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Plants Potential Impacts. Fourteen special status vascular plant species are known to occur in the general project vicinity (Table 1). Site development would have no effect on regional populations of these species since the site provides no habitat for special status plants. Therefore, state and federal laws protecting special status plants would not be relevant to development of the site. lylitiaation. Mitigation measures are not warranted. 3.3.2 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Animals Potential Impacts. Twenty special status animal species occur, or once occurred, regionally (Table 1). With the exception of the white-tailed kite and yellow warbler, all of these species would be absent from or unlikely to occur on the site due to unsuitable habitat conditions. ?9 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PAT 1 SRQ_/11 Proposed channel realignment and maintenance activities would have no effect on these species or their breeding success because there is little or'no likelihood that they are present. White-tailed kites and yellow warblers may utilize the site for nesting (section 3.3.3).' Filling of the channel would, at most, result in a temporary reduction of foraging and/or breeding habitat available regionally. The temporary loss of foraging or nesting habitat for these species would only last for the duration of 'construction and would be concurrent with construction of the new channel: alignment. The new channel alignment will be planted with native tree, shrub, ° and herbaceous vegetation, 'providing a net overall increase in foraging and nesting habitat. Therefore, the temporary loss of habitat would be considered less than significant. The remaining site disturbance, from removal of the existing utility poles and undergrounding of power lines along the driveway on the site's western boundary, would be temporary in nature. Any vegetation disturbed in these areas is expected to rapidly recruit to cover areas left barren as a result of trenching activities. Therefore, the loss of habitat for special status animals would be considered less than significant Mitigation.. Mitigation measures are not warranted. 33.3 Disturbance to Active Raptor and Migratory Bird Nests Potential Impacts. While no stick nests were observed in trees on the site, the willows, redwoods, oaks, and other trees occurring on the site and trees adjacent to the site provide potential nesting -habitat for tree -nesting raptors and other migratory birds, includingwhite-tailed kites and yellow. warblers. -Existing birdhouses on the site may also provide nesting habitat for migratory birds. If a raptor or migratory bird, regardless of its federal or state status, was to nest on or adjacent to the site prior to or .during proposed tree removal activities or removal of birdhouses; such activities could result in the abandonment of active nests or direct mortality to these birds. Any activities that adversely affect the nesting success of raptors or result in mortality of individual birds constitute a violation of state and federal laws (sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3) and would be considered a significant impact under CEQA. 0 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 Nlitigation. Trees and other structures (i.e., birdhouses) planned for removal should be removed during the non -breeding season (September 1 through January 31). If it is not possible to avoid tree removal during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist should conduct a pre -disturbance survey for tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds in all trees and other structures planned for removal and immediately adjacent to the disturbance zone no more than 30 days from the onset of the removal activities, if such disturbance will occur during the breeding season. If nesting raptors and migratory birds are detected on the site during the survey, a suitable activity -free buffer should be established around all active nests. The precise dimension of the buffer (up to 250 ft.) would be determined at that time and may vary depending on location and species. Buffers should remain in place for the duration of the breeding season or until it has been confirmed by a qualified biologist that all chicks have fledged and are independent of their parents. Pre -disturbance surveys during the non -breeding season are not necessary for tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds, as they are expected to abandon their roosts during disturbance activities. Implementation of the above measures would mitigate impacts to tree -nesting raptors and migratory birds to a less -than -significant level. 3.3.4 Disturbance to Bat Nursery Sites Potential Impacts. Bat boxes on the site provide potential roosting habitat for bats. Project - related activities or future demolition of these boxes may cause disturbance to bats roosting in these structures. The loss of a maternity colony for any bat species, regardless of the species' status, would constitute a potentially significant impact. Mitigation. A qualified biologist should conduct a pre -construction survey of the bat boxes for bats within 30 days of the onset of ground disturbance, if such disturbance will occur during the roosting season (March 1 through August 31). If active maternity roosts are detected during the survey, then a construction -free buffer should be established around all active roosts. The buffer radius would be established at the time work is to be carried out and would be determined by the extent and duration of construction activities scheduled to occur as well as the location of any roosts at that time. An onsite biological monitor would be necessary during construction when construction activities would be performed near these features during the roosting season. The �l Live OakAssociates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 monitor would have authority to issue a cease and desist order if construction activities disturb any bat roosts. If demolition of the bat boxes is to occur, then pre -demolition bat surveys should be conducted to determine if special status bat species are present. If no bats are observed to be roosting in the boxes, then no further action would be required, and dismantling of the boxes can proceed. However, if bats are found to be roosting on the site, the project proponents should exclude bats prior to dismantling to ensure no harm or take would occur to any special status .bats as a result of demolition activities. Dismantling of the boxes should occur after August 31 and before March 1. to avoid interfering with an active nursery. If a non -breeding bat colony is found in the boxes, the individuals should be safely evicted under the direction of a qualified bat biologist through a "partial dismantle" process, whereby the roosting area is opened to allow airflow through and sunlight into the structure, making it unsuitable habitat and undesirable for the bats to return to the site. Full dismantling should then follow no later than the following day (i.e., there should be no less than one night between initial disturbance for airflow and -the demolition). This action should allow bats to leave during the night, thus increasing their. chances of finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation during daylight hours. By implementing the .above mitigation, impacts to bats would be .reduced to a less-than- significant ess-thansignificant level. 33.5 Disturbance to Waters of the United States or Riparian Habitats Potential Impacts. Barron Creek is a water of the U.S. and California subject to regulation by the USAGE, RWQCB, and CDFG. If the USACE determines that the wetland patch abutting Barron Creek is under their jurisdiction, then this feature will be regulated by the USACE and is also likely to be regulated by the RWQCB. Realignment of the straightened portion of the channel and maintenance activities at the upstream end of the channel will result in temporary impacts to approximately 600 linear fL and 0.12 acres of wetland channel within Barron Creek and will also result in the removal of riparian trees, including: 31 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 • Approximately 19 willows in the bed and along the lower banks of the upstream end of the channel; and • Approximately 23 willows occurring below the top of bank at the downstream end of the channel. The placement of fill within wetlands occurring in the existing channel to accommodate the realignment would be considered a significant impact. Removal of the willows from all portions of the channel as well as removal of any other associated riparian trees at the downstream end of the channel would also be considered a significant impact. Additionally, channel realignment would permanently impact approximately 400 sq. ft. of the abutting wetland. For the purposes of CEQA, impacts to the abutting wetland patch would be considered minimal due to the small size of the area being affected and, therefore, would be considered a less -than -significant impact. Four crossings are proposed to clearspan the new channel alignment. Because they are one of the design elements for the new alignment, they would not be considered an impact to waters of the U.S. Mitigation. Due to the nature of the proposed project activities, full avoidance of jurisdictional waters and sensitive habitats on the site is not possible. Therefore, the project proponent should implement minimization and compensation measures to reduce impacts to jurisdictional waters and sensitive habitats to a less -than -significant level. Minimization. Because full avoidance is not possible, actions should be taken to minimize impacts to aquatic and riparian habitats. Measures taken during construction activities should include placing construction fencing around the aquatic features or riparian areas to be preserved to ensure that construction activities do not inadvertently impact these areas. Any proposed future lighting on the property (e.g., footpath lighting) should be designed to minimize light and glare impacts to the riparian corridor. To the maximum extent practicable, light sources should not be visible from riparian areas and should not illuminate riparian areas or _ 33 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PATI SRQ_/l 1 cause glare on the opposite side of the channel (e -g., to neighboring properties). Additionally, with the exception of the willows to be removed at the upstream end of the channel, proposed realignment activities should be designed and situated to avoid the loss of trees within and adjacent to the channel to the maximum extent practicable. The Town's creek protection ordinance requires all structures to be set back a minimum of 25 ft. from the top of bank of all creeks. The existing Wadhwani estate fence is located within approximately 10 ft. of the top of bankalong' the east side of the channel. The proposed revegetation for the channel realignment will provide increased riparian habitat function and value over the channel's existing condition. Therefore, rather .than conforming strictly to the Town's creek protection ordinance, the new estate fence should be set back in a manner that accommodates the intended function and value of the channel revegetation plan. This includes a minimum setback of 15 ft. from the center of any planted riparian trees (i.e., 15 ft. from the tree trunk) or. 15 ft. from the top of bank of the realigned channel, whichever provides the greater setback distance. Compensation. An onsite revegetation plan should be developed to compensate for temporary impacts to 0.12 .acres of wetlands occurring within the channel and the loss of the willows and other riparian trees. A formal tree survey should be completed to .determine the actual number of trees to be removed. It is expected that all compensation measures can be accommodated within the proposed channel alignment, as the channel is proposed to be planted with native wetland vegetation .(section 1.1). If the new channel alignment- cannot fully accommodate the compensation measures, then offsite restoration would be necessary. Compensation measures should include: • Creation of.0.12 acres of wetlands within the channel. Replacement of all willows removed from anywhere below the top of bank along the existing channel alignment at a minimum Replacement of the nineteen willows removed from the upstream end of the channel should occur along the upper banks of this same reach of the creek. Replacement of the willows removed from the downstream end of the channel can be planted along the realigned portion of the creek All of the willows occurring in the creek were originally 4 Live OakAssociates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 planted as pole cuttings and occurred as natural recruits. Because they have become a nuisance by obstructing the flow of water through the channel,. the Town has indicated its desire to have these trees removed. Therefore, the recommended replacement -to -removal ratio for willow impacts as described above was developed with the Town and through informal conversations with the USACE and CDFG (Paula Gill, pers. comm., February 2011; Dave Johnston, pers. comm., February 2011). This mitigation is conceptually consistent with the requirements of these regulatory agencies. To the maximum extent practicable, removed trees should be replaced with like species. Due to the flow obstructions created by the existing willows and the project's objective to prevent future obstructions, other riparian tree species (e.g., coast live oaks and California sycamores) may be substituted in consultation with a qualified biologist. • Replacement of all other native riparian trees (i.e., riparian trees occurring beyond the top of bank, should removal be required) at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio. To the maximum extent practicable, removed trees should be replaced with like species. • Reseeding or replanting of riparian or wetland vegetation (i.e., a combination of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation) along the channel benches and banks. These measures should be implemented according to a site-specific revegetation plan. This mitigation plan would need to be approved by the responsible agency prior to the start of project activities. The revegetation plan should: 1. Designate suitable replanting areas. 2. Describe the methods by which the revegetation will occur, including species to be planted and plant installation guidelines. 3. Develop a timetable for implementation of the plan. 4. Outline a monitoring methodology and establish appropriate performance criteria. 5. Describe remedial measures to be performed in the event that initial revegetation measures are unsuccessful in meeting the performance criteria. 6. Describe site maintenance activities to follow revegetation activities. These may include weed control, irrigation, and control of herbivory. This measure will reduce impacts to waters of the U.S. and sensitive habitats to a less -than - significant level. _ 35 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation P>•I 1584-01 Regulatory issues. The applicant should also comply with all state and federal regulations related to work that will impact jurisdictional waters occurring on the site; which includes Barron Creek and may also include the wetland patch abutting the creek, should it be regulated by the agencies. This may require obtaining a Section -404. Clean Water Act permit from the USACE, Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, and Section 1600 Stream Alteration Agreement from the CDFG prior to initiating any realignment and maintenance activities, if deemed necessary. Permit conditions typically require a mitigation plan outlining compensatory measures for impacts to all jurisdictional features. As such, while impacts to the abutting wetland would -not be considered significant and, therefore; would not require mitigation under CEQA, a small amount of additional mitigation may be required by the agencies for impacts to the abutting wetland in order to comply with their permit conditions. It is expected that the agencies would seek mitigation in the form of onsite wetland creation or enhancement. The project proposes to plant the channel of the new alignment with wetland vegetation. This would accommodate both temporary impacts to wetlands occurring within the existing channel and permanent impacts to the wetland patch abutting the creek 3.3.6 Tree Removal Impacts Potential Impacts. Channel realignment and maintenance activities will include the removal of approximately nineteen willows currently along the bed and lower banks of the upstream portion of the -channel, approximately '23 willows at the downstream end of the channel, and one young coast redwood in upland habitat beyond the top of bank at the downstream end of the channel (section 3.3.5). The actual number of trees to be removed will depend on the final project plans. The removal of trees would constitute: a significant impact. Construction activities that lead to the injury, decline, structural failure, or death of a tree proposed to be retained on the site would also constitute a significant impact. 6 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 Mitigation. For mitigation measures related to the removal of trees within the riparian habitat of Barron Creek, refer to section 3.3.5. The following measures are recommended for trees occurring outside of the riparian habitat. A formal tree survey should be completed to determine the actual number of trees to be removed from the site. Tree removal should occur pursuant to relevant Town ordinances, including securing a tree removal permit and complying with the permit conditions. All trees to be removed should be replaced onsite at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio (two trees planted for each tree removed) or as specified by the Town, whichever is greater. A monitoring plan for the replacement trees should be developed and submitted to the Town during the permit process. The basic components of the monitoring plan should consist of final success criteria, specific performance criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, monitoring schedule, contingency/remedial measures, and reporting requirements. For trees to be retained, impacts to any retained trees during the construction and operation phases of the project can be reduced to a less -than -significant level by conforming to the following guidelines. These measures should remain in place for the duration of construction activities at the project site: • The project proponent should retain a consulting arborist prior to any ground disturbance activities. The consulting arborist would develop a tree -protection plan outlining specific procedures to ensure that retained trees are protected during the construction phase. • Prior to any ground disturbance activities, fencing should be installed around the drip -line of all retained trees occurring within the development envelope, and the fencing should remain in place throughout the construction phase of the project. The type of fencing to be utilized would be at the direction of the consulting arborist. • Any limb or root pruning to be conducted on retained trees should be approved and supervised by the consulting arborist and should follow best management practices developed by the International Society of Arboriculture. • Supplemental irrigation to retained trees should be applied as determined by the consulting arborist. 37 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 • If any of the retained trees should be damaged during the construction phase, they should be evaluated at the earliest possible time by the consulting arborist so that appropriate measures can be taken. Implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce tree impacts to _ a less -than - significant level. 3.3.7 Loss of Habitat for Native Wildlife Potential Impacts. Channel realignment and maintenance activities will include the removal of up to nineteen willows currently along the -bed and lower banks of the upstream portion of the channel, approximately twenty-three willows along the downstream portion of the channel, and at least one tree occurring in upland habitat at the downstream end of the channel. Mitigation measures for impacts to these trees have been provided (sections 3.3.5 and 3.3.6). All other proposed activities would result in only temporary impacts to the site, for the duration of construction. Vegetation that may be impacted would be expected to naturally recruit in a short period of time from surrounding areas. The site would be expected to return to its prior habitat function and value following project buildout. Therefore, the project would not result in a permanent or significant loss of habitat for native wildlife, nor would the project result in a wildlife population dropping below self-sustaining levels or threaten to eliminate an animal community. The loss of habitat for native wildlife resulting from the proposed project would constitute a less -than -significant impact. Mitigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted. 3.3.8 Interference with the Movement of Native Wildlife Potential Impacts. The reach of Barron Creek occurring onsite facilitates the movement of wildlife through the site itself. However, the project site does not function as a wildlife movement corridor because it is surrounded by development and because the creek is below ground immediately upstream and downstream of the site. The proposed project is not expected to have a significant effect on home range and dispersal movements of native wildlife that may occur in the region. The proposed work may result in a temporary disruption of local wildlife 8 Live Oak -Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 movements and would be expected to do so only during daylight hours. Because the site will have functionally been unchanged once construction is complete, these activities are not expected to result in any permanent or substantial changes in use or movement patterns. Wildlife species presently utilizing this area are expected to continue moving through it after maintenance activities have been completed. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less -than - significant impact on corridor -type movements of native wildlife within the region. Nlitigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted. 3.3.9 Degradation of Water Quality in Seasonal Drainages, Stock Ponds, and Downstream Waters Potential Impacts. Proposed channel realignment and maintenance activities will result in soils temporarily left barren in the new and existing portions of Barron Creek and, therefore, vulnerable to sheet, rill, or gully erosion. Eroded and soils may be carried as sediment in surface runoff to be deposited in downstream waters and adjacent wetlands. Furthermore, urban runoff is often polluted with grease, oil, residues of pesticides and herbicides, heavy metals, and other pollutants, which may eventually be carried to sensitive wetland habitats used by a diversity of native wildlife species. The applicant is expected to comply with the provisions of applicable permits, including standard erosion control measures that employ best management practices (BMPs). Compliance with the above permit(s) should result in no impact to water quality in seasonal creeks, reservoirs, and downstream waters from the proposed project and should not result in the deposition of pollutants and sediments in sensitive riparian and wetland habitats. IN/litigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted. 3.3.10 Local Ordinances or Habitat Conservation Plans Potential Impacts. Aside from the creek setback ordinance (section 3.3.5) and tree -related ordinances (section 3.3.6), no local ordinances, HCPs, or NCCPs are known to be in effect for 39 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation DAr troy n this project. Therefore, the proposed project would not be impacted by any local policies related to biological resources. Mitigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted. 4 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 REFERENCES California Department of Fish and Game. 2011. California fish and game code. Gould Publications. Binghamton, NY. . 2011. State and federally listed endangered and threatened animals of California. The Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA. 2011. California natural diversity database. The Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA. California Native Plant Society. 2011. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (7th Edition). Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee, David P. Tibor, Convening Editor. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA. EPA and USACE. 2007. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington, D.C. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2012. Barron Creek channel improvements, planning review set. San Jose, CA. Natural Resource Conservation Service. 2010. Soil survey of Santa Clara Area, California, Western Part, USDA. http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. U.S. Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Department of the Army. USACE. 2001. Minimum standards for acceptance of preliminary wetland delineations. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Branch. November 30. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0). Engineer Research and Development Center. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants. Wetland Training Insitute, Inc. 1991. 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. 1988. California's wildlife, volume II, birds. Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. 731 pp. 1988. California's wildlife, volume III, mammals. Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. 407 pp. 41 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PNI584-07 Personal Communications Gill, Paula. February 22, 2011. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Johnston, Dave. February 17, 2011. California Department of Fish and Game. 41 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation PN 1584-01 APPENDIX A: VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE STUDY AREA The plants species listed below were observed on the Barron Creek site during field surveys conducted by Live Oak Associates in August 2010 and October and December 2011. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wetland indicator status of each plant has been shown following its common name. OBL - Obligate FACW - Facultative Wetland FAC - Facultative FACU - Facultative Upland UPL - Upland +/- - Higher/lower end of category NR - No review NA - No agreement NI - No investigation ANACARDIACEAE — Sumac Family Rhus lancea* African sumac UPL APIACEAE — Carrot Family Torilis arvensis* Field hedge parsley UPL APOCYNACEAE — Dogbane Family Nerium oleander* Oleander UPL Vinca major* Greater periwinkle UPL ASTERACEAE - Sunflower Family Baccharis pilularis Coyote brush UPL Carduus pycnocephalus * Italian thistle UPI, Helminthotheca echioides * Bristly ox -tongue FAC* Lactuca serriola* Prickly lettuce FAC Picris echioides* Bristly ox -tongue FAC* BRASSICACEAE — Mustard Family Brassica sp.* Mustard UPI, Hirschfeldia incana* Summer mustard UPL Raphanus sativus * Wild radish UPI, CHENOPODIACEAE — Goosefoot Family Chenopodium sp.* Chenopodium - CONVOLVULACEAE — Morning -Glory Family . Convolvulus. arvensis* Field bindweed UPI, CORNACEAE —Dogwood Family Cornus sericea ssp. sericea American dogwood FACW CUPRESSACEAE — Cypress Family Cupressus sp. Cypress - Cupressus sempervirens* Italian cypress NI CYPERACEAE — Sedge Family Cypertis eragrostis Tall flatsedge FACW FAGACEAE — Oak Family 43 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation nnr Ira, n1 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak UPL Quercus lobata Valley oak FAC* GERANIACEAE — Geranium Family Geranium dissectum* Wild geranium UPL AAMAMELIDACEAE — Liquidambarstyraciflua* American sweet gum UPL JUGLANDACEAE — Walnut Family Juglans regia* English walnut UPL LYTE RACEAE — Loosestrife Family Lythrum hyssopifolium * Hyssop loosestrife FACW MAGNOLIACEAE—1VIagnolia Family Magnolia grandiora* Southern magnolia - MALVACEAE — Mallow Family Malva neglecta* Dwarf mallow UPL MORACEAE — Mulberry Family Morus alba* Mulberry NI MYRTACEAE — Myrtle Family Lophostemon confertus* Brisbane box UPL ONAGRACEAE — Evening Primrose Family Epilobium ciliatum ssp. ciliatum Fringed willowherb FACW PINACEAE — Pine Family Pinus sp. * Pine _ PLATANACEAE — Sycamore Family Platanus racemosa Western sycamore FACW POACEAE - Grass Family Agrostis viridis* Bentgrass OBL Bromus hordeaceus * Soft chess FACU- Dactylis glomerata* Orchard grass FACU Hordeum marinum ssp. gussoneanum* Mediterranean barley FAC Hordeum murinum * Foxtail barley NI Paspalum dilatatum* Dallis grass FAC Phalaris californica Canary grass FAC Piptatherum miliaceum * Smilo grass UPL Polypogon monspeliensis * Rabbitsfoot grass FACW POLYGONACEAE — Buckwheat Family Rumex crispus * Curly dock FACW- ROSACEAE — Rose Family Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon UPL, Prunus sp. * Prunus UPL Rosa sp. Ornamental rose - Rubus discolor* Himalayan blackberry FACW* RUBIACEAE — Madder Family Galium aparine Goose grass FACU SALICACEAE — Willow Family Populus nigra var. Italica* Lombardy poplar UPL Salix laevigata Red willow UPL 44 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation Salix lasiandra ssp. lasiandra Salix lasiolepis SAPINDACEAE — Soapberry Family Cupaniopsis anacardioides* TAXODIACEAE — Bald Cypress Family Sequoia sempervirens TYPHACEAE — Cattail Family Typha latifolia VITACEAE — Grape Family Vitis californica * Introduced non-native species PN 1584-01 Pacific willow OBL Arroyo willow FACW Carrot wood UPL Coast redwood UPL Broadleaf cattail OBL California wild grape FACW QS Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation APPENDIXII: SELECTED PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE 11O1ry ... eam e -',� -_-on Creek. Photo taken 07 June 2010. :slid -reach of Barron Creek and adjacent upland area. Photo taken 21 October 2011. 46 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biological Evaluation Pv 15,4.1-01 LL 1pst; eam end of Barron Creek. Photo taken U4 August ' u l u. (Disregard date on photo.) 'Wetland pa.ch along southern fenceline and abu! ting Marron UreeS- Photo taken 21 October 2011. Al Live OakAssociates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhtivani Biological t valuation PV 1588-01 xuaeral and landscaped area immediately west of Bar. -on Creek. 4R Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Wadhwani Biolo,;ical Evaluation �T4T Op M� r O MrE5 OF P� Regulatory Division DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1455 MARKET STREET, 16T" FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94103-1398 Subject: File Number 2010-00442S Town of Los Altos Hills Public Works Department Attn: Mr. John Chau 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, California 94022 Dear Mr. Chau: 2Q This correspondence is in reference to your submittal of December 20, 2010, requesting an approved jurisdictional determination of the extent of navigable waters of the United States and waters of the United States occurring along 6241inear feet of Barron Creek located off of West Fremont Road in the Town of Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California. All proposed discharges of dredged or fill material occurring below the plane of ordinary high water in non -tidal waters of the United States; or below the high tide line in tidal waters of the United States; and within the lateral extent of wetlands adjacent to these waters, typically require Department of the Army authorization and the issuance of a permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972, as amended (33 U.S.C. § 1344 et seq.). Waters of the United States generally include the territorial seas; all traditional navigable waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; wetlands adjacent to traditional navigable waters; non -navigable tributaries of traditional navigable waters that are relatively permanent, where the tributaries typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally, and wetlands directly abutting such tributaries. Where a case -specific analysis determines the existence of a "significant nexus" effect with a traditional navigable water, waters of the United States may also include non -navigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent; wetlands adjacent to non -navigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent; wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting a relatively permanent non -navigable tributary; and certain ephemeral streams in the and West. All proposed structures and work, including excavation, dredging, and discharges of dredged or fill material, occurring below the plane of mean high water in tidal waters of the United States; in former diked baylands currently below mean high water; outside the limits of mean high water but affecting the navigable capacity of tidal waters; or below the plane of ordinary high water in non -tidal waters designated as navigable waters of the United States, typically require Department of the Army authorization and the issuance of a permit under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, as amended (33 U.S.C. § 403 et seq.). Navigable waters of the United States generally include all waters subject to the ebb and flow of -2 - the tide; and/or all waters presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for future use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. The enclosed delineation map entitled, "Extent of U.S. Army Corps of Eno veers Jurisdiction Pursuant to Section 404 of Clean Water Act, Barron Creek Los Altos Hills." date certified March 25, 2011, accurately depicts the extent and location of wetlands within the boundary area of the site that are subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' regulatory authority under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This approved jurisdictional determination is based on the current conditions of the site, as verified during a field investigation of February 22, 2011, and a review of other data included in your submittal. This approved jurisdictional determination will expire in five years from the date of this letter, unless new information or a change in field conditions warrants a revision to the delineation map prior to the expiration date. This approved jurisdictional determination is presumed to be consistent with the official interagency guidance of June 5, 2007, interpreting the Supreme Court decision, Rapanos v. United States, 126 S. Ct. 2208 (2006). You are advised that the approved jurisdictional determination may be appealed through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Administrative Appeal Process, as described in 33 C.F.R. Part 331 (65 Fed. Reg. 16,486; Mar. 28, 2000), and outlined in the enclosed flowchart and Notification of Administrative Appeal Options, Process, and Request for Appeal (NAO-RFA) Form. If you do not intend to accept the approved jurisdictional determination, you may elect to provide new information to this office for reconsideration of this decision. If you do not provide new information to this office, you may elect to submit a completed NAO-RFA Form to the Division Engineer to initiate the appeal process; the completed NAO-RFA Form must be submitted directly to the Appeal Review Officer at the address specified on the NAO-RFA Form. You will relinquish all rights to a review or an appeal, unless this office or the Division Engineer receives new information or a completed NAO-RFA Form within 60 days of the date on the NAO-RFA Form. If you intend to accept the approved jurisdictional determination, you do not need to take any further action associated with the Administrative Appeal Process. You may refer any questions on this matter to Paula Gill of my Regulatory staff by telephone at 415-503-6776 or by e-mail at Paula.C.Gill@usace.army.mil. All correspondence should be addressed to the Regulatory Division, South Branch, referencing the file number at the head of this letter. The San Francisco District is committed to improving service to our customers. My Regulatory staff seeks to achieve the goals of the Regulatory Program in an efficient and cooperative manner, while preserving and protecting our nation's aquatic resources. If you would like to provide comments on our Regulatory Program, please complete the Customer Service Survey Form available on our website: http://www.spn.usace.army.mii/regulatory/. Sincerely, i Jane M. Hick Chief, Regulatory Division Enclosures Copy (w/ encls): Live Oak Associates, Attn: Ms. Davinna Ohlson CA RWQCB, Oakland, CA Furnished (w/o encls): U.S. EPA, San Francisco, CA CA SWRCB, Sacramento, CA NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND REQUEST FOR APPEAL Applicant: Town of Los Altos Hills File No. 2010-00111 S Date s':�, ,, i Attached is: See Section below INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission) A PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission) B PERMIT DENIAL C X APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision. Additional information may be found at http://usace.arrny_mili inet/functions/cw;/cecwo/reg or Corps regulations'at 33 CFR Part 331. A:__INITIAL PROFFERED PF.RMTT: _You=y accept nr nhj-e.ct to thepenit _ • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the DISTRICT ENGINEER for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this Notice and return the Notice to the DISTRICT ENGINEER Your objections must be received by the DISTRICT ENGINEER within 60 days of the date of this Notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your NOTICE, the DISTRICT ENGINEER will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the DISTRICT ENGINEER will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below. B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the DISTRICT ENGINEER for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Enineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this NOTICE and sending the NOTICE to the DIVISION' ENGINEER. This Notice must be received by the DMSION ENGINEER within 60 days of the date of this Notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this Notice sending the Notice to the DIVISION ENGINEER. This Notice must be received by the DVISION ENGINEER within 60 days of the date of this Notice. D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information. • ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this Notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD. • APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this Notice and sending the Notice to the DIVISION ENGINEER. This Notice must be received by the DIVISION ENGINEER within 60 days of the date of this Notice. E: PRELI.MINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD. SECTION II = REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED-PERMIT ,k.: " REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to 11 an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record. POINTOF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may process you may contact: also contact: Cameron L. Johnson, Chief, South Branch, Regulatory Division Thomas J. Cavanaugh, Appeal Review Officer U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Pacific Division 1455 Market Street, 16'b Floor, Attn: CESPN-R-S 1455 Market Street, 20`' Floor, Attn: CESPD-PDS-O San Francisco, CA 94103-1398 San Francisco, CA 94103-1399 Tel. 415) 503-6773 FAX 415 503-6690 1 Tel. (415 503-6574 FAX 415 503-6646 RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations. Date: Telephone number: Signature of appellant or agent. emnnt Rd '• -� z^-� er r e� Extent of U.S. Arm Corps ------ —' L - Y 4 of Engineers Jurisdiction LU r • ` , r Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act .f U.S. Army Corps 5arron Creek Los Altos Hills of Engineers Santa Clare County. California It' s '�!; y ` '`�" i Sal' =a: Ciszn s - r"gwarcry Crvsion Wetland Tributary 0.12 acre F° - j-�, -;-. — — Study Area Boundary Re Number. 2010-004425 D=te. MaMt� 1 —�► x ti• �_�u`9� ;fit s . � t-•..- ,.� t ., � .:. � z;i - .,.,fir kr rip '4 m _ o ( A -now + r It £s mss` {moi 'END Wetland Tributary (5,230 Sq. Ft. / 0.12 ac.) Culvert 100 feet apprcx;mace Scam 1- - ap• CM aunav of 3o:z N Live Oak Associates, In:. Barron Creek Waters of the U.S. Date Projec, # Figure Al 10108'2010 � gry.0� _ LIVE OAK ASSOCIATES, INC. an Ecological Consulting Firm INVESTIGATION OF POTENTIAL WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES BARRON CREEK TOWN OF LOS ALTOS HILLS, CALIFORNIA Prepared by LIVE OAK ASSOCIATES, INC. Rick Hopkins, Ph.D., Principal and Senior Wildlife Ecologist Davinna Ohlson, M.S., Senior Project Manager and Plant/Wetland Ecologist Neal Kramer, M.S., Botanist Prepared for Town of Los Altos Hills Public Works Department Attn: John Chau 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 December 6. 2010 PN 143-01 San Jose: 6840 Via del Oro, Suite 220. San Jose, CA 95119 . Phone: (408) 224.8300. Fax: (408) 224-1411 Oakhurst: P.O. Box 2697.39930 Sierra Way, Suite B . Oakhurst, CA 93644 . Phone: (559) 642-4880. Fax: (559) 642-4883 Bakersfield: 8200 Stockdale Highway, M10-293. Bakersfield, CA 93311 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Live Oak Associates, Inc. surveyed 624 linear feet of Barron Creek located off of West Fremont Road in the Town of Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California, for potential waters of the United States, including areas meeting the technical criteria of jurisdictional wetlands. A site survey was conducted on August 4, 2010, for possible waters of the U.S., at which time vegetation, hydrology, and soil data were gathered at two sample locations. Barron Creek was delineated and mapped. Based on a strict interpretation of guidelines issued by the USACE and EPA following the Rapanos decision, it is our opinion that Barron Creek is a water of the U.S., as it is a relatively permanent water having a direct hydrologic connection to San Francisco Bay, a known water of the U.S. It is understood that only the USACE can ultimately determine if Barron Creek would be considered a water of the U.S. In the unlikely event that the USACE disclaims jurisdiction over the creek, it may still be considered jurisdictional by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the California Department of Fish and Game. Areas above the ordinary high water level and beyond the top of the creek bank failed to meet any of the regulatory definitions of waters of the United States. Upland habitats included ruderal grassland and riparian woodland. Live Oak Associates, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLEEXECUTIVESLTNffv ARY............................................................................................................. I OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................II 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 2.0 METHODS 1 ................................................. 2.1 AREAS MEETING THE TECHNICALCRITERIA OF JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS ................................. ................................... ........................ 5 2.2 TRADITIONAL NAVIG ............................ ABLE WATERS AND TRIBUTARY WATERS ................. 7 2.3 OTHER WATERS.......................................................................................................... 7 3.0 RESULTS ................... ..................................... 3.1 POTENTIAL WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES ................................................... 8 3.1.1 Tributary Waters......................................................................................................... 8 3.2 UPLAND AREAS ....................... 4.011 DISCUSSION ..................................................................................12 ................................. 4.1 BASIS FOR USACE JURISDICTION ............................................. 4.2 JURISDICTIONAL STA """""""""""""' 12 TUS OF ONSITE FEATURES ....................... .. 14 LITERATURE CITED ....................... .. ............................................................................ APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPHS OF .. 15 THE STUDY AREA ...................... APPENDIX B: WETLAND DATASHEETS................................ 16 ............................................... 19 APPENDIX C: VASCULAR PL .............................. ANTS OF THE STUDY AREA .............................................. 24 ii Live Oak Associates, Inc. 1.0 INTRODUCTION Live Oak Associates, Inc. (LOA), surveyed 624 linear feet of Barron Creek located off of West Fremont Road in the Town of Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California, for potential waters of the United States, including areas meeting the technical criteria of jurisdictional wetlands, on August 4, 2010 (Figure 1). The site is located in the Palo Alto 7.5" U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle in section 25 of township 6 south, range 3 west (Figure 2). The Department of the Army, acting through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), is authorized to issue permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). They may also regulate activities in or on navigable waters under the authority of Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Waters of the United States are defined in 33 CFR 328.3(a) as: 1. All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all water which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; 2. All interstate waters including interstate wetlands; 3. All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters: a. Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or b. From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or c. Which are used or could be used for industrial purpose by industries in interstate commerce; 4. All impoundments of water otherwise defined as waters of the United States under the definition; 5. Tributaries to waters identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section; 6. The territorial seas; 7. Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters which are themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this section. Live Oak Associates, Inc. = =!13PARK Site Location Ma LT L RD Q C - .p� QQ 4.r SUN C ` _ site -- gPiject f iy��r`cy _'Fre, 10,9t:_ 2 - POR I OLAr.:. VALLEY f C YA VY_FP 147 r.VE-` - aLQS 6 FJ.S . Z .... o m S, EVENS CREEK SLVD 3 miles 0 3 miles aooroximace scale VicinitY Map Regional Map l _ See Vicinity Map (left) t y .Opp Project location. '` . See ae Location, - '' i Map (abo") Sad Jose - - Live Oak Associates, Inc. Barron Creek Site/ Vicinity Map J Date Folect # Figure # 10/9/2010 1435-01 1 • ,J� t �.';,,�� , ��--" '�sther Y grk w `,,I �• i. .Y � ; J� , � . � \ `` _ _ Tau � j ti. 't_.,...� �t� • � / �� __ .... . i,' ,� ti •'�� r t�nnn tiflillrt ~ '._• I �" � � `�"�, .`1 L .'----�•• .- -:-- .. ' �� .x live" k • '*'1. �, �,�' `� �� ,•T\t \� � � �ti'V 1 � ,,,�"•E I . � _ .._ x'11 IL 1. t'O� �� I P oje t S1 e. r c • 111 ' Wb �,�� ,. i` ��il '''�"�- �.A►. � 1 � ,�� l }', ltttil+• 'I�risairn,t ( �� ` '�, F•r � t'��, 1, - ,,�j �• 1 '� � � j ,�'. _.__•__ %,;�,,��,, 'L� `�• ir1r, '..�,...`. �[�I�$ f: � ,,_�' ' .,. 1 1 � I O\ 1` t - ,�„�'.''�„ ( _ i:,li � a �'•'•` t\, \''� lb� � 4-...�_ ` ; ..' �� • ' •A w lei- 10 30' t �.• +tom. !''' ' 7 , 3 74 (�� f 11 ►� .1� f., • r,� Live Oak Associates, Inc. . "°" �`, i. ,✓'`` . • d�` �� •' b n<0 t 1 Barron Creek • Vl • .•� i ,. i' *. • tw.*i •� \'•� ♦ !� �i •I } �/ U.S.G.S. Quadrangle Froin uses 1/2 0 112 mile. Uate Piojecl # Figure # Palo,Allo 7.5' Quadrangle 1995 __ __ _ _____ Mountain View 7.5' Quadrangle 1994 approximate scale - 10/912010 1435-01 2 Examples of waters of the U.S. include drainage channels, or tributary waters, their impoundments, and wetlands (Wetland Training Institute, Inc. 1990). Tributary waters include incised channels that connect to other jurisdictional waters. Such channels may carry a permanent, intermittent, or ephemeral flow of water. Jurisdictional wetlands are those wetlands adjacent to other jurisdictional waters. Such wetlands are characterized by the nreaent-a of wetland hydrology (i.e., surface inundation or saturated soils), hydric soils (i.e., soils which have developed under the anaerobic conditions imposed by soil saturation), and hydrophytic vegetation (i.e., an association of plants adapted to saturated soils). Drainage channels and adjacent wetlands are within the jurisdiction of the USACE according to provisions of Section 404 of the CWA as recently interpreted in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. Corps of Engineers (SWANCC) and Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (referred together as the Rapanos decision). The filling, grading, or excavation of jurisdictional waters requires a CWA Section 404 permit. Even in those cases where the USACE has disclaimed jurisdiction over isolated drainage features on the basis of the SWANCC ruling and the Rapanos decision, two state agencies, the California Department of Fish and Game and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, may still regulate the placement of fill in such waters. 4 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 2.0 METHODS LOA wetland ecologists Davinna Ohlson and LOA botanist Neal Kramer surveyed the site for potential jurisdictional waters on August 4, 2010. The survey was conducted on foot in order to maximize visual coverage of the entire area. Potential waters of the U.S. were surveyed using a GPS unit with sub -meter accuracy. The surveys were consistent with guidelines found in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (USACE 2008), and Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Preliminary Wetland Delineations (USACE 2001). Color photographs were taken in various areas of the site (Appendix A). 2.1 AREAS MEETING THE TECHNICAL CRITERIA OF JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS Wetlands are defined as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas" (Environmental Laboratory 1987). The diagnostic environmental characteristics of wetlands include hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and a hydrology characterized by an aquic or peraquic moisture regime. Accordingly, LOA surveyed the site for wetland indicator plants, positive indicators of hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. Two sample locations were selected within the study area. Vegetation, soils, and hydrology information were collected at these sample locations to document site conditions; the data collected were entered on standard data sheets patterned after those used by the USACE (Appendix B). The dominant species observed within the plant community of each sample location were recorded. Plants observed at the sample location were identified using the Jepson Manual of Higher Plants of California (Hickman 1993) to the lowest taxonomic level necessary to obtain their wetland indicator status. The wetland indicator status of each species was obtained from the 1987 Wetland Plant List, California (Reed 1988). A list of vascular plant species observed on the site is provided in Appendix C. 5 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Wetland indicator species are designated according to their frequency of occurrence in wetlands: OBLIGATE (OBL) Probability to occur in wetland is >99% FACULTATIVE WETLAND (FACW) Probability to occur in wetland is >67 to 99% FACULTATIVE (FAC) Probability to occur in wetland is 33 to 67% FACULTATIVE UPLAND (FACU) Probability to occur in wetland is 1 to <33%. UPLAND (UPL) Probability to occur in wetland is <1% Hydrophytic vegetation is considered present when "inundation or soil saturation is either permanent or of sufficient frequency and duration to exert a controlling influence on the plant species present" (USACE 2008). The presence of hydrophytic vegetation is typically determined using the dominance test. This occurs when more than 50% of the dominant species across all vegetative strata (i.e., trees, shrubs, herbs, and woody vines) at a given location are composed of obligate, facultative wetland, and facultative plant species. On sites where the vegetation initially fails the dominance test but indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology are present, a plot -based prevalence index is calculated. The prevalence index is a weighted -average wetland indicator status of all plant species in the sampling plot; hydrophytic vegetation is considered present when the prevalence index is 3.0 or less. The presence of hydrophytic vegetation was determined using the dominance test for both sample locations in this evaluation. Each sample location was also examined for positive indicators of wetland hydrology and hydric soils. Evidence of wetland hydrology consists of primary indicators including, but not limited to, the presence of surface water, saturation, water marks in nonriverine systems, water -stained leaves, and a biotic crust. Secondary indicators of wetland hydrology include, but are not limited to, water marks in riverine systems, drainage patterns, and a dry season water table. Excavated soil horizons were examined for low chromas, -]eying, mottling, concretions, sulfidic odors, and other hydric soil indicators. 6 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 2.2 TRADITIONAL NAVIGABLE WATERS AND TRIBUTARY WATERS According to the Federal Register, 33 CFR Part 329, traditional navigable waters are those waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. In the absence of adjacent wetlands, the limit of jurisdiction in traditional navigable waters, rivers, streams, and their tributaries extends to the "ordinary high water" (OHW) mark. The OHW mark refers to "that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas." For the purposes of this report, traditional navigable waters were absent from the site, but potential tributary waters were present on the site in the form of Barron Creek. The creek was visually inspected for physical characteristics of the OHW mark in order to determine the extent of potential jurisdiction. 2.3 OTHER WATERS The term "other waters" is a general category found in 33 CFR, Part 328, Section 328.3(a)(3). This category can include tributary waters and wetlands, but these terms are defined separately in this section as well. For the purposes of this document, other waters were absent from the site. 7 Live OakAssociales, Inc. 3.0 RESULTS Barron Creek is located off of West Fremont Road, across from Donelson Place, in the Town of Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California. The site is bounded by West Fremont Road to the north, a residential estate to the east, a single-family residence to the south, and a field and single-family residences to the west. Topographically, the site is relatively level at approximately 215 ft. (66 m) National Geodetic Vertical Datum. The surrounding land use is primarily residential. Three soil types from two soil complexes, Urbanland-Cropley and Literr-Urbanland-Merbeth, were identified on the project site (Figure 3; NRCS 2010). Urban land soils are derived from disturbed and human -transported material. Cropley soils consist of alluvium derived from calcareous shale. Literr and Merbeth soils consist of old, eroded alluvium. None of these soils are considered hydric, although hydric inclusions may occur. Santa Clara County experiences a Mediterranean climate with warm, dry summers and cool, wet winters. The average annual daytime temperature in the general vicinity of the site is 69° F. Average annual precipitation in the general vicinity of the site is 15 inches, nearly all of which falls between November and April. Stormwater runoff infiltrates the soils of upland areas immediately adjacent to Barron creek, but when field capacity has been reached, gravitational water drains into the creek. 3.1 POTENTIAL WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES Barron Creek was mapped (Figure 4). Vegetation, soil, and hydrology data were gathered at two sample locations. 3.1.1 Tributary Waters Relativelv ermanent waters. A 624 -ft. reach of Barron Creek was mapped (sample point 1; Fig. 4). The creek has been channelized and straightened from its original alignment, and it enters and exits the site via culverts. Barron Creek is presumed to be a perennial watercourse, as it has been observed to convey water by LOA in December 2009 and in June and August 2010. Water 8 Live Oak Associates, Inc. n . W. Fremont Rd a sem., - � -� • - �. vim.'- _ - L y- 4* _ _ .. .�' *•. -1Z- ..E� W. _ - F �• AL ;tea eels,. Ar i� "*. ¢ y� ow 1 =. ` � _ a , Arc .y F ._A A- A' LA LEGEND 317 Urbanland-Cropley complex, 0 to 2% slopes u 313 Urban land-Cropley complex, 2 to 9% slopes - Live Oak Associates; Inc. 327 Literr-Urbanland-Merbeth complex, 9 to 15% slopes Barron Creek 10 0' 0 10 0 feet soils Source: ap prox im ate sc ale Date Project # Figure # U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service 5 10ro812010 1435-01 s W. Fremont Rd — OILR y •%� _ - ..1 � is — t F � A# 54— Live Oak Associates, Inc. B 11 arron Creek Waters of the U.S. Gate Project # Figure # 10/0812010 1 1435-01 a sources include natural runoff upstream of the site. Additionally, several small pipes convey runoff from adjacent properties into the creek at the upstream end of the site. Because the creek conveys water perennially or, at the very least, on a seasonal basis, this tributary would be considered a relatively permanent water. Barron Creek is represented as a USGS blue line and is characterized as having a defined bed and bank. This creek is hydrologically connected to known waters of the U.S., as it flows into San Francisco Bay. Overstory vegetation was dominated by arroyo willows (Salix lasiolepis; FACW) and American dogwood (Cornus sericea; FACW). Herbaceous areas within the creek bed were dominated by fringed willowherb (Epilobium ciliatum; FACW), bristly ox -tongue (Picris echioides; FAC*), and tall flatsedge (Cyperus eragrostis; FACW). The channel bed consists of sandy and gravelly sedimentation over a rock layer and is considered to be a problematic hydric soil. Therefore, this reach of Barron Creek met the technical criteria for jurisdicational wetlands. The creek's average width varied between 8 ft. and 11 ft. The total area of the reach of Barron Creek occurring onsite and below OHW is 0.12 acre (5,230 sq. ft.). 3.2 UPLAND AREAS The remainder of the site failed to meet any of the regulatory definitions of waters of the United States (sample point 2). Upland habitats include ruderal grassland and riparian woodland just beyond the top of the banks of Barron Creek. Vegetation dominating the upland areas included western sycamore (Platanus racemosa; FACW), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia; UPL), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus; UPL), and bristly ox -tongue. Indicators of hydric soils and wetland hydrology were absent. Therefore, these areas failed to meet the criteria for jurisdictional wetlands. 11 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 4.0 DISCUSSION 4.1 BASIS FOR USACE JURISDICTION In January 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, also known as the SWANCC decision, that "non -navigable, isolated, intrastate" waters could not be claimed as jurisdictional by the USACE on the basis of their use by migratory birds (Guzy 2001). According to a memorandum prepared by Gary S. Guzy, General Counsel for the Environmental Protection Agency, and Robert M. Andersen, Chief Counsel for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (undated), the SWANCC decision limited federal jurisdiction to the following waters (from 33 C.F.R. § 328.3(a)): 1. All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all water which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; 2. All interstate waters including interstate wetlands; 3. All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters: a. Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or b. From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or c. Which are used or could be used for industrial purpose by industries in interstate commerce; 4. All impoundments of water otherwise defined as waters of the United States under the definition; 5. Tributaries to waters identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section; 6. The territorial seas; 7. Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters which are themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this section. Although the Court did not specifically define the term "isolated," it upheld the jurisdictional status of "adjacent" wetlands and other waters, which are defined as "bordering, contiguous, or neighboring" other jurisdictional waters. Therefore, an "isolated wetland" was implicitly defined as "wetlands that are not bordering, contiguous, or neighboring" other jurisdictional waters. 12 Live Oak Associates, Inc. This definition does not, however, address the degree of proximity necessary to establish that a wetland or other water is "adjacent" to a known jurisdictional water. As established by the Supreme Court in the United States v. Riverside Bayview Homes, Inc. in 1985, `wetlands separated from other waters by man-made dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes, and the like are `adjacent wetlands"' (Guzy 2001). In June 2006, these definitions were further clarified by the U.S Supreme Court decisions Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (referred together as the Rapanos decision), which impose a "significant nexus" test for federal jurisdiction over wetlands. In June 2007, the USACE and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established guidelines for applying the significant nexus standard. This standard includes 1) a case-by-case analysis of the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary or adjacent wetland to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of downstream navigable waters and 2) consideration of hydrologic and ecologic factors (USACE and EPA 2007a). The U.S. Supreme Court's Rapanos decision further clarifies the language of the Act, restricting the extent of the agencies' Clean Water Act jurisdiction to 1. Waters that are traditionally navigable; 2. Wetlands immediately adjacent to such waters; 3. Non -navigable tributaries of traditionally navigable waters that are relatively permanent, where the tributaries typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically three months); and 4. Wetlands that directly abut such tributaries. Relatively permanent, non -navigable tributaries and wetlands adjacent to—including those that do not directly abut—such waters will also be subject to a fact -specific analysis in order for the USACE to determine if such waters have a significant nexus to a traditional navigable water. Swales, erosional features, and ditches excavated in and draining only uplands and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water typically will not be subject to agency jurisdiction (USACE and EPA 2007a). 13 Live Oak Associates, Inc. 4.2 JURISDICTIONAL STATUS OF ONSITE FEATURES Barron Creek is believed to be a water of the U.S. because it is a USGS blue line feature with seasonal or perennial flows that has a direct hydrologic connection to San Francisco Bay, a known water of the U.S. While Barron Creek appears to be a water of the U.S., the USACE has the sole authority to determine the jurisdictional status of waters on any given project site. In the unlikely event that the USACE disclaims jurisdiction over Barron Creek, the creek may still be subject to regulation by the RWQCB on the basis of provisions contained in the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Act and the State Water Code and by the CDFG on the basis of provisions contained in the State Fish and Game Code. Therefore, any project activities resulting in the placement of fill within delineated features considered jurisdictional by the RWQCB and/or CDFG would likely require a Section 401 Certification/Waiver and Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements from the RWQCB and a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFG. 14 Live Oak .associates, Inc. LITERATURE CITED Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Department of the Army. Washington D.C. 100 pp. Guzy, GaryS. 2001. Memorandum: Supreme Court Ruling Concerning CWA Jurisdiction over Isolated Waters. January 19. Hickman, James C. 1993. The Jepson Manual, Higher Plants of California. University of California Press Berkeley, California. Natural Resource Conservation Service. 2010. Soil survey of Contra Costa County, California, USDA. http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Reed, Porter B. 1988. 1987 Wetland plant list, California. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 37pp. USACE. 2001. Minimum standards for acceptance of preliminary wetland delineations. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Branch. November 30. _. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0). Engineer Research and Development Center. USACE and EPA. 2007a. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington, D.C. _. 2007b. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington, D.C. Wetland Training Institute, Inc. 1990. Federal wetland regulation reference manual. B.N. Goode and R.J. Pierce (eds.) WTI 90-1. 281pp. 15 Live Oak Associates, Inc. APPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE STUDY AREA 16 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Downstream; end of Barron Creek. Photo taken 07 June 2010. mia-reach of tsarron Creek and adjacent upland area. Photo taken 04 August 2010. (Disregard date on photo.) 17 Live Oak Associates, Inc. rte•=��__ —Au u• Ua►lu►, ,.rceK. rnoto tai:en 04 August 2010. (Disregard date on photo.) 18 Lire Oak .=Associates, Inc. APPENDIX B: WETLAND DATASHEETS 19 Live Oak Associates, Inc. WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Arid West Region ProjecUSite: Barron Creek City/County: Los Altos Hills Santa Clara County Sampling Date: 4 August 2010 Applicant/Owner. Town of Los Altos Hills State: CA Sampling Point: 1 Investigator(s): Davinna Ohlson Neal Kramer Section, Township, Range: Section 25. township 6 south range 3 west Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Channelized creek Local relief (concave, convex, none): Flat Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): C Lat: 37° 22.930' Long: 122° 08.166 Datum: NAD 83 Soil Map Unit Name: Urban land-Croplev complex. 2 to 9% slopes NWI classification: None (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes x No Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes x No Are Vegetation Soil x or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes x No Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No I within a Wetland? Yes x No All three criteria were met. See "Soil" section for discussion of problematic soils. Sample point was taken in the Barron Creek channel bed. VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: _ o /° CC 1v« vuminant maicator Dominance Test worksheet: over S ecies? Status 1. Salix lasJolepis Number of Dominant Species 45 Y 2. Salix babvlonica FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 10 N FACW- 3. Vids califomicus Total Number of Dominant 4. 1 N FACW Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 56 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B) 1. Comus sencea <1 FACW 2. 3. 4. 5. <1 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: Total % Cover of.• Multiply by- OBL species 1. cilia tu 7 FACW species x2=— 2=FAC FAC species _Epilobium 18 Y FACW 2. Picris echibides 15 Y FAC' 3. Cyperus eraarostis 12 Y FACW 4. Paspa/um dilitatum 5 N FAC 5. Rumex crisbus 3 N FACW- 6. Tvoha so. 3 N OBL 7. Agrostis viridus 1 N OBL 8. Carduus pvcnocephalus <1 N UPL Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 58 = Total Cover 1. 2. rrevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of.• Multiply by- OBL species x 1 = FACW species x2=— 2=FAC FAC species x3= FACU species x 4 = UPL species X5= Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: x Dominance Test is >50% _ Prevalence Index is _<3.0' _ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 3 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Present? Yes x No Remarks: Dominance test was passed. Criterion has been met. Willows were planted within the last ten years. US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West —Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks 0-6 5Y 2.5/1 100 - - Sandy Sedimentation overlays rock laver_ 'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': _ Histosol (Al) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C) _ Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Stripped Matrix (S6) _ 2 cm Muck (Al 0) (LRR B) _ Black Histic (A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) _ Reduced Vertic (F18) _ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Red Parent Material (TF2) _ Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) x Other (Explain in Remarks) _ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ _ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Redox Depressions (F8) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Vernal Pools (F9) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) wetland hydrology must be present. Restrictive Layer (if present): Field Observations: Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No Remarks: The channel is mostly lined with rocks and gravel. Sedimentation overlaying the rocks consists primarily of sand. Sedimentation is up to 10" deep. Gravel lines the bed at the upstream end of the channel. Due to the seasonal to perennial water source, the hydric soil criterion is assumed to be met. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) x Surface Water (Al) _ Salt Crust (B11) _ Water Marks (131) (Riverine) _ High Water Table (A2) _ Biotic Crust (B12) _ Sediment Deposits (62) (Riverine) _ Saturation (A3) _ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) x Drift Deposits (133) (Riverine) _ Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _ Drainage Patterns (1310) _ Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) _ Drift Deposits (133) (Nonriverine) _ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (136) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Other (Explain in Remarks) _ FAC -Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes x No Depth (inches): 2 Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: The channel has a small amount of flow. Debris buildup is present around the willows in the channel bed. Drift marks are present along the banks. The current source of water is from runoff via at least two culverts from neighboring properties. US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Arid West Region Project/Site: Barron Creek City/County: _Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County Sampling Date: 4 August 2010 Applicant/Owner.. Town of Los Altos Hills State: CA Sampling Point: 2 Investigator(s): Davinna Ohlson, Neal Kramer Section, Township, Range: Section 25. township 6 south range 3 west Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Channelized creek Local relief (concave, convex, none): Flat Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): C Lat: 37' 22.925' Long: 122'08.162' Datum: NAD 83 Soil Map Unit Name: Urban land-Cropley complex 2 to 9% slopes NWI classification: None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site Typical for this time of year? Yes x No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes x No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No x Hydric Soil Present? Yes No x Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x within a Wetland? Yes No None of the three criteria were met. Sample point was taken in upland habitat adjacent to the channel. VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. apsowte Uominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status 1. Platanus racemosa 1 Y FACW 2. 3. 4. 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plat size: ) Total Cover 1. Heteromeles arbutifolia 5 Y UPL 2. 3. 4. 5. 5 = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: _ ) 1. Carduus oycnocephalus 50 Y , UPL 2. Picris echioides 50 Y FAC' 3. _Galium apadne 3 N FACU 4. Bromus diandrris 2 N UPL 5. Piofatherum milia <1 N UPL 6. 7. 8. Number of Dominant Species. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply bw OBL species x 1 = FACW species x2— 2=FAC FAC species X3= FACU species x4= UPL species x5= Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index, = B/A _ Dominance Test is >5o% _ Prevalence Index is 53.0' _ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in. Remarks or on a separate sheet) _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 106 =Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum. (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 1' be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 2. = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 % Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Present? Yes No x Criterion has not been met. US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West — Version 2.0 SOIL Samnlinn Pninf- Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) -(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc' Texture Remarks 0-12 2.5Y 3/2 100 - Sandy loam 'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': _ Histosol (Al) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C) Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Stripped Matrix (S6) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) _ Black Histic (A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) _ Reduced Vertic (F18) _ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Red Parent Material (TF2) _ Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) FAC -Neutral Test (D5) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) _ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Redox Depressions (F8) x Depth (inches): Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ Vernal Pools (F9) 'indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) wetland hydrology must be present. Restrictive Layer (if present): x Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x Type: Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Hydric Soil Present? Yes No x Remarks: The criterion has not been met. No redox concentrations were.observed. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) _ Surface Water (Al) _ Salt Crust (B11) _ Water Marks (131) (Riverine) _ High Water Table (A2) _ Biotic Crust (B12) _ Sediment Deposits (62) (Riverine) _ Saturation (A3) _ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) _ Drift Deposits (133) (Riverine) Water Marks (131) (Nonriverine) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) _ Drainage Patterns (1310) Sediment Deposits (132) (Nonriverine) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) _ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Drift Deposits (133) (Nonriverine) _ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8) _ Surface Soil Cracks (136) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ Shallow Aquitard (D3) _ Water -Stained Leaves (89) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ FAC -Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No x Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No x Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No x Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No hydrology indicators were present. The criterion has not been met. US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West —Version 2.0 APPENDIX C: VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE STUDY AREA The plants species listed below were observed on the Barron Creek site during field surveys conducted by Live Oak Associates in August 2010. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wetland indicator status of each plant has been shown following its common name. OBL - Obligate FACW - Facultative Wetland FAC - Facultative FACU - Facultative Upland UPL - Upland +/- - Higher/lower, end of category NR - No review NA - No agreement NI - No investigation ANACARDIACEAE — Sumac Family Rhus lancea* African sumac UPI, APOCYNACEAE — Dogbane Family Vinca major* ASTERACEAE - Sunflower Family Greater periwinkle UPL Carduus pycnocephalus * Italian thistle UPI, Helminthotheca echioides* Bristly ox -tongue FAC* Lactuca serriola * Prickly lettuce FAC CORNACEAE — Dogwood Family Cornus sericea ssp. sericea American dogwood FACW CUPRESSACEAE — Cypress Family Cupressus sempervirens* Italian cypress NI CYPERACEAE — Sedge Family Cyperus eragrostis HAMAMFLIDACEAE — Tall flatsedge FACW Liquidambar styraciva* American sweet gum UPL LYTHRACEAE — Loosestrife Family Lythrum hyssopifolium* Hyssop loosestrife FACW MAGNOLIACEAE — Magnolia Family Magnolia grandiora* Southern magnolia - MYRTACEAE — Myrtle Family Lophostemon confertus* Brisbane box UPL ONAGRACEAE — Evening Primrose Family Epilobium ciliatum ssp. ciliatum Fringed willowherb FACW PLATANACEAE — Sycamore Family Platanus racemosa Western sycamore FACW POACEAE - Grass Family Agrostis viridis* Bentgrass OBL Paspalum dilatatum* Dallis grass FAC 24 Live Oak Associates, Inc. Piptatherum miliaceum * Smilo grass UPL Polypogon monspeliensis* Rabbitsfoot grass FACW POLYGONACEAE — Buckwheat Family Rumex crispus* Curly dock FACW- SALICACEAE — Willow Family Populus nigra var. Italica* Lombardy poplar UPL Salix laevigata Red willow UPL Salix lasiandra ssp. lasiandra Pacific willow OBL Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow FACW SAPINDACEAE — Soapberry Family Cupaniopsis anacardioides* Carrot wood UPL TAXODIACEAE — Bald Cypress Family Sequoia sempervirens Coast redwood UPL TYPHACEAE — Cattail Family Typha latifolia Broadleaf cattail OBL VITACEAE — Grape Family Vitis californica California wild grape FACW * Introduced non-native species 25 Live OakAssociates, Inc. H rr� ngrrs os� Regulatory Division DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1455 MARKET STREET, 18TH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94103-1398 Subject: File Number 2010-00442S Town of Los Altos Hills Public Works Department Attn: Mr. John Chau. 26379 Fremont Road . Los Altos Hills, California 94022 Dear Mr. Chau; This coiTespondence is in reference to your submittal of December 20, 2010, requesting an approved jurisdictional determination of the extent of navigable waters of the:United States and waters of the United States occurring along 624 linear feet of Barron Creek located off of West Fremont Road in the Town of Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California_ All proposeddischarges of dredged or fill material. occurring.below the. plane of ordinary high water in'non-tidal wateis. of the United States; or below the.high; tide line in tidal waters of the United States; and within the lateral extent. of wetlands adjacent to these waters, typically require Depaitment of theArmy authorization.and the issuance of a permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Ac g t of 1972, as amended (33 U.S.C. § 1344 et seq.)., Waters:.of,the United.. States eneralIy include the ternforial seas; all traditional navigable waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; wetlands adjacent to.traditional navigable waters; non -navigable tributaries of traditional navigable waters that are relatively permanent, where the tributaries typically flow.year.-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally; and wetlands,,directly abutting such tributaries: Where a case -specific analysis determines the existence of a "significant nexus' effect with a traditional navigable water, waters of the United States may also include non -navigable tributaries that are not relatively permanent; wetlands adjacent to non -navigable tributaries.that are not relatively permanent; wetlands adjacent to but not. directly abutting a relatively permanent non -navigable tributary; and certain ephemeral streams in- the and West., All proposed structures and work; including excavation, dredging, and discharges of dredged or fill material, occurring below the plane ofinean high water in tidal waters of the United States; in former diked baylands currently below mean high water; outside the limits of mean high water but affecting the navigable capacity of tidal waters; or below the plane of ordinary high water in non -tidal waters designated as navigable waters of the United States, typically require Department of the Army authorization and the issuance of a permit under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, as amended (33 U.S.C. § 403 et seg.)" Navigable waters of the United States generally include all waters subject to the ebb and flow of -2 - the tide; and/or all waters presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for future use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. The enclosed delineation map entitled, "Extent of U.S Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdiction Pursuant to Section 404 of Clean Water Act, Barron CreehLosAltos Hills." date certified March 25, 2011, accurately depicts the extent and location of wetlands within the boundary area of the site that are subject to U.S_ Army Corps of Engineers' regulatory authority under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This approved ,jurisdictional determination is based on the current conditions of the site, as verified during a field investigation of February 22, 2011, and a review of other data included in your submittal. This approved jurisdictional determination will expire in five years from the date of this letter, unless new information or a change in field conditions warrants a revision to the delineationmap prior to the expiration date. This approved jurisdictional determination is presumed to be consistent with the official interagency guidance of June 5, 2007, interpreting the Supreme Court decision, Rapanos v. United States, 126 S. Ct. 2208 (2006), You are advised that the approved jurisdictional determination may be appealed through the U.S.. Army Corps of Engineers' Administrative Appeal Process, as described in 33 C.F.R. Part 331 (65 Fed. Reg. 16,486; Mar. 28, 2000), and outlined in the enclosed flowchart and Notification of Administrative Appeal Options, Process, and Request. for Appeal (NAO-RFA) Form. If you do not intend to accept the approved jurisdictional determination, you may elect to provide new information to this office for reconsideration of this decision. If you do not provide new information to this office, you may elect to submit a completed NAO-RFA Form to the Division Engineer to initiate the appeal process; the completed NAO-RFA Form must be submitted directly to the Appeal Review Officer at the address specified on the NAO-RFA Form. You will relinquish all rights to a review or an appeal, unless this office or the Division Engineer receives new information or a completed NAO-RFA Form within 60 days of the date on the NAO-RFA Form. If you intend to accept the approved jurisdictional determination, you do not need to take any further action associated with the Administrative Appeal Process. You may refer any questions on this matter to Paula Gill of my Regulatory staff by telephone at 415-503-6776 or by e-mail at Paula.C.Gill@usace.army.mil. All correspondence should be addressed to the Regulatory Division, South Branch, referencing the file number at the head of this letter. -3 - The San Francisco District is committed to. improving service to our customers. My Regulatory staff seeks to achieve the -goals of the Regulatory Program in an efficient and cooperative manner, while preserving and protecting our nation's aquatic resources. If you would like to provide comments on our, Regulatory Program., please compleie'the Customer Service Survey Form available on our website: httpJ%www.spn.usace.army.mil/regulatory/_ Sincerely, Jane M. Hicko_ Chief, Regulatory Division Enclosures Copy (w/ encls): Live Oak Associates, Attn: Ms. Davinna OhIson CA RWQCB, Oakland, CA Furnished (w/o encls): U.S_ EPA, San Francisco, CA CA SWRCB, Sacramento, CA .,...._...s:c:-..:.....-^.i::.:...: .Y ..tom' _ _..::..:s.;.'i'.� _�>='i`t'c."�r=r - - .....__..... J� :-- A'TION:QE.ADNIIIVISI'ItATTUE:API:I1Ai��4. TFORAPPEAR Applicant: Town of Los Altos Hills File No. 20 10-00111 S Date: sna/i i Attached is: See Section below INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission) A PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission) B PERMIT DENIAL C X APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E SECTION :I: le Tl .. following:;identif es: your .rights and: options iegaiding an;adniinistrative appeal `of the :above. decision.':: Additional information may -be found at httmh usace army mictions/cw/cecc,: eg Corps regulat"io"'ns's at 33 CFR Part 3 A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit_ • ACCEPT: If'you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the DISTRICT ENGINEER for final authorization. Ifyou received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your wort: is authorized Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • OBJECT: if you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of' certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this Notice and return the Notice to the DISTRICT ENGINEER. Your objections must be received by the DISTRICT ENGINEER within 60 days of the date of this Notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your NOTICE, the DISTRICT ENGINEER will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the DISTRICT ENGINEER will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below. B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the DISTRICT ENGINEER for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terns and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section Il of this NOTICE and sending the NOTICE• to the DIVISION ENGINEER. This Notice must be received by the DIVISION ENGINEER within 60 days of the date ofthis Notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of this Notice sending the Notice to the DIVISION ENGINEER. This Notice must be received by the DVISION ENGINEER within 60 days of the date ofthis Notice D: APPROVED-.IURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may acceptor appeal the approved JD or provide new information, • ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this Notice, means that you accept. the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD • APPEAL.: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved ID under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section li of this Notice and sending the Notice to the DIVISION ENGINEER, This Notice must be received by the DIVISION ENGINEER within 60 days of the date of this Notice. E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD, SECTION Il :=-REQUEST FOR -AP-PEAI:6r'OBJECTIONS -TO AN -INITIAL."MOFFERED :P .REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS:. (Describe your reasons for appealing g the decision or your ob jections to an .initial proffered permit in clear concise "statements. You may attach addition -al infornation to this; fio -to clarifywhere your reasons ons , rm or objections are addressed in the administrative record.) 3.131TIONAL INFORMATION: The. appeal is limited to a review of the administTative record the i ' - 'Corps memorandum for th,e6rd'oftlie appeal conference 6rmde n,and any.suppIenettal information that thereview Iofficer has d�iermned is-needed,totrfythe adimsratw-record:l ant nor the Corps inioqna on or analyses to the record However, Wmay proVil&additi nal infib -th 0 rmation4dclafifV 6�4&kiofi)af information If yqdhav6, pro6ess; , you Cameron L: U.S Army 1455 Ma'rkie -San -'Prancisc Tel. 4TS) 5( RIGHT. OF 1 consultants',, notice of any South lk6guflat ,Chief, S6u Branch; h Regulator Engineers, S6,'F ci �- Dlsi�' jsco� 1 01 16`h Floor Aufi'-',, ", CES FN -R -S .M' 4M34398 RAX (4l'56'503T1.6�� 690 Youf:signatu-t.,e below ict ggt;ont*.6Tthe projeiit srt estigaq6n, and will have the ovDc of AFbeffint or If yo6-onlyh alsoconiac; homas-i. CaviiiiauizE.) I 455.,Mar cet Stri Sqn,Francisco,,,.0 tof entry' '10 Corps.6f Eiig frig the -course of the app e ty to participate in all site I Date: Telephone number: ` Fh KJhy� nF " .-_ � ,;e '��` _°•�. } � w ',yam. '� � '� 5- db R7 b � --m-N. . ws �4 Y'E ,c •N r t �r �.` F S^ ` Fh KJhy� nF " .-_ � ,;e '��` _°•�. } � w ',yam. '� � '� 5- db R7 b Attachment 3 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE BARRON CREEK CHANNEL FLOOD CONTROL AND REALIGNMENT PROJECT LANDS OF WADHWANI, RED ORCHID, BLUE ORCHID AND PEFLEY (APN'S 175-35-036,175-35-014,175-35-002, 175-35-028) FILE #163-11, 234 -11,239 -11 -SD -IS -ND -VAR PLANNING 1. No other modifications to the approved plans are allowed except as otherwise first reviewed and approved by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission, depending on the scope of the changes. 2. These Site Development permits shall be valid for two years from the final approval date. All required permits must be obtained within that two year period and work must be commenced. 3. The Heritage Oak tree shown on sheet 3 of 25 to be removed for the construction of a new driveway on the Red Orchid property shall not be removed. The driveway shall be redesigned to preserve this tree to the satisfaction of the Planning. and Engineering Department. 4. 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. 5. Prior to beginning any grading or construction .operations; all, significant trees shall be fenced with chain link type material at the 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 drip lines. All large and heritage oak trees shall be retained to the greatest extent feasible. 6. No access shall be allowed from 26238 Fremont Road along the western property line. A non access strip deed restriction shall be recorded against the property. The form of the deed restriction shall be subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney and City Engineer prior to final inspection. Lands of Wadhwani, Red Orchid, Blue Orchid and Pefley Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 4 7. 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 project. 8. 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: AT&T Telephone Company, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Comcast Cable Television, and California Water Service Company. The dedications shall all be completed in conjunction with the Site Development Permit, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 9. Trees and other structures (i.e., birdhouses) planned for removal shall be removed during the non -breeding season (September 1 through January 31). If it is not possible to avoid tree removal during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre -disturbance survey for tree - nesting raptors and migratory birds as described in Biologic Resource Measure 1. 10. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre -construction survey of the bat boxes for bats within 30 days prior to construction, if construction is to take place between March 1 through August 31. If active maternity roosts are detected during the survey, then a construction -free buffer shall be established around all active roosts as further described in Biologic Recourse Measure 2. 11. Prior to construction the applicant. shall place construction fencing around the aquatic features or riparian areas to be preserved to ensure that construction activities do not inadvertently impact these areas. 12. Any proposed future lighting on the property (e.g., footpath lighting) shall be designed to minimize light and glare impacts to the riparian corridor. To the maximum extent practicable, light sources shall not be visible from riparian areas and shall not illuminate riparian areas or cause glare on the opposite side of the channel (e.g., to neighboring properties). 13. The proposed fence shall be set back in a manner that accommodates the intended function and value of the channel revegetation plan. This includes a minimum setback of 15 ft. from the center of any planted riparian trees or 15 ft. from the top of bank of the realigned channel, whichever is greater. Lands of Wadhwani, Red Orchid, Blue Orchid and Pefley Conditions of Approval Page 3 of 4 14. Replacement of all willows removed from anywhere below the top of bank along the existing channel alignment shall be replaced at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Replacement of all other native riparian trees (i.e., riparian trees occurring beyond the top of -bank) shall be replaced at a minimum 2:1 replacement -to -removal ratio and shall be replaced with like species. All trees shall be replaced prior to final inspection. 15. Reseeding or replanting of riparian or wetland vegetation (i.e., a combination of trees; shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation) along the channel benches and banks shall be implemented prior to final inspection. ENGINEERING 16: The Engineer of Record `shall observe the construction of the Barron Creek .Channel Improvements and state that all improvements have been installed and constructed per the approved plans:. A stamped and signed letter shall be prepared and submitted to the Town prior to final inspection. 17. Any, and all, changes to the approved improvement plans shall be submitted as revisions from the project engineer and shall first be approved by the Town Engineering -Department. No grading shall take place during the grading moratorium (October 15 to April 15). 18. All public utility services for 26238 & 26240 Fremont Road shall be placed underground prior to final inspection. A copy of recorded easements shall be provided to Town prior to start work 19. A recorded copy of an irrevocable private driveway easement over 26238 Fremont Road for the benefit of 26170 West Fremont Road shall be provided to Town prior to issuance of the grading permit. The easement language shall be provided to Town for review and approval as to form by the City Attorney and the City Engineer prior to recording. 20. The property owner shall provide a copy of required permits from outside agencies prior to start work. 2.1. The property owner shall provide an approved conditional Letter of Map Revision from FEMA prior to start work. 22. Two copies of a grading and construction operation plan shall be submitted by the property owner for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Director prior to start work The grading/construction operation plan shall address truck traffic issues regarding dust, noise, and vehicular and pedestrian traffic Lands of Wadhwani, Red Orchid, Blue Orchid and Pefley Conditions of Approval Page 4 of 4 safety on Fremont Road and common driveway, storage of construction materials, placement of sanitary facilities, parking for construction vehicles, clean-up area, and parking for construction personnel. A debris box (trash dumpster) shall be placed on site for collection of construction debris. Arrangements must be made with the Green Waste Recovery, Inc. for the debris box, since they have a franchise with the Town and no other hauler is allowed within the Town limits. 23. The property owner shall inform the Town of any damage and shall repair any damage caused by the construction of the project to pathways, private driveways, and public and private roadways, prior to final inspection and shall provide the Town with photographs of the existing conditions of the roadways, private driveway, and pathways prior to start work. 24. The property owner shall dedicate a minimum 27' wide storm drain casement to the Town. 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 start work. 25. The storm drain maintenance agreement shall be signed and notarized by the property owner and returned to the Town prior to start work. 26. An encroachment permit shall be required by the Public Works Department for the proposed sanitary sewer laterals for 26238 & 26240 Fremont Road and channel work prior to start work. Attac anent 4 RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF A VARIANCE FOR PATH AND BRIDGE ENCROACHMENTS WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINE SETBACKS LANDS OF WADHWANI, RED ORCHID AND BLUE ORCHID 26170, 26238, 26240 W. FREMONT ROAD 1. Because of exceptional and extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the provisions of this Title is found to deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification; The strict application of the Zoning Code does not preclude the applicant from reducing the size of the paths to four feet to comply with the Town's setback requirements. No exceptional or extraordinary circumstances exist on this property. 2. Upon the granting of the variance, the intent and purpose of the applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance will still be served and the recipient of the variance will not be granted special privileges not enjoyed by other surrounding property owners. The intent of the setback requirements is to provide an undeveloped space between neighbors for noise, privacy, and aesthetic purposes. The granting of a Variance for this project could be a grant of special privilege and create a new precedent for allowing paving greater than four feet within the setbacks. 3. The granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property, improvements or uses within the immediate vicinity and within the same zoning district. The granting of a variance will conflict with the general purposes and intent of the Zoning Code to maintain adequate landscaping and open space between properties and to preserve the Town's rural appearance. 4. The variance will not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the Zoning District regulations governing the parcel of property. Paths and bridges limited to 4' in width are authorized uses in the R -A zoning district. Attachment 5 L cE FoRwARD 121 Spear Street ATTORNEYS AT LAW • FOUNDED 1873 Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94105 LucE, FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP 415.356.4600 www.luce.com STEVE ATKINSON, PARTNER DIREcrDIAL NUMBER 415.356.4617 DIRECT FAx NUMBER 415.356.3886. EMAIL ADDRESS satkinsonouce.com February 23, 2012 39684-1 VIA R -MAIL Cynthia Richardson Consulting Planner Town of Los Altos Hills 26379 Fremont Road Los Altos Hill, CA 94022 Re: Wadhwani — Barron Creek Project; Proposed Variance Findings Dear Cynthia: I have revised the proposed variance findings to address the questions you sent to me the other day. These revised findings follow: Wadhwani/Barron Creek Channel Proiect — Variance Findings for Proposed Garden Crossing Bridges and Associated Walkways Background In connection with the inter -related Site Development Permits for re -aligning Barron Creek on portions of -Parcel 175 -35 -002 -("Red Orchid"), 175-35-014 (`Blue Orchid") and' 175-35436 ('Main Parcel'; the Applicant is proposing to construct four bridges over the proposed realigned channel of Barron Creek. Starting from the north, closest to Fremont Road, the Driveway Bridge is part of a common driveway with the adjacent Red Orchid property. The Driveway- 'is intended to provide a second means of ingress to the Main Parcel, while also providing the Red Orchid Parcel a direct driveway access to Fremont Road. The Red Orchid Parcel will grant an easement to the Main Parcel permitting the Main Parcel ,rights to cross the Red Orchid Parcel to Fremont Road. However, the Red Orchid Parcel does not need and will not be granted access.across the Main Parcel. Although this first bridge and associated driveway are within the property line setbacksof the Main Parcel and Red Orchid, they are permitted by Town Code as part of a common driveway. 301314520.1. SAN DIEGO . SAN FRANcISco . LOS ANGELES CARMEL VALLEY/DEL MAR . .ORANGE COUNTY . RANCHO SANTA FE LucE FoRwARD ATTORNEYS AT LAW • FOUNDED 1873 LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP Cynthia Richardson February 23, 2012 Page 2 The remaining three proposed bridges are garden crossings intended to provide access from the Main Parcel to the central portions of the Red Orchid and Blue Orchid properties (and from the central portions of the Orchid Parcels to the areas on the Orchid Parcels east of the realigned channel). Each bridge is proposed to be eight feet wide and would be connected to the Main Parcel property line by pathways of the same 8 foot width; pathways on the Main Parcel would then connect to the existing perimeter walkway on the Main Parcel. The east end of Garden Crossing #1 is located within the mandated property line setback from the Main Parcel property line. (It is approximately 23.5 feet at its closest point to the common property line between the Red Orchid and Main Parcel.) The eight foot wide pathway from the east end of the bridge to the existing pathway on the Main Parcel is also within the 30 foot property line setback area. Garden Crossing #2 is located within the property line setback area of the Blue Orchid property. The pathway connecting to the Main Parcel is also within the 30 foot setback area of both the Blue Orchid and Main Parcel properties. For Garden Crossing #3, the extreme eastern portion (about 11.5 feet) is located within the setback area of the Blue Orchid property where it adjoins the Main Parcel. The remainder of the bridge length is outside the property line setback area. The path from the eastern end of the bridge to the perimeter walkway on the Main Parcel is located in the setback areas of both the Blue Orchid and. Main Parcels. The Code permits "walkways" within the property line setback areas. Walkways are defined as being four feet wide. Thus, the presence of bridges or walkways up to four feet wide within the setback areas is allowed by the Code. However, Planning staff has determined that a variance is necessary for any bridge or pathway located in the property line setback area with a width greater than four feet. In summary, Applicant is seeking variances with respect to the following: -.Garden Crossing #1 - Eastern approximate 7 feet length of Garden Crossing #1, four feet width beyond authorized four feet -Pathway from eastern end, of Garden Crossing bridge to Main Parcel property line (approximately 23.5 feet in length) for four feet of width beyond authorized four feet 301314520.1 LucE FoRwARD ATTORNEYS AT LAW • FOUNDED 1873 LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP Cynthia Richardson February 23, 2012 Page 3 - 30 foot pathway from property line to existing Main Parcel perimeter path, for width beyond four feet Garden Crossing #2 - 22 foot long bridge, to extent exceeds four foot width - 23.5 foot Poway from. east end of bridge to Main Parcel property line,. to extent exceeds allowed 4 foot width - 3.0 foot Pathway from Blue Orchid property line to existing Main Parcel perimeter path, to extent exceeds allowed four -toot width - Garden Crossing #3 - Eastern -most -11.5 feet of Garden Crossing bridge #3 (Blue Orchid Property), four width beyond allowed four feet - 18.5 foot from pathway to property line; four foot -width beyond allowed four foot width (Blue Orchid Property) - 27 foot pathway on Main Parcel from property line to existing perimeter path, four foot of width in excess of generally allowed four foot "walkway" width. The purpose of the variance(s) is to allow the bridges and connecting walkways (to extent they are located -in property line setback zones) -to be built to a width of eight �feet' as opposed to the maximum width` of four feet under Planning staff s interpretation of theTown's Municipal Code. The requested additional width is necessary to --(I) allow the bridges and 'connecting paths- to be utilized' by- landscaping-(e.g:, mowers, etc.) and other small maintenance vehicles to move freely between the two "Orchid" properties and the. Main Parcel, (2) provide more convenient pedestrian access between the Main Parcel and the Red and Blue Orchid properties. The variances for additional width of the bridges and pathways meet -the tests for approval as explained below. I - 1. There are exceotional and. extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject properties. The three properties which are the subject of this variance request are currently in -common ownership. The Main Parcel was developed approximately eleven years ago withh-a large home 301314520.1 LucE FoRwARD ATTORNEYS AT LAW • FOUNDED 1873 LUCE,FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP Cynthia Richardson February 23, 2012 Page 4 on the center of the lot and a pool and gardens at the south end. In 2011, the two parcels to the immediate west of the Main Parcel (Red Orchid and Blue Orchid) were purchased by entities controlled by the owner of the Main Parcel. Thus, all three parcels are in common beneficial ownership. The "Orchid" properties were each occupied by undistinguished homes built in the early 1950's, which have been demolished. The Owner currently intends to develop each of the Orchid parcels with a house to be used by persons visiting the Owner. No plans have been prepared or submitted for the use or development of the "Orchid" properties; the current Site Development and Variance Applications do not propose any development beyond the west end of the three proposed garden crossing bridges. Currently, the area near the western boundary of Main Parcel is occupied by a man-made channel for Barron Creek and its associated channel easement. This channel effectively limits any pedestrian or vehicular access from the Orchid parcels to the Main Parcel. The Site Development Permit application proposes to realign the existing Barron Creek channel approximately 40 feet to the west of its current position, onto the eastern portion of the Orchid parcels. The realignment is intended to improve the flow characteristics of the channel and reduce the existing flood extents, due to the channel's current configuration. Also, for various reasons the existing channel is severely degraded, and the new channel will provide substantially greater biological value. Although the stream channel is proposed to be relocated, the relocation will not change the fact that the stream channel will remain as a barrier to access between the Main Parcel and the developable areas of the Orchid properties. The presence of a stream channel dividing the Main Parcel from the developable areas of the adjacent Orchid parcels is an exceptional and extraordinary circumstance not generally applicable to other properties in the vicinity. Only a small percentage of the properties in the Town are affected by an open stream channel which prevents access between adjacent properties or portions of the same parcel. Immediately upstream and downstream from the Properties, Barron Creek flows in culverts and does not present a barrier to movement between and within parcels. The vast majority of the properties in the Town are not affected by an open stream channel that prevents access by small landscaping or maintenance vehicles between different portions of a parcel or between adjacent parcels. For most parcels, small landscaping or maintenance vehicles may access the full area of a parcel or pass freely from one adjacent parcel to another (subject obviously to authorization from parcels in question.) The presence of an open stream corridor separating the Orchid parcels into mutually inaccessible portions and preventing access between the Main Parcel and developable areas of the otherwise adjacent Orchid parcels is an exceptional circumstance which does not affect the vast majority of parcels in the vicinity of these Properties. 301314520.1 LucE FoR wARD ATTORNEYS AT LAW • FOUNDED 2873 LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP Cynthia Richardson February 23, 2012 Page 5 Strict compliance with the four foot width limitation for walkways and bridges would eliminate the ability to build a bridge across the stream corridor that would be wide enoughto allow passage for typically -sized landscaping vehicles. or .small construction/maintenance vehicles. Although the Project will provide a -Driveway Bridge over the channel near Fremont `Road, this Driveway Bridge would provide awkward and inconvenient access for .landscaping and maintenance vehicles needing to pass from one parcel to another. Although Garden Crossing #1 is very= close ,to the Driveway Bridge; use of the Driveway` Bridge for landscaping and other small maintenance vehicles could result in conflicts which could create safety risks for both landscaping and maintenance workers and cars or trucks using the Driveway Bridge. While in -the abstract a single 8 foot garden crossing bridge could provide maintenance and landscaping vehicle access across the drainage channel; providing multiple bridges accessible to landscaping/maintenance vehicles minimizes the need: for such vehicles to make long traverses near the banks -on the east `side of the relocated creek - channel. To protect such drainage channels, the Town generally requires a25 foot setback from the top of the creek bank. This 25 foot wide stream protection are extends beyond 'the Main Parcel property line. A limitation to one garden crossing bridge would increase the need and frequency of landscaping and maintenance vehicles to travel through this'setback area to reach other sections more distant from the bridge, Increasing the potential for landscape and.habitat disruption, soil disturbance and erosion/siltation in this sensitive area near the channel. Providing three bridges as proposed mizes the need for landscape - and maintenance vehicles to pass back and forth in this sensitive area along the creek. 2. Upon granting the variance the intent and purpose of the ordinance will be served and recipient of the variance will not be Vanted special privileges not enjoyed by other surrounding property- owners. The apparent purpose of the properly line setback is to prevent or minimize structures near the boundaryof one property from having'a negative impact -on an adjacent property: Under the circumstances of these proposed variances, the variances are -compatible with this purpose. The properties for -which the variances are "requested are `under- common ownership. Thus, the somewhat wider pathways and (portions -of) bridges within the setback areas'will not have any visual or other impact on the adjacent owners. Because the'Main Parcel and -Orchid properties are not being merged, it is probable that at some point in the future the Main Parcel and the Orchid properties will return to separate ownership. However, any person considering the purchase of any of the parcels after the proposed Garden Crossing bridges and pathways are built will be aware of the bridges and pathways in the setback areas. If the bridges/walkways four feet wider than typically allowed by Code are objectionable, a potential new owner can (1) chose to not purchase the property in question; (2) remove/modify 301314520.1 LucE .FORWARD ATTORNEYS AT LAW • FOUNDED 1873 LUCE, FDRWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP Cynthia Richardson February 23, 2012 Page 6 pathways or bridges in the setback areas or bargain for their removal in connection with the purchase of such property (subject to the then -applicable rules of the Town and any other agency with regulatory authority over the . drainage channel). Thus, with the proposed variances no property owner will be involuntarily subjected to construction in the setback area which is objectionable. In addition, the rules of the Town and agencies regulating the new channel will require that the channel area be heavily vegetated, further minimizing any visual impact of the bridges and pathways on one property to any adjacent owner. In addition, granting of the variance will not grant any special privilege to the Applicant. As noted above, the vast majority of the surrounding property owners do not have open stream channels . or drainage ditches cutting through their properties and thus landscaping and maintenance vehicles are free to access any area of their properties, or to cross from one adjacent property to another, without the necessity of using any bridge. Thus, providing the three 8 foot wide garden crossings only provides the Applicant some approximation of the ability most land owners have to freely move such equipment around their properties. Being able to move such equipment within property and among adjacent properties is in no sense a "special privilege." Barron Creek does traverse several properties immediately upstream and downstream of the subject properties. However, in those properties the creek runs in underground culverts. Both pedestrians and small equipment are free to cross the path of the creek alignment on those properties. without the need for any bridge or the construction of a bridge or path limited to a 4 foot width. Again, the variance would grant no "special privilege" as compared to those adjacent properties in which Barron Creek runs in a culvert and therefore does not raise access issues. 3. Granting of this variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or incurious to the Property. The bridge and pathways which are subject to these variance(s) are located so as to be essentially invisible from the adjacent public roadways. The bridges will be located so as to span the channels and be of height as to not impair the hydrologic capacity of the stream channel. The additional width (eight feet vs four feet) of the bridge and walkway will not have any significant environmental impacts. Because of their location near the interior property lines of the Main Parcel and the Orchid parcels, the somewhat wider bridges and walkways will not impact or be readily visible from any other nearby properties under different ownership. No adjacent parcel not under common ownership would have a close or direct view to the two northern- most garden crossings. While it is possible that the southern -most garden bridge (Crossing #3) could be visible from the property to the immediate south, neither this bridge or nor its connecting paths would be in or 301314520.1 LUCE Fomm ATTORNEYS AT LAW • FOUNDED 1873 LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP Cynthia Richardson February 23, 2012 Page 7 near the setback area with that adjacent residence, and under the Code it would be possible to build other structures in the Blue Orchid property that would be much closer and more visible to the property to the south than the small bridge and pathway proposed under the variance. In any event, the visual impact of an 8 foot wide bridge vs the Code authorized four foot wide bridge would be insignificant. 4. The variances will not allow a use or activity which is not expressly authorized by Zoning Ordinance. The variances requested do not involve any change to the "use" of any of the three properties in question. The bridges and pathways are consistent with and accessory to the continued planned residential use of all three parcels. The Code would permit the construction of three garden crossing bridges, and the walkways connecting those bridges to existing pathways on the Main Parcel. The additional four feet of width for each of those bridges/walkways does not change the "use" but merely makes it more convenient to move landscaping and small construction vehicles within and between the Orchid parcels and the Main Parcel. Based on the above, findings satisfying the applicable criteria support the approval of the variances to permit the three Garden Crossing bridges and pathways described above to be increased from four feet to eight feet in width. Please contact me if thee are any further questions. Thanks for your help on this matter. Very truly yours, Steve Atkinson of LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP ESA/jaz 301314520.1 t +•^tiR,` P4 3 L t M. . `•t 3'.T�„ - t ny Fak ": ,� Y � ftyK utw a�g C .+�G,^T q(nY' 4�'%" h f �i •s'.x•>::"•S,e.r„e"� Lam.'` �-�-c �" •*�7.��'�a"� ,�• F'3 it ""r �y g��t�� `�'{� ° r'Sf r � 4 "'• c t z ""3•.�- r.. r3,� z � � "-��°`"" ,�-r ? s c4 �. i��.«w A,x-u� �§ . aE �iy f 'rr•.}vzw�-�„ -!`Y 3.J,r t n a i "� E 1 ��•�' � a. '� ` y. 4 �F '3`� C' 'r z +�'�� s ,�• -fit ^e. _ s"'��, `eta a...11+:--*w.s a.,,4ss, ' ^."^.�S `1 S'i'c' � a�.F,`(L4..F. Cf � , z - .+K�„ s•A, c � : �1 fir^ r .,< F��'a %ti"i� �.�a. �,r �'�'� 1•�%{ �33� fir' ,#.3z �f^a al,� - ` �_�. �" 1� A Yy 2t�� "•. � � a �Yr rr� .� .X4t -�T .T � � S'� .xtt tia t � � R �^�.�,' ��ti3�a�.tr#'dam ys' �� t' f lnX ,UIIK}i k ny s ,§, ,t "r• ^ ''°� e IF ' , *" , i 7 , 'i"t '` tr• „" ,4, }, it �.' �, `%r T ap �fi,- -t�4Y1 � aF �t ! � +e'�. `� 4r• � R a:x.,�r�,.,.,F,',,,,� ''F ,a i(�n S sti ; � Fg^` &' . .L•,..«c>-�. � 1315 TJ t ra5y' x' '9"6 Y _ 1�5 '•y't�" �'wy55%11 s4� ro FF, o f i a ,d+xAlli '�,��°,�9ss�� n r'C iI 7t j, xd`'., ha a`v'rk;t r.Fr v�4. k E yf= ti * a.` w 3^n ;i� nsa 5rI L`.'. y fir{ -�f T^ c t t cc 't rn 5 �� ;.. r.;%+sF.;c}ztI ..' �,F�-x u-'r�°�'e3,s"`''.s..S. •c� -��,nT."s,ag°tom.sn'fa� 2m .s „��r``r`"k"5i`jlI'F a"e#°4-� a�a1 rl�lt�e�-a�a`' {,�.�'`,•� { ,,s^-��;' i „,,aTrx''.�,r��;a Yn'n$Q. z,mIIea'�OQ-"n.r<'S � �� .€.,< a y �- RqZ �-�rb„x-vrn-{ LW_ �c i ti �'i"r,r*u i'`.ya `.', fi t > •eAa7 a:.#;' ib` T 'i >t, $'.,Y;.s' '.�•' r "cy m `�"�` '�.' c+ ' ,�Y8r ' 1 t 3f—"j'.s` kms, � :'�� Vc �' s ,Y',r��.„„.f,��t,dl .I.. v fR •r� #. sS U�1FF ,t �' t x t 5 i �4- t <s^ ARM I k' rxs�r�aarD4$f �a �$� C iIi vr+ +{ k e tl T,"*k,-It:• r��:af`'�ss D1,,.zt•# . 5 { i >''t °a,l afi tt 'Tyy. s� �'� _' 3�M1Iw:W.a'�+.�4k i >"L"�� tL'!h1'i'�'. '�� l��l�� "�}i Sti f�l'�it �T (�� •�<�� y'�ff F"s 1 WAX �'�„a.. + . , 5" F ' 4 ��'rvyr �t �! k 2Si "w..+R:a• r'-�, :i* ,�W ,, �'r 4�'.,a 'F"&e ;� S• I 9 its � HUM Kim F -om ora sN � � d^`}•r. ��' c x r f��F9 * - • 4'F` �,,� r � � � m I ,N+'s�`,� �.r�r u�; z. zi'i §�P�p"� s,��%i41 ;tt; `m 5-''�.�< a,'t�urL•i.T,-g �x '�� ccoccr ^ BARRON CREEK °s'pfi'°°° C2_/ 1 IGmley-Hom -- EXHIBIT 1 CHANNEL Z�'°�'°" — and Associates, Inc. zx[ e5 9gv't [uLLv-Mo: uO ASSOOvai ae VARIANCE AREAS IMPROVEMENTS TOM OF L°5 ALTOS HILLS Ca x nan.K�Afr-nww.cw - i¢+s ..'L By Environmental Design and Protection Committee Reviewed by: IAJ,_t�iG� Applicant Name Address-�llr0 Site impact/lighting/noise: Creeks, drainage, easements: �c Attachment 6 Date t31-1 �L , I f I RECEIVED I Existing Vegetati6n: DEC 12 27011 ILLS Significant issues/comments: Attaclunent 7 is Richardson From: Roger Spreen [roger@spreen.com] Sent. Monday, December 19, 2011 1:13 PM To: Cynthia Richardson; Debbie Pedro Subject: Re: Barron Creek Hi, Debbie & Cynthia: Here's a summary of our thoughts. Thanks again for attending our meeting! Cheers, Roger Barron Creek Project Summary Open Space Committe Mtg 12/15/11 Features contributing to project's status as a net improvement over existing condition: • Removal of the rock lining. • vegetation of the banks with natives. • Addition of bends that slow flows and potentially promote the formation of pools. • Natural channel bottom (elimination of Enkamat in low flow channel). • Channel sized for mature plantings (grasses and bushes, in Eric the CE's words, though we don't know how many). Remaining concerns: 1. The top -of -bank buffer zone is at most only the remainder of the planned 27' wide drainage easement. Gary asked Town staff to look into whether this kind of development required the granting of a 25' from top -of -bank open space conservation easement such as the ones we normally place on creekside properties in town at the time of development. Not requiring this easement may set a undesirable precedent for other development in the Town. 2. Rock toe protection is planned for all bends. In some locations, space constraints because of existing development and property lines probably make this feature necessary. At least two of the bends, however, are in locations where the slope of the bank could be laid back, eliminating the need for more hardscape along this extremely short stretch of creek. Eric indicated that the soil analysis and other evaluations were in process to define what this might look like. 3. It appears from one of the drawings that a driveway from Fremont to the existing house is planned over the first "garden crossing". The four garden crossings scale to be at least 10' wide, which is indeed driveway width. They conflict with Standard 1.G (in Appendix B) of the Water Resources Protection Collaborative's Guidelines & Standards for Land Use Near Streams, "Refrain from locating new paved areas ... within riparian corridors." 4. The channel will be narrower than what currently exists. Hydraulic engineers should confirm that the channel's capacity will be sufficient. 1 Attaclunent 8 Municipal Code 10-2.702(e) Creek Protection. Structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from the top of bank of all creeks. Greater setbacks may be required along major creeks in the Town; however, lesser setbacks may be allowed where approved by the Planning Commission. Improvements required to all creeks shall be accomplished to appear natural and to maintain the natural meandering course of the existing creek. Creeks and banks shall be protected so as to remain in their natural state as much as possible. They should not be disturbed by the building or grading process. No grading shall be allowed in creeks or within the required setbacks from top of bank. Siting of structures shall be done with safety as a primary concern. Safety concerns and preservation of riparian habitat are required to be simultaneously addressed when designing development and required improvements to creeks. (§ 15, Ord. 299, eff. December 11, 1985; §§ 6, 7, Ord. 370, eff. May 20, 1994; § 1, Ord. 504, eff. October 28, 2006) 10-1.1007(2) Variances—Approval—Conditions. Pap Attachment 9 Los Altos hills Municipal Code Up Previous Next Main Search Print No Frames Title 10 ZONING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT Chapter 1 ZONING Article 10 Aopeals Variances Conditional Use Permits Conditional Development Permits and Amendments J remove hi-hli-htine 1 10-1_10077(2). Variances-Approval—Conditions_-------------.---..------------.--------------.—.—._..--------.._.------.--- The Staff Committee comprised of the Zoning Administrator and. City Manager or designee (herein called the "Staff Committee") and Planning Commission are empowered to grant variances from the requirements of this title. The Staff Committee or Planning Commission shall act as the authority to grant variances as specified in subsections (d) and (e) below. (a) Purpose. The purpose of the variance is to resolve practical difficulties or undue hardships, not of the applicant's own making, which may result from the exceptional size, shape, topography, location, or other physical site conditions, or the use or development of property in the immediate vicinity. In this context, personal, family, or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits and neighboring violations are not practical difficulties or hardships justifying a vatin nee. In some cases, the location of existing structures may result in a practical difficulty or hardship. (b) Findings. The Staff Committee or Planning Commission may grant the requested variance in whole or in part only if, from the application or the facts presented at the public hearing, it can affirmatively find that all of the following four (4) requirements have been met: (1) That, because of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the provisions of this title is found to deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification; (2) That upon the granting of the variance, the intent and purpose of the applicable sections of this title will still be served and the recipient of the variance will not be granted special privileges not enjoyed by other surrounding property owners; (3) That the granting of such varia nee will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property, improvements or uses within the immediate vicinity and within the same zoning district; (4) That the variance will not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning district regulations governing the parcel or property. (c) Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity within the same zoning district. (d) The Staff Committee shall act as the permitting body for all applications involving the following: (1) Maximum Development Area (MDA). Requests to exceed MDA by five hundred (500) square feet or less; (2) Maximum Floor Area (MFA). Requests to exceed MFA by one hundred fifty (150) square feet or less; (3) Setbacks. Requests for encroachments into any setback of two (2) feet or less and measuring one hundred fifty (150) square feet of floor area or less; (4) Fences and Walls. Requests to locate fences on the roadway side ofthe "reference line" defined in Section 10-1.504(d)(1). (e) The Planning Commission shall act as the permitting body for all variance applications involving the following: (1) Maximum Development Area (MDA). Requests to exceed MDA by more than two hundred fifty (250) square feet; (2) Maximum Floor Area (MFA). Requests to exceed MFA by more than one hundred fifty (150) square feet; (3) Setbacks. Requests for encroachment into any setback of more than two (2) feet and measuring less than one hundred fifty (150) square feet of floor area; (4) Height. All requests for height envelope encroachments, to exceed maximum height of twenty-seven (27) feet and/or to exceed special height limitation of thirty-five (35) feet; (5) Others. All other variance applications not specified above, and any applications referred to the Planning Commission by the Zoning Administrator. (§ 1, Ord. 305, eff. October 3, 1986; § 5, Ord. 314, eff. November 6, 1987; § 3, Ord. 326, eff. September 16, 1988) http://gcode.us/codes/losaltoshills/view.php?topic=10-1-10-10_1_1007_2&highlightWord... 2/21/2012