Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-05-18 City Council Agenda Packet 1 05/18/09 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. A binder containing supporting materials is available in the Council Chambers on the Friday preceding the meeting. Special Meeting Council Chambers May 18, 2009 6:30 PM ROLL CALL CLOSED SESSION This item may occur during the recess or after the Regular Meeting. Public Comments: Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker. 1. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY – EXISTING LITIGATION Subject: Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Palo Alto, et al Santa Clara County Superior Court, Case No. 109CV140463 Authority: Government Code section 54956.9(a) CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Members of the public may speak to any item not on the agenda; three minutes per speaker. Council reserves the right to limit the duration or Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. CONSENT CALENDAR Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by two Council Members. 2. Approval of Two Utilities Public Benefit Contracts for up to Three Years for Delivery of Third Party Energy Efficiency Programs with: 1) Enovity, Inc. in a Amount Not to Exceed $1,496,250, and 2) National Resources Management, Inc. in a Amount Not to Exceed $300,000 CMR 229:09 and ATTACHMENTS 3. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to File an Application for 2009/2010 Transportation Development Act Funds in the Amount of $256,317 for Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects 2 05/18/09 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. CMR 245:09 and ATTACHMENTS 4. Request for Authorization to Apply for an Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) in a Total Amount Up to $663,000 Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) CMR 239:09 5. Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation to Approve Changes to the ProjectPLEDGE Program CMR 240:09 and ATTACHMENTS 6. Approval of Plan to Develop Three Options for a City of Palo Alto Utilities Customer Energy Efficiency Financing Program CMR 234:09 7. Approval of Agreement with Bay Conservation and Development Commission to Provide Public Access to Designated Areas in the Restored Marsh Located in the Palo Alto Baylands CMR 249:09 and ATTACHMENTS 8. Adoption of a Resolution to Establish a Pledge of Revenue as a Financial Assurance Mechanism for Post Closure Maintenance of the Palo Alto Landfill and Approval of a Pledge of Revenue Agreement with the California Integrated Waste Management Board for Post Closure Maintenance of the Palo Alto Landfill 3 05/18/09 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. CMR 244:09 and ATTACHMENTS AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW: Applications and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their remarks and put up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken. OTHER AGENDA ITEMS: Public comments or testimony on agenda items other than Oral Communications shall be limited to a maximum of three minutes per speaker. REPORTS OF OFFICIALS 9. Direction to Implement Recommendations of Website Advisory Committee CMR 246:09 and ATTACHMENTS 10. Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Foothills Fire Management Plan CMR 254:09 and ATTACHMENTS CITIZEN LETTER 11. Discussion on Termination of Option Agreements Between the City and Essex Park Boulevard, LLC and Brown-Fairchild Park Investment Company, L.P. for the Purchase of the Properties Located at 2785 Park Boulevard and 2747 Park Boulevard, Respectively and Direction to Pursue Alternative Land Banking Options for Public Safety Building CMR 226:09 and ATTACHMENT COUNCIL MATTERS 12. Council Direction to High Speed Rail Ad Hoc Committee and Report and Update on High Speed Rail Activities 4 05/18/09 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. CMR 253:09 and ATTACHMENTS CITIZEN LETTER COUNCIL COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, AND REPORTS FROM CONFERENCES Members of the public may not speak to the item(s). ADJOURNMENT Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services, or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact 650-329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: UTILITIES DATE: MAY 18,2009 CMR: 229:09 REPORT TYPE: CONSENT SUBJECT: Approval of Two Utilities Public Benefit Contracts for up to Three Years with Enovity, Inc. and National Resources Management, Inc. in the Total Amount Not to Exceed $1,796,250 for Administration and Delivery of Third Party Energy Efficiency Programs RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract with Enovity for the Commercial and Industrial Energy Efficiency Program; 2. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to extend the contract annually for up to two additional years, subject to Council approval of sufficient funds; 3. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract with National Resource Management for a Commercial Express Refrigeration Efficiency Program; and 4. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to extend each contract annually for up to two additional years, subject to Council approval of sufficient funds. BACKGROUND The Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) objectives and guidelines set the direction for staff in planning and managing the electric supply portfolio, including the use of cost-effective efficiency as energy resources. Council approved the LEAP Objectives and Guidelines in 2001 and 2002 (CMR:425:01 and CMR:398:02). Staff updates the Council at least annually on progress in implementing LEAP. The LEAP implementation tasks were most recently updated in March 2007 (CMR:158:07). In addition, the City's Ten-Year Energy Efficiency Portfolio Plan, approved by Council in April 2007 (CMR:216:07) identifies and sets high goals for gas and electric conservation and efficiency programs. The State Legislature has also enacted an update to California's Public Resources Code through Assembly Bill 2021 (AB 2021, enacted in September 2006), which requires publicly-owned utilities to set goals for energy efficiency results and implement and fund third party measurement and verification of the results of these programs. The proposed contracts are intended to meet the state and local requirements by enhancing our energy efficiency programs. CMR: 229:09 Page 1 of4 DISCUSSION In January 2009, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) seeking responses from organizations interested in providing third party energy efficiency programs. An evaluation committee of City of Palo Alto Utilities staff members reviewed the proposals. Respondents were specifically required to present proposals that were not duplicative of current, ongoing customer programs. The committee carefully reviewed the firms' qualifications and submittals in response to the criteria identified in the RFP. A number ofthe proposals were found to be non- compliant because they either duplicated ongoing programs or provided proposals that were not for third party energy efficiency programs. The committee evaluated the firms based on six main criteria consisting of: quality of service proposed, cost, location of the vendor, qualifications of the consultant, experience, and the financial capability of the company to deliver the services requested in the RFP. S ummarvo o lei a Ion fS r 't f P rocess Proposal Description/Number Third-Party Energy Efficiency Progr<lllls, RFP Number 130404 Proposed Length of Project 36 months Number of Proposals Received: 8 Points Company Name Location (City, State) Type of Program Out of 200 Possible 1. Enovity San Francisco, CA Large Business Efficiency--Controls, 193 -------~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------J~~E.!!!'L~~_~_~§9~!PE..1.~.!1!J~!?!J!g~J:LIJE2 _______ --------------------Proposal Amount Submitted $498,750 annually 2. National Resource Management Canton, MA (with Express Refrigeration Program for 185 Union City, CA office Stores, Restaurants, and Cold Storage _~~!ty_~!i!!g_~~~)j£~~) ______ Facilities ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Proposal Amount Submitted $250,000 (modified scope to $100,000 annually) I _1: ___ ~Y-~~i!?!~~_§~gJ_IJ_~_~I!!1.g ________________ _ ~.<?~J_~_~!.t_~Q. ___________________ Data ResearchIPresentation Tool _______ Q_t~s:L ----------------------~~-~~"-----------------------------------------Proposal Amount Submitted i $59,000 NON-COMPLIANT _~: __ ~£.<?~S::!?E_~~!!~!1.g __________________________ ~X.<?!!!-~~~-, __ Q.~ __________________ _ C°Il!PI~~_~~~_~~I_~~!?1[~~ ____________________________ 103 --------------------. Proposal Amount Submitted ! $750,000 _~: ___ ~_!I.l!l.~] __ ~~}£~] __ IJ.~!.~ _______________________ _!'.~!.<?_~!!.<?~_f~ ________________ _H_Y_~_g_A~~}_!~!Ret.r..<?£.<?~~L~i.<?!!!!!g __________ 147 Proposal Amount Submitted $278,980 Determined to be Repetitive Pro2ram 6. Resource Solutions Group HalfMoon Bay, CA Energy Audits for SchoolslPublic O(NC) --------------------------------------------------------0-------------------------------------J~~t~Q!!!gL ____________________________________________________ --------------------Proposal Amount Submitted $235,000 DeterminedJo be Repetitive Pr02ram 7. Mazzetti & Associates San Francisco, CA Solar Thermal Program O(NC) _f~~~~!!i~.s __________________________________________ _ _____ M ___________________________ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Proposal Amount Submitted No total cost; only Determined to be Repetitive Program hourly rates ~: __ ~~~g~!!_~~!!~_~!!!!!S _____________________ X~!!l_i!_E~]_g_~ __________________ Measurement & Verification _ ____ ~~_9_ ----------------------~-----------------------------------------------Proposal Amount Submitted $244,500 Determined to be Repetitive Program CMR: 229:09 Page 2 of4 Enovity and National Resource Management were selected for third party energy efficiency programs based on their expertise with delivery of commercial and industrial efficiency programs. Programs will be delivered by the consultants in the following areas: (1) Enovity: Large business efficiency program implementation for controls, repair of equipment, and adding new efficient equipment (not inclusive of lighting, which is already addressed by a 3rd party energy efficiency program in Palo Alto); and (2) National Resource Management: Express Refrigeration Program for Stores, Restaurants, and Cold Storage Facilities RESOURCE IMPACT The total budget impact by fiscal year is shown below: .' .. Total Contractor Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Contract Not ... to": E~cee.J Contract ' . '. >~, " Estimate Enovity $498,750 $498,750 $498,750 .' Sl,49(),250 " c ;:~ " Per Year National .. ' " .. Resource $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 < ·····5300,000 ~ .. -,-:"... -Management : :.: .'" ' Total 5600,000 5600,000 $600,000 ,,' $1,796,250 These costs include funds from both the Electric and Gas Funds. Contract funding for Fiscal Year 08/09 is included in the Electric and Gas Fund budgets for Public Benefit Programs and Resource Management. Funds for subsequent years will be subject to appropriation of funds in subsequent budgets and will be subject to Council's approval. Contract costs will include program development, implementation, and some energy incentives payments. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposed contracts support the Council-approved Gas Utility Long-Term Plan, the Ten-year Energy Efficiency Portfolio Plan, and the Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan. Implementation of efficiency programs supports greenhouse gas reduction goals identified in the Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan and in the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The provision of these services do not constitute a project pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code, thus no environmental review under CEQA is required. C:NIR: 229:09 Page 3 of4 ATTACHMENTS A. B. DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR: 229:09 Assistant Director, Utilities Director, Utilities Page 4 of4 ATTACHMENT A CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTR-\CT :'f0. C09130404A AGREEMENT BET\VEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND ENOVITY, INC. FOR PROFESS10NAL SERVICES (COMMERlCAL A~l) .I}.T)USTRlAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRA.vI) This AGREEMENT is entered into , by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California ("CITY"), and ENOVITY, INC., a California corporation, located at 100 Montgomery Street, Suite 600, San Francisco, CA 941 04 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to evaluate existing energy programs ("Project") and desires to engage a consultant to provide evaluation, measurement and verification, demand reduction; and third party energy efficiency in connection with the Project ("Services"). B. CONSULT ANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit "A", attached to and made a part oft11is Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in Exhibit "A" in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The perfomlance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through completion of the services in accordance with the Schedule of Performance attached as Exhibit "B" unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 ofthis Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORt~ANCE. Time is ofthe essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULT ANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit "B", attached to and made a prut of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY's agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages 090413 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 SECT10'J 4. NOT TO EXC[EP CCr\1P'E:·;SATI00'. for professional sen-ices at1c. reimc.ur3:::b1e expe::1ses, shall not ex seed Fou:-H;.,r:dred :-';ine[y . Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars per year ($498,750 per year) for a potential three years. The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit "C", entitled "COr ..... fPENSATION," which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit "C". CONSULT i\..:."',JT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Sen'ices perfonued without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any \-'lork that is detennined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit "A". SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services perfonned and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT's billing rates (set forth in Exhibit "C"). Ifapplicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The infonnation in CONSULTA.~T's payment requests shall be subjectto verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City's proj ect manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULT ANT or under CONSULT ANT's supervision. CONSULT .ANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perfonn the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, ifpennitted, have and shall maintain during the tenn of this Agreement all licenses, penuits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perfonn the Services. All of the services to be filrnished by CONSULT'ANT uncler this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION7. COMPLIANCE WITf{LA\VS. CONSULTANT shall keep itselfinfonned of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the perfonnance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISStONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the work product submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives notice to CONSULT ANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design 2 0904::: Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 GOCIlr:J.·::~ts to constrt:ctt:1e Prc,jeC[, CO~I or .. :.issions or ar{lbig~.li~ies C.iscO\l,erf~,t2 S~CTION 9, COST ESTDIXfES. I.::' this Agreesent pertain;:; to the of a . werks proj ect, CONSULT Ai'iT shall submit estimates of probab Ie construction costs at eac!} phase of design submittal. If the total estimated constmction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%) of the CITY's stated construction budget, CONSULT.;:\l"l'T shall make recorr'.Jnendations to the CITY for aligning the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRt\CTOR It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed byor contracted with CONSULTA...NT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGN::VIENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the perfonnance of any of CONSULTANT's obligations hereunder wi thout the prior wri tten consent 0 f the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. CONS UL T ANT shall no t subcontract any portion 0 f the work: to be perfomled under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or designee. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsul!C\.nL CONSULTANT shall Ch811['Je or Hdd sllbconsulta.ils with the pric))' approval of th.e city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT lVIANAGElVIENT. CONSULTAl'l'TwillassignLoriMalkasian as the project director to have supervisory responsibility for the perfonnance, progress, and execution of the Services to represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Project If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement persOlmel will be subject to the prior written approval ofthe CITY's project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY's request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY fl11ds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. The City's project manager is Joyce Kinnear, Utilities Department, Marketing Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone: 650-329-2652. The project manager will be 3 09042 Professional Ser~ices Revised 10/18/07 v;ithout limitation, \-vrirings, dr:r'~;i:1gs, plans, reports, spe'.::ific:ltiorrs, c;;:lCt:bt~or.s, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under thIS Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTA,l"IT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTAt"\,jT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor ofthe CITY. Neither CONSULTA1'\TT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization \vithout the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULT ANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSl.JLTANT's records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Councilmcmbers, officers, employees and agents (each an "Indemnified Party") from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements ("Claims") resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or nonperfonnance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party_ 16.2. Notwithstanding the abovG, nothing in this Section 16 sh,il] be construed to rcqtlirc CONSULTANT to indcnmiry an Indemnified Party from Claims arising frOll1 the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Inderrlllified Party. 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT's services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. §ECTIO~ 17. 'VAIV~. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision ofthis Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not be deemed to be a waiver of any other telm, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation ofthe same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 4 09042 and tll~~ terrr.:. 0 f this _ cost tlJ.e CONSULT}.'...?'·rT and its cC!1tmctors,' any, 3hJ.~1 obcain a policy enccr:;·.;mert r:ami::g additional inSlll'ed under any general hability or automobile policy or policies. .i as a!1 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AJ.\iI Best's Kev Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the tenn of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution ofthis Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY's Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification, CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY's Purchasing Manager during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indem.l1ification provisions of this Agreement Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERlVIINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The J.mmilgcr may sllspcnd the pcrfonn:mc.c ofthG ill whole 0' ill parI, or temlinatc 1his Agreement, with. or without cause, by gjving ten (10) days prior written Il.olice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULT ANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event ofa substantial failure of perf01111ance by CITY. 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or gi ven to CONSULT A.NT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement Such materials will become the property of CITY. 5 09042 Professional services Revised 10/lS/07 CITY will obligated to comper:sate COSSTJ"I-T orily [,::1' t:1a~ por.io!!. COSSu-' ... :T services whic~l are of direct and imr . .1ediate benefit to CITY as suet determination be made by the City Manager acting III the reasonable exercise ofhislher discretion 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY \vill operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 "With a copy to the Purchasing Manager ToCONSULTAt"l"T: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above ~_ECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. ? 1.7.. CONSULTANT further covenants 1h~:1, in the pcrformanee ofthisAgrccrnent, it ,,,,ill not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT celiifies that no person who has orwill have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State ofCalifomia. 21.3. If the Proj ect Manager determines that CONSULT AL"JT is a "Consultant" as that tenn is defined by the Regulations ofthe Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of thIS Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, 6 09042 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 CITY alld set tor::l: in SECTIO~ 23. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 23.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 23.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 23.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys' fees paid to third parties. 3.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written insL.-ument, vvhich is signed by the parties. 23.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions ofthis Agreemcntwil1 apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 23.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 2~L7. All exhibits referred to this Agreement amI 2n)' addenda, append attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be rcfen'cd to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 23.8. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will termmate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion ofthe fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer availabJe. This Section 23.8 sha 11 take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, teml, condition, or provision of this Agreement. 23.9. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 7 09042 CITY OF PALO ALTO ENOVITY, INC. Deputy City Manager By: 6,~cltn ~- APPROVED AS TO FOR.t\1: Title: ~,\;.,\( 1M L Senior Asst. City Attorney APPROVED: Director of Administrative Services Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": EXHIBIT "B": EXHIBIT "C": EXHIBIT "D": EXHIBIT "E": 09042 SCOPE OF WORK SCHEDULE OF PERFOR.t\t[ANCE COMPENSATION INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION 8 Professional Services Revised 10/1S/07 ". ~.1 ??:;f~, ;:,.~~",.~ .~ ~ -r~ 1.1 OVERV1E'YV The C~ty cf Paio ,~:ta Ccmrnerc~a! and ;nclustri~i Ef':sr:;;y Efficfe~c~! Prol;;ram (P~cgr2rn) is an ince:~tiv9 program to encc:urage commercial and industrial seCLOr customers to optimize bu:!din£j energy performance through implementation of builc!ing system infrastructure improvements, boiler energy efficiency upgrades, HVAC system improvements and controls tune-up measures. The City of Palo A:to Municipal Utility District supplies electricity. gas and water to its customers. The program targets gas and electrical savings. The Program shall begin May 1, 2009 and run through December 31, 20'11. 1.2 TARGET MARKET The Program is targeted to commercial and industrial customers in the government, institutional and private sectors within the City of Palo Alto Municipal Utility District. Buildings will include State, local government, colleges and schools and private office buildings; high tech facilities; manufacturing facilities (may be limited in City of Palo Alto); lab buildings; retail buildings; hospitality buildings (hotels and resorts), and hospitals. The minimum building size is targeted at greater than 30,000 square feet, with an average candidate size of around 50,000 square feet, and no limit on maximum building size. 1.3 ENERGY SAVINGS TARGETS The energy savings targets for Years 2009, 2010 and 2011 are provided in Table 1.1. The Program shall operate on gross energy savings. This includes tracking, reporting, incentives, and performance payments. Table 1.1 Program Energy Saving Targets -------- Gross kW Gross kWh Gross Therms 2009·11 Tota! 513 7,410,000 216,600 2009 77 1,111,500 32,490 2010 205 2,964,000 86,640 ..... . .---'~~ ~. -.-.--... ........ : ...... ..... .,,'_. i 2011 231 3,334,500 97,470 1.4 SCOPE OF ENERGY EFFiCIENCY PROJECTS The Program shall focus on HVAC, process (including compressed air and steam), controls, domestic hot water, lighting controls, and lighting retrofit energy efficiency projects. Existing HVAC, controls and lighting systems shall be re-commissioned and optimized, and more energy efficient equipment will be installed. For larger buildings where Building Automation Systems (BAS) that incorporate Direct Digital Controls (DOC) are already installed, the facility shall be evaluated to determine if it is suitable for the installation of a fault diagnostic tool SUcil as Performance and Continuous Re-commissioning Analysis Tool (PACRAT); if a site is suitable the Program shall work with the customer to install the tool. A fault diagnostic tool alerts the building operator to poor HVAC system performance and allows for fast correction of system deficiencies and longer perSistence of energy savings. ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved 3 E ;('''' I:: i t .~\ --------.~-------.. ~--- ., He-enable cperat:on of air-sice economizer (ar,c] assoc:3tec camper.:;) and im;:;)ernent optimal differential economizer control (ccmpai8 outside air to return air) • Eliminate unnecessary or simultaneous heating or cooling • Eliminate! reduce boiler staging $ Burner tune-up or linkage repair! replacement .. Replace, relocate or calibrate temperature sensors .. Multi-zone! dual-duct air handler hot deck and cold deck temperature reset based on worst case zone • VAV air handler static pressure reset based on zone demand • VA V air handler supply air temperature adjustments and!or reset .. Lower the VAV box and!or air handler minimum air flow settings • Repair faulty or failed VAV box controls .. Implement night-time or unoccupied mode temperature reset if equipment can be scheduled off • Adjust HVAC equipment start-stop schedules and operating times to match occupancy .. Schedule exhaust fans that currently operate continuously <II Add optimum start control .. Re-enable air handler morning warm-up control .. Tune control loop PIO parameters! reduce control loop hunting • Install new sensors for improved control • Improve return fan VFO control (track to supply fan or control building static pressure) .. Reset CHW supply temperature a Reset CW supply temperature (either approach to wet-bulb reset or optimal fan-chiller reset strategy) .. Reset HW supply temperature • Optimize compressed air systems .. Boiler-HW system cut-off based on outside air temperature .. Implement demand side ventilation control and/or reduce ventilation if excessive. • Operate multiple pump VFDs versus single pump VFD at less than design system flow and head • Adjust lighting schedules to match occupancy • Over-pump chillers to improve chiller loading for low delta-T systems .. Optimize I improve chiller staging ,; Re-enable 01" expand 11ydronic economizer p!ate·alld·fr2!Tl8 l"leal exc:hanoer Hardware Repair ., Repair leaking air dampers .. Repair hot water or steam leaks .. Repair or replace damaged actuators • Repair leaks on compressed air systems .. Repair leaking cooling or heating coil valves .. Reconfigure air handler duct work to reduce fan static and/or improve air mixing and!or economizer operation iii Repair control loop for pump or fan speed control .. Repair! replace failed fan or pump VFOs .. Correct static pressure problems or diagnose VFOs operating at 100% -resolve air balance issues, repair significant duct leakage, repair uncontrolled boxes or zones • Clean cooling or heating coils ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reser.;ed 4 " Pap2ir boiler refractory "" 82tar.C8 cnli!ed 'li~te( rIC'N 2~~ pr':'\ii( :: cc:"';'"'ect f~OVi ~J cnil:ers to impr.:'f2 ef~icje':""c~J • Reset va,'iacle f:ow pur:;:;ing sjster-,j C21t3-P tasec en c:)il demar:c (or a seascr;2i reset) • Correct CHW piping for improved cor.trcl, operation or del:a-T • Repair, replace and/or adjust occupancy sensor controls • Pipe and Tank Insulation Repair • Repair or re-enable lighting system controls • Clean chiller evaporator and condenser bundle tubes Installation of New Equipment • Convert constant volume pumping systems to variable volume pumping sjstems • Convert constant volume airside systems to variable volume • Retrofit economizer sections on to rooftop packaged units • Install smarter controllers (including economizer control and temperature reset control) on to rooftop packaged units. • Replace pilot lights with electronic ignition .. Install occupancy based controls for hotel room I·-NAC systems • Trim pump impellers • Replace inefficient AC units with units that have improved SEER and EERs • Boiler burner efficiency and control upgrades (including Parallel Positioning Control, 02 Trim Control, and SCRs) .. High efficiency boiler installations and steam to hot water boiler conversions; condensing boilers • Boiler feed-water economizer heat recovery .. Boiler condensing econornizer heat recovery • Install heat wheels (heat recovery) on air handlers .. Boiler feed pump VFD .. Replace or repair steam traps • Condensate and blow-down heat recovery • Ozone water treatment (for laundries) • Constant volume to variable volume conversions for lab building/fume hood systems • Upgrade air handler with discharge damper or inlet vane controls to VFD control .. Install CO sensors to control parking garage exhaust fans ,; Install a VrD or Irim ille pump inl[wllcrs fo:-ovel'sized pump!; wilh throillcd bellarlsing v,1lves " Convert distribution system to variable flow and install Vr:D I> Install VFDs on primary pumps and track primary pumps to secondary pumps • Expand lighting control system controls • Add bi-Ievellighting control and/or occupancy sensor control • Install more efficient lighting systems • Upgrade older pneumatic control systems to Direct Digital Control (DOC) 4.6 PROGRAM WORK PLAN Task 1 -Project Initiation Meeting Enovity shall attend a Project Initiation Meeting with CPAU staff to establish roles, timelines, and priorities in the delivery of the Program. The meeting will alse cover Program logistics, marketing, coordination, evaluation, monitoring and verification activities, invoicing requirements, scope of work, and any remaining contractual issues. ©2009 Enovity Inc. Ail Rights Reserved 5 ;::;: c f eei; tract eXecuticr~ Task 2 -Develop Program Plan In coordiration with CPAU staff, Enovity shall develop the proposed Program for achieving installed energy savings. As part of this Process, Enovity shall develop the following documents: Internal PolicIes and Procedures Manual Documentation of the internal policies and procedures that will be adhered to in the implementation of the Program and identification, evaluation, implementation and verification of energy efficiency measures. The Policies and Procedures Manual shall also include a Quality Assurance and Quality Control Plan, a Program Plan, and Implementation Timeline. Deliverable: Draft Internal Policies and Procedures Manual ==-=c=:;..:.Within 30 days of contract execution Deliverable: Final Internal Policies and Procedures Manual Due Date: Within 15 days of CPAU Contract Manger Comments External Policies and Procedures Manual The External Policies and Procedures Manual shall include the terms and conditions for participating in the Program, the process for participating in t!le Program and receiving incentive funds, and a customer complaint and resolution plan. The External Policies and Procedures Manual shall be posted to the Program website (to be developed by Enovity) and will be used as a communication tool for contractors, customers and CPAU representatives to avoid confusion and maintain customer satisfaction. Deliverable: Draft External Policies and Procedures Manual Due Date: Within 45 days of contract execution Due Date: Within 15 days of CPAU Contract lVianger Cornments Marketing Plan The Marketing Plan shall outline pre-planned marketir.g activities including a description of the activity, date and location of the activity, target audience, estimated reach, and marketing materials that will be distributed. The Marketing Plan will also address the proposed brand- identity for the Program and how Enovity will market the Program to reach a broad target audience and how it will promote the program and provide technical training to building owners and operators, equipl"nent suppliers/vendors, mechanical and maintenance contractors, mechanical engineers, CPAU internal staff, etc. Marketing materials shall be developed in conjunction with CPAU staff and CPAU's design firm, RHDG. Deliverable Draft Marketing Plan ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved 6 S,:oce of Work =-:::...:::.....;=-=-=-,-Wilhin 3C ,j?::.'js or c:ncrac( ~x~c:...tGr. .=..::::'-"-'-:=.:..:::.=:;;.;. Final ivlark8t:ng Pic" =::..::::.::::...:::=~ Within 15 dajs o~ CPA...' Contract :\!ar.8C( Ccr;-:mer.:s Coordination Plan Eno'lity shall de'Jelop a Coordination Plan that wiil provide details on how Enol/iti will coordinate the efforts and actions of this Program with other existing internal CPAU energy efficiency, water conservation, and renewable energy programs as well as any other potential external third party programs. =.:::.c.:...:..::::.:..:::=-,,:;..;. Draft Coordination Plan =.::::...:::~~ Within 45 days of contract execution ~~:::.:...:::=:;;.;. Final Coordination Plan Due Date: Within 15 days of CPAU Contract Manger Comments Task 3 -Deveiop Program Documents Enovity shall develop documents necessary for implementation of the Program. All documents related to the Program shall be submitted to CPAU for approval prior to any distribution, circulation, or publication. Enovity shall revise and/or produce new documents as needed to effectively promote the Program. Program Participation Agreement Enovity shall create a Program Participation Agreement that shall be used to collect basic information from a customer including facility contact information, financial requirements, etc, and will act as a Site Access Agreement for the Program . .:::..::::!.!..!..::'~=~ Draft Program Participation Agreement =.:::.-!::::..::::..'C:::.:. Within 30 days of contract execution =.;::;....:..=;.;:::..;.Within 15 days of CPI\U Contract Manger Comments Project Installation Agreement Enovity shall develop a template Program Participation Agreement for committing owners to install the identified energy efficiency measures. The Program Participation Agreement shall detail the measure installation and eligibility requirements needed to receive an incentive from the Program The Project Installation Agreement, once fully executed, shall reserve the specified incentive funds for the Customer. =~:::.:...:::=::.:. Draft Project Installation Agreement ==-=c.=..:.;:;..;. Within 60 days of contract execution =-:=:.:..:..:..=-.::::.:.:.;::..:. Final Program Participation Agreement ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved 7 SeGDe cf 'Ncr'( Sits! Assass;Tlent F or~';i Enol/It} shail de'/e!cp Siti3 AS3as"2rr,~:1t Forms which ~'t\/j!l C:3 l~sec to co;;sct st3r;c2:-d1zsG j data ar.c metr!cs to use in deter;",'H"':inr; jf a f3c:1ity rnset3 ~he ProGram collecting standard data ir,puts fo; determining system eql...:icmer:t and fur.cticr,8iity. The Sice Assessment Form shall be maintained in the facility's electronic project file. Deliverable: Draft Site Assessment Forms Due Date: vVithin 45 days of contract execution Deliverable: Final Site Assessment Forms Due Date: Within 15 days of CPAU Contract Manger Comments Reporting Templates Enovity shall create standard reporting templates including templates for the Initial Site Assessment Report, Detailed Evaluation Report, and Measurement and Verification Report. These templates shall be sent to CPAU for review and approval prior to use Deliverable: Draft Initiai Site Assessment Report, Detailed Evaluation Report, and Measurement and Verification Report Templates ==-=:.=.:..:;::.,:.Within 45 days of contract execution =~.~="-'-Final Initial Sito Asscssrnenl Report, Detailed EvaiuDtion Report, and Measurement and Verification Report Templates Due Date: Within 15 days of CPAU Contract Manger Comments Energy Analysis Tools Enovity shall develop standard energy analysis tools to use in quantifying energy savings for measures covered under the Program. The energy analysis tools shall be sent to CPAU for roview nnd ;::<.pprovnL !'~cw ener~1Y calculation tools ;;hall be develope\! clS tI'::eded durillfj tile Program cycle. Deliverable: Draft Energy Analysis Tools Due Date: Within 45 days of contract execution Deliverable: Final Energy Analysis Tools Due Date: Within 15 days of CPAU Contract Manger Comments Task 4 -Develop Invoicing and Reporting Too!s Enovity will submit to CPAU a sample of all the reporting tools that will be used to meet CPAU reporting requirements. This will include, but is not limited to a: 1. Monthly Narrative ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved 8 2. i\1cr:t:llj invoice 3. Cuarte;ly Report 4. CL:s:cr.;er Data ExpoI'': File 5. Customer Summary 6. Program Savings Repoii (including a forecast of committed and installed savings) 7. Other tools as requested by CPAU Deliverable: Draft Invoicing and Reporting Tools Due Date: Within 30 days of contract execution Deliverable: Final Invoice and Reporting Tools :::...::~==.:. Within 15 days of contract execution Task 5 -Launch Program Program Information Enovity shall provide CPAU with a Program Presentation, Technical Presentation, and a Frequently Asked Questions document on the Program. Deliverable: ProgrHrn Presentation, Technical rJresentalion and Frequently Af;ked Questions Document Due Date: Within 30 days of contract execution Training Enovity shall provide in-person training on the Program process, eligibility requirements, and incentives as well as a high-level overview of typical energy efficiency measures and their applications for requested CPAU staff. In addition, a Pro9rarn r-epresentative shall be availabl(~ to assist all CPAU rcpreS811tatives on i-lii ongoing basis to <.J1l:3W(;! any quustiollc> related to inc r)I'OOram and to determine if specific customers are Hiioibie for r)ro£:]I'arn participation. Deliverable: In~Person Training on Program to CPAU Staff Due Date: Within 60 days of contract execution Deliverable: Ongoing training and assistance for CPAU Staff Due Date: Ongoing Implement Marketing Campaign Enovity shall execute the planned marketing campaign based on the approved detailed Marketing Plan. All marketing activities will be coordinated with CPAU. ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved 9 Pian De!i'/ef3bie: Finai Prc;ram fvlar:~a!~r:g l\!a~e(:G~is as S;laU ~e OUt:;lE;d ir: tr-,e F:ndl {\!a((ctiri£; Plan Due Date: Within 15 days of CPAU Contract Manger Corr.ments =~=~ Presf:!nt at marketing events and perform one-on-one customer marketing as needed Due Date: Ongoing Task 6 -Enroll Customer (Pre-Commitment Stage) Attain Signed Program Participation Agreement Enovity shall implement the Marketing Plan and utilize the marketing materials created to enroll customers that have been screened and identified as qualified for Program participation. Customer enrollment occurs when the customer executes a signed Program agreement (called the Program Participation Agreement), and submits it to Enovity. After the Program Participation Agreement is executed by the facility, the customer becomes eligible to receive preliminary Program services. Enovity shall only sign up customers that appear highly motivated to implement energy efficiency projects and who state that they can fund implementation within a pre-determined timeframe. =-=-'-'-'-=-==.:...:::..:. Signed Program Participation Agreements Due Date: Ongoing Perform Initial Site Assessments Enovity shall perform preliminary program services for a facility that has been deemed e!igible for participation. Once a signed Program Participation Agreement has been received by Enovity, Enovity staff shall perform an Initial Site Assessment. Durinq the Initial Site Assessment, Enovity wi!1 dcdE!rlflirw what pole; Iti,JI 8n('iilY fdCicinlic)' InU'1::;urc;;·; GXI~,t 8t tl18 fr.\ciiity and wiil cal.:lIla(c, using rule of thumb estirnClles and hiqh level assumptions, what the potential energy s8vinos, greenhouse gas reductions, projoct cost, ii1centives, and payback tor each measure will be. f.\11 Initial Site Assessment Report will be developed for each facility that qualifies for Program services. The Initial Site Assessment Report shall be developed and submitted to the Customer and CPAU, which will provide descriptions of the energy efficiency measures identified, and also include analysis of 12 months of electricity and gas data. ==-=.:.=:..:.::...: Initial Site Assessment Reports Perform Detailed Evaluations If, based on review of the Initial Site Assessment, energy efficiency measures are selected for further evaluation by the Customer and Enovity, Enovity shall perform a Detailed Evaluation of ©2009 Enovity Inc, All Rights Reserved 10 the sc!t-::Ct8C~ "::r.e:G~1 ef:c;er.c~/ ~neasu;"es. it ls r3X~~c~eC! ti-:8C cata!i::sc e\/s;!''';2~:Gr:5 Sh2li ':13 Gn 2t !e3S~ 70~-'~ Ct; (tlt? S;l·::~S \tv~E:rs lfli~i2: 2;~"2. 1~,S;::~~S3iT1:;)rHS \8(3;"2 ;:>:;rf~;ITr·J:.':. The Ciojt2;!ec E\/3;U8t;Ct .. :s sr2!1 j(1c~Lde cns;ta Sf:-c:·t (,;,!22.3;...;r~i',3r~s g:c/or ~'crii"'~;<ng of ~~c:li(~e'3 ena(9Y ccr.s~~~mj:~~g 8(1U!prnent, 1d8nt1nca(:c[~ (if er:8r;j' er-;;c:6;iCY :r:c;asc.;('O~·;1 caic.,"~l2t!cn ·::f aner~y savir,',;s for ead: iile,3SLif8, ccstir.g fer eacr meeSiJr8, c(:d a for sach ;r,easure. Enovit~' shall conc!uct an ir:dependent anaiysis to determine the t::crentiat energy savir:gs ar.d calculate the incentives for the customer. The analysis will use pre-developed energy analysis tools. With focused data collection and specific tool sets pre-daveloped for each measure the analysis can be performed in a relatively short time peri cd and accurately. Enovity S;12!1 write up a Detailed Evaluation Report that describes in detail each energy efficiency measure and an estimate of the potential energy savings and incentive for each measure. The Detailed Evaluation Report shall be presented to the Customer and the CPAU. For any sites that have a modern building automation DOC system and where customer cooperation can be obtained, an appropriate fault diagnostic toolset shall be installed at this stage. Enovity staff shall perform the technical services provided by the program including surveys, measurements and analysis. Enovity shall perform the energy savings calculations using Enovity developed tool sets. The customer shall procure the implementation services with Enovity providing technical support throughout the implementation process; Enovity shall also offer the customer turnkey implementation services. =:.:..:...:::,,-==Draft Detailed Evaluation Reports ==-=== Ongoing ==-=== Ongoing and within 15 days of CPAU Contract Manger Comments Task 7-1nstall Energy Efficient Hardware and Projects Project Installation Agreement Upon completion of the Detailed Evaluation Report, Enovity shall supply the Customer with a Projecllnstallation Agreement that will be executed for those measures selected by the customer fG, L [~~l si~lniI1n th~.:· ~')rGJo(:t ;1-l~':;t~!I!ntio:-l/\fJrc;(:nlc-;ntj the custcliner i~j ab!n In I'es(;[ve the specified incentive and make tile monies unavailable to others. The incentive amounls specified ill tho ['mjcct Inslallation Agreement shall be estimates only and Illay vary based on the final installed and verified energy savings amounts. The Project Installation Agreement shall provide details on the equipment specifications and installation requirements that will need to be met in order to receive the agreed to incentive amounts. At this stage Enovity shall invoice CPAU 50% of the performance payment. Deliverable: Signed Project Installation Agreements ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved 11 'The ider.t;r:ed energy en:Ciency r:easures. shall (;f~€r fL.l! turnKey sErilCeS tc ~;;e (.US~G~8;. Ij trio C:JstcmfJr 81c,;rs t.) use a CC:llr8ctcr ci.her tran Ene'iity, thtn s:~ai! provide technical assistst:C8 regarding equiprr.ent spedfications anc insta:lation criteria to the contractor chosen by the customer to implement the work. Enovity shall attend meetings with ccntractors to explain project scope and installation requirements as needed. Deliverable: None Inspections Enovity shall review 100% of project purchase orders, final invoices, and technical equipment cut- sheets to verify that the equipment purchased and installed meets the specifications and performance requirements outlined in the Detailed Evaluation Report. Enovity shall complete a pre-and post installation inspection for all projects. Enovity shall perform on-site inspections proceeding and following completion of work by the contractor. Following the installation of the measures by the contractor, Enovity shall perform a post- installation inspection of the installation, collecting and verifying facility data and performing typical measurement and monitoring, as performed during the pre-installation inspection. Enovity shall compare the performance data against what was prOjected during the Detailed Evaluation. Enovity shall generate a list documenting completed energy efficiency measures and those that are incomplete or incorrectly installed or adjusted. After completion of energy efficiency measures installation, Enovity shall document and describe in detail the measures trwt have been implemented. Enovity shall prepare a Final Measurement and Verification Report with all energy efficiency measures specifying the ones that were implemented and those that were not. At this stage Enovity shall invoice CPAU 100% of the performance payment minus the previously received performance payment for the project. Deliverable: Draft Measurement and Verification Reports D.?:.liY.f).r:.~[)l(r Final MeClsurement and Verification F<eports Due Date: Ongoing and within 15 days of CPAU Contract Manger Comments Remedy Installation Issues To prevent installation issues, Enovity shall ensure the facility operation staff has received training and all necessary operations and maintenance manuals and that the customer is satisfied with the installation. If an installation or customer satisfaction issue should arise, Enovity shall promptly remedy it. Enovity shall respond to any customer questions or complaints within twenty-four (24) hours by telephone and wili include the equipment manufacturer on the call, if necessary. to provide immediate guidance, service, or corrective work. Enovity shall have trained respondents on call to rapidly respond to field issues, as needed, and will maintain a customer service log to track such customer calls and the service that was provided. ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved 12 ,C\s par: of the PrCJgr",;"1's Extar::al Pclicies 2;~C Prscec:uss i\!anl.!2i, Er;cvit; Sh2il p(]"ide contae: information for a Prograr:l that wiil be responsible for fielding customer complaints and wil describe the complaint resolution process. A,s part of the Program's Internal Poiicies and Procedures Manual, Enovity shall outline specific complaint resolution procedures to be following by Program staff, Deliverable: Customer Complaint Log Due Date: Ongoing as part of the Monthly Report Payment of Incentives Incentive amounts will be determined by multiplying the annual energy savings over the first year, inclusive of baseline adjustments, if any, by the incentive rate multiplier per annual unit of energy saved. The final incentive rates shall be agreed with CPAU, Final incentive payments will be based on actual installed and verified energy savings. Incentives will be capped at 100% of the incremental project cost, and are expected to typically cover 20 -60% of the incremental project cost. A Final Incentive Release Form shall be drafted by Enovity and signed by Enovity and the Customer. The Final Incentive Release Form shall indicate the final savings and incentives amounts, as well as confirm the designated payee and corresponding taxpayer information. CPAU shall facilitate the payment of incentives to reduce the cost of the implemented measures and lower the payback period. The incentive shall be paid directly to the customer, or customer appointed payee, by CPAU to help buy down the payback of implemented measures. Deliverable: List of incentives due to customers with corresponding Final Incentive Release Forms Due Date: Ongoing 8···, Invoicing and Report Invoicing Requirements Enovity shall submit a monthly invoice to CPAU for Program accomplishments and installations performed in the preceding calendar month. The monthly invoice shall include reimbursements for time and materials tasks and performance payments. The monthly invoice shall be submitted in conjunction with the Monthly Report and other documentation as required by CPAU, RQ]lyerable: Monthly invoices, accompanied by supporting electronic flat file reports Due Date: The 15th day of each month for work completed the preceding month ©2009 Enovity Inc, All Rights Reserved 13 perfcrr~eL ;( In€ ;:;reC8~ing C2:enCar ri2r;~n. "ir:e i\lor-:tril'j pr:or mCiith's acti\/lti;;:s, acccrr:p!:sh[~en1s ·21CC expe~ditures re!a~eJ to the Progr~rr;. minimum, the '\iionthly Report shall contain: " Program Cost Data • 'Program Impacts Data • Program Changes f New Program Information • Any other requirements as determined by the CPAU =.::::c.:..:..:::.:...;;:;=.:",,-,-Monthly Report and supporting documentation ==-==;:..:. The 15th day of each month for work completed the preceding month Quarterly Report Enovity shall submit a Quarterly Report to the CPAU which, at a minimum, shall include: It Program Expenditures Data • Program Narrative for the Quarter e Program Results for the Quarter • Any Changes to the Program Plan or Program Design =.::::"-'-!..:::.:...;;:;~::.:. Quarterly Report and supporting documentation =.::::;..:=::.:. 45 days following the end of the quarter /\t tile compleiion of the F'rogram cycle, Enovity Sl1311 submit a firm! comprehensive Program Report that will provide an evaluation of the Program. At a minimum, the Report shall include the following: " Program Achievements " Program Challenges f!l Goal Attainment .. Lessons Learned .. Program Improvement Recommendations ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved 14 Sc<:ce of Task 9 -Perform Customer Feedback Sun/eys Enovity shall provide a customer feedback sur"ey form to obtain customer feedback on the Program's services, equipment, and the value. Survey topics shall range from the customer's perceived convenience of the program and notification of other energy efficiency programs available, to customer's overall satisfaction with the implementation of the Program. Enovity shall submit draft customer feedback surveys to CPAU for review and approval. Surveys shall be delivered to the customer upon project completion with instructions for completion online and via ground mail. For mail surveys, Enovity shall include a postage-paid addressed envelope for collection. Enovity shall request feedback surveys for 100% of projects. Enovity shall augment form surveys with telephone surveys as needed to gain a higher percentage of responses to the survey. Deliverable: Draft Customer Feedback Survey Template =.;;::.....::..:::;.;:.;:::..:. Within 90 days following Contract execution Final Customer Feedback Survey Template Due Date: Within 15 days of CPAU Contract Manger Comments Q.~Li.Y~r9bl.~ Customer Feedback Summary =.::::....:::.=::.:. 45 days following the completion of each quarter, as part of the Quarterly Report ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved 15 ":~.J:I.. "j: ?;-C;f;.:i: fr:iiiatic('l rj!2e~itg .Ait5nd l~r(;j9C: lniti30c.1 !\l~etin~:; Intern<ll Policies and Procedures Ma:1Ual Develop Draft internal P&P Manual Review Draft Internal P&P Manual Finaiize Internal P&P Manual External Policies and Procedures rvlanual Develop Draft External P&P Manual Review Draft External P&P Manual Finalize External P&P Manual Marketing Plan Develop Draft Marketing Plan Review Draft Marketing Plan Finalize Marketing Plan Coordination Plan Develop Draft Coordination Plan Review Draft Coordination Plan Finalize Coordination Plan Task 3: Develop Program Documents Program Participation Agreement Develop Draft Program Participation Agreement Review Draft Program Participation Agreement Finalize Program Participation Agreement Project Installation Agreement Develop Draft Project Installation Agreement Review Draft Project Installation Agreement Finalize Project Installation Agreement Site Assessment Forms Develop Draft Site Assessment Forms Review Draft Site Assessment Forms Finalize Site Assessment Forms Report Templates Develop Draft Report Templates Review Draft Report Templates Finalize Report Templates Energy Analysis Tools De'Jelop Draft Energy Analysis Tools Review Draft Energy Analysis Tools Finalize Energy Analysis Tools ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved ::: 'i ::.( 1,,":('/,''-'.;: 1·.JI .... -..I·""~ NTP + 30d 15d 15d NT? + 45d 15d 15d NTP + 30d 15d 15d NTP + 45d 15d 15d NTP + 30d 15d 15d NTP + 60d 15d 15d NTP + 45d 15d 15d NTP + 45d 15d 15d NTP + 45d 15d 15d C;:>,~.U 8eth CPAL' Encvity Enovi!y CPAU Enovlty CP,t\U Enovity Enovity CPAU Enovity Enovity CPAU Enovity Enovily CPAU Enovily Enovity CPAU Enovity Enovity CPAU Enovity Enovity CPAU Enovity T3S~ 5: L3Ur:C:l Fror.;r2rr, PrJ(;'3f'11 In'ormaticn Deliver Prcgr3m Inforrr.ation to CFAU Training In-Person Training on Program to CPAU Staff Ongoing Training and Assistance for CPAU Staff Implement Marketing Campaign Develop Draft Program Marketing Materials Review Draft Marketing Materials Finalize Marketing Materials Present at Marketing Events Task 6: Enroll Customers Attain Signed Program Participation Agreements Perform Initial Site Assessments Perform Detailed Evaluations Task 7: Install Energy Efficient Projects Install Projects Perform Post Installation M&V Remedy Installation Issues Pay Incentives Lo Customers Task 8: Invoicing and Reporting Submit Monthly Invoices Submit Monthly Reports Submit Quarterly Report Submit Final Report Task 9: Perform Customer Feedback Surveys Develop Drail Customer "ecclbdci; Survey Review Draft Customer Feedback Survey Finalize Cuslomer Feedback Survey Perform Customer Feedback Surveys ©2009 Enovity Inc. All Rights Reserved NTP + 30d Ei1Gvity Ongoing Enovity Ongoing Enovity NTP + 45d Enovity 15d CPAU 15d Enovity Ongoing Enovity Ongoing Enovity OngOing Enovity Ongoing Enovity Ongcing Various Ongoing Enovity OngOing Enovity Ollgoing CPAU Ongoing Enol/ity OngOing Enovity Ongoing Enovity Ongoing Enovity NTP .: 90d F:r.nvit)' 15d CPAU 15d Enovity Ongoing Enovity 2 in-,/o!ce CP;:',~! via 2 ;~~-'i~;:C' P~jC:~"G f.)~;:.".>::;~,j.,.;r~. Ti;e pt;c:r:; S::-L~·::ur·? "" cf a fb<ec~unit r:i~c:r;g ,,/t:l 2 tirti= 2.C;C 1T:2tdri(,~J r'C":~ t:· ex-:::;,:: j C1Tt1:/~f r·r~:::ll) s~r;~ctL!re \;\/her9 e1:;~!/ perce~t (80~;c-~ cr ~hs costs Si;21~ Ce pc~ic far perfc(!T:2.nce. i~cministration and marketing costs are consiC8r,:;.d 'I3J/1 and wiil maKe L.p tne rernainir.g twenty percent (20%). Incentives shall be paid by CPAU directly to Customers and are no! includec in Eno'/itis Payment Schedule. Table A 1 provides the Program BudGet for Years 2009, 2010 and 2011. Table A.1 Program Budget Total Admin Marketing Performanca Payment 2009-11 Total $1,496,250 $179,550 $119,700 $1,197,000 2009 $293,265 $59,850 $53,865 $179,550 2010 $585,530 $59,850 $47,880 478,800 20'11 $616,455 $59,850 $17,O;}-';0 $538,650 Performance Payments shall be paid to Enovity on the basis of $0,908 per gross therm and $0.135 per gross kWh. Performance payment shall be paid to Enovity by CPAU in two illstallrnents; ~iO% (based on estimated energy savings) wl1en tile customer commits to implementing the energy efficiency measures 100% minus any previous payment when the energy efficiency measures have been installed and verified (based on installed and verified savings). Enovity's hourly rates for the time and materials (administration and marketing) portion of the contract are provided in 'Iable A2. Table A.2 Hourly Rates for Time and Materials Work Dimr.:{ Lal)or Respon~ibi!itjr Proposed Houdy Rat~7 ",·_.iT""~'~.\."'·"""#''''7:¥-,,~,,<tt.>-''t_<!-\M'''''}&'''~'''-':'=~~:'~''''' ~~_.t<::;'!'_.-.... z:"""""".Au"._ ..... ·as;""""«::"''''''''''~ihl>-lI>n'''''U",'c.)'t>.v'Z''9':-_'''''-''''''''''''''' _"""""""="""" __ .. :;, .... "'.:.~_ Princ:ipal Overall executive responsibility Technical Director Tool development, project OC, technical $185 support, and Program design Utility Program Manager Program design, management, tracking, $160 marketing, coordination Project Manager Project management and delivery, technical $160 management ---_._---_.-~----.. -------.----.-.---------.-... ................. _--_._-- Engineering Staff TechnicGI evaluations, measure validation $150 ---'-.-- Project Coordinator Assisting in administrative functions of $90 Program '":'~):A:~j AND ~~-L~:~,JTAh'l 1~~SUP~~N{:c Ii'J TH2 r\)!ICL'i't73 :::'C~f~, Tn= CC'\/::?A.;,::;<~:: SF:::C,lf=lEL-:;' 13E~·:i!V, ~~·.:=t-:()R.C'E) 8'( r;':~ilPA}··P2.3 'i!!TH Ai'I' BEST'S KEY R.·1,Tli'i(3 OF )",,:VIl, ~:R hl·G:'!2:-(, L~C2:·ISc.C C:K A,:""T:1C\?!Z=[: ;(r T?~.}·i::.?,~,_·T ';\-J3 iJRANCE 2~SJNE3S IN TH:':. STATE OF CALFOR,'j;A. R2:QUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT I YES ! YES YES YES COMPENSA nON E!'vIPLOYER'S LIABILITY GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE lEGAL LIABILITY AUTOMOBilE LIABILITY, INCLUDING STAT:JTORY ST.A. TUTORY BODilY If\lJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. BODilY INJURY EACH PERSON EACH OCCURRENCE All OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN AND NEGLIGENT BODilY INJURY AND PROPERTY COMBINED OCCIjRR:::~ICE $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 • $1,000,000 • $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDiTIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHAll OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSUlTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATIOf\J, EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITlONAl INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCil MEMBERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A A PHOVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY D!W f,OVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVr:RAGE OR OF COVi-=r~!"G[ C/\I'-lC[lJj\TjOI~; ld--!D B. A CONTf~ACTUAL LlAF31L1TY I:NDOF<S[~MEI'JT F'f<'OVI[)ING INSUr{!"NCl':: COVER/l.GE r:OH CONTRACTOR'S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C, DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY'S PRIOR APPROVAL. 11. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMiT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO "ADDITIONAL INSUREDS" A. PRIMARY COVERAGF; WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE I'JAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL I~ISUREDS. B. CROSS LIABILITY Rav, 11/07 E~{)ljC!t D ;j~~>~3! .... R~~~)\l (;::: R'E: Q'lj ~RE~\fi :::'JT:3 THE i'i,6.)vlii'!G OF ~/Jr~)R.~ 7H,'~.\i ~::~,~~= F'ER3C:i';, r=:~~::\11 C,~;, I':C~,:-:C!~,,::'~i~i()j\! /.:3 ll\;~~~.~:f~,~~~<·~ L!;'iDE:,'":. ~;.;-:c. j.:.I:>_;'=:V SHALL r--JC'T, FOR TrLtl.-:-REA,2C.t'~ r\LGt\iE, EJ'c(;1t',i(3Ui:3H 1~j'( ~,:C;r;S C~ Tr.E li\iSL.:;:;:::S A,~';;~iST (~\~I-:';~'-:EP., BUT THiS Ef\iCORS,=:\!E~~Tr A.;'.IJ -;-:-i~ j'IAi\:!l'iG i.=:';-: 1",~Ui_:-i:':L~ :i'.iS~F~=:::'.S·, S:-~;..~~ >j.:·7 II'/~I::'::/~"S:: T:~~ T'.JT/~,~ C. NOT!CE OF CAi'lCELLA.T:GN 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATiON DATE FOF~ ANY REASOf'l OTHER T:--iAN THE NON-PAYME~IT OF PRErvllUM, THE ISSUI~~G C:OMPMJY SHi\LL PROViDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYiVlEt'-JT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHAH PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: Rev. 11/07 PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303. ATTACHMENT B CITY OF PALO ALTO C00fTR-\.CT NO, C09130404 AGREKMENT BET\YEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND NATION • .\.L RESOVI{CE MA.:.'iAGE)'IENT, 1:.'i FOR PROFESSIO:,,{AL SERVICES (COMMERlCAL EXPRESS REFRlGER.A.TION EFFICIENCY PROGR.A.c.\'f) This AGREEMENT is entered into , by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California (HCITY"), and NATIONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, INC., a Massachusetts corporation, located at 480 Neponset Street, Bldg. #2, Canton, MA 02021 (HCONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to evaluate existing energy programs ("Project") and desires to engage a consultant to provide evaluation, measurement and verification, demand reduction; and third party energy efficiency in connection with the Project ("Services"). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit "A", attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREE'MENT §'~GTJQN 1. ;;C01?E QF SEPJlICE~. CONSULTANT shall perform tbG Services descrjbed in Exhibit "A" in accordance with the tenns and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through completion of the services in accordance with the Schedule of Performance attached as Exhibit "B" unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORNIANCE. Time is ofthe essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term ofthis Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set f01ih in Exhibit "B", attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULT ANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY's agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages 09041 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 for delay if the extension is requirec. due to the fault of CONS1.TTA . .;.~T. SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPZN~.ATIO~. The compensation to paid to CO"!l.·~UTT 'T'A.N'T -,-. ,-h C' . ". " ,. T:; • ',' "",. 1 d' 1 • , 1 ~~ 'L J.".1 . lor perrorm&"":.ce CI Le...,ervlCes dcscl1aed In LXhlOlt • A ,Inc u l~g DOth pa:lillem for professional services and reimbursable expe~ses, shall not exceed One Hundred Thousand. Dollars per year ($100,000 per year) for a potential three years. The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit "C", entitled "COMPENSATION," which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit "C". CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit "A". SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who perfonned the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULT ANT's billing rates (set forth in Exhibit "C"). If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULT ANT's payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City's project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be perfonned by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT's supervision. CONSULT ANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perfonn the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees andsubconsultants, ifpermitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All of the services to be fumished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout Califomla under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COlVIPLIANCE 'WITH LA \VS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all pennits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the perfonnance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/ONIISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the work product submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives notice to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design 2 09041 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 documents to construct the Project, CONSULT.\.i."iT shall obligated to correct any and all eLors, omissions Ot ambiguities pr:c:" to and (~uring COL:rSe of construction This obligation shull survive t';!rmination of the Agreement. SECTION 9, COST EST1MATES. II this Agrr.:ement to the design of a public works project, CONSlTLT At"JT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of design submittaL If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%) of the CITY's stated construction budget, CONSULT A.1\[T shall make recommendations to the CITY for aligning the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULT ANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULT ANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTA.l\l"T shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSUL TANT' s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent ofthe city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. SECTION 12. ~UBCONTRACTING. CONSULT ANT shall not subcontract any portion ofthe work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or designee. CONSULT A.1\[T shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due tB subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsllHant. CONS1JLTANT shall Gh(iDB;f~ or (ldd suhc:onsllltants only with the prior tlpproval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Lori Malkasian as the project director to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services to represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY's project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY's request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. The City's project manager is Joyce Kinnear, Utilities Department, Marketing Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone: 650-329-2652. The project manager will be 3 09041 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 CONSULT A~T' 5 poi::1.t of contact with respect to performance, progress ane executioIl of the S';rliCes. The CITY may d.esignate an alternate project ma.:.lager time to tine. §ECTION 14. O\YNERSHJP OF MATEHJALS. Cpon deFvery. all work product, including "vithout limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specificatior::.s, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTAl'l"T agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTAl"lT's records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSuLTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an "Indemnified Party") from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements ("Claims") resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the at'ove, nothing in this Srcticl11 16 shall he construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party [rom Claims arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party_ 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT's serlices and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section l6 shall survive the expiration or early tennination of this Agreement. SECTION 17. \VAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, tenn, condition or provision ofthis Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, wi 11 not be deemed to be a waiver of any other tenn, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation ofthe same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 09041 4 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its cest and expense, shall oct:.1in ar;.d maintain, full force and effect during the terrn of this Agreement, the insl..:rance cC/erage descriJed in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall cbtain a polic:1 endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability cr automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with A.l\1 Best's Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution ofthis Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY's Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification, CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY's Purchasing Manager during the entire term ofthis Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result ofthe Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The city manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole orin part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice tJlcreof 10 CONSPLTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will i.mmediately discontinue its perf01TI1anCe of the Services. 19.2. CONSULT ANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in cOlmection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on 5 09041 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days aft-.:r giving notice) ofs;}spension -)1 termination; providec, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a defadt by CONSDLTA . .l.'TT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTA);"T only for that portion of CONSULTANTs services \vhich are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such detennination rllay be ill ade Jy the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices heretmder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address ofCONSULTk'J"T recited above §ECTIO~ 21. CONF~JI~T OF JNTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance ofthis Agreement, it will not employ sub consultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person wlm has or will h,we any financia 1 interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. 21.3. Ifthe Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a "Consultant" as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULT ANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination 6 09041 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 Requirements and the penalties for vIOlation and to meet all require>ne:r:ts of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment, induc.ing compieting th.; fODn fclmishcd by CITY and set forth in ExhibiI "E." SECTION 23. MISCELLA:-mOUS PROVISIONS. 23.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State ofCalifomia. 23.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 23.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys' fees paid to third parties. 3.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 23.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 23.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 23.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any cluJy executed amendment hereto arc by sllch reference incorpor;:J(cd in this Agreement and \vill bee deemed to be a part ofthis Agreement. 23.8. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions ofthe Charter ofthe City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion ofthe fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This Section 23.8 shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. 23.9. The indi viduals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. 09041 IN WITNESS \VHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized 7 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 representJ.tives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO City Mfu'1ager APPROVED AS TO FORL\l: Senior Asst. City Attorney APPROVED: Director of Administrative Services Attaclunents: EXHIBIT "A": SCOPE OF WORK NATIONAL RESOGRCE MANAGEME~IT, INC. By: 0. "" s we r -' .. Name: j J!{'f\ Stc..\-Jl Title: CCo EXHIBIT "B": EXHIBIT "C": SCHED1JLE OF PERFORMANCE COMPENSATION EXHIBIT "D": EXHIBIT 09041 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION OF NONDISCRIMINATION 8 Professional Services Revised 10/18/07 Exhibit A. NR~,/l Express Refrigeraticn Program -Final Scope of VVork Summary N t' I R . i\1 t I ' h . ... 'I'IRil..1" '=' ,. .' P" f" adona, esource "anagamen" .1':0. S, llerelncher f\ \11. , 1,6mgerallon .".8,10,;[ Program, focuses on delivering refrigeration cor.trols. motors, and LED lights to customers with commercial refrigeration equipmefit. These customers, typically labe!ed the 'hard to reach customer', inciude liquor stores, convenience stores, grocery stores, restaurants and cold storage facilities (meat, floral and produce). NRM's Express Refrigeration Program is designed to target those customers with commercial refrigeration, conduct a free audit and assessment for them, provide a detailed analysis that shows exactly how much energy they can save by installing our measures and provide them with the assurance our equipment works. If necessary, we will explain to their refrigeration tech how our equipment works. NRM provides a lengthy warranty period - 2 years for Cooltrol® (parts and labor) and 1 year for ECM's and LED's (parts and Labor). Because NRM's technicians are licensed in the electrical and refrigeration field, the customer is assured that our equipment will in no way jeopardize the life of their refrigeration equipment or the product that is in it. Additionally. because we are high tech company that is constantly creating new products in this field, the customer will be getting a product that is 'supermarket' level quality or better with little or no cost to them. The program can be summarized in the following steps: Identify target market, audit target market, perform evaluation and final perform the installations. A. NRM will identify potential customers by the following methods. 1. NRM uses an SIC search of the types of customers who have refrigeration for specific geographic areas. This list will serve as our cold call list. 2. CPAU may provide a potential customer listing. 3. NRM will identify prospective customers from current customer base who have sites in the CPAU service area. 4. NRM will contact refrigeration companies to obtain their customers in the CPAU service territory. 5. NRM is a member of the Neighborhood Market Association, a group of California c- stores, liquor stores and independently owned stores. We will use our network here to help identif}! our tmget market. 6. NRM will seek referrals from existing customers in other service areas and CPAU service area (we have installed our products in % dozen sites in CPAU service area). 7. NRM will work with CPAU Key Account Reps who interact with customers on a daily basis. B. Audit Target Market The second step is to introduce the program to CPAU Target Market and obtain the required information. 1. One full time NRM Energy Consultant will be devoted to this program. 2. The NRM Energy Consultant will use the listing of customers identified above and visit the site. During the visit, Energy ConSUltant will explain the program and conduct a free, no obligation energy assessment of their refrigeration equipment. National Resource \'ianagement 480 Neponset St, Bldg #2 Canton, MA 02021 Exhibit A NRM Express Refrigeration Program -Final Scope of 'Nork 3. As audits are done, Energy Consultant wi!: look for other sites not identified en list above. Energy Cal lsultant will cold call those sites. 4. Energy Consultant will explain how our equipment wor!<s, anS'lJer technical questions and conduct demos of the equipment to customer and refrigeration technician (if necessary). 5. The audit is more than opportunity to get equipment information. It is the time to create excitement for the program and 'pre-sell'. This is done by providing the customer quality brochures of our products and case studies for local customers that have installed our equipment and realized savings. Please see the enclosed folder for an example of our marketing materials. C. Evaluation -The final step is presenting the proposal to the customer. 1. Analysis is engineering quality analysis that clearly explains derivation of kWh savings. As a result, customer will feel confident in our estimates. 2. Summary of Proposal is 'bottom line' based -How much will customer save and what is their payback. These customers are business driven people and want to know the 'bottom line'. Although most proposals will be fully funded, the proposal will clearly state the benefit of making an investment for those customers who have a co-payment. D. Installation -Upon a customer signing a contract with NRM to proceed with the recommended measures, the following steps are taken: All installations are performed by employees of NRM. NRM is a licensed electrical contractor in California. 1. Installer paperwork is created from our software tool that is derived from what we specified for their site and customer agreed to. 2. Equipment is configured in Union City, CA office. 3. NRM Installer receives equipment, confirms equipment against audit and Installer paperwork and sets appointment with customer for installation. 4. NRM Installer installs equipment, tests equipment, completes Installer Completion Form and trains customer. Customer signs Installer Completion Form that verifies Installer reviewed everything with them. 5. If needed, Energy analysis is modified based on 'as-built'. Customer information is then entered into NRM Service Software so that jf customer calls with service issues, Service Dispatch has all necessary paperwork and information to trouble shoot over the phone and/or dispatch service technicians. All custornet phone colis, questions and resolutions are tracked within Service Software. 6. Issue Resolution -Please note that NRM maintains a Service Technician Line that is available to customers during normal business hours. During off hours, customers can leave messages and on call technicians are paged. On Call technicians will then get in touch with the customer. Most issues are refrigeration related issues. However, NRM works with customers to solve these issues which include conducting downloads of Cooltrol. Through this process, we are able to look back in time at how the controls are working in conjunction with customers' refrigeration equipment and solve problems. Project Management for CPAU's Express Refrigeration Program will be conducted by: National Resource Management, Inc. National Resource Management 480 Neponset Sl. F31dg !!-2 Canton, MA 02021 NRM Express Refrigeration Program -Final Scope of "'Jerk :"'Oii lVlalkasian 29300 Kohoutek \Nay, Suite 110 Union City, CA 94587 510.471.2000 Lori@mminc.com Work Plan Exhibit A MARKETING -NRM will use a multifaceted approach to market the Express Refrigeration Program to CPAU customers: o Mail and distribute CPAU printed material explaining the program, its benefits and how customers can participate in conjunction with NRM's own marketing information. This will be done in an organized strategic method so as to effectively control and manage leads, and perform audits, evaluations and installations in a timely manner and cost-effective method. Please see included marketing materials for an example of our product brochures, case studies and data sheets that we provide to customers. o Cold Calling -NRM has found that in order to reach these customers, you must visit them in person, explain how the program works, provide an overview of our products, provide referrals and then enroll them in the program. NRM will explain how the customer can take advantage of the program, what they are expected to pay of the total cost and detail the exact steps of the process: the audit, the evaluation, the proposal, and the installation and payment term options. This is a key step in avoiding any misunderstandings by customers and to set their expectations as to the entire process of participation in the program and its implementation at their facility. o Referrals -NRM uses customers and refrigeration contractors to gain referrals. We have found this to be an extremely effective method of generating more sales. We routinely conduct downloads of our controllers and perform bill analyses to show customers how much they have saved by installing our equipment. We then calion these customers to act on our behalf when we find oiher customers with similar facilities. All CPAU Customers with commercial refrigeration are eligible for the Express Refrigeration Program where NRM measures can be installed that provide energy (kWh) savings. In determining eligibility, NRM will conduct an audit and perform an analysis. NRM will also require the customer provide a current CPAU electric bill for that site. No assistance will be required from CPAU to enroll customer except to have a point of contact available should the customer want to validate the existence of this program. EVALUATION National R.esource Management 480 Neponset St, Bldg #2 Canton, !'vIA 02021 Exhibit A NRM Express Refrigeration Program -Final Scope of VVork :J An NRM representative will review and explain the proposal with the customer. If he agrees to the installation and proposed measures, NRvl wBl prepare aGreement contract and obtain customer's authorization to proceed. o A work order will be issued to the assigned installer detailing items to be installed as well as location of each item (if necessary, a drawi1g will be provided with the work order). ENERGY SAVINGS STRATEGIES OF NRM The following energy savings strategies are configured as part of one controller, allowing for a central point of control for the end-user (please see attached marketing materials for a picture of the system). In addition, each controller can maintain or control up to 3 freezers or coolers (or zones). This helps eliminate redundant equipment and provides for a very cost effective solution. o COOLER/FREEZER TEMPERATURE & EVAPORATOR FAN CONTROLS -Cost effective when the cooler has at least 600 watts of evaporator fan load. While the system maintains temperature in the cooler or freezer, it also controls the evaporator fans. They are turned off approximately 60-85% of the time that the compressor is off depending on existing cooler sizing and configuration. This reduction in energy use by fans also results in less heat introduced into the cooler from the fan motors. The system is also programmed to control the defrost operation and to notify the user of any potential problems that may arise during normal operation thus reducing both maintenance and product loss. A night setback can be set where no perishables are stored in the cooler, saving the customers 3- 5% per degree setback. The CoolTrol system provides runtime statistics for both compressor and evaporator fans. This can alert customer to operation under inefficient conditions. For example, if there is a slow refrigerant leak the run time (which is shown on the display unit) gradually increases until it can't handle the load. o COOLER DOOR HEATER -The controller monitors the dew point in the store, determines the power level that the cooler heaters need to run at, and pulses a relay at a power level appropriate for the particular dew point. As a result the door heaters are controlled, aulornaticaliy, at their optimLim energy savings point, without creating condensation. Can be controlled through Cooltrol® or through our stand-alone door heater controller for applications where there are only cooler door heaters to control. Typical savings for cooler doors is 60-95%, depending on ambient conditions in the store. o FREEZER DOOR HEATER -The controller monitors the dew point in the store, determines the power level that the freezer heaters need to run at, and pulses a relay at a power level appropriate for the particular dew point. As a result, the door heaters are controlled, automatically, at their optimum energy savings point, without creating condensation. Can be controlled through Cooltrol or through our stand-alone door heater controller for applications where there are only freezer door heaters to control. Typical savings for freezer doors is 25-55% depending on ambient conditions in the store. National Resource Management 480 Neponset Bldg 1+2 Canton, MA 02021 Exhibit A I'JRM Express Refrigeration Program -Final Scope of 'Nark o i\lOVEL TY COOLER CONTROL NIGHT SHUT OFF -Cost effective 'Nhen the nOlJelty cooier is at least 5 amps and can be shut off for over 5 hours per day. This is typically the 'j·3 door cooler provided by beverage vendors (Coke ®, Pepsi ®, etc.). No'/eity Cooler Control perfcr:ned through Cooltroi where it can concurrently control a wa:k-in cooler or freezer. Typical savings for Night shut offs are 20% to 30%. The coolers cannot have perishables stored in them. o EC (Electronically Commutated) Evaporator Fan Replacement Motor (for walk-ins) - Over the last 4 years, NRM has worked in conjunction with major manufacturers to design, manufacture and market the most efficient motor available for walk-in cooler and freezer evaporator coils. The ECM (EC Motor) reduces energy consumption by up to 70% vs. shaded pole motors and up to 40% vs. PSC motors. The motors are manufactured for NRM in different bracket configurations to accommodate replacement in both ceiling mount and wall mount evaporator types. NRM has also custom designed 'retrofit brackets' to accommodate swap outs for older style coils. NRM offers several different models for the myriad of evaporator coils in the market including motors to replace 16W, 1/20 HP, 1/15 HP, 1/30 HP, % HP, 1/3 HP ~ HP and 3/4HP motors. o EC or SSC (Solid State Commutated) Evaporator Fan Replacement Motor (for reach-in cases) -Manufactured for NRM, this motor is designed for replacement of existing shaded pole and PSC motors contained in reach-in coolers and freezers located on the retail floor of grocery stores. NRM's NlE25 motor reduces energy consumption by up to 60% vs. shaded pole motors and up to 35% for PSC motors. The motor is designed for NRM with a 'one size fits all' configuration that allows it to be used across a large number of manufacturer equipment types and models. o LED Retrofits -To date, NRM has researched and tested nearly a dozen different LED products for medium temp and low temp applications. Since early June 2008, we have been rolling out the latest in technology (Generation VI) of a product that provides optimal energy savings and light distribution. This product is manufactured by Schott Gemtron. o Remote Site Manager (RSM) -Over the past 4 years, NRM has developed and marketed an intemet based controls system. This ~;ystem and its components are designed, manufactured and installed by NRM. For each installation a website is created and optional levels of monitoring 1 support 1 training and service are provided by NRM. To date, over 200 systems have been installed and yielded positive energy savings. Through a 'gateway' that transfers information over the internet, 3rd party controls for lighting and air conditioning, and a custom configurable user interface, customers are able to remotely monitor and contro" their refrigeration, lighting and air conditioning equipment. Through its custom designed alarms and algorithms, customers can be quickly alerted if equipment is not running efficiently (i.e. compressors are Iowan Freon, pressure settings are incorrect, etc). Such alarms and 'continuous commissioning' can provide additional energy savings to customers. Additionally, refrigeration system's temperature control and defrost cycles can be fine tuned to yield on-peak demand savings. This product is targeted towards convenience store chains, grocers and cold Natiollal Resource Managemell( 480 Neponset St Bldg #2 Canton, MA 02021 Exhibit A NRM Express Ref;-igeration Program -Final Scope of 'Nark storage facilities such as fruitfproduce distributors and foed processing centers. RSM has received several aVv'srds from well known groups including Energy Star and Flex Your Power. NRM recently applied and won Santa Clara's Energy Innovator award for a Silicon Valley Power customer, Sierra Meats, \ivhere we installed RSM in the Spring of 2007. NRM reduced Sierra Meat's electric bill by over 27%. o Smart Defrost System -Designed for refrigeration systems with electric defrost (typically walk-in and freestanding freezers), this system uses an algorithm to decrease the number of set defrosts each day. Preliminary testing by NRM indicates this system will reduce electric defrosts by approximately 40% to 60%. o Hood Exhaust Fan Control (Custom Measure) -In August 2008, NRM began to work with EccoVent on the installation of a control system for hood exhaust fans in restaurants and other facilities with cooking areas. The system, which is compromised of a processor, temperature sensors and VFD's, uses a unique algorithm to detect heat in the cooking hood and slows down the exhaust and make-up air motors when they do not need to run at 100%. This system uniquely stands out since it can be programmed and tweaked remotely over the internet allowing NRM and utilities to maximize and verify savings easily and economically. INSTALLATION -Each NRM technician is trained to be personable with customers and to deal with any inconsistencies found at time of installation like wiring issues where existing wiring is not up to current electrical code or other safety standards. All of our technicians are required to carry cell phones for quick resolution of potential problems or to deal with a customer's last minute concerns. o NRM maintains a database of end users that details kWh savings, installed measures and other demographic information. NRM can and will make this information available to CPAU staff members to aid them in preparation of reports, etc. o NRM maintains a manufacturing and assembling facility in Canton Massachusetts. All job kits will be assembled, tested and shipped from this facility directly to our office in Union City, CA whore final assembly is performed. Ali equipment is UL listed. Installations are scheduled based on convenience to customer. NRM maintains a goal of installing all CoolTrol systems within 30 days of a Purchase Order. TECHNICAL SUPPORT-NRM maintains a toll free number for customers that have questions about the CoolTrol system and their refrigeration equipment. In addition, NRM has on call support, 24 hours a day via automated pager. COORDINA TlON WITH STAFF MEMBERS FROM CPAU -NRM will cooperate and work with CPAU staff members for the purposes of program management, providing detailed energy analysis, project inspections, monitoring and evaluation. National Resource Management 480 Neponset St. Bldg #2 Canton, ::VIA 0202 J Exhibit A NRM Express Refrigeration Program -Final Scope of \Nark REFERRALS -NRM will offer ref.srrais fer customers that could benefit by lamp and ballast changes or other ty~es of energy conservation rm)asu:-es to vendors contracted by CPA.U. QUALITY CONTROL -Since 1995, NRM has taken severa! steps to ensure quality centrol for the end user and each utility program. o Thorough training of all staff members performing audits and sales. D Routine checks of audits by NRM management to ensure accuracy and completeness. NRM has regular meetings to review personal performance. D Implementation of system test checklists and installer sign-offs subsequent to installations. D Evaluations of installations and regular communications of tips and recommendations for higher quality installs. D In some cases, installations cannot be performed as audited due to pre-existing wiring conditions, refrigeration equipment functionality or building configuration. Installations that are different from what was audited undergo corrections to proposals, kWh savings and final invoice price. D From time to time or at a customer's request, NRM downloads equipment runtimes from installed CoolTrol system to ensure persistence. Typically, NRM reviews the downloads with customers to explain actual energy savings. TARGET MARKET NRM estimates 25 Liquor, Grocery and C-Store sites; 160 Restaurants; 5 Wholesale/Cold Storage (Fruit, Produce, Meat, etc); 60 Other (Hotels with kitchens, schools, universities, etc). PROGRAM OBJECTIVES 1. NRM Conduct 50 Audits and Evaluations over a 3 year period. 2. NRM will Perform up to 24 installs over the 3 year duration of the program -this will deplete program budget and deliver at least 6,000,000 lifecycle kWh. Budget will used at a rate of $100,000 per year. 3. NRM will obtain feedback from customers of the program that they are happy with their installations and achieved estimated savings. 4. NRM will request feedback from refrigeration contractors for our customers that they understand how the system works. 5. For those customers that did not participate in the program due to incentive limitations, NRM will request feedback they would like to participate in the future if the program is extended in duration. PROGRAM IMPLEMENTA TlON 1. NRM will Develop one page document (marketing piece) which describes NRM Express Refrigeration Program for CPAU. This collateral piece will be given to target group at the time of the audit. 2. CPAU and NRM will Review of existing collateral materials that describe our products. These are the materials that will be provided to target group during the audit and evaluation. Natiol1al Resourceivlanagement 480 :-Ieponset St, Bldg #2 Canton,MA 02021 Exhibit A NRM Express Refrigeration Program -Final Scope of \Nork 3. CPAU and NR~i! will Review of NRi\l v\fork and Authorizaton Form. This is the contract that indic8tes the customer would like to move forvvard with a project. 4. CPAU and NRM will Review of analysis tool which estimates savings based on audited informaticn. This should not take long since it has been widely accepted by other ut:Hty programs. National Resource Managemcnt 430 Neponset St, BJdg #2 Canton, MA 02021 Exhibit B NRM Express Refrigeration Program -PROJECT SCHEDULE TERM This is a ons-contract with the option of two additional one-year terms. PROJECT SCHEDULE -June 2009 through June 2012 1. Audit/Evaluation -This portion of the program will begin when Program Development phase ends. It will run through May 2012 or until all funds are accounted for with customers that have enrolled. NRM will provide CPAU monthly reports that list all sites where an audit has been conducted, status of the project (customer is interested, not interested, enrolled) and potential lifetime savings at that site. Audits Signed Contracts Year 1 20 8 Year 2 20 8 Year 3 10 8 Total 50 24 2. Installation -This portion of the project will begin within 45 days of the first customer enrollment. It is likely to run from July 2009 through May 2012 or until all customers who have enrolled in Audit/Evaluation have undergone an installation. NRM will provide CPAU monthly reports that list all sites where an installation has taken place, the project cost, the incentive amount, the kWh savings and KW savings. Additionally, monthly invoices will be mailed (one for each site) that has a complete breakdown of what has been installed, accompanied by an installer completion form. Finally, a detailed energy analysis will also be provided that details and quantifies the energy savings for each measure installed. I # Installs Lifetime kWh Delivered Year 1 8 2,000,000 -, Year 2 8 2,000,000 Year 3 8 2,000,000 Total 24 6,000,000 3. Payment --Invoices will be mailed at the end of each month for all installations performed during that month. The customer will be responsible for the difference between the total project cost and CPAU incentive (if applicable). Payments to NRM are net 30 days. National Resource Management 480 Nepon::;et St. Bldg #2 Canton, \:1A 02021 Exhibit B NRl\1 Express Refrigeration Program -PROJECT SCHEiJULE NRM's Express Refrigeration Program is designed to target those customers with commercial refrigeration, conduct a free audit and assessment for them, provide a detailed analysis that shows exactly how much energy they can save by installing our measures and provide them with the assurance our equipment works. If necessary, we will explain to their refrigeration tech how our equipment works. NRM provides a lengthy warranty period - 2 years for Cooltrol® (parts and labor) and 1 year for ECM's and LED's (parts and Labor). Because NRM's technicians are licensed in the electrical and refrigeration field, the customer is assured that our equipment will in no way jeopardize the life of their refrigeration equipment or the product that is in it. Additionally, because we are high tech company that is constantly creating new products in this field, the customer will be getting a product that is 'supermarket' level quality or better with little or no cost to them. The program can be summarized in the following steps: Identify target market, audit target market, perform evaluation and final perform the installations. PROGRAM OBJECTIVES 1. NRM Conduct 50 Audits and Evaluations over a 3 year period. 2. NRM will Perform up to 24 installs over the 3 year duration of the program -this will deplete program budget and deliver at least 6,000,000 lifecycle kWh. Budget will used at a rate of $100,000 per year. 3. N RM will obtarn feedback from customers of the program that they are happy with their installations and achieved estimated savings. 4. NRM will request feedback from refrigeration contractors for our customers that they understand how the system works. 5. For those customers that did not participate in the program due to incentive limitations, NRM will request feedback they would like to participate in the future if the program is extended in duration. PROGRAM IMPLEMENTA TlON 1. NRM will Develop one page document (marketing piece) which describes NRM Express Refrigeration Program for CPAll. This collateral piece will be given to target group at the time of tt18 audit. 2. CPAU and NRM will Review of existing collateral materials that describe our products. These are the materials that will be provided to target group during the audit and evaluation. 3. CPAU and NRM will Review of NRM Work and Authorization Form. This is the contract that indicates the customer would like to move forward with a project. 4. CPAU and NRM will Review of analysis tool which estimates savings based on audited information. This should not take long since it has been widely accepted by other utility programs. Nil(iollal Resource Management 480 Neponset St, Bldg #2 Canton, MA 02021 EXHlBiT C . h8.s 11 ~ years cx;:er:c;-'~\~e if. e:'cesti,,"'ai' a}.;l;." ·0 '1',,-', on c-"s,o_f,'::1,~t;,-\'O",,1 .\. J..'-' I";' l)j,.I.!L} L 0 v!.._'\. !. .i ' ..... oJ ;"w. .......... ,:.",l.l.-...LJ, Bose Corporation ar:d S~aples. Lary "Yilliams, Auditing and Sales/Energy Consultant Over 20 years of sales experience. Strengths include good presentation and closing skills, results oriented and works well with any size customer. Lary currently with all ofNRM's Bay A.rea programs. He has been with NRM for 1 112 years. Joe Brewer, Installations/Technical Support Joe is responsible for all installations and technical support for the P AU Express Refrigeration Program. currently oversees 4 electrical and refrigeration technicians who perform all installations in our Bay program. Joe has over 8 years of experience in the electrical trade and has focused on refrigeration and controls since he joined NRM 3 years ago. Gina Questlld, Office rvfanager is responsible for all tracking, customer file maintenance and invoicing. She will also provide any monthly reports required by PAU. Gina performs similar functions for KErviA., SVP and Ecology Action. All of NRM's staff memhers have c-mai], voice mail and are reqllirect to carry cell phones. In addition, all personnel are proficient in Microsoft applications, database administration and file management. Chapter 8 -Proposal Costs lvfEASURE COSTS -Following is a description of standard offerings NRi\f. .Also included is the price (materials and labor, no tax) for each measure. o WALK-IN COOLER/FREEZER TErvlPERATURE & EVAPORATOR FAN CONTROL (COOLTROL@) -NRM charges per solenoid circuit/compressorlcooler/free7.erlzom~. TIle 1st fC is $2~095.00. Each additiollai solenoid circuiticomprcssor/cooierlfreezcrizonc is $1~2BS.()O. Additional clJarges maybe applied for mOle intricate instaliatiolls, such as larger supermarkets 3nd cold storage facilities, which require additional engineering and labor work. 1 st FC = $1,550 materials, $545 labor Add'l FC = $840 materials, $445 labor o COOLER DOOR HEATER -NRM charges per circuit or relay installed. The 1st cooler door heater circuiUrelay is $1,175.00. Each additional cooler door heater circuit/relay is $900.00. 1 st DH = $730 materials, $445 labor Add'l DH = $555 materials, $345 labor National Resource Management 480 Neponset St, Bldg #2 Canton. LvIA 0202 t 1 sc FH == 5730 materials, 5445 labor Add'l FH :5555 materials, $345 bbor Gcor CJ NOVELTY COOLER CONTROL NIGHT SECT OFF -NR.\rI charges $325.00 for each nm-elty unit that is controlled . . Materials = $170, labor $155 o EC (Electronical1y Commutated) Evaporator Fan Replacement Motor (for walk-ins)- NRM charges $305.00 for each motor that is replaced with its standard ME59 and ME30 ECM (Materials = $165, labor = $140). This motor replaces standard 1115 HP and smaller motors. This price includes any blades or brackets that maybe needed in the retrofit. Larger size HP motors (1/4 HP, 1/3 HP, V2 HP and % HP), for example our ME125 ECM cost $430 per motor (Materials = $290, labor = $140). o SSC2 (Solid State Commutated) Evaporator Fan Replacement Motor (for reach-in cases) -NRM charges $130.00 for each ME25 that is replaced in a case. This includes pre-metering motors in the cases to determine existing motor type (shaded pole, PSC, ECM) and existing wattage draw to calculate savings. This also includes associated labor costs to replace motors that typically must be done at night or during off hours and requires moving food in cases. Materials = $65, Labor = $65 o LED LIGHTBAR REPLACEMENT For Freestanding Units and Walk-ins NRM charges $445.00 for each door on a Walk-in or F/S Unit that is replaced with its NSG-60 DF LED Light Bar (Material = $355, Labor $90) and $490.00 for each door on a Walk-in or F/S Unit that is replaced with its NSG-72 DF LED Light Bar (Material $400, Labor = $90). National Resource Management 480 Neponset St, Bldg #2 Canton, MA 02021 Exhibit D INSURANCE REQU1REiV1ENTS COt'lTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO Ai.. TO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT G8TA:N AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOVV, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES W!TH A}Ji BEST'S KEY RATING OF A·:V!l, OR HIGHE~, LlC:=NSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE 8i..iSINESS lN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. !:I,'i'/ARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH Clrf'S INSURANCE REQU1REMENTS AS SPECIFlED BELOW' , , I REQUIRED I MINIMUM LIMITS TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES WORKER'S COMPENSATION STATUTORY YES EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY STATUTORY BODILY INJURY $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE $1,000,000 $1,000,000 PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE $1,000,000 $1,000,000 LIABILITY COMBINED. BODILY INJURY $1,000,000 $1,000,000 . EACH PERSON $1,000,000 $1,000,000 . EACH OCCURRENCE $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON·OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE $1,000,000 $1,000,000 BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY $1,000,000 $1,000,000 DAMAGE, COMBINED PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, I INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT ! PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSUL TANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES, L INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR'S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY'S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS. WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO "ADDITIONAL INSUREDS" A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. B. CROSS LIABILITY Rev. 11/07 Exhitit D iNSURANCE RE(~UjREMENTS TH:: NANliNG OF f'vlORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION I\S INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON AUNE, EXTINGUISH i~NY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, GUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAiVliNG OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL (\JOT INCREA,SE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF TiiE COlvlPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C, NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2, IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: Rev. 11107 PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303. I I Client#: 36573 NATlORES ACORDrM CERT1F1CATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE {MMiDDlYY'fV) 011.'28/09 ?"lODUC2R STARKWEATHER 8. SHEPLEY (MAl 400 Slue Hiil Drive Suite 138 'Nestwood, MA 02090·2161 COVERAGES NATIONAL RESOURCE MANAGEMErrr 430 NEPONSET ST CANTON, MA 02021 TH1S CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A ,V1;\TTER OF INFORMATION ONLf AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICA fE THIS CERTifiCATe DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR THE COVERAGE BELOW. THE POLICiES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFiCATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES, AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS ~t; ~~~c TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER PDOA'?~i,i~r88ii~\E P~~fl f~~:;<t~~N LIMITS A GENERAL lIABILITY 6807977C34ATIL 10/01/08 10/01109 EACH OCCURRENCE $1 000000 A COMMERCIAL GENERAL LlASILITY 6808302C290TCT 10/01/08 10/01109 ~~~~~~J?E~ENTED $300000 CLAIMS MADE ~ OCCUR MED EXP (Anyone person) $10000 PERSONAL & AOV INJURY $1 000000 GENERAL AGGREGATE $2000000 GEN'L AGGREn LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS -COMP/OP AGG $2000000 n PRO-n POLICY JECr LOC A ~TOMOBILE LIABILITY BA8290C907SEL 10101/08 10101/09 COMBINED SINGLE liMIT A X ANY AUTO BA7977C928SEL 10/01/08 10/01/09 (Ea accident) $1,000,000 c-- !--ALL OWNED AUTOS BODILY INJURY (Pe( person) $ SCHEDULED AUTOS !--~ HIRED AUTOS BODilY INJURY $ ~ NON-OWNED AUTOS (Per Bccidenl) r-PROPERTY DAMAGE (Per accident) $ GARAG!; LIABILITY AUTO ONLY· Ell AC $ R ANY AUTO ' ------- OTHER THAN $ AUTO ONLY: A ~ESSJUMBRELLA LIABILITY CUP5414Y31A 10/01/08 10/01/09 EACH OCCURRENCE $5000000 X OCCUR C CLAIMS MADE AGGREGATE $5000000 P DEDUCTIBLE $ $ X i RETENTION $10000 $ A WORKERS COMPENSATION AND UB7769C132 10/01/08 10/01/09 X I T~~;[~Ws I EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNERlEXECUTIVE E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $500,000 OFFICERlMEMBER EXCLUDED? E,l, DISEASE -EA EMPL OYEE ~?!!g,ooo . __ ~. " yes, describe untle-, --------------- SPECIAL PROVISIONS below E.l, DISEASE -POLICY LIMIT $500,000 ... OHlER DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS I VEHICLES I EXCLUSIONS ADDED BY ENDORSEMENT I SPECIAL PROVISIONS • 10 days notice of cancellation for non payment of premium SERTIFICA TE HOLDER CANCELLATION "SAMPLE· for Bid Purposes" ACORD 25 (2001/08) 1 of 2 #S206854/M 19977 5 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL ~ DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE INSURER,ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES, AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE "E~'(' kit··ll..A>"-,, KMO @ ACORD CORPORATION 1988 IMPORTANT If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder In lieu of such endorsement(s). If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED. subject to the terms and conditions of the policy. certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). DISCLAIMER The Certificate of Insurance on the reverse side of this form does not constitute a contract between the issuing insurer(s), authorized representative or producer, and the certificate holder. nor does it affirmatively or negatively amend, extend or alter the coverage afforded by the policies listed thereon. ACORD 25·S (2001/08) 2 of 2 #S206854/M199775 EXH I BlT E p\s suppliers of or ssriic8S to t;;e City of Pai:: t;-;& fit:;! ar:c irClvit~l,.;als !;3zed cs;c,,v certify that they do rot discriminat8 ir: 8r:lplcyment of any person because cf race, s:'<i" eeler, ger.der, age, religion, disabilitj, natioral erigir:, ancestij, sax:..!21 crier,tallen, hocsir,g mar:tai status, familial status, weight or height of such person; that tr,ey are in compliarce with 8;: Federal, State and local directives ar,d executive orders regardir:g nondiscrimir.ation in employment. 1. If Proposer is INDIVIDUAL, sign here: Oate: _____ _ Proposer's Signature Proposer's typed name and title 2. If Proposer is PARTNERSHIP or JOiNT VENTURE, at least (2) Partners or each of Ihe Joint Venturers shall sign here: Partnership or Joint Venture Name (type or print) Oate: _____ _ Member of the Partnership or Joint Venture signature Date: _____ _ Member of the Partnership or Joint Venture signature 3. If Proposer is a COR?ORAT10N. the duly authorized officer(s) shall sign as follows: The under~d ~rt~ that t:ey ~ respectively: tJ /(0"/" -:--:-_--'~=--_~.=--. _I<:...-r_-=--_::'_, c-_<?V\ _____ and ~~~~~L/d...-:t:.d~1t'~tL./\ Title / Of the corporation named bolow; that they are desinnatecl 10 siDn tile Proposal Cost Forni by resolution (attach a certified copy, with corporate seal, if applicable, notarized as to its authenticity or Secretary's certificate of authorization) for and on behalf of the below named CORPORATION, and that they are authorized to execute same tor and on behalf of said CORPORATION. rnl"\'C<:l"c,n Name (type or print) -----~1~~--~------------·-·----------Date: City of Palo Alto -RFP 130404 TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE: May 18,2009 CMR: 245:09 REPORT TYPE: CONSENT SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to File an Application for 2009/2010 Transportation Development Act Funds in the Amount of $256,317 for Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment A) authorizing submittal of Transportation Development Act (TDA) grant application documents for fiscal year 2009-2010 requesting $256,317 for the following bicycle/pedestrian projects in the City of Palo Alto: VTA Bicycle Expenditure Program Fund: 1. Park Boulevard Bicycle Boulevard project Local Agency Guarantee Funds: 2. Purchase and installation of bike racks 3. Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan 4. Directional Guide Signs on City Bike Routes 5. Enhance Crosswalks at Various Locations Total BACKGROUND $60,000 $50,000 $55,000 $40,000 $51,317 $256,317 The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) issued a call for bicycle and pedestrian projects on March 11, 2009 for the Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Transportation Development Act Article 3 funding program. The deadline to submit project applications to VTA was on April 15, 2009 (with which staff complied). A Resolution adopted by the City Council supporting the project submittals is due to VTA on May 29, 2009. VTA staff will review the project proposals for eligibility, conlpleteness and compliance. The resulting countywide list of projects will be reviewed by the VTA Advisory Committees before adoption by the Board of Directors in June. The countywide list will be forwarded to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and MTC will issue funding allocations in the fall. There are two components to the TDA Article 3 program in Santa Clara County: CMR:245:09 Page 10f6 1. Bicycle Expenditure Program Per VTA Board policy, 30% of Santa Clara County's TDA fund is dedicated for projects that are on the Valley Transportation Plan 2030 Countywide Bicycle Plan Bicycle Expenditure Program (BEP) list. There is $688,144 available for BEP projects this year. Palo Alto has three projects on the VTA Countywide Bicycle Expenditure Plan (BEP) list that would be eligible for funding from the reserve for BEP projects: (1) Bicycle Boulevards Network Project, (2) California Avenue Caltrain Undercrossing Replacement Project, and (3) Highway 101/Adobe Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Grade Separation. 2. Guarantee Funds The remaining 70% of this year's TDA funds ($1,402, 166) will be assigned to the Guarantee Fund. The monies in the Guarantee Fund are distributed to local jurisdictions on a population-based apportionment formula. These monies are available to local jurisdictions exclusively for eligible projects of their choosing as per TDA guidelines. There is no competition amongst local jurisdiction to acquire these funds for eligible projects. The total TDA Guarantee fund estimate for the Santa Clara County is $2,102,166, which includes the current year 70% allocation of this year's TDA funds plus funds banked or rescinded by agencies in prior years. Palo Alto's total guaranteed amount, including banked funds from prior years, is $196,31 7. DISCUSSION Staff proposes to request a total of $256,317 in TDA funds this year, including an allocation of $60,000 from the VTA Bicycle Expenditure Program (BEP) fund for the Park Boulevard Bicycle Boulevard project, which is one of the projects in the City's bicycle boulevards network implementing program, a BEP project. The City is also requesting allocation of $196,317 from the Guarantee share for the four additional projects that are described in detail below: Bicycle Expenditure Program Project Park Boulevard Bicycle Boulevard Project This project was identified in the priority projects list in the adopted Palo Alto Bicycle Transportation Plan and is also on the VT A Countywide Bicycle Expenditure Plan (BEP) list. This project would be eligible for funding from the $688,144 funds reserved for BEP projects. The VTA BEP includes $4,000,000 for the Bicycle BoulevardslBike Lanes Project, which includes implementation of the entire list of the high priority bicycle boulevards (Class III bikeways) and bike lane (Class II bikeways) projects included in the Palo Alto Bicycle Transportation Plan. Palo Alto is eligible to apply for these funds as projects develop but is ineligible to apply for feasibility study for any project. Staff anticipates drawing upon these funds for future bicycle boulevard projects and other high priority projects in Bicycle Transportation Plan. Palo Alto received $75,000 from the BEP for the MaybelllDonald bicycle boulevard in 2006. This year staff is submitting a request to the VTA for $60,000 in TDA BEP funds for the implementation of the Park Boulevard Bicycle Boulevard Project. The Park Boulevard corridor was identified as a bicycle boulevard priority in the adopted CIP Project PL-04010 (Bicycle Boulevards Implementation) because of its importance as a bicycle route amongst cyclists. It provides a convenient connection from the City's south boundary all the way to the downtown area. The route connects two major regional transit stations, several schools, a newer medical center, two commercial business districts, and Stanford University. CMR:245:09 Page 2 of6 Park Boulevard runs parallel to (and in between) Camino Real and Alma Street, both of which are major arterials with high travel speeds and no bike lanes. The Park Boulevard Bicycle Boulevard Project would include enhancements to make the bike route more attractive and safer for cyclists. Such enhancements would include modifications to vehicular traffic calming barriers to make them more user friendly for bicyclists, reversing of I-way or 2-way stop controls to reduce the number of stops cyclists travelling along the route would need to make, and the potential addition of speed humps to further calm vehicular traffic. Consistent signage throughout the route indicating its status as a bicycle boulevard would encourage its use by bicyclists and would also provide a warning to vehicle drivers. Staff is in the process of working with neighborhood residents and the Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee to finalize the plan for the Park Boulevard corridor. Staff considered submittal of Palo Alto's other two projects on the BEP, the California Avenue underpass replacement and the Highway 101 pedestrianlbicycle bridge in south Palo Alto, for funding as well. Both are at the feasibility study stage and VT A staff verified that TDA funds cannot be used to fund feasibility studies. However, as part of the Palo Alto Capital Improvement Program, staff has included funding of $100,000 in 2010/2011 for a feasibility study for the Highway 101 PedestrianlBicycle overpass/underpass. The City is also seeking federal funding for this project working with our Congressional representatives. Guarantee Fund Projects Bike Rack Installation Project Staff is proposing that the City's request for Guarantee Funds also include $50,000 to purchase and install additional bike racks in the commercial and business districts citywide and at City facilities. The City's existing reserve of bike racks has been exhausted, and, without new racks, staff would not be able to replace damaged bike racks or respond to citizen requests for installations of new bike racks where needed. With this funding, staff will be able to install about 50-100 bike racks. These funds are required to be used within 3 years of allocation but the City will be able to purchase and store racks for future use, if all are not used within 3 years. This request also responds to Council direction in December 2008 to pursue measures to encourage bicycling to the City's business districts. Palo Alto typically uses an inverted-U bicycle rack. It is 36" high and constructed of 2 3/8" galvanized pipe and holds two bikes. The rack provides good support to the bicycle, and users are able to lock both the wheels and frame of the bicycle to the rack. The rack has no sharp edges or moving parts and is virtually maintenance free. Racks are installed in public right-of-way and are placed to avoid conflicts with pedestrians and parked vehicles, usually near the curb and away from building entranceways or crosswalks. Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan The existing Palo Alto Bicycle Transportation Plan contains a recommended bikeways network to meet the needs of all bicyclists. It features bicycle boulevards, bike lanes on arterial streets, new bicycle/pedestrian grade separations, and spot improvements at key intersections. The Plan also details recommended best practices for bicycle education and outreach programs, bicycle facilities design and maintenance, and enforcement. The Palo Alto Bicycle Transportation Plan was adopted by the City Council in November 2003. The Bicycle Plan should be updated every 5 years to meet requirements for Caltrans Bicycle Transportation Account funding. The Bicycle CMR:245:09 Page 3 of6 Plan fulfills Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Program T-18: "Develop and periodically update a comprehensive bicycle plan" and Program T -19: "Develop, periodically update, and implement, a bicycle facilities improvement program that prioritizes critical pedestrian and bicycle links to parks, schools, retail centers, and civic facilities." Staff has been advised by VT A staff that, in order to qualify for TD A funding, the Plan must be expanded in scope to incorporate a pedestrian facilities element, thus creating a Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. A total of $55,000 in Guarantee Funds is proposed to retain contract services to update and expand the existing plan as required, in coordination with the Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee and other community stakeholders. Directional Guide Signs on City Bicycle Routes The City of Palo Alto's Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC) has been working with staff for several years identifying numerous locations along designated bicycle routes and popular cycling corridors that do not currently provide directional signage to connecting routes and/or major attractions. PABAC has identified over 50 locations that would benefit from additional bicycle route identification and new way-finding signage. As part of this project, staff would work with PABAC to identify the most needed and top priority locations along currently identified bicycle routes, and install signage as soon as possible. A total of $40,000 of requested funds would be devoted to the proposed signage work. Enhanced Crosswalks at Various Locations This project would consist of installing supplemental features to enhance basic marked crosswalks with physical features including, but not limited to, raised pavement, pedestrian refuge islands, bulbouts, and lighted crosswalk warning systen1s or actuated warning systems. The installations will be at an existing or new crosswalk at various locations in the City of Palo Alto including ones that are a part of the California Avenue business district streetscape improvement project. A total of $51,317 in Guarantee Funds is requested to enhance the existing crosswalks. Staff estimates that a minimum of 2-3 crosswalks will be enhanced, and possibly more depending on the complexity of each location. Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee Review As required by the MTC grant application policies, all five projects mentioned above were reviewed by PABAC at the April meeting and the committee supports all projects and funding for their implementation. TDA Grant Requirements The TDA grant funds are allocated on a three-year basis. The funds are claimed by the City on a reimbursement basis. MTC requires that City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing staff to submit appliqations requesting TDA funding. Since 2002, the MTC has attached findings to the resolution authorizing submittal of the TDA grant application. Staff has provided sufficient information in this staff report to support the required findings and is not aware of any issues that would preclude the Council from adopting the findings for this grant request. CMR:245:09 Page 4 of6 RESOURCE IMPACT No local match is required for TDA Guarantee funds, and a 20% local match is required for BEP funds. The City Council has already approved funding in the Bicycle Boulevards CIP Project (PL-040 1 0) that can be used toward the local match for the Park Boulevard BEP project. However, because TDA funds are disbursed on a reimbursement basis, the City will have to spend the budgeted funds and then apply for reimbursement by TDA funds. The capital funding and the staff resources in the Planning and Transportation Division are available to implement these projects in the coming years. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommended actions in this report are consistent with Comprehensive Plan transportation policies, the Bicycle Transportation Plan and the Transportation Strategic Plan. Bicycle Boulevards are identified as high priority projects in those documents. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed modifications under four proj ects (installing bike racks, installing guide signs, enhancing crosswalks and Park Boulevard Bicycle project) are minor upgrades to existing residential and commercial street right-of-way and would not result in any new impacts to the existing environment. These projects are considered as a minor alteration to the existing street system, and are, therefore, categorically exempt (Class 1 Exemption, Section 15301) from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Funding the update of the Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan is not considered a defined project under CEQA. An environmental review will be conducted when the master plan is prepared. PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD: --------+-~=-~~~~~---------------------- irector of Planning and Community Environment CITY MANAGERAPPROVAL: _____ ~ ___ .. __ ~__"__ ________ _ JAMES KEENE City Manager ATTACHMENTS A. Resolution Authorizing the Filing of Application for TDA Funds B. TDA Article 3 Project Application Forms C. Memorandum from Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority CMR:245:09 Page 5 of6 D. Project area map for Park Boulevard cc: Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee CMR:245:09 Page 6 of6 ATTACHMENT A NOT YET APPROVED Resolution No. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the City Manager to File an Application for 2009/2010 Transportation Development Act Funds for Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects WHEREAS, Article 3 of the Transportation Development Act (TDA), Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 99200 et seq., authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrian and bicyclists; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region, has adopted MTC Resolution No. 875, Revised, entitled "Transportation Development Act, Article 3, PedestrianlBicycle Projects," which delineates procedures and criteria for, submission of requests for the allocation of "TDA Article 3" funding; and WHEREAS, MTC Resolution No. 875, Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDAIArticle 3 funding be submitted as part of a single, countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto desires to subnlit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution, which are for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The Council declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code. SECTION 2. The Council finds that there is no known pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or projects described in Attachment B to this resolution, or that might impair the ability of the City of Palo Alto to carry out the project. SECTION 3. The Council finds and detemlines that those matters set forth in Attachment A to this resolution are true and correct. SECTION 4. The Council agrees that the City shall maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the projects and facilities described in Attachment B for the benefit of, and use by the public. SECTION 5. The Council directs that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments, and any accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency, countywide transportation planning agency, or county association of 090514 syn 0120349 2 NOT YET APPROVED governnlents, as the case nlay be, of Santa Clara County for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. SECTION 6. The Council finds that the proposed modifications under four projects (installing bike racks, installing guide signs, enhancing crosswalks and Park Boulevard Bicycle project) are minor upgrades to existing residential and commercial street right-of-way and would not result in any new impacts to the existing environment. These projects are considered as a minor alteration to the existing street system, and are, therefore, categorically exempt (Class 1 Exemption, Section 15301) from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant City Attorney 090514 syn 0120349 2 Mayor APPROVED: City Manager Interim Director of Planning and Conlmunity Environment Director of Administrative Services NOT YET APPROVED ATTACHMENT A Findings 1. The City of Palo Alto is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is the City of Palo Alto legally impeded from undertaking the projects described in "Attachment B" of this resolution. 2. The City of Palo Alto has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the projects described on Attachment B. 3. A review of the projects described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right-of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the projects. 4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right-of-way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. The project described in Attachment B complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). 6. As portrayed in the budgetary descriptions of the projects in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are adequate for completion of the projects. 7. The projects described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or design engineering; and/or for the nlaintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA Article 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by the City of Palo Alto within the prior five fiscal years. 8. The projects described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan, or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) 9. Any project described in Attachment B that is a "Class I Bikeway," meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in Chapter 1000 of the California Highway Design Manual. 10. The projects described in Attachment B are ready to commence implementation during the fiscal year of the requested allocation. 11. The City of Palo Alto agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the projects and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the public. 090514 syn 0120349 2 ATTACHMENT B TDA Article 3 Project Application Form Fiscal Year of this Claim: 2009/2010 Applicant: City of Palo Alto Contact person: RuchikaAggarwal Mailing Address: P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto CA 94303 E-Mail Address: ruchika.aggarwal@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone: 650-617-3136 Secondary Contact (in event primary not available) Gayle Likens E-Mail Address: gayle.likens@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone: 650-329-2136 Short Title Description of Project: Park Boulevard Bike Boulevard project Amount of claim: $60.000 Functional Description of Project: This project consists of implementing improvements along Park Boulevard to convert this street into a bicycle boulevard (a Class II bikeway) Financial Plan: List the project elements for which TDA funding is being requested (e.g., planning, environmental, engineering, right-of-way, construction, inspection, contingency, audit). Use the table below to show the project budget. Include prior and proposed future funding of the project. If the project is a segment of a larger project, include prior and proposed funding sources for the other segments. Project Elements: The project would include making enhancements to the bike route by installing traffic calming measures and signage so it is safer for bicyclists. Cost includes construction. contingencies and inflation. Funding Source All Prior FYs Application FY Next FY Following FYs Totals TDA Article 3 $60,000 $60,000 list all other sources: 1. 2. 3. 4. Totals $60,000 Project Eligibility: YES?/NO ? A. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? (If "NO," provide the approximate date approval is No anticipated). Approval is anticipated on May 18th• B. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page. no C. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California yes Highway Design Manual? (Available on the internet via: http://www.dot.ca.gov). D. Has the project been reviewed by a Bicycle Advisory Committee? (If "NO," provide an explanation). yes no E. Has the public availability of the environmental compliance documentation for the project (pursuant to CEQA) been evidenced by the dated stamping of the document by the county clerk or county recorder? (required only for projects that include construction). F. Will the project be completed before the allocation expires? Enter the anticipated completion date of project (month and yes year) June 2010 G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has the claimant arranged for such yes maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility provide its name: -----1 Short title description of project: Park Boulevard Bicycle Boulevard: The Park Boulevard corridor is currently used as a bicycle route and is popular with cyclists as it provides a convenient connect from the City's south boundary all the way to the downtown area. The route connects two major regional transit stations, several schools, a newer medical center, two commercial business districts, and Stanford University. Park Boulevard runs parallel to (and in-between) El Camino Real and Alma Street, both of which are Major Arterials with high travel speeds and no bike lanes. The proposed Bicycle Boulevard Project would include enhancements to make the bike route more attractive and safer for cyclists. Such enhancements would include modifications to vehicular traffic calming barriers to make them more user friendly for bicyclists, reversing of I-way or 2-way stop control to reduce the number of stops cyclists travelling along the route would need to make, and the potential addition of speed humps to further calm vehicular traffic. Consistent signage throughout the route indicating its status of a bicycle boulevard would encourage its use by bicyclists and also provide a warning to vehicle drivers. Attachment B TDA Article 3 Project Application Form Fiscal Year of this Claim: 2009/2010 Applicant: City of Palo Alto Contact person: Ruchika Aggarwal Mailing Address: P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto CA 94303 E-Mail Address: ruchika.aggarwal@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone: 650-617-3136 Secondary Contact (in event primary not available) Gayle Likens E-Mail Address: gayle.likens@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone: 650-329-2136 Short Title Description of Project: Installation of Class III bike racks Amount of claim: $50.000 Functional Description of Project: This project consists of purchasing and installing bike racks in business districts citywide and at city facilities. Financial Plan: List the project elements for which TDA funding is being requested (e.g., planning, environmental, engineering, right-of-way, construction, inspection, contingency, audit). Use the table below to show the project budget. Include prior and proposed future funding of the project. If the project is a segment of a larger project, include prior and proposed funding sources for the other segments. Project Elements: Cost includes purchasing bike rack units. labor. installation and contingencies. Funding Source All Prior FYs Application FY Next FY Following FYs Totals TDA Article 3 $50,000 $50,000 list all other sources: [1. 2. 3. 4. Totals $50,000 Project Eligibility: YES?/NO? A. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? (If "NO," provide the approximate date approval is no anticipated). Approval is anticipated on May 18th. B. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 fllnding? If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page. no C. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California yes Highway Design Manual? (Available on the internet via: http://www.dot.ca.gov). D. Has the project been reviewed by a Bicycle Advisory Committee? (If "NO/' provide an explanation). yes no E. Has the public availability of the environmental compliance documentation for the project (pursuant to CEQA) been evidenced by the dated stamping of the document by the county clerk or county recorder? (required only for projects that include construction). F. Will the project be completed before the allocation expires? Enter the anticipated completion date of project (month and yes year) June 2010 G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has the claimant arranged for such yes maintenance by another agency? {If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility provide its name: 1 I Short title description of Project: City of Palo would like to install additional bike racks in commercial and business districts citywide and in City facilities. Palo Alto uses an inverted-U bicycle rack. It is 36" high constructed of 2 3/8" galvanized pipe and holds two bikes. The rack provides good support to the bicycle, and users are able to lock both the wheels and frame of the bicycle to the rack. The rack has no sharp edges or moving parts and is virtually maintenance free. Racks are installed in public right of way and are placed to avoid conflicts with pedestrians and parked vehicles, usually near the curb and away from building entranceways or crosswalks. Attachment B TDA Article 3 Project Application Form Fiscal Year of this Claim: 2009/2010 Applicant: City of Palo Alto Contact person: Ruchika Aggarwal Mailing Address: P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto CA 94303 E-Mail Address: ruchika.aggarwal@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone: 650-617-3136 Secondary Contact (in event primary not available) Gayle Likens E-Mail Address: gayle.likens@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone: 650-329-2136 Short Title Description of Project: Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian plan Amount of claim: $55.000 Functional Description of Project: Financial Plan: List the project elements for which TDA funding is being requested (e.g., planning, environmental, engineering, right-of-way, construction, inspection, contingency, audit). Use the table below to show the project budget. Include prior and proposed future funding of the project. If the project is a segment of a larger project, include prior and proposed funding sources for the other segments. Project Elements: Consultant services contract for preparation of plan. Funding Source All PriorFYs Application FY Next FY Following FYs Totals TDA Article 3 $55,000 $55,000 list all other sources: 1. 2. 3. 4. Totals $55,000 Project Eligibility: YES?/NO? A. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? (If "NO," provide the approximate date approval is No ! anticipated). Approval is anticipated on May 18th. B. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page. no C. For "bikeways, II does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California NIA Highway Design Manual? (Available on the internet via: http://www.dot.ca.gov). D. Has the project been reviewed by a Bicycle Advisory Committee? (If "NO," provide an explanation). yes no E. Has the public availability of the environmental compliance documentation for the project (pursuant to CEOA) been evidenced by the dated stamping of the document by the county clerk or county recorder? (required only for projects that include construction). F. Will the project be completed before the allocation expires? Enter the anticipated completion date of project (month and yes year) June 2010 G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has the claimant arranged for such yes maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility provide its name: ) Short title description of Project: Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian plan: The Bicycle Transportation Plan contains a recommended bikeways network to meet the needs of all bicyclists. It features bicycle boulevards, bike lanes on arterial streets, new bicycle/pedestrian grade separations, and spot improvements at key intersections. The Plan also details recommended best practices for bicycle education and outreach programs, bicycle facilities design and maintenance, and enforcement. The Palo Alto Bicycle Transportation Plan was adopted by the City Council in November 2003. The Bicycle plan should be updated every 5 years to meet requirements for Caltrans Bicycle Transportation Account funding. The Bicycle Plan fulfills Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Program T -18: "Develop and periodically update a comprehensive bicycle plan" and Program T -19: "Develop, periodically update, and implement, a bicycle facilities improvement program that prioritizes critical pedestrian and bicycle links to parks, schools, retail centers, and civic facilities." Attachment B TDA Article 3 Project Application Form Fiscal Year of this Claim: 2009/2010 Applicant: City of Palo Alto Contact person: Ruchika Aggarwal Mailing Address: P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto CA 94303 E-Mail Address: ruchika.aggarwal@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone: 650-617-3136 Secondary Contact (in event primary not available) Gayle Likens E-Mail Address: gayle.likens@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone: 650-329-2136 Short Title Description of Project: Installing directional guide signs on City bicycle routes Amount of claim: $40.000 Functional Description of Project: These will provide informational directional signage on City bicycle routes to advise bicyclists of connecting bike routes and/or major attractions. Financial Plan: List the project elements for which TDA funding is being requested (e.g., planning, environmental, engineering, right-of-way, construction, inspection, contingency, audit). Use the table below to show the project budget. Include prior and proposed future funding of the project. If the project is a segment of a larger project, include prior and proposed funding sources for the other segments. Project Elements: Cost includes design & purchasing signs. labor. installation and contingencies. Funding Source All Prior FYs Application FY Next FY Following FYs Totals TDA Article 3 $40,000 $40,000 sources: 1. 2. 3. 4. Totals $40,000 Project Eligibility: YES?/NO? A. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? (If "NO," provide the approximate date approval is No anticipated). Approval is anticipated on May 18th • B. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page. no C. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California yes Highway Design Manual? (Available on the internet via: http://www.dot.ca.gov). D. Has the project been reviewed by a Bicycle Advisory Committee? (If "NO," provide an explanation). yes no E. Has the public availability of the environmental compliance documentation for the project (pursuant to CEQA) been evidenced by the dated stamping of the document by the county clerk or county recorder? (required only for projects that include construction). F. Will the project be completed before the allocation expires? Enter the anticipated completion date of project (month and yes year) June 2010 G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has the claimant arranged for such yes maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility provide its name: Short title description of Project: Directional Guide Signs: The City of Palo Alto's Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC) has been working with City Staff for several years identifying numerous locations along designated bicycle routes and popular cycling corridors that do not currently provide directional signage to connecting routes and/or major attractions. P ABAC has identified over 50 locations that would benefit from additional bicycle route identification and new way-finding signage. As part of this project, City Staff would work with P ABAC to identify the most needed and top priority locations along currently identified bicycle routes, and install signage as soon as possible. Attachment B TDA Article 3 Project Application Form Fiscal Year of this Claim: 2009/2010 Applicant: City of Palo Alto Contact person: Ruchika Aggarwal Mailing Address: P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto CA 94303 E-Mail Address: ruchika.aggarwal@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone: 650-617-3136 Secondary Contact (in event primary not available) Gayle Likens E-Mail Address: gayle.likens@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone: 650-329-2136 Short Title Description of Project: Enhance crosswalks Amount of claim: $5t317 Functional Description of Project: The project includes installing new crosswalks and enhancing existing crosswalks at various locations in the City including ones that are a part of the California Avenue business district streetscape improvement project. Financial Plan: List the project elements for which TDA funding is being requested (e.g., planning, environmental, engineering, right-of-way, construction, inspection, contingency, audit). Use the table below to show the project budget. Include prior and proposed future funding of the project. If the project is a segment of a larger project, include prior and proposed funding sources for the other segments. Project Elements: Cost includes design& installation of crosswalks. labor. installation and contingencies. Funding Source All Prior FYs Application FY Next FY Following FYs Totals TDA Article 3 $51,317 $51,317 list all other sources: 1. 2. 3. 4. Totals $51,317 Project Eligibility: YES?/NO ? A. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? (If"NO," provide the approximate date approval is No anticipated). Approval is anticipated on May 18th• B. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page. no C. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California NIA Highway Design Manual? (Available on the internet via: http://www.dot.ca.gov). D. Has the project been reviewed by a Bicycle Advisory Committee? (If tlNO," provide an explanation). yes no E. Has the public availability of the environmental compliance documentation for the project (pursuant to CEQA) been evidenced by the dated stamping of the document by the county clerk or county recorder? (required only for projects that include construction). F. Will the project be completed before the allocation expires? Enter the anticipated completion date of project (month and yes year) June !O G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has the claimant arranged for such yes maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility provide its name: ---1 Short title description of Project: Enhance crosswalks: This project consists of installing supplemental features to enhance basic marked crosswalks with physical features including, but not limited to, raised pavement, pedestrian refuge islands, bulbouts, and lighted crosswalk warning systems or actuated warning systems. The installations will be at an existing or new crosswalk at various locations in the City of Palo Alto, as determined by the City Transportation Engineer. TO: FROM: DATE: ATTACHMENT C SANTA (LARA Valley Transportation Authority MEMORANDUM TDA Article 3 Bicycle and PedestriaThProgram Grant Applicants Technical Advisory Committee Members Bill Hough, Transportation Planner III March 11, 2009 SUBJECT: Call for Projects, Transportation Development Act Article 3 FY 200911 0 Program TDA Article 3 Funds Available This memorandum serves as the General Call-for-Projects for the FY 200911 0 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Program funding cycle. There are two components to the TDA Article 3 program: 1. Bicycle Expenditure Program The VTA Board of Directors took action on August 3, 2000 to dedicate 30% of Santa Clara County's TDA Article 3 fund estimate to projects on the VTP 2030 Countywide Bicycle Plan Bicycle Expenditure Program (BEP) List. There is $688,144 available for BEP projects this year. Your project must be on the Board-adopted BEP list, an update of which is scheduled for the April 2009 Board meeting. BEP project sponsors must submit MTC's TDA Article 3 Project Application Form. If you plan on submitting an application in the 2009/10 cycle, please contact Michelle DeRobertis at (408) 321-5716 or Michelle.DeRobertis@VTA.org before April 3, 2009. However, applications are not due until April 1 0, 2009. 2. Guarantee Funds Table 1 below shows each city and the County's "Guarantee" share of MTC's TDA Article 3 Estimate. There is $1,402,166 available for "Guarantee" projects this year. This guarantee share is based on California Department of Finance (DOF) population projections and funds banked or rescinded from previous years, where applicable. Your agency's total applications cannot exceed its guarantee share. Application Due Date: Date: April 10, 2009 Time: 4:00 PM To: Bill Hough, Transportation Planner III Page 1 of 5 Table 1 2009110 TDA ARTICLE 3 ESTIlYIATE FOR SANTA CLARA COl:NTY I Guarantee Amount Agency (Includes banked and rescinded funds from prior years.) Campbell $39,860 Cupertino $55,135 Gilroy $§2,328 Los Altos $28,079 Los Altos Hills $25,949 Los Gatos $48,749 Milpitas $68,899 Monte Sereno $5,817 Morgan Hill $38,924 Mountain View $78,354 Palo Alto $196,317 San Jose $982,087 Santa Clara $114,638 Saratoga $31,355 Sunnyvale $207,294 Santa Clara County $98,380 $2,102,166 .. RescindlReallocation Requests The guidelines for rescinding and reallocating TDA Article 3 projects have been amended by MTC. Previously, sponsors were allowed to rescind projects and reallocate the funds to other projects immediately. However, MTC is now only allowed to allocate up to their estimate in any given year. Sponsors may still rescind projects, but VTA cannot reallocate them until the next TDA funding cycle. Funds rescinded in 2009 will be added to the sponsor's guarantee in 2010. It is the responsibility of the project sponsor to monitor project expiration deadlines and to apply for rescind/reallocation funds in a timely manner. Failure to do so will result in the sponsor losing the funds. Banking of Funds TDA Article 3 funds may be banked for up to two years plus one year to prograITI funds. To bank TDA funds, project sponsors must submit a letter stating that funds will be banked and the TDA Article 3 eligible project to which banked funds will go to. banked funds are not programmed by the end of the 3rd Year, they will be redistributed to the Countywide TDA Article 3 Pool for the following fiscal year. If you are planning to bank funds, please send a letter to that effect to Bill Hough at the address below. 2 of 5 Project Types and Guidelines Your TDA Article 3 project must be ready to implement within ONE year of the application cycle. Eligible Project Types The following project types are eligible for TDA Article 3 Funding: • • • • Design & construction of on and off-street bicycle facility projects -including but not limited to bicycle parking. Design & construction of on and off-street pedestrian facility projects Maintenance of Class I bikeways (unlimited) Maintenance of Class II bikeways. Countywide, the total funds allocated to Class II bikeway maintenance cannot exceed 20% of the total countywide TDA estimate. Call Bill Hough at (408) 321-5735 if you plan to exceed 20% of your agency's guarantee amount. • Bicycle Safety Education Programs (not more than 500/0 of the project's budget and not more 5% of the countywide TDA Article 3 funds) • Comprehensive Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Plans (not more than once per jurisdiction every 5 years) . • Projects identified in a recent (within 5 years) comprehensive local bicycle or pedestrian plan • Annual TDA Article 3 Audits Other Eligibility & Procedural Issues Environmental clearance is required for construction projects only. If you are submitting an application for design, you are not required to submit a County stamped notice. Additional information on the TDA Article 3 procedures and criteria can be found in the MTC TDA Article 3 Rules and Procedures, which is available on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission website at: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/funding/STA-TDAlRES-0875.doc Bicycle Advisory Committee and Bicycle Plan Requirement Cities and counties may not receive TDA Article 3 funds for bicycle projects unless the jurisdiction has established a Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) and the project is included in an adopted plan as stipulated in the MTC TDA Article 3 Rules and Procedures. This requirement does not apply to pedestrian projects. VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines The VTA Board of Directors approved the VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines update on December 13, 2007. The purpose of the Guidelines is to provide a uniform set of optimum standards for the planning, design, and construction of bicycle facilities that are part of the countywide bicycle system. Bicycle projects funded by TDA Article 3 funds must comply with the Guidelines. For a copy of this document, please contact Michelle Page 3 of 5 DeRobertis at (408) 321 16 or Michel1e.DeRobertis0)vta. org. It is also available on the VTA website at http://www.vta.org/scheduleslbikewaysJ)rogram.html Application Submittals MTC's TDA Article 3 Project Application Form is located at: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/funding/STA-TDAlTDA_Article_3_Claim_Forms.doc Project sponsors must use this form to subnlit applications. Completed project applications should be submitted to VTA by 4:00 p.m. on Friday, April 10, 2009. (See detailed submittal instructions below.) Complete one application for each project. PLEASE NOTE: VTA should receive ~ of each project application. LATE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. 2009/10 TDA A . I 3 D '1 d N P . t S b 'tt I R rtlc e etal e ew rOJec u ml a equlrements N umber of Copies Item 1 per agency Cover letter that indicates whether application is for guarantee and/or BEP funding. The cover letter must include a statement i that the project must be ready to implement within ONE year of the application cycle. 2 per agency Governing body resolution wording and Council Resolution supporting the project(s) (due on May 29, 2009). The sample is on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission website: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/funding/STA-TDA/ 2 per project MTC's TDA Article 3 Application (See Application Form- available on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission website: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/junding/STA-TDAI) 2 per project A vicinity map showing the project's general location in your jurisdiction 2 per project A detail map showing the project and phases where applicable 2 per project Documentation of environmental clearance (jor applicable projects). The county clerk must stamp the environmental document. Please send applications to: Bill Hough, Transportation Planner III Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Programming & Grants 3331 North 1st St., Bldg. B2 San Jose, CA 95134-1906 Page 4 of 5 I Evaluation Process, Programming and Drawing Programmed Funds VTA staff will review project applications. The resulting countywide program will be reviewed by the VTA advisory committees before adoption by the VTA Board of Directors at its June 2009 meeting. The VTA Board adopted project priorities will be forwarded to MTC for review and adoption. Once NITC has adopted the program, MTC's Finance Section will issue allocation instructions to your agency. These instructions will provide your agency with guidance on invoicing and annual audit and reporting requirements. All project invoicing goes directly to MTC. All work must be completed by June 30, 2012 and MTC needs to receive reimbursement requests by August 1, 2012. TDA Audit Information In accordance with MTC Resolution 875, all claimants that have received an allocation of TDA funds are required to submit an annual fiscal and compliance audit to MTC and to the Secretary of Business and Transportation Agency within 180 days after the close of the fiscal year. Your audits are due to MTC by December 31 of each year. Failure to submit the audit will prohibit MTC from making a new TDA allocation. If no TDA funds were expended during the fiscal year, the applicant should file a statement to that effect with MTC. Please contact MTC's TDA program manager Bob Bates, at 510-817-5733 or bbates@mtc.ca.gov, for additional information on audit requirements. Page 5 of 5 The City of Palo Alto ragg_. :zoo&.OS.13 10:23:24 (l1cc-<'n"""'GIs$'GIs\admIn~_.mclb) I/i ATTACHMENT D Project area map for Park Boulevard Bike project Attachment D This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS ---0' 1500' ThIs document Is a graphic rep<asentatlon triy 01 beet lIVeiabIe IIOU'C8S. The CHy 01 Palo Alto assunes no responsI)IIIIy lot MY 1IITlln. 101989 to 2009 CHy 01 Palo Alto TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: UTILITIES DATE: May 18,2009 CMR: 239:09 REPORT TYPE: CONSENT SUBJECT: Request for Authorization to Apply for an Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) in a Total Amount Up to $663,000 Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to complete and sign an application for Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funds authorized through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) to be used for energy reduction and efficiency projects. BACKGROUND The EECBG program was created by Congress in 2007 and was funded for the first time by ARRA with an appropriation of $3.2 billion. The Program provides federal grants to units of local government, Indian tribes, states and territories to reduce energy use and fossil fuel emissions, and for improvements in energy efficiency. The EECBG Program is administered by the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). On March 26, 2009, DOE announced the EECBG formula grant allocations, and the City of Palo Alto was determined to be eligible to receive up to $663,000. The deadline to apply for this formula grant is June 25, 2009. The DOE will review each application to ensure that the grantee has an appropriate strategy to fund activities eligible under the Program and that the proposed budgets are acceptable. After receipt of Program funds, grantees will be required to report regularly to the DOE. DISCUSSION The DOE encourages program applicants to pursue activities that result in maximum energy efficiency improvements, fossil-fuel emission reductions, economic benefits and total energy use reduction. There is a broad list of eligible activities under the EECBG program. However, many of these eligible activities will require federal environmental review and/or have limitations on the amount of funding that could be available from the EECBG. In addition, the grant application requires detailed information, including budget justification, for each activity that the CMR: 239:09 Page 1 of3 applicant plans to undertake using the allocated EECBO funds. Finally, the EECBO funds need to be obligated within 18 months and expended within 36 months from the time of the application. Staff has reviewed a number of programs for inclusion in the grant application, including: a utility-financed revolving loan program to help businesses implement energy efficiency projects; a program to provide sub-grants to local schools, City facilities and community agencies to implement energy efficient projects; and the expansion of current residential energy efficiency program offerings such as weatherization, energy audits and appliance exchange. These programs were not selected for inclusion in the application for funding due to their current stage of development. Due to the EECBG timing constraints and limitations, the staff review team recommends that only those new technology demonstration projects that are already of interest to the community, and which have received preliminary City approvals, be included in the application. The two demonstration projects being developed for the EECBG application include the early replacement of High Pressure Sodium (HPS) street lights on selected streets with Light Emitting Diode (LED) streetlights, and the implementation of a Home Energy Report for residential customers. The estimated EECBG funds to be allocated to the LED Streetlight Project and the Home Energy Report project are $450,000 and $213,000 respectively. LED Streetlight Project On September 15, 2008, the City Council received an informational report regarding LED street lighting. At that time, Council was advised that staff was developing a pilot project to review the technology. That pilot project is currently in the early stages of implementation, but early research and review of similar pilots in other cities is positive. The report discussed replacing a majority of the City's existing street light inventory using LED lighting in the time-frame of 2015. The estimated OHG reduction per fixture per year is 49 metric tons of C02 (C02 equivalent). With the stimulus funds provided through the EECBG, the City can undertake an early replacement of existing HPS street lights on selected streets and could accelerate full deployment at an earlier date. This helps to accelerate the reduction of energy and greenhouse gas emissions associated with the City's street lighting. Home Energy Report The second project being prepared for the grant application is to implement a Home Energy Report for residential customers to help them reduce their energy usage. Upon approval of the grant application by the DOE, staff would prepare a Request for Proposals. The winning vendor would provide paper and/or online reports to residents to benchmark and compare their energy usage against other households with similar square footage in their neighborhood, and offer tips for reducing electric and natural gas usage. The rationale for adopting such a tool is based on sociological research showing that people change their behaviors to match those of others. This reporting tool is in use by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) and Puget Sound Energy. SMUD has demonstrated energy usage reductions among the participating residential customers. SMUD set a target energy reduction of 2% for the test group compared to the control group. Evaluation of customer energy usage shows that the test group saved 1.75% more than the control group in the first six months. Page 2 of3 POLICY IMPLICATIONS Both of the proposed projects help to meet one of the City Council's top three priorities of environmental protection as well as the goals identified in the Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan and in the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). The proposed projects also support the Council-approved Ten-year Energy Efficiency Portfolio Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The completion of this application is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15308 of the CEQA Guidelines (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for protection of the environment.) ATTACHMENT None PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: JOYCE KINNEAR ~.¥-- Utility Marketing Services Manager CHRISTINE TAM ~. Resource Planner TOM AUZENNE ~ ()')) / Assistant Director, ~ JANE RATCHYE\~V Assistant Director, UtThlies Page 3 of3 TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEP ARMENT: UTILITIES DATE: MAY 18,2009 CMR: 240:09 REPORT TYPE: CONSENT SUBJECT: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation to Approve Changes to the ProjectPLEDGE Program RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the Council approve changes to the ProjectPLEDGE customer financial assistance program. These changes modify the criteria for program eligibility, frequency of disbursements, and recipient funding limits. BACKGROUND ProjectPLEDGE provides funds which are applied to the Utilities accounts of residential customers having difficulty paying their bills due to financial hardship. The ProjectPLEDGE program is not funded in the Utilities Operating Budget. ProjectPLEDGE funding is provided by interested Utilities customers via voluntary contributions on their own monthly Utilities bills, made in addition to their regular charges. The Utilities Department currently administers ProjectPLEDGE on behalf of those donating customers to ensure that the funds reach those in need. On December 16, 1996, the Council approved the implementation of ProjectPLEDGE as a one- year pilot program (CMR:498:96). The program's goal was to target and assist Palo Alto residents who are elderly, handicapped, working low-income families or individuals, and public assistance families and individuals experiencing unusual hardship such as medical problems, loss of employment, abandonment, or other situations. This program allowed customers to voluntarily pledge an amount that was added to their utilities bill each month. The funds collected for the program were controlled by the Utilities Department and were originally administered by the Salvation Army. The Salvation Army received an administrative fee of 10 percent to make site-visits, verify eligibility, assist Utilities customers with completing the program application, or to make other Utilities customer contacts to complete outreach activities and reach potential program participants. At the end of the one-year pilot period approved by Council in December 1996, the program was continued. Although ProjectPLEDGE continued after 1996, the Salvation Army discontinued administering the program during Fiscal Year 2004-05, when their local Palo Alto office was closed. Regional Salvation Army representatives do, however, inform their Palo Alto clients of CMR: 240:09 Page I of 4 the existence of the program and refer these Utilities customers to the Utilities Department. The work of outreach, eligibility determination, site visits and other program functions has been performed by the Utilities Credit and Collection staff since Fiscal Year 2004-2005. DISCUSSION Project PLEDGE was originally established as a "needs-based" intervention program for Utilities customers in one-time crisis situations, unlike the long-term financial assistance for low-income customers addressed by the "income-based" Utilities-discount Rate Assistance Program (RAP). Other community-based utility bill financial support programs available to City of Palo Alto Utilities customers include annual payment programs from: a) the federal "Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program" (LIHEAP), administered by the County of Santa Clara, and b) from St. Vincent De Paul. Non-cash assistance is available through the Utilities Residential Energy Assistance Program (REAP), funded by the Electric Public Benefits Program, which helps low- income customers better manage their Utilities costs through free weatherization of their homes. Over time, the line between the long-term RAP rate discount and crisis-driven ProjectPLEDGE has become blurred, with RAP customers who are experiencing chronic financial hardship, rather than a one-time crisis, seeking and receiving assistance from ProjectPLEDGE. This has affected staff's ability to budget and dispense ProjectPLEDGE funds to families experiencing a one-time CrISIS. Staff recommends the ProjectPLEDGE program parameters be changed to more accurately differentiate between the RAP and ProjectPLEDGE programs. These changes to ProjectPLEDGE are based upon the most common customer "crises" that have been seen by staff and are intended to clarify eligibility, frequency, and funding availability. The changes will increase speed of service delivery to customers by reducing the need for site visits to determine eligibility and the amount of documentation required. The changes will also reduce overlap with the Rate Assistance Program, although RAP participants will remain eligible for one-time ProjectPLEDGE crisis assistance after implementation of the new guidelines. CMR: 240:09 Page 2 of4 CURRENT PROPOSED ProjectP LEDGE Elderly, Handicapped, • Recent unemployment by both the PROGRAM Working Low Income account holder and working ELIGIBILITY families, or Public spouse/domestic partner; Assistance families • Recent unemployment by the account experiencing "unusual" holder, ifthe spouse/domestic partner hardship such as an does not work; ongoing medical • Recent acute medical condition or problem, loss of job, unreimbursed medical expenses; abandonment, etc. • Recent death by either the account .......... holder or spouse/domestic £artner FREQUENCY Once every One time only for each unique event OF FUNDING 12 calendar months (including RAP participants after Guideline changes) I RECIPIENT Up to $750 Up to $750 . FUNDING (No Change) LIMITS In the current economic climate, long-term unemployment is increasing and represents one of the largest financial impacts on a household for a "needs-based" program, and is explicitly addressed in the recommended changes to the eligibility criteria. Death of one or more primary wage earners or the onset of an acute medical condition that affects the ability to work can lead to sudden and large expenses and result in financial crisis affecting a customer's ability to pay hislher Utilities bilL It is proposed that ProjectPLEDGE pay up to $750 to address crises situations. Chronic financial conditions affecting a customer's ability to pay Utilities bills are addressed through the Rate Assistance Program. The $750 amount represents several months of Utilities consumption for some customers; for others it represents a portion of a single month. Written documentation would be required from the ProjectPLEDGE applicant verifying that the customer meets the proposed guidelines. Since the program is limited to the voluntary donations of customers, approving these guideline changes would help to ensure that the program targets those customers needing critical assistance, improves staff's ability to plan, budget and disburse funds, and allows for clearer community awareness and outreach for ProjectPLEDGE. If approved, the proposed changes would ensure that ProjectPLEDGE would remain "needs- based" for crisis-only intervention, as opposed to the "income-based" Utilities Rate Assistance Program. COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS On May 6, 2009, the UAC voted unanimously (4-0, 1 absent) to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed changes to the ProjectPLEDGE Program, with the additional clarification that the "Frequency of Funding" originally indicated in the Table ("One Time Only Including RAP participants after the Guideline Changes"), be amended to read "Once per Unique Event", ensuring that recipients would remain eligible for program assistance more than once, but not for the same event. CMR: 240:09 Page 3 of4 RESOURCE IMPACT ProjectPLEDGE is voluntarily funded by Utilities customers with contributions held in a special account. This account allows contributions to exceed disbursements in some years (leaving a positive balance), or disbursements to exceed annual contributions in that year (if the account balance allows). At no time is the program allowed to have disbursements that exceed the ongoing positive balance in the account. The level of annual customer donations for ProjectPLEDGE has been relatively stable since the program was started in 1996, with donations averaging approximately $10,000 per year. Program marketing to increase donations has been limited. Twenty-four customers participated in ProjectPLEDGE for Fiscal Year 2007-08, with $13,063 in disbursements (average $544/recipient). Nineteen customers participated for the first three quarters of FY 2008-09 with $9,197 in disbursements (average $484/recipient). Approximately $11,000 remains in the ProjectPLEDGE fund as of the end of March, 2009. The ProjectPLEDGE program does not have a significant impact on the total amount of Utilities Department annual bad debt or write-off. Customer participation in ProjectPLEDGE will not affect the Utilities delinquency process or avoid termination of service for non-payment. Participation may result in a mutually agreed-upon payment arrangement between the customer and Utilities to help financially manage the customer account. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposed program changes reinforce the policy of limiting availability of ProjectPLEDGE to unusual, non-recurring situations for customers needing financial assistance with the City of Palo Alto Utilities bill. The proposed changes to ProjectPLEDGE do not change or impact the long- term financial assistance offered through the Utilities Rate Assistance Program. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Approval of changes to the ProjectPLEDGE program do not meet the definition of a "project" pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065, thus no review under the California Environmental Quality Act is required. ATTACHMENTS A. CMR: 498:96 Utilities Charitable Contribution Program, ProjectPLEDGE B. Excerpt Minutes from UAC Meeting o~~~ PREPARED BY: ~------- TOM AUZENNE Assistant Director, Customer Support Services DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: VALE~ Director of Utilities CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR: 240:09 Page 4 of4 ATTACHMENT A City of.Palo Alto .. City Manager's Report ---.---.. ---~."-.--.... ~ .... ~ .... ~.-------~---... --.. «'~-·-----·---------·--·1 0 TO: . ,HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL' ' . FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: UTILITIES AGENDA DATE: December 16, 1966 CMR:498:96 SUBJECT: Utilities Charitable Contribution Program, ProjectPLEDGE REQUEST This report transmits to the Council a proposal approved by the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) to intro~uce a charitable con~ribution program that will raise funds to help resident experiencing financial difficulties pay their utility bilis. This report requests that Councjl approve the staffs ProjectPLEDGE proposaL . RECOMMENDATIONS Staffrecomme.nds that Council approve ProjectPLEDGE as a <;me·Year pilot program and' . direct staff to return to Council with results on customer participation levels and staff workload impact. Based on this infonnation, staff will recommend to Council that ProjectPLEDGE continue, be modified, or be discontinued. POLICY IMPLICATIONS ProjectPLEDGE supports the City Council's priority established in 1993 to develop programs to address "People in Crisis." , EXECUTIVES~ARY In fiscal year 1995-96, at the direction of Council, staff began exploring ways to design and implement a voluntary ratepayer donation program to help residents who are unable to pay their utility bills due to financial hardship. Staff evaluated several kinds of programs which are described in an attachment to this report. Based on this evaluation, staff recommends that the City introduce ProjectPLEDGE this fiscal year. With this program, ratepayers would voluntarily pledge a given amount that would be added to their utility bill charges each month. St~ff does not anticipate a need to add resources to implement and manage ProjectPLEDGE. CMR:498:96 Page 1 of 2 For services provided to administer the distribution of funds, the Salvation Army will charge approximately 10 percent of the amount-distributed to ratepayers. Targeted for assistance would be the elderly, handicapped, working low income families/individuals, and public. assistance families/individuals experiencing unusual hardship such as an ongoing medical problem, loss of job, recent desertion, abandonment, etc .. Funds received through ProjectPLEDGE by the Salvation Anny would be dispersed only to Palo Alto residents. Staff estimates that this type of program will be cost effective, convenient for customers, and introduce a new source of funds to complement existing rate relief programs. With regard to the other two kinds of programs evaluated, staff does not consider a checkoff box program to be cost effective and estimates that il direct mail solicitation program would generate an insignificant level of donations. FISCAL INIP ACT Ongoing costs to implement ProjectPLEDGE are estimated at $1,500 annually which would be funded from the existing operating budget. ENVIRONMENT At ASSESSMENT This proposal does not constitute a project und~r the California Environmental Quality Act; therefore, an environmental assessment is riot required. ATTACHMENTS Memorandum to UAC entitled ProjectPLEDGE Proposal . UAC Minutes of 11-6-96 PREPARED BY: Randy Baldschun, Assistant Director of Utilities DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR:498:96 Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Utilities Advisory Commission FROM: Utilities Department AGENDA DATE: November 6, 1996 SUBJECT: ProjectPLEDGE Proposal REQUEST This report presents staffs evaluation of charitable contribution programs designed to raise funds to help residents experiencing financial difficulties to pay their utility bills. On November 6, 1995, the City Council referred this matter to the staff and UAC for consideration. This is a request that the UAC approve and recommend to the City Council staffs proposal for a charitable contribution program that would be called ProjectPLEDGE. RECOl\fMENDATION Staff recommends that the City offer ProjectPLEDGE as a pilot prog~am near the end of FY96- 97. After a one-year pilot .program, staff will return to Council with results on customer participation levels and staff workload impact. Based on this information, staff will recommend to Council that ProjectPLEDGE continue, be modified, or be discontinued. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposed program supports the City· Council's priority established in 1993 to develop programs to address "People in Crisis. II EXECUTIVE SVMl\1ARY In fiscal year 1995-96, at the direction of ~ouncil, staff began exploring ways to design and implement a voluntary ratepayer donation program to help residents who are unable to pay their utility bills due to financial hardship. The assignment was limited in scope and not inten~ed to provide a mechanism to solicit contributions for multiple charitable purposes. Staff from Information Technology, Revenue Collections, Accounting, Attorneys Office, and Utilities participated in the assignment. Staff identified three types of donation programs in place at municipal and investor-owned ·utilities. They are: 1) a checkoff box on the monthly utility bill statement whereby customers add a contribution amount to their utility bill payment; 2) a pledge program whereby customers donate a specific amount eacp month that is added to the utility bill; and 3) a direct mail solicitation program whereby customers send donations to the Salvation Army for dispersement. 1 The following table summarizes the programs: Type of Frequency Total Estimated Program of Estimated On-going Impact on Stqff Customer Donations Costs per Do1UJtion per Year Year Substantial. Utility Payment Processing Center and Accounting require Checkoff Monthly $25,000 $20,000-additional staff resources (one half to Box $40,000 one full-time temp) to reconcile payments received with amounts actually billed on a daily basis. Costs would outweigh benefits. Significant software programming initially. On-going impacts on Utilities Pledge. Monthly $25,000 $1,500 Customer Service Center, Payment Processing Center, and Accounting expected to be absorbed within existing staff levels. Direct Mail Semi-$5,000 $900 Minimal Solid-annually tation From a municipal law point. of view it is do-able to implement anyone of the three donation programs. After a thorough evaluation of each of these three programs, staff recommends the Pledge Program because it provides a regular stream of contributions and the impact can .be accommodated by existing resources. The Cpeckoff Box Program provides the most flexible option to ratepayers; however, it would result in a substantial workload impact on staff that would necessitate the addition of resources. A Direct Mail Solicitation Program would have the least impact on existing City resources; however, considerably less donations are anticipated by this program compared to a pledge program. For the foregoing reasons, staff -recommends ProjectPLEDGE. ProjectPLEDGE is patterned from PG&E's REACH Program whereby ratepayers authorize a given amount to be added to their utility bill each month. Staff recommends that the Salvation Army be contracted to disperse funds under ProjectPLEDGE. While staff does not expect this program to appreciably lower bad debt write-off, it would provide another source of funds for residents experiencing financial difficulties and would complement existing programs. Furthermore, ProjectPLEDGE fills a void created this year by a 90 percent reduction in funding available to Palo Alto residents through PG&E's REACH Program. 2 Staff estimates a two to four month timeframe to implement ProjectPLEDGE. Staff does not anticipate a need to add resources to implement and manage ProjectPLEDGE. Non-salary costs are estimated to be approximately $1,500 annually. Existing staff would be utilized for software programming, accounting, bill processing, administration, and promotion. For services provided, the Salvation Army will charge approximately 10 percent of the amount distributed to ratepayers. This administrative fee would be funded by the ratepayer donations. Based on Palo Alto's 26,000 residential electric accounts, a projected 4 percent participation rate, and an average monthly pledge of $2, ProjectPLEDGE residential contributions are estimated at approximately $25,000 annually. DISCUSSION Last fiscal year a total of approximately $54,000 was written off on uncollectible utility bills of which $6,900 was ·subsequently recovered by the City'S collection agency. Single-family residents and multi-family residents accounted for $35,400 of the write-off total. The principal reasons for non-payment by residents during FY95-96 are summarized in the following table: Amounl #of Situation ofWrile-Residents • Reason/Customer Explanation off S1O,200 92 ~!.!st. r~u~sls dis~onn~tiQn/l~v~s townfnQ f~u:~·:ardin~ ilddr~ss • Forwarding address not known at tim~ of disconnect order • Customer delays notifying post office of fQrwarding address • Customer forgets to pay bill in midst of. moving • Customer believes bill too small to matter $16,800 nfa ~usl, r~uest diS~Qnn~liQnffQrwardin~ adgr~ss ~iv~nfd~S!l't 12aX • Similar reasons as above $1,700 6 Customer deceased • No family member or estate responsible for bill $6,700 23 UtilitX initiates di~nn~tiQn Qf servi" CQr nQn-12ilxm$3lt • Customer leaves town, often experiencing financial difficultiest no forwarding address given Of the $35,400 write-off for residents, only $6,700 appears related to financial hardship cases and $28,700 related to other factors. On this basis, staff does not anticipate that a program providing financial assistance to customers to pay delinquent utility bills would have a significant impact on the amount of bad debt write-off. It should also be noted that on an annual basis, the Utilities terminates service to approximately 120 residents for non-payment. Approximately 100 residents have service restored after payment is made. Currently, a number of services are available to residents experiencing difficulties paying their utilities bill. They include: 3 1) Payment schedules are often extended to meet customer needs. 2) Utilities offer a Budget Billing Program, whereby monthly bills are levelized over a 12 month schedule to help a customers cash flow. 3) Utilities place a customer in contact with the State Department of Equal Opportunity which can offer direct financial assistance through the Federal Home Energy Assistance Program (HEAP). 4) Funds are available from the Salvation Army, however beginning this year, they are significantly reduced. 5) In 199Jthe Council approved the utilities Residential Rate Assistance Program (RAP). This program whereby qualifying residents receive a 15 percent reduction applied to water, gas, and electric charges. To date, the program has 225 participating residents meeting the financial need criteria and another 69 residents meeting the disability criteria. Despite the availability of rate relief programs, there are limitations on how much and how often a resident can obtain financial assistance from such resources. Therefore, staff believes that a program which complements existing services and programs would provide additional benefits to residents. Staff evaluated alternative programs with three objectives in mind: 1) No additional funding or City resources will be requested to implement the program. Minor costs related to materials, set-up, and administration will be accommodated with existing resources. . . 2) The program will be convenient for ratepayers to make donations. 3) The program will introduce a new source of funds not currently available to ratepayers experiencing financial difficulties. Regardless of which program the City adopts, staff recommends that the Salvation Army be contracted with to administer fund dispersement. The Salvation Army has trained staff with . experience dispersing funds forPG&E's REACH program. Staff would develop income and other qualifying guidelines similar to the City'S RAP program with the Salvation Army to address Palo Alto's needs. Targeted for assistance would be the elderly, handicapped, working low income families/individuals, and public assistance families/individuals experiencing unusual hardship such as an ongoing medical problem, loss of job, recent desenion, abandonment, etc. Funds received through ProjectPLEDGE by the Salvation Army would be dispersed only to Palo Alto residents. Also, as a legal requirement under any program, . the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and State Franchise Tax Board (FTB) require documents be prepared to report annual taxpayer charitable contributions. The taxpayer must similarly be notified of the amount reported to these agencies. The utilities bill statement has adequate space available to provide this notification. Under program types one and two these tax reporting activities would be performed by the City of Palo Alto whereas with direct mail solicitation, the Salvation Army would do the reporting. With 4 regard to City accounting staff completing IRS and FTB reports, the impact is seasonal and not expected to be substantial. A description and evaluation of the three types of programs and how they might be structured follows: l, Checkoff Box: Utility bills would be printed every month with the checkoff box on the payment stub. If residents want to contribute to the program during that month, they check the box and indicate the amount of the donation. This approach was identified by Council in referring the matter to the staff and UAC. This program provides maximum flexibility for donors. One major drawback of the Checkoff Box Program is the substantial impact on staff in the Accounting section and the Utility Payment Processing Center. In Accounting, additional time would be necessary to reconcile daily payments with the corresponding amounts billed since they would not match, . Also, this difference between the amount billed and the amount received creates exceptions in the Utilities Payment Processing Center. When transactions become exceptions, they are no longer processed by the computerized billing system; manual intervention is necessary to determine the reason for the discrepancy between the amount paid and the amount due and data entry is required. The impact on Accounting and the Utilities Payment Processing Center would require additional resources that would exceed the~ benefits of the program. There is software programming required with a checkoff box with a one-time workload impact.· The insert could be used to promote the program at a cost of $450 per promotion; this cost may be mitigated by using space on the "Utilities Community and Announcement" page on the bill statement. 2. Pled&e: This program allows the customer to request that a specific amount be added each month to the utility bill as a contribution. The program would be promoted by inserting a small pledge form (approximate $450 cost) on which the customer authorizes a donation each month and encloses with the utility bill payment. This information would be entered into the billing system by the Utilities Customer Service Center and subsequent bilI statements would show a line item description on the bill for the pledge. The customer would be able to notify the Utilities to discontinue or change the pledge amount. If the customer skips a donation or pays less than was pledged, the customer credit rating is unaffected. The advantage of a Pledge Program compared to a Checkoff Box Program is that it would not automatically create exceptions for the Utility Payment Processing Center; the payment amount would generally equal the amount billed. Little tracking, analysis, and record keeping would be required. A disadvantage is that the software programming for the pledge system would require more "business rules" to address infrequent instances when the pledge amount does not equal the amount received. However, 'once the software program is written and debugged, the programming workload ends. The Pledge Program is the most popular customer donation program among utilities. 5 3. Direct Mail Solicitation: The utility would promote the program using semi-annual bill inserts. The utility would include a one-time donation form and residents would be encouraged to send their contributions for Palo Alto's program directly to the Salvation Army. The Salvation Army would be responsible for reporting the ~endar year contributions to tax agencies and donors and would redistribute the contributions to qualifying Palo Alto residents. stafr gave this program strong consideration because it has minimal impact on existing resources. There is no additional postage cost associated with including the insert in the utility bill mailings. There would be a printing and paper cost of approximately $450 for the insert. A disadvantage of the Direct Mail Solicitation Program is that it may result in fewer contributions because solicitation would be exercised less frequently than a program operating every month. This result has been confirmed with one utility that collected $1,500 by direct mail solicitation compared to their subsequently established Project HELP pledge program which achieved donations of $2,200 per month ($26,400 annually). A recent survey of twenty California municipal utilities indicates that Burbank, Colton, Riverside and Lodi currently offer programs whereby ratepayers donate funds to help residents experiencing financial hardship pay their utility bills. California investor-owned utilities such as Pacific Gas & Electric (pG&E) have such programs. The Modesto Irrigation District and the Sacramento Municipal Utility District are presently reviewing agreements with the Salvation Army to institute custQmer pledge programs in their service territories. The following chart represents a sample of utilitys with programs in place. . utUity Program Program Type Disperser Est. % of Name of Funds Customer Participation Gainesville ProjectSHARE Monthly Pledge Salvation 5% Regional Army Utilities Salt River SHARE Monthly Pledge Salvation 3% Project Army Sierra SAFE Monthly Pledge or Salvation nla Pacific one time donation Army PG&E REACH Monthly Pledge Salvation nla Army City of SHARE Checkoff Box Riverside 5% '! Riverside County Grays Project HELP Monthly Pledge Community 2% Harbor Action PUD Group 6 CONCLUSION Staff recommends that the City introduce ProjectPLEDGE this fiscal year to provide rate relief to residential ratepayers experiencing financial hardship. Staff estimates that this type of program will be cost effective, convenient for customers, and introduce.a new source of funds to complement existing rate relief programs. Staff proposes to introduce ProjectPLEDGE as a pilot program for one year and report back to Council on the results with any appropriate recommendations. Staff does not consider a checkoff box program to be cost effective. Finally, staff estimates that a direct mail solicitation program would generate an insignificant level of donations. FISCAL IMPACT On-going costs to implement ProjectPLEDGE are estimated at $1,500 annually which would be funded from the existing operating budget. ENVIRONMENT AL ASSESSMENT This proposal does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act; therefore; an environmental assessment is nQt required. PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: Randy Baldschun, Asst. Director of Utilities, Administrative Services 7 1. 2. 3 • 4. 5. 6. 7. 8 • 9 . 10. 11: of Palo Alto Utilities Advisory Conunission Wednesday, November 6, 1996 City Council Chambers MINUTES Roll Call Oral Communications Approval of Minutes Agenda Review and Revisions Consent Calendar Unfinished Business: ...... . a. Final Report by the Organizational Review Consultant, TB&A . . . . . . . . . . . . b. Gas Issues Update .............. . c.' UAC Planning for Joint Meeting With Council .. New Business: ............... . a. Compressed Natural Gas Rate ......•. b. Information Report, Street Light Conversion 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 • • 17 • • • 42 • • 17 · • 17 Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 c. utilities Project PLEDGE Proposal .. • • 24 d. Electric Utility Stranded Cost Update . • • 29 City Council Referrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • 37 Reports of Officials/Liaisons: .....•. • • 37 a. NCPA Commission Report ....... . • • 54 b. BAWUA Report .... . • • 37 Next Meeting • • 54 Adjournment 54 250 Hamilton Avenue . Palo Alto. 94301 "B" 415.329.2277 FAX 415.321.0651 Chairman Johnston called the meeting to order at 7: 30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Item 1. Roll Call PRESENT: Commissioners Chandler, Eyerly, Gruen, Johnston and Sahagian. ABSENT: None. COUNCIL MEMBER PRESENT: Rosenbaum. Item 2. Oral Communications -None. Item 3. Approval of Minutes and Executive Summary Chairman Johnston: The next item is approval of the minutes of October" 2, 1996 and the Executive Summary. MOTION: Commissioner Eyerly: I move approval of t.he minutes and Executive Summary. SECOND! By Commissioner Sahagian. MOTION PASSES: 5-0. Item 4. Agenda Review and Revisions. Chairman Johnston: I would like to propose that we move Item 6c, UAC Planning for Joint Meeting with City Council, to follow 7d, Electric Utility Stranded Cost Update. One reason for my request is that it is a Commission matter preparing for our meeting with the City Council next week, and we do not need to have everyone present in the audience for that item. Also, I would like it to occur after we have the update on the stranded costs. Does that meet with everyone's approval? (It was so agreed.) Item 5. Item 6. Item 6 MINUTES Final Consent Calendar -Nothing. Unfinished Business a. Final Report by the Organizationai Review Consultant, ~ UAD:1II061% Pagel success story. What I am suggesting here is that when you get it all done, in a couple of months, you put in the success story parts, calling them out explicitly, and send it on tQ the council. You have something you are doing right, so let's"go crow about it. Mr. Starr: We will be glad to point out when this is done. It has been a long-term project. Commissioner Chandler: Larry, is there any other technology coming down the pipeline on this, while we are looking at it, that is going to make us say in five years time that we are not going to want to do it again? Not that this is a criticism. Mr. Starr: Not that we have seen. Remember when you are going around the country, you will see the pink lights almost everywhere now when you fly someplace. There is nothing else that we have seen on the market. Commissioner Chandler: Also, as a point of interest, because I happen to live near there (and this borders on the trivial), the last section of the report talks about the conversion of the final 500. I notice that 36 of them are going to be part of undergounding project #37. Is that a project that will be underta~en in the current fiscal year? ~r. Starr: Yes, we are looking at the design for that right now. So it is really going to happen in our lifetime. Chairman Johnston: I would certainly second this program. It is obyiously one of those very successful programs. In a sense, it is a good example of the utility leading by example in terms of the cost effectiveness of a variety of energy~saving measures. I know that the utility has been trying to persuade many customers to change their light bulbs, and here, you are doing it on a grander scale. So I feel it is a excellent program. Thank you very much. Item 7. c. Utilities Project PLEDGE Proposal Mr. Baldschun: Proj ect PLEDGE is a proposal. You have read the memorandum. It is a utilities program that is supported particularly by Administrative Services. Emily is here to answer questions that could potentially impact her group. Also Rob Pound from Information Technology Services is here to answer questions that affect his area regarding software programming. Melissa Cavallo will answer questions on the accounting end of it. There are really four areas, and the fourth one is utilities. The Project PLEDGE proposal is staff's recommendation to provide a mechanism MIi'iUTES Final UAD: 11106/96 Page 24 for rate payers to contribute ~r donate funds to help other rate payers who are having trouble paying their utility bills. You have seen a lot of literature on it, so I will not spend a lot of time on the details of the program. To summarize, we think that the kind of program we are recommending is cost-effective, however, we want to try it for a one- year period and evaluate the results and come back to the City Council with the number of participants and the impacts on staff. The program that was referred to us by the council was one that involved the checkoff box. We evaluated that proposal, and based on the impacts on staff, we do not feel it is cost-effective, so we are not recommending to the council that we pursue that option. The third option we mention in the report is male solicitation, which has very little impact on the staff. It doesn't appear to provide very many contributions, based upon the experience of other utilities. With those opening comments, I will open it up for questions. COmmissioner Gruen: I have a question on your Page 3 where you talk about the number of residents who meet your four categories. One of your "# of Residents" is n/a. Somehow, the theory is that if someone who owes,Us money gives us a forwarding address, we do not know how many people 'we have in that category, whereas if they give us a forwarding address which doesn't work, we know how many there are. Mr. Baldschun: We have not bothered to look up the records for that activity. It is not something we normally collect on a regular basis. We had to do some special digging for this assignment just to come up with these numbers. It was not worth the effort to pursue every last customer in this report for that purpose. Chairman Johnston: I have several questions. This obviously seems to be one of those things where you try to make the logical compromise between the program that gives the most money and the program that is most cost-effective. This seems to me to be a very reasonable compromise from that standpoint. You are talking about this being a pilot program. As I understand it, it is going to be done for all residents for a period of one year, so the piloting is a time period. It is not going to be some subset. Is that correct? Mr. Baldschun: We are proposing to implement the program beginning near the end of the current fiscal year, running it for 12 months, and then report back to council on the results. Chairman Johnston: The question I have when I see a report like this MINUTES UAD:llf06196 Final Page ZS and when you are building the software, although it is apparently relatively easy for this purpose to do so, is about other potential programs that might want to use this. Obviously, there are all kinds of people who lobby for various checkoff boxes. One that has perhaps been knocking around here a little louder than some of the others is the issue of green pricing. That is one of those areas that, at least in theory, could be handled in exactly the same way. You could have a pledge with regard to some fixed dollar increment or a percent of markup on your bill, and you could proceed that way. In working on this program, how do you see it relating to that? Do you see it as being an opportunity to build software that could be applied that way? Or do you see it as being totally separate? Is there any connection here at all? Mr. Baldschun: The software program for green pricing, and I assume what you are referring to is customers just contributing to a fund that would go toward non-renewable resources, would not involve any programming other than putting a line on the bill statement. "That would be fairly easy. What we are talking about with Project PLEDGE is much more complicated than that. We would have to get into the billing software programs which are a kluge of many, many programs with no documentation. The problem with a lot of these things is that they sound simple, but you have to plan for· the unexpected. A custome"r pledges that he is going to send two dollars a month, but only sends a dollar. How do you handle that dollar difference? Those are the "exceptions that create the problems for a lot of folks. So the software program has to be designed to anticipate and allow for all of those exceptions. With green pricing, that would be an easy one-line item ~n the bill, and there is room for it on the bill. Chairman Johnston: The way I understand how that might work, it would be quite similar to a pledge. People could pledge to sign up for so many dollars per bill, for example, to be added to their bill for purposes of green pricing. Then you would have the exact same situation when they pay the bill if they do not pay the full amount. How do you allocate that? I guess I do not really understand the difference between this pledge program and a pledge program for money for green pricing. Mr., Baldschun: Maybe I do not understand what you are referring to on green pricing. Is it a situation where the utility is simply collecting a sum of money and distributing those sums toward the purchase of non- renewable resources as part of its portfolio, not specifically identifying on a customer's bill how much of their kilowatt hours went to that? If you are talking about the latter, it is more complicated. Chairman Johnston: MIl'iUTES Final What I was talking about is what you might call UAD:II/06/96 Page 26 "voluntary green pricing" where essentially, some individuals or companies could choose to pay a surcharge on their utility bill, a fixed amount per month or a percentage markup, some such thing, and that money would go to a fund. I believe we have had a number of letters, proposals, etc., over the years that talked about that program. It seems tome that there was a direct analogy with the Program PLEDGE. Mr. Baldschun: If it is a voluntary program, then it would be a problem because we would run into the same problems we have. If they did not pay what they had pledged, it would become an accounts receivable Commissioner Sahagian: First of all, in concept, I think this is a really good program. At the same time, given that we are in an election year and a year of welfare reform, I looked at it in that light trying to understand it. Two things often come to mind with these kinds of programs. One is ensuring that the money gets channeled to where it really needs to be channeled. Secondly, wha,t are the real administration costs, relative to what you get back. In terms of the channeling, it looks like you have indicated that you would use the Salvation Army anq would work in some kind of tandem or joint basis to have them prequalify recipients. In terms of the cost of the program, you indicate that there is a relatively nominal costO because you would be piggybacking all of the work on the mailings that we are already doing, so the postage and handling cost would be small. My only question is in your analysis of administration costs. You really do not talk much about the joint evaluation aspect of it with the Salvation Army and how you determine who qualifies and who does not. Has that been looked into? Those costs could run up pretty quick, offsetting the value of the total program. Mr. Baldschun: I debated whether or not to lengthen the report, and I decided not include that part. Basically, the Salvation Army is very amenable to working with agencies. There are a number of utilities, and that part I mentioned. They have cri"teria they use for REACH. It is Palo Alto's choice. We could decide to liberalize those requirements or not. We will meet with them and decide what makes the most sense. My guess is that we will probably collect more money than the rate payers are going to apply for if we simply stuck with the PG&:.E REACH guidelines, which is once a year. I am aware of customers who really could use rate relief four or five months of the year, butothey do not qualify under the current system. I would hope that we could liberalize what is currently provided by the Salvation Army. They seem to be open to that. Commissioner sahagian: I tend to agree with you. That was my reaction --that the collections would probably exceed the distributions. Would MI~UTES Final UAD:llI06196 Page 27 the administration costs be included as part of that? Mr. Baldschun: The Salvation Army would take 10% of the contributions to cover their expenses. That is a verbal agreement with them. We have not signed on the dotted line yet, but that is an estimate. commissioner Sahaqian: And for the utility administration costs, extraordinary costs, would there be any recovery there? Mr. Baldschun: In our administration costs we are not talking about incremental costs. It is just time of the existing staff to do the work. It cuts across four areas, the four sitting here. The incremental costs are only about $1,500 a year. We have not calculated the actual costs of everybody doing their particular activity. HI. Harrison: The staff that would be working on this program are already working on utilities program~ in Administrative Services. So there would be no increased cost to the utili ties. It would be a tradeoff as to which utility's work they were doing at any point in time, just additional work . . Chairman Johnston: I have a card from Mr. Lewis to speak. James Lewis, 1498 Edgewood Drive, Palo Alto: Chairman Johnston and members of the Commission, I wish to thank the UAC and staff for your consideration of the Project PLEDGE program. This community has long been known as a caring, compassionate place, and I believe this program potentially. will be a fine example. This concept was originally introduced to the City three years ago in 1993. At that time, there was some interest, but for a variety of reasons, it was not pursued. A year ago today, November 6, 1995, the City Council once again considered this program, which I called "Utility assistance for families in crisis.". It followed a City Council priority known as "People in Crisis." At that time, the City Council voted unanimously 9-0 to refer it to the UAC and staff for further consideration. One might ask, who would donate into such a program? The answer may be found by looking at a number of other places that already offer this program such as the following. First, PG&E's highly successful REACH program has been offered for many years. OVer 70,000 customers per year contributed $4.5 million in 1995. In the State of Texas, their program brought in $2.15 million, and in the ~tate of Arizona, last year $775,000 was contributed into their program. At the City or municipal level, we find that in the City of Mesa in Arizona, over $30,000 was contributed by their citizens. In the City of Garland, Texas, over $10 .. 000 was voluntarily contributed. You might ask whether, once collected, are the rate payers in need of the funds? In checking with several groups, I learned that Palo Alto has such a need, MINUTES Final UAD: 11106196 Plge 28 • as outlined in your staff report. With PG&E, over 350,000 customers statewide have been helped over the, years by this program. In Texas, the Lone Star Gas Company reports that they have helped 29,000 customers. Incidentally, th~ Salvation Army already helps a number of Palo Alto residents, but the source of their funds is outside of Palo Alto. The REACH program that is collected by PG&E customers has been allocated to the local Palo Alto Salvation Army people, and unfortunately, they run out of those funds during the year. Presently, there is an insufficient amount, so if this program dOes get approved by the City, we can either replace those funds with our own citizens helping our own citizens, or we can supplement those funds that they are allocat~d by their own office. I am delighted and pleased that this program is being considered by the UAC and by the Palo Alto Utilities Department. I can share with you that I fully support the staff recommendation. Thank you very much. Chairman Johnston: Tha~k you, Mr. Lewis. MOTION: Commissioner Eyerly: I move approval of the staff recommendation. aSCOND: By Commissioner Sahagian . MOTION PASSES: Chairman Johnston: That motion passes unanimously on a vote of 5-0. Item 7. d. Electric Utility Stranded Cost Update Mr. Baldschun: Earlier this spring; as you know, we spent some time on the subject recommendations that council approved, one of which was that we review this matter again this year with the UAC. That is why we are here tonight to begin the first of three meetings on stranded costs. Tonight we have a report that outlines our approach to the subject and how.we plan to approach it over the next three meetings. We also have Attachme~t 1 that was performed by Jane Ratchye and Doug Boccignone with Tom Habashi's review on the updated stranded cost estimates. They can answer specific questions in that area, and I will try to answer questions on the agenda items and how we plan on addressing these items. Next month, I will primarily be addressing the mitigation measures that we want to bring to your attention to engage in a dialogue, specifically, what happens if the staff is wrong in our forecast and we underestimate or overestimate stranded costs, what options are available to the City? This is something that we danced around in the spring. We did not spend much time on it, and I don't know if any of us sitting here tonight have definitive answers tonight or next month, but we want to attempt to look at these things and try to get a comfort zone for MINUTES Final UAD:11106196 Page 29 them. In order to recommend a stranded cost plan, you need to have some· sense of the risk involved if you are wrong. One other comment I wish to make is that the current council policy is that we will establish'a balance in the Calaveras Reserve by the end of 2003 of $31.6 million. As you know, since the spring, AB 1890 has come out, and now they have moved it up a year, essentially for the investor- owned utilities for fall, open competition in 12/31/01. So we have updated the stranded costs numbers to include what the target balance in the Calaveras Reserve would be in 2002 rather than in 2003. There are some other changes that Tom's group is going to talk about. Mainly, the COTP is in there this time. Also, the there are some refinancing assumptions regarding Calaveras that have an impact on the numbers. There are also some policy decisions that we plan to bring before the council that really have to be made before any final action can be taken on the stranded cost policy. The plan is to get those to the council and to you prior to the final decision on stranded cost. Chairman Johnston: Tom, are you going to make a presentation? Mr. Habashi: We do not have one but we are ·ready to respond to 'your questions. I have one thing to add to what Randy said. I want to emphasize that next month, in addition to the stranded cost investment, the stranded cost report that you will be getting from Randy addressing mitigation measures and recovery measures, we will ·also be bringing in recommendations for certain policy issues that need to be addressed by the council in regard to customer choice and asset investment recovery, as well as sales. We ~re working on that right now, and we hope to be able to bring it to you in December. Chairman Johnston: Could I begin by trying to get a gut level feel of where we think we are now? I understand that a lot more work needs to be done, but when I look at Exhibit A, I wonder if I am reading it right or wrong. The way I look at it, it appears that maybe my worst fears have been realized. When we had this issue h.ere before, we had talked about a projection of how fast the energy prices would rise and that if we were going to have relatively low stranded costs, it would depend upon our having a fairly steep climb in energy prices. You show the four different levels that we had talked about before for the City of Palo Alto, and then there are these two other lines which, at least to a first order, mirror the City of Palo Alto low-estimate cost for low energy prices therefore being the stranded cost high estimate. If I understand this correctly, that seems to be telling us that the projection is as bad as we thought it could have been. To make matters even worse, we knew we had a limited time period. We missed a year in MINUTES Final UAD:ll/06196 PageJO ATT ACHMENT 8 EXCERPTED from Draft Minutes of UAC Meeting of May 6, 2009 ITEM 5: ACTION ITEM: Recommendation to Approve Changes to the ProjectPLEDGE Program· Director Fong indicated that there would not be a presentation but that Tom Auzenne, Utilities Assistant Director for Customer Support Services, was there to answer questions. Director Fong prefaced the discussion by stating that the line between the Rate Assistance Program (RAP), a long-term financial assistance program for those chronically challenged with paying their Utilities bill, and ProjectPLEDGE, a program to assist those with unusual situations, had become blurred over time, making ProjectPLEDGE more difficult to administer. Commissioner Melton indicated that he was unsure as to whether the proposed program change under "Frequency of Funding" indicated in the table on page 3 ("One Time Only -Including RAP participants after the Guideline Changes") meant that program recipients were being limited to partiCipating in ProjectPLEDGE only once, forever, or if it meant limited to once per recipient per isolated event, because unusual things can happen years apart. Auzenne replied "once per unique event." Commission Chairman Dawes indicated that it seemed a positive program, but one he was unfamiliar with due to the lack of outreach since 1996. Commissioner Waldfogel asked if the proposed changes would lead to increased demand by potential program recipients. Auzenne felt that there would probably be an increase in program demand just because of the economy. Director Fong stated that that there would also be increased marketing and outreach to potential donors, once the program guidelines were clarified and distinguished from the long-term financial assistance provided by the Rate Assistance Program (RAP). Auzenne also forecast that the Department was likely to see an increase in Rate Assistance Program applications due to the state of the economy. Commissioner Keller asked that the "Frequency of Funding" language in the table, as identified by Commissioner Melton, be clarified in the report to Council. Director Fong indicated that it would be clarified. The Commission voted 4-0 to recommend staffs proposed changes to the program with the additional clarification that the "Frequency of Funding" will be "Once per unique event" and not "One time only". TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: UTILITIES DATE: MAY 18, 2009 CMR: 234:09 REPORT TYPE: CONSENT SUBJECT: Approval of Plan to Develop Three Options for a City of Palo Alto Utilities Customer Energy Efficiency Financing Program RECOMMENDATION After researching four options that could provide a City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) customer energy efficiency financing program, staff recommends that City Council direct staff to develop a multi-prong approach to meet customer needs by offering different solutions over a timeline that would allow programs to phase in as soon as they are possible. • The first, early option would be to contract with a lending agency to provide energy efficiency loans. This program is likely able to start within six months. • In parallel, City Council would direct staff to undertake a thorough legal and administrative review of one or both of the following programs: (i) an on-bill or off-bill financing program; (ii) a municipal financing program that would allow property owners to repay energy efficiency loans through superior liens on property tax bills. Pursuing different program options provide the greatest flexibility to customers in financing efficiency upgrades, allowing both residential and business customers to recei ve loans for a variety of upgrades at a low or no cost interest rate (depending on the City's cost to buy down the interest rate). If Council does direct staff to implement a financing option, staff will return to Council with the details of the programs and a more complete timeline after detailed legal and project reviews are completed. This will be delivered to Council by the end of the third quarter in 2009. BACKGROUND City Council members have requested that staff review financing options for CPAU customer energy efficiency installation projects. A financing program helps to overcome the first cost barrier that inhibit customers from investing in energy efficient equipment. Depending on the repayment terms of the financing program, the loan payments would be offset by the energy cost CMR: 234:09 Page 1 of 8 savings, resulting in significantly lower upfront cost to the customer. Staff has reviewed four program types available in the industry: 1. Superior liens payable on property tax bills, 2. Notes secured by a Deed of Trust, 3. On-Bill or Off-Bill Financing, and 4. Contracting with a lending agency to provide efficiency loans. To date, staff has spoken with several utility, industry and City representatives, and completed a preliminary analysis of the costs and risks associated with each type of financing program. Each type of financing program for customer energy efficiency and renewable projects has different legal, financial, and customer costs, benefits, and risks. Each methodology would require some lead time to implement and most would require additional staffing for program development and administration. The types of energy efficiency financing are summarized below. A full discussion of the costs, benefits, and risks is presented below in the Discussion section. Superior Liens Payable on Property Tax Bills: Charter cities may use one of two methods to create superior liens on property which secure the repayment of energy retrofit loans. The first is to create contractual assessments; the second is to create a Mello-Roos community facilities district. Each of these debts is paid on the property owner's property tax bill, through a contractual assessment that is not a tax. Note Secured By Deed of Trust from the Property Owner A note secured by deed of trust is a lien on the property and is paid on a monthly or other time period basis. Repayment may also be required within a short period of time or upon sale. However, such a lien is last in priority after other liens. In other words, in the event of foreclosure, this lien will be last to be paid back from the equity left in the property (if any exists) after other pre-existing mortgages and liens. This makes the property appraisal prior to the retrofit much more important. If the City does not do an extensive appraisal, it is possible to lose money when homes are foreclosed. On the other hand, formal appraisals increase the cost of making the loans in the first place. According to the Santa Clara County Assessor's Office, eight properties were foreclosed in Palo Alto in calendar year 2008. Loan Paid on Utility Bill ("On-Bill Financing") or with the Utility Bill ("Off-Bill Financing") Another option is a loan taken by the customer from the utility for an energy efficiency upgrade. The loan is repaid on the utility bill and is called "on-bill financing." This kind of loan is unsecured and thus dischargeable upon bankruptcy. This option is likely only available to businesses under California law. Loans to customers would come with significant cost, reporting, and auditing requirements for the City. A variation of this option is to provide "Off-Bill Financing." In this option, the utility provides funding for a project, and the bill is manually computed separately from a utility bill. The bill for an energy efficiency project can be included with the utility bill. Contracting with a Lending Agency (Bank or Credit Union) to Provide LowlNo-Cost Efficiency Loans A program widely undertaken by many utilities including Alameda Municipal Power and City of Palo Alto several years ago is for the utility to work with a lending institution or credit agency to provide loans for customers' efficiency projects. Staff is currently discussing the interest of the local credit union in revitalizing this program. CMR: 234:09 Page 2 of 8 DISCUSSION Superior Liens paid on property tax bills. Using superior liens to assure loan repayment is desirable for several reasons. First, these liens are superior to all other liens and mortgages on the property with the exception of property tax. In the case of bankruptcy or foreclosure, the City will be repaid second, after only the county. The lender would be third. In addition, repayment may be scheduled for a short period of time. This will prevent legal challenges on issues including successor liability and gifts of public funds. There are two ways to set up a system in which the loan would be treated as a lien on property. The first is to create a contractual assessment pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911, which was amended last year by AB 811 specifically to allow the creation of contractual assessments for energy retrofits. To create contractual assessments, which take the fonn of liens on affected property, Council must adopt a resolution initiating study of an AB 811 program and detennining that the program would be in the public interest. Next, the City will create a rep011 that ensures that the assessment is based on a specific benefit to the property and defines program specifics. The contents of the report are specifically enumerated in the amended Improvement Act. After the report is complete, Council must hold a hearing and adopt a second resolution establishing and approving the program. AB 811 contractual assessments take place only upon consent of the propel1y owner or owners. Additionally, AB 811 affinns that the lien created by this assessment would be superior to all other liens and mortgages on the property. The City, as assessment administrator, could require property appraisals and a credit review prior to lending. Cities are pennitted to issue bonds to support an AB 811 program, and program administration costs can be built into the loan amounts. A second way to create a loan repaid on the property tax bill is to create a Mello-Roos community facilities district. AB 811 Programs and Mello-Roos districts have four main commonalities: 1) both allow a lien to be placed against the property, 2) both are done with property owner consent, 3) both allow the lien to be secured with bonds or other financing, and 4) both ensure that the lien is positioned ahead of the mortgage in the event of foreclosure. Creating a Mello-Roos district, or special tax assessment district, is an option available only to charter cities such as Palo Alto. In 2007, Berkeley used a Mello-Roos-like fonnulation to create a solar loan program called BerkeleyFIRST. Because a Mello Roos district creates a tax, it does not have to be apportioned based on the exact benefit to the property. This means that less background justification will be required, though it is, of course, optional. To use this procedure, Palo Alto would first enact legislation allowing it to create a special tax assessment district and to fund the program from its electric utility funds. At creation, this district will be city-wide, but "empty" -property owners will choose to opt into it, thus avoiding Proposition 218 requirements for a city-wide vote. Once a property owner opts into the district, the energy retrofit will be installed and the City will assess a special tax on the affected property. This tax would be paid back to the electric utility via the yearly property tax bill. There are benefits to this option. While it may take more background research to fonn and staff time to administer, it is by far the most secure option, may be designed to suit the City's specific needs, and is suitable for residential customers, commercial customers, and even property CMR: 234:09 Page 3 of 8 owners with tenants. The staff time to coordinate between the County assessor, property owners, and contractors is not insignificant, however. The City of Berkeley has a full-time staff person assigned to its $1,500,000 pilot SolarFIRST program (in addition to working with bond counsel and consultants to administer the program). There are contractors who have assisted cities and counties in the development of this type of program, e.g. the City of Palm Desert and Sonoma County used the same consultant in setting up their AB 811 program. To lower the implementation costs of an AB 811 program the City could participate in a county-wide or even a statewide program. One such program that is currently being developed by Renewable Funding, a private investment firm, is the CaliforniaFIRST Statewide Program. Note Secured by Deed of Trustfrom the Property Owner: A note secured by deed of trust is a lien on the property and is paid on a billed basis. Repayment may also be required within a shorter period of time or upon sale. However, such a lien is last in priority after other liens. In other words, at foreclosure, this lien will be last to be paid back from any equity left in the property after other pre-existing mortgages and liens. This makes the property appraisal prior to the retrofit much more important. If the City does not do an extensive appraisal, it is more likely to lose money when homes are foreclosed. On the other hand, a formal appraisal increases the cost of making the loans in the first place. More research on this option could be completed; however, due to the fact that this lien would require similar up-front costs as with the superior liens and would be much riskier to the City, this option has not been researched extensively. On or Off-Bill Financing: On-bill financing incorporates 0% interest loans and short payment terms for customers, allowing easier payment of upfront costs to install efficiency measures. A drawback to this option is that the utility is exposed to default risks. The risk of default increases over time particularly for efficiency projects with long payback periods. Consumer lending laws and license requirements make lending funds for non-business customers for less than $5,000 a very arduous and expensive process. As in a lease, collection problems could also arise upon sale or foreclosure, making it important that adequate screening is done before approving a loan. Non- payment of the loan portion of the bill likely cannot justifY turning utilities off. One of the largest concerns about this method is that it is insecure for the City and entails risk of nonpayment and of implementation, which results from an inexperienced entity trying to become a lender and high up front program implementation costs over a relatively small base of participants. Program implementation costs consist of utility billing system conversion cost and ongoing program administration cost. At Southern Gas Company (SGC) and San Diego-Gas & Electric (SDG&E), both subsidiaries ofSempra Energy, the conversion costs were relatively high and the process time consuming. At SDG&E, the billing IT conversion took one year and cost around $400,000. The program has been in place since 2006, and there are 3 full time employees currently administering the program. To date, there have been 120 projects funded, and an average of one application is filed per week. At SCG, the IT utility bill conversion project cost about $120,000. The program has also been in place since 2006, and one and one-half full-time employees are required to administer the program. This program has only nine customer projects funded. These utilities were not comfortable giving out information about the exact number of defaults, but CP AU staff members were led to believe that default rates are relatively low, and the utilities expect a one to five percent default rate. CMR: 234:09 Page 4 of8 To implement an on-bill financing program for the City, staff working on the SAP utility billing system conversion estimated the cost will be $500,000. Billing system upgrades typically involve a fixed number of programming hours regardless of the number of customer accounts. Therefore, the cost for system upgrade on a per customer basis is much higher in smaller utilities. Staff estimates that an implementation of an on-bill financing program would take at least 24 months. Off bill financing is used by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD). It helps to provide funding for efficiency projects without changing the utility's billing program. To avoid the issues related to utility billing systems and much of the risk with lending to tenants, SMUD lends only to property owners and sends the bills through a separate system in the same envelope as the utility bill. To further reduce utility risk, SMUD has a limit of $10,000 per loan, charges the customers interest and an application fee to cover the costs of the program, and has credit requirements for any customer who wishes to enroll in the program. Information is not yet available on exact numbers of customers involved or in the numbers of defaults, but SMUD staff have told CPA U staff that loan applications are not high. Within the state of California, there are stringent legal, licensing and reporting requirements to consumer loan providers. Some of these requirements come from the Truth in Lending Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the California Code of Regulations and the California Finance Lender's Law. Consumer loans are any loans for residential use or any commercial loan of less than $5,000. These requirements are so onerous that the two utilities in California providing on- bill financing, SGC and SDG&E, have chosen not to include this type of loan for residential customers or for commercial customers seeking less than $5,000 in their program. Even for commercial loans, there are lengthy and costly licensing requirements. This begins with completing the license application with the State Department of Corporations (http://www.corp.ca.gov/forms/pdf/1422CFLLF.pd.t). To avoid some of the restrictions and cost of the license (which is based on total business sales, not a percentage of the lending operation), SGC and SDG&E obtained an official exemption from the Department of Corporations for these areas. This exemption process took six months. CPAU staff was advised by Sempra staff that it is unknown whether this exemption would be available for publicly owned utilities, as part of the justification from the Department of Corporations for the exemption was that a state body (the California Public Utilities Commission) would be over-seeing the program. Once this exemption was in effect, the utilities still had to follow general guidelines with extensive reporting and compliance requirements as listed below: o Licensees are subject to periodic regulatory examinations that the licensee must pay for. o Licensees must pay an annual assessment each year. o Licensees must file an Annual Report by March 15th each year. o Licensees are subject to statutory books and record requirements. o Licensees are responsible for compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. o Licensees must maintain a $25,000 surety bond at all times. Typically, applicants must receive a loan approval from the utility prior to installation of any equipment. The installation property must have an active, connected electric account with the utility and, preferably, no record of missed or late payments. The equipment to be installed must meet all the efficiency requirements as a rebated item. To determine the amount of the loan, the utility will evaluate the simple period of the installation. loan CMR: 234:09 Page 5 of 8 periods are limited to three to five years. Equipment for which a loan is received must have a payback that is shorter than the loan period. If this method is ultimately selected, it should be coupled with an unsecured promissory note and the loan capped at a pre-determined amount to minimize the risk of non-payment. Staff has not completed a thorough legal review of this option due to its complexity and will need to conduct a more thorough review should the Council direct staff to pursue this option. Contracting with a Lending Agency: Since the purpose of a lending agency is to provide loans, several utilities with whom CPAU staff spoke have developed this option. The City of Palo Alto itself, in late 1999 (CMR 447:99), contracted with the Palo Alto Community Federal Credit Union to provide home energy efficiency improvement loans with City subsidized loan rates. This contract was completed after a Request for Proposals response from the Credit Union to provide loans during a two year program life to customers who wished to install efficiency measures. This program was mostly used by residential customers. In particular, residents who owned "Eichler" homes found this a low-cost way to fund efficiency measures. Over $2.2 million was loaned to residents during the program's life. Staff is currently confirming the credit union's interest in reinitiating such a program. Because banks and credit unions are set up to fill customer loans, many of the utility's administrative issues, such as licensure, restrictions on consumer lending, changes to the utility billing system, or credit requirements, are removed in this option. The utility's cost will be limited to a part-time staff person to assist customers in completing the loan application and any amount the utility wishes to "pay down" the interest rate for customers' loans. This option does have a higher transaction cost for customers, however, as customers must work with both utility and lending agency staff to complete the transaction. Alameda's collaborative program with a local bank offers business customers low-interest loans for approved electric technologies, including energy-efficient lighting and charging equipment for electric vehicles. Several outside agencies, most particularly the Electric and Gas Industries Association (EGIA) also provide a service of utility sponsored financing for residential efficiency and renewable (solar electric and hot water heating) projects. Whether working with a bank, credit union, or agency such as EGIA, the utility assists the customer in developing the project and loan applications and "buys-down" the interest rate. The bank will have pre-developed guidelines for appropriate lending limits and credit requirements and may work with the utility to expand its typical credit requirements. Given the risks and costs involved with the different financing program options, staff recommends that City Council direct staff to contract with a lending agency to provide energy efficiency loans as a short term solution. In parallel, City Council would direct staff to undertake a thorough legal and administrative review of one or both of the following programs: (i) an on- bill or off-bill financing program; (ii) a municipal financing program that would allow property owners to repay energy efficiency loans through superior liens on property tax bills. An off-bill financing program could begin within a year, while an on-bill program is expected to take at least 24 months. The timing of a municipal financing program would depend on whether or not the City participates in a regional or statewide program; such a program will likely take at least 12 months before an official launch. CMR: 234:09 Page 6 of8 RESOURCE IMPACT Any of the options discussed in this staff report would have resource impacts on the City. A table summarizing the most important impacts is shown below: Program Upfront Staffing Operations Legal Financing Total Cost Risk (1 Name Capital Estimate for Estimate for Review Estimate to 5, with for 3 Year 3 Year 5 being Lending Program Program highest) One full-time Superior professional Consultant- Lien on $1,500,000 -salary and Estimated at Outside $1,925,000 1 Property benefits--$50,000 per counsel: Tax $75,000 per year $50,000 year One full-time Outside counsel: Note professional Consultant-$25,000 Secured $1,500,000 -salary and Estimated at plus In-$1,900,000 4* by Deed benefits--$50,000 per house of Trust $75,000 per year counsel: year $10,000 Billing One full-time System--Costs to professional $500,000 In-house Buy- On-Bill $1,500,000 -salary and one time counsel: Down $2,435,000 5* Financing benefits--Marketing, $10,000 Interest- $75,000 per Processing, Estimated year etc.--$50,000 at $50,000 per year One full-time Costs to professional Billing In-house Buy- Off-Bill $1,500,000 -salary and processmg--counsel: Down $1,960,000 5* Financing benefits--$75,000 per $10,000 Interest- $75,000 per year Estimated year at $50,000 One-half full-Costs to Contract time Buy-professional In-house with Down Financing $0 -salary and Minimal counsel: Interest-$165,000 1 benefits--$10,000 Agency $35,000 per Estimated at $50,000 year * Some risk can be reduced by program design. Note: all costs are annual for the three year duration of a pilot program except for upfront capital infusion of the program and modifications to the billing system, which are presumed to be one- time. CMR: 234:09 Page 7 of 8 Staff will look at ways to keep risks at a reasonable level for other rate payers. Risk reduction methods, including starting with a shorter-term, such as three years, limiting/capping the numbers of customers or dollars invested, and limiting loans to a time period less than the lifetime of the equipment being installed will help to reduce credit risk. In addition, limiting the program to customers who have not had a late payment and who have been utility customers for at least two years can be used as terms to pre-qualify applicants. Final risk reduction steps will be included when the programs have completed legal and management review and are ready to launch. Funding for this proposed pilot project could come from the Calaveras Reserve and/or Public Benefits funding (if sufficient funds are available in that area without eliminating other efficiency programs). Staff will further review these funding options and return with a complete proposal to implement a program as directed by Council. POLICY IMPLICA TI ONS Implementing any of these options would demonstrate the City of Palo Alto's policy to encourage energy efficiency installations and to assist customers in their attempts to use electricity and natural gas more effectively. Approval of staff's recommendations to implement a Customer Energy Efficiency Financing Program would support the City Council Priority Number Three, "Environmental Protection." ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The provision of these services do not constitute a project pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code, thus no environmental review under CEQA is required. ATTACHMENT None. PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT APPROVAL: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR: 234:09 JOYCE KINNEAR, Utility Marketing Services Manager CHRISTINE TAM, Resource Planner AMY BARTELL, Deputy City Attorney KARL V AN ORSDOL, Manager, Energy Risk TOM AUZENNE, Assistant Director, Utilities JANE RA TCHYE, Assistant Director, Utilities JOE SACCIO, Deputy Director, Administrative Services L 'C::.~~'JL'LJ Director of Administrative Services Page 8 of 8 TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DATE: MAY 18,2009 CMR:249:09 REPORT TYPE: CONSENT SUBJECT: Approval of Agreement with Bay Conservation and Development Commission to Provide Public Access to Designated Areas in the Restored Marsh located in the Palo Alto Baylands RECOMlVIENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached agreement with the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) to provide public access to designated areas in the restored marsh located in the Palo Alto Baylands. BACKGROUND The Palo Alto Harbor was dredged and opened in 1928. During the 1930s, more dredging to create a channel out to deep water resulted in over 100 acres of marsh being filled in. Dredging the marsh and installing dikes continued into the 1960s. In 1965, due to a new awareness of the ecological value of marshlands, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) was created to regulate development around San Francisco Bay. Also in 1965, the City dedicated the Baylands as a park In 1978, Council adopted the Baylands Master Plan to balance ecological preservation with continued commercial and recreational use of this area. The Master Plan included the provision to eventually remove the harbor and return the area to marsh. In 1986, Council closed the harbor and, in 1987, Council approved changes to the Master Plan that required the 11.2 acre harbor be returned to marsh. Subsequently, in 1992, the BCDC issued a permit to the City to restore the marsh in two phases and to create public pathways, observation stations, vista points and a picnic area. Additionally, the permit required the City to monitor the restored marsh for ten years to ensure restoration was achieved. The marsh restoration was completed in 1997 and the 10-year monitoring period ended in 2007 with the determination that the marsh has been successfully restored. DISCUSSION One of the stipulations in the BCDC permit is that the City must enter into an agreement with the BCDC that guarantees public access to the paths, vista points, observation areas and picnic area within the marsh while restricting public access to those ecologically sensitive areas of the marsh. As the final step in the marsh restoration project, Public Works commissioned the CMR:249:09 Page 1 of2 preparation of plats and descriptions of the marsh, including the public spaces within it. The attached agreement, which has been reviewed and approved by the Attorney's Office and the BCDC, memorializes the public access terms. The exhibits to the agreement are: Exhibit A, a map of the marsh including the public access areas; Exhibit B, the BCDC permit; and Exhibits C-1 thru C-4, plats and descriptions of the marsh and the public access areas. RESOURCE IMPACT Maintenance of the restored marsh is a task that is already performed by the City's Open Space Division. There will be no additional maintenance work as a result of this agreement. The consultant cost to prepare plats and descriptions was included in the capital improvement project budget. Therefore, there is no impact to City resources. POLICY IMPLICATIONS This Agreement is consistent with the Baylands Master Plan. No policy changes result from adoption of this agreement. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared as part of the original 1978 Baylands Master Plan and adopted by Council on October 11, 1978. An environmental assessment with mitigated negative declaration was prepared and adopted by Council on March 18, 1991, for the improvements authorized in BCDC Permit No. 11-81 Amendment No. Six, which included the restoration of the marsh and the creation of public access areas within the marsh. No further environmental review is required at this time. ATTACHMENTS Attachment: Agreement Imposing Public Access and Open Space Restriction on the Use of Real Property PREPARED BY: GA WEINREICH ( DEPARTMENT HEAD: Engineer i&s.1R8fr Director of Public Works CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR:249:09 Page 2 of2 Recorded at the request of State of California San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission WHEN RECORDED, mail to: San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission 50 California Street, Suite 2600 San Francisco, California 9411 ] STATE OF CALIFORNIA OFFICIAL BUSINESS --Document entitled to free recording pursuant to Government Code Sections 6103 and 27383 .. NO TAX DUE ATIALHIVU!;l"'41 A .THIS SPACE FOR RECORDER Notice of Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions Affecting Santa Clara County Assessor Parcel Numbers 008-05-005 and 008-06-001. 1. An agreement imposing public access and open space restrictions on the use of the affected parcels. 2. BCDC Permit No.11-81 dated August 25,1981, as amended through Amendment No. EIGHT, dated March II, 1996. Revised 03/05/09 1 Agreement Imposing Public Access and Open Space Restrictions on the Use of Real Property . . This agreement ("Agreement") is made this I ? day o~.L~; 20~, by and between the City of Palo Alto, a chartered municipal-~ hereinafter referred to as "the permittee," and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, hereinafter referred to as "Commission. " WHEREAS, the permittee owns certain real property referred to as "the subject property" that is located in the City of Palo Alto, County of Santa Clara, State of California, and is more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and by such reference incorporated h~rein; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act (Government Code Section 66600 et seq.), the permittee sought in Application No.l1-81 a permit for the following . improvements at the Palo Alto Baylands, at the terminus of Embarcadero Road, in the City of Palo Alto, Santa Clara County: Revised 03/05/09 1. In the Bay a. Hydraulically dredge approximately 50,000 c:!Jbic yards of material over a five-year period from the Palo Alto Yacht Harbor and boat launch ramp, with disposal on a site adjacent to the harbor known as Yacht Harbor Point; b. Remove existing berths, docks, and pilings associated with the Yacht Harbor; c. Remove existing docks, piers, and catwalks associated with the Yacht Club and with the southerly Sea Scout ancillary buildings according to a \ 2 Revised 03/05/09 phased removal plan which provides for (1) removal of two large boats to a site outside Palo Alto by January 2, 1989, (2) removal of the five finger piers by March 31, 1989, and 93) removal of all remaining docks and piers not otherwise authorized by or on behalf of the Commission to remain by June 30, 1991 (Amendment Nos. Three and Five); d. Restore a total of 11.2 acres at Yacht Harbor Point to tidal marsh by excavating approximately 140,000 cubic yards of dredge spoils, and disposing of the material a the Byxbee Landfill located in Palo alto (Amendment No. Six); e. Construct a wildlife corridor between Yacht Harbor Point and Mundy Marsh by removing an existing boat launch ramp, backfilling it with 2,800 square feet of earth fill, and restoring it to tidal marsh (Amendment No. Six); f. Construct and use a 3,282-square-fot, pile-supported and floating sailing station for launching small boats (Amendment No. Six). 2. Within the 100-foot Shoreline Band a. Excavate approximately 50,000 cubic yards of previously placed dredge spoils from Yacht Harbor Point to make room for the spoils from the proposed dredging of the Yacht Harbor; o.Deposit 50,000 cubic yards of dredged sedimentfrom Palo Alto Yacht Harbor on Yacht Harbor Point over a five-year period; c. Demolish and remove to a location outside the Commission's jurisdiction security fencing to the floating docks (Amendment No. three); d. Demolish and remove to a location outside the Commission's jurisdiction the Yacht Club building and its ancillary structures (Amendment No. three); e. Demolish and remove to a location outside the Commission's 3 and jurisdiction the Sea Scout ancillary buildings (Amendment No. Three). f. Install and use sailing station support facilities including a boat hose4 off area, public telephone, enclosures for existing portable toilets, a changing area, waste receptacles, bicycle racks, and a drinking fountain (Amendment No. Six); g. Construct and use an approximately) ,81 O-foot-Iong and eight-foot- wide decomposed granite pathway, three interpretive observation stations with wildlife habitat placards and six benches, and three vista points with seven benches (Amendment No. Six); h. Construct and use an approximately 345-foot-long and four-foot-wide connector pathway (Amendment No. Six); i. Construct and use an approximately 3,970-square-foot picnic area with four picnic benches, four barbecues, two garbage cans, a drinking fountain, two benches, approximately 800 square feet of landscaping, and a 265-foot-Iong and five-foot-wide oyster shell pathway (Amendment No. Six); j. Install sections offour-foot-high bollard fencing totaling 1,550 feet in length, and 500 feet of picket fencing (Amendment No. Six); and K. Maintain, on and in-kind basis, all improvements authorized herein and do routine maintenance of existing park facilities (Amendment No. Six). WHEREAS, the Commission has issued Permit No. 11-81 as amended, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B and incorporated by reference, for this work and the uses subject to conditions that are imposed for the benefit of the public and surrounding landowners, and without agreement to which by the pel1llittee no permit could be issued; and Revised 03/05/09 4 WHEREAS, Special Conditions II D 4-7 to the permit provide that the permittee must dedicate or otherwise permanently restrict certain real property more specifically described in Exhibit C to this agreement, which is attached and incorporated by reference into this agreement, for public access and open space NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the issuance of the development pennit by the Commission and ofthe benefit conferred thereby on the subject property, the permittee, on behalf of himself, his heirs, his successors "and assigns, hereby covenants and agrees with the Commission, its successors and assigns that: I. Public Access Areas including a Sailing Station & Support Facilities, Pathways, three Observation Stations three Vista Points and Picnic Area (Special Condition II-D-4). The portion of property more particularly described in Exhibit C-I and C~3, which is attached and incorporated by reference, shall be made available exclusively to the public for unrestricted public access for walking, bicycling, sitting, viewing, picnicking, and related purposes., and that the restriction shall be attached to and become a part of the deed of the property. 2. Open Space -Marsh Restoration Area Phase 1 (Special Condition II-D-5). The portion of property at Yacht Harbor Point more particularly described in Exhibit C-2, which is attached and incorporated by reference, shall be made available exclusively to the public for open space to remain permanently unfilled and undeveloped and that the restriction shall be attached to and become a part of the deed of the property. 3. Open Space -Marsh Restoration Area Phase 2 (Special Condition II-D-6). Revised 03/05/09 The portion of property at Yacht Harbor Point more particularly described in Exhibit C-4, which is attached and incorporated by reference, shall be made 5 available exclusively to the public for open space to remain permanently unfilled and undeveloped and that the restriction shall be attached to and become a part of the deed of the property. 4. Public Access to these areas will be limited to established pathways, interpretative observation stations and vista points described in paragraph 1 and excludes environmentally sensitive areas. 5. The property described in Paragraphs 1 to 3 of this Agreement shall be subject to reasonable rules and regulations governing similar City-owned parks and open space. FURTHER, the permittee acknowledges that any violation of this deed restriction will constitute a violation of the McAteer-Petris Aot and of Permit No. 11-81, and, in addition to any other remedies provided by law, will subject the permittee or any other person violating the deed restriction to suit as provided by the McAteer:-Petris Act. IT IS FURTHER RECOGNIZED that this agreement and deed restriction is a covenant running with the land in perpetuity and shall bind the permittee, its heirs; successors, and assigns. The permittee further agrees that the permittee shall insert the restriction herein described in any subsequent deed or other legal instrument by which it divests itself of either the fee simple title to or of its possessory interest in the subject property or some portion thereof. In witness thereof, the parties hereto have duly executed this agreement. Revised 03/05/09 6 Executed on this __ I--,9:...-...:..7).L-I/ ___ day of /ftA;eC)J ,20<?9 , at San Francisco, California. Executive Director San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT (Civil Code § 1189) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTYO~· On If./Mt) , before ~ , a notary public in and for said County, ersonally appeared ~ ~ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be th~ personts1 whose nametsj isfare-subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in hisAler/their authorized capacity6es7, and that by hislhen'tlteiI signaturets? on the instrument the persot$t, or the entity upon behalf of which the personfstacted, executed the instrument I certifY under penaltY of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS ~y hand and official seal. Revised 03/05/09 8 Executed on this ________ day of _______ , 20 __ , at ________________ , California. APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Atty JAMES KEENE City Manager City of Palo Alto CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT (Civil Code § 1189) STA TE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF ) On , before me, , a notary public in and for said County, personally appeared who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in hislher/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by hislher/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under penalty 6f perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Revised 03/05/09 7 LINE TABLE REFERENCES: DISCLAIMER: a) LINE a) Ll a) La 2) L3 2) L4 2) L5 e> L6 2) L7 2) LB 2> L9 2) LIO 2) Lll 2> Lie 2) LI3 2) Lt4 PREPARED BY: BEARING (1) VOL 531 DEEDS, PG 144 PLOnED FROM AVAILABLE RECORD DATA (2) VOL 532 DEEDS, PG 59 ONLY. iT WAS ASSUMED THAT THE 3X4 RECORDS OF SANTA CLARA STAKE SHOWN HEREON WAS THE SAME COUNTY. BOTH ON FILE AT STAKE REFERENCED ON SURVEY 62, THE CITY OF PALO ALTO. WHICH WAS TIED TO DEEDS 67 & 88 USING SECTION CORNERS. APN 008-06-00 1 SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 DEED 67~/ ,." .. ", -.------" "- /' \0 CREEK "-,/ /' SOU \ "- ./,/ .... ,c, \ t--... \'\ LI,2 ./ ./ «<;?--r' \.11 // S"?--~ ,-,,, APN 008-06-001 ~ 3x4 STAKE ON BANK OF SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK ~ APN 008-05-005 29B (2) CL OF WILSON SLOUGH/ SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK IN1ERSEcnOll Cl UA'IflEU) SlOllGH ""m Cl OF SS ItO,W,. 66-FT ""DE ~ .. STAI(£ ON 8ANK OF MA'lfIELD SLOUGH 55 ROW TO PALO ALTO, DEED 218 PG 122/220 PG 164 500 0 250 500 ~ ... I-I ( IN FEET) 1 inch = 500 ft. ACCOMPANY ABOVE-REFERENCED DEEDS CSG Consultants Inc. DEEDS NO. 29A & 29B CITY OF PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard, 3rd Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 Phone (650)522-2500 Fax (650)522-2599 DATE: 02/19/09 DRAWN BY: ST JOB NO. 08.327 EXHIBIT A (1 OF 2) 19 30 ~ l57 ~ (,sS L63 REFERENCES; (1) 500 O.R. 89 (2) 704 O.R. 445 RECORDS OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY. BOTH ON FILE AT THE CITY OF PALO ALTO. DISCLAIMER: PLOTTED FROM AVAILABLE RECORD DATA ONLY. PLOnED RELATIVE TO OTHER DEEDS USING SECTION CORNERS. SW'L Y LINE OF SURVEY NO. 64 AND RESURVEY NO. 48 MORGAN OYSTER CO L79 67 (~) I ~n ._. __ ~ ___ . __ ...... A .... P ..... _N_._0_.0. __ 8_._-... _0_6_ .... '-0_0_1-=:l6:::...5 _30-lI~. __ .. _.~ ............ ___ .. _",,_._ ... _ .. _ .. _ ................... 8 ... _.8 ... _(_2.) .. '<--§I BANK OF lS SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK APN 008-06-001 LINE TABLE BEARING PREPARED BY: CSG Consultants Inc. 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard, 3rd Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 Phone (650)522-2500 Fax (650)522-2599 ( IN FEET) 1 inch == 1600 ft. DEEDS NO. 67 & 88 CITY OF PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA DATE: 02/19/09 JOB NO. 08.327 DRAWN BY: ST EXHIBIT A (2 OF 2) . l Exhibit B : STATE OF CAliFORNIA PETE WILSON, Governor $AN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION' THIRTY VAN NESS AVENUE, SUITE 2011 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102-6080 PHONE: (415) 557-3888 pty of Palo Alto P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 PERMrr NO. 11-81 AMENDMENT NO. EIGHT March 11, 1996 ATTENTION: James M. Hanington, Senior Engineer SUBJECf: Amendment No. Eight to BCDC Permit No. 11-81 Dear Mr. Hanington: -"'\;.> = = c:: ,-. :£ c ~ ~' CM -:z:: FR ~ z Q") AJC'; :g 111~ J;:1I ';0 :')C . ." I-' ·11 "0 :,.!J '-'" ::5 --' cO mae: cO (j) od As requested in your letter of September 9, 1995, you are hereby granted an extension of commencement time, until January 1, 1998 and an extension of completion time, until January 1,.J999, of permission previously granted to the Oty of Palo Alto for an additional 7.2 acres of marsh restoration at Harbor Point pursuant to Sections I-C and ll-C in BCDC Permit No. 11-81. This extension of time is for the completion of marsh restoration work authorized only and does not apply to any other time requirement in the pennit. This extension of time is issued pursuant to the authority granted by Government Code Section 66632(f), Regulation Section 10822, and upon the rmding that this time extension is not a material alteration of the project authorized by Permit No. 11-81 Amendment No. Seven. Except as stated herein, all conditions of the pennit, as amended, dated August 25, 1981, remain in full force and effect . Ene. WTIRLC/rr cc: U. S. Anny Corps of Engineers, Attn.: Regulatory Functions Branch San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, . . Attn.: Certification Section Environmental Protection Agency, Attn.: Mike Monroe, W-3-3 Dedicated to making San Francisco B!}' better. EXHIBIT· B Sheet 1 of 34 .L... " .-- ST A TI: OF CALIfORNIA = pm W!tSOM __ Govern~ SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THIRTY VAN NESS AVENUE. SUITE 2011 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102·6080 PHONE. (415) 557-3686 " PERMIT NO. 11-81 AMENDMENT NO. 7 March 15, 1993 City of ,Palo Alto P. O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 ATTENTION: Jim Harrington, Senior'Engineer Gentlemen: As requested in your letter dated December 4, 1992, you are hereby grant,ed: ' 1. An extension of commencement time, until Dec~mber 20, 1992, and an extension of completion time, until February 15" -1994, of permission previously gran'ted to complete 4 acres of marsh reconstruction as verified under Special Condition II-C-1 in BCDC Permit No. 11-81; 3. An extension of commencement time, until January 5, 1993, and an extension of completion time, until February 15, ,1994, of permission previously granted to complete a Sailing Station, as verified under Special Conditions II-D-9(a), II-D·9(b), II-D-9(c), II-D-9(d), & II-D-9(f) in Permit No~ 11-81, 3. An extention of commencement time, until December 21, 1993, and an extension of completion time until May 1, 1993, .of. permission prev~,ously granted to complete a picnic area,' as verified under Special Condition II-D-7 in BCDC Permit No. 11-81. These.extensions of time are for the completion of work authorized only and do not apply to any other time 'requirement in the permit. These exten- sion;; of time ar'e issued', pursllant to the authority granted by Government, Code Section 66632(f), Regulation Section 10822, and upon the finding that these time extensions are not material alterations of the project authorized by Permit No. 11-81. J:~BIT.JI . Dedicated to makings, '2llijf ~ better. PERMIT NO. 11-81 AMENDMENT NO. 7 City of Pal~Alto March 15, 19-93 Page Two --) ..... Except as stated herein, all conditions of the permit originally issued ori August 25, 1981, as amended through ,ebruary 20, 1993, remain in full force and effect. ARP/JL/mm Very ALAN R. PENDLE~ON Executive Director EXHIBIT -B Sheet 3 of-34 0170 STAlE OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO SAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THIRTY VAN NESS AVENUE, SUITE 2011 .. '~:RANCISCO, CA ' .. 102-6080 ye, (AU) 557·3686 Permittees' Copy ) ) City of Palo Alto P. O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 ATTENTION: Jim Harrington, Senior. Engineer Gentlemen: PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX On August 20, 1981, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, by a vote of 16 affirmative, 0 negative, and 1 abstention, approved the resolution pursuant to which the original permit had been issued. Moreover, on March 9, 1982, June 9, 1982, OCtober 17, 1986, and July 19, 1989, pursuant to Commission Regulation Section 10822, the Executive Director approved Amendment Nos. One, TWo, Three, and Five, respectively, to which this amended permit is hereby issued. Furthermore, on February 20, 1992, the San Francis~o Bay Conservatio.n ~ Development Commission, ~! vote of 17 ,--- affirmative, .Q negatiVe, and! abstention"appeoved ~ resolution pursuap,t. to which thisniaterial amendment ~ Six .!! hereby issued. (NOTE: Amend'm«tf"t No. Foue was deemed denied on April 23, 1988, when material amendment request not received) : 1. Authorization A. Subject to the conditions stated below, the permittee, the City of Palo Alto, is granted permission to do the following at ~~~/_~i_¢~~tlt¢lt~¢ '~~¢/~~t¢11~¢~t/~~f~¢f the Palo Alto Baylands, at the terminus of Embarcadero Road, in the City.of Palo Alto, Santa Clara County: 1. In the' Bay a. Hydraulically dredge approximately 50,000 cubic yards of material over a five-year period from the Palo Alto Yacht Harbor and boat launch ramp, with disposal on a site adjacent to the harbor known as Yacht Harbor Point; EXHIBIT -B Sheet 4 of 34 " PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 2 b. Remove existing berths, docks, and pilings associated with the Yacht Harbor; c. Remove existing docks, piers, and catwalks associated with the Yacht Club and with the southerly Sea Scout ancillary buildings accord- ing to a phased removal plan which provides for (1) removal of two large boats to a site outside Palo Alto by' January 2, 1989, (2) removal of the five finger piers by March 31, 1989, and (3) removal of all remaining docks and piers not otherwise authorized by or on behalf of the Commission to remain by June 30, 1991 (Amendment Nos. Three and Five) 1 d. Restore a ¢t~t¢~¢/¢t/t¢~f/.¢f;¢/¢t/t~; ;~¥¢~¥~g/~~/.¢;,¢/¢t/t~'/~.¢~t/~.f~¢;/1¢t~~ .;,./t¢/t¥~.~/¢.f¢~/~~;~~¢'~t/~_I/t~i'_Y total of 11.2 acres at Y~cht Harbor Point to tidal marsh by excavating approximately 140,000 cubic lardS of dredge sp?ils, and disf0sing of the materia+ at the Byxbe~ Landfill located in Palo Alto (Amendment No. Six); e. Construct a wildlife corridor between Yacht Harbor point and Mundy Marsh by removing an existing boat launch ramp, backfilling it with 2,800 square feet of earth fil,l, and restoring i~ to tidal marsh (Amendment No. Six); and f. for 2. Within the 100-foot Shoreline Band a. 'Excavate approximately 50,000 cubic yards of previously placed dredge spoils from Yacht Harbor Point to make room for the spoils from the proposed dredging of the Yacht Harbor; EXHIBIT - B Sheet 5 of 34 " paRMIT NOo 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 3 b. Deposit 50,000 cubic yards of dredged sediment from Palo Alto Yacht Harbor on Yacht Harbor Point over a five-year period; c. Demolish and remove to a location outside the Commission's jurisdiction security fencing to the floating docks (Amendment No. Three), do Demolish and remove to a location outside the Commission's jurisdiction the Yacht Club build- ing and its ancillary structures {Amendment No. Thr ee) J _rts6 ee Demolish and remove to a location outside the Commission's jurisdiction the Sea Scoul::.ancillary buildings (Amendment No. Three). ~ Install and use sailIng station support facilities· including a boat hose-off area, public telephone, enclosures for exi"sting EQrtable toilets, a changing area, waste receptacles, bicycle racks, and a drinking fountain (Amendment No. S,ix) , ~ Construct and use an aeeroximately 1,810-foot-long and eight-foot-wide decomposed granite pathway, three interpretive observation stations with wildlife habitat placards and six benches, and three vista points with seven benches (Amendment No. Six);, !!.:. Construct and Ilse an approximately 345-foot-long and four-foot-wide connector pathway (Amendment No. Six): i. Construct and use an approximately 3,970-square-foot eicnic area with four picnic benches, four barbecues, two garbage cans, a drinking fountain, two benches, approximately 800 square feet of landscaR1n9, and a 265~foot-long and five-foot-wide oyster shell pathway (Amendment No. Six), EXHIBIT -B Sheet 6 of 34 PERMIT NOe 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 4 ~ Install sections of four-foot-high bollard fencing totaling 1,550 feet in length, and 500 feet of picket fencing (Amendment No. Six), and ~ Maintain, on an in-kird basis, all improvements authorfzed herein and do routine mo\lintenance of existing park facilities (~endment No. Six). B. This amended authorization~y is generally pursuant to and limited by (1) your application filed June 19, 1991, including all its accompanying and subsequent exhibits, (2) your letter d~ted February 25, 1982, requesting Amendment No. One, (3) your letter dated May 26, 1982, requesting Amendment No. Two, (4) your letters dated May 6, 1986 and August 27, 1986, requesting Amendmenr-No. Three, .~~ JAY (5) your letter received January 6-, 1989, reques-ting Amendment No. Five, (6) your application dated March 22, 1991 and your revised application dated June 17, 19911. reguestlng Material Amendment No. Six, and all of the t~¢ accompanying exhibits, but as modified by the condition~ contained herein. (NOTE: Amendment No. Four was deemed denied on April 23, 1988, when material amendment request not received.) c. Work authorized herein must commence prior to January 1, 1982, or this amended permi t will lapse and become null and void. Such work must also be diligently pursued to completion and all work relating to the dredging must be completed by March 1, 1986. Work authorized by Amendment No. Three and Fivell~x¢~~~/t~t/~~; ".;'t¢'p(lt~¢~¢'I"K.j.~~/J4¢'I't' must commence prior to March 1, 1987, or this amended permit will lapse and become null and void. Such work must also be diligently pursued to completion and must be completed by December 31, 1987, except for the removal of docks, piers, and catwalks associated with the Sea Scout base which may be removed in two phases. The five finger piers shall be removed by March 31, 1989. All remaining docking facilities associated with the Sea Scout base and not otherwise authorized by or on behalf of the Commission to remain shall be removed by June 30, 1991. ''p(~/~t_'p( 'I~;K.¢'I"K.t~~/J4~'I'tI¢W"~~/~;/¢~~~~;~~~/~¢/~"K.~tltW.~/I"~~.'IYlt'lt~'~1 Work authorized in Material Amendment No. Six, including four acres of mar"sh restoration-at Yacht Harbor Point, restoration of the boat launch ramp to a wildlife corridor, and construction of 0.66 acres of public access improvements, as required in Special Condition II-C and 11-0, must be diligently pursued to completion and must be completed by January 1, 1993. Work on the additional 7.2 acres of marsh restoration authorized at Yacht . EXHIBIT .. B Sheet 7 of 34 " PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX city of Palo Alto page 5 Harbor Point may commence, as defined in se~cial Condition II-C, at any time. until January 1, 1997. Such work must be diligently eursued to comeletion and must be completed within one year of commencement of work. The maintenance provision authorized in Material Amendment No. Six shall exeire on January 1, 1997. Five year time extensions of the maintenance provision ma~ be granted bl amendment of this amended authorization where application 1S made erior to the expIration date and the aeplicant has diligentll satisfied the terms, 'conditions, and requirements of this amended authori zation. D. The project involves maintenance dredging of an existing marina over a five-year period. Disposal of the dredge spoils will occur on Yacht Harbor point, a site partially within the Commission's lOO-foot shoreline band-. Existing interim public access along the shoreline will not be affected by the proposed project, and at project completionJ/tW;/;'f.;~;_'X/;f.'t;, Yacht Harbor Point will be restored to tidal marsh and ~;,;'X~~;;./t¢f public access develoeed along the perimeter of the _p;. marsh. The project, as autho.rized and conditioned through Amendment No. Six, will result in a total of 11.2 acres of marsh restoration, aperoximately 28,000 square feet (0.66 acres) of public access, and approximately 9,622 square feet of Bal fill for eublic access and habitat enhancement. II. Seecial Conditions The amended authorization made herein shall be subject to the following special conditions, in addition to the standard conditions in Part IV: A. seecific Plans and Plan Review 1. plan Review. No work whatsoever shall be performed at any location pursuant to this amended ~;;~f,t authorization until final precise site, ;psf,p;;;YpsJ grading, _p;. landscaein2, eublic access plans and any other ~elevant criteria, specifications and plan information, for that portion of the work have been submitted to, reviewed, arid approved in writing by or on behalf of the . Commission. The specific drawings and information required will be determined qy or on behalf of the Commission. To ensure timely compliance with the EXHIBIT· B Sheet 8 of 34 " PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 6 amended permi t requirements, ereliminary drawings should be submitted and approved prior to final drawings. ~ Site, Landscaeing, and Public Access Plans. Site, landscaping, and public access plans shall include and clearly label the 7.3-foot contour line above Mean Sea Level (the line of highest tidal action), the line 100 feet inland of the line of highest tidal action, property lines, the boundaries of all areas to be reserved for public access and open space eurposes, grading, details showing the location, types, dimensions, and materials to be used for all public access imerovements, structures, irri2ation, landscaping, drainage, sea tln9, . ear king , si2ns, lighting, fences, pa~hs, trash containers, utilities and other prOposed improvements, the location and details of any construction stora2e and staging areas, project phasin2' and other relevant details. b. Spoil Disposal plans. 1~/'_;tJ¢~1_;'lt~; ~;;~Jtt¢;/~~~t/~~~¢Jt Spoil disposal plans shall include details;~/,1_~~ of how the disposal site at Yacht Harbor Point will be excavated prior to spoil disposal, location of any pipelines and equipment, particularly in relation to public access areas, finished elevations at the disposal site at the completion of dredging, and how the spoils will be dewatered and the water returned to the Bay. 1~/;~~~;;ltJ¢;ttl¢~¢;1J_~¢;/~Jt~/t~;I_¢;~~;~ ,;;¢ft'~/;;~~J;;¢;~t~'I;;;1J¢J~_;t/~;_~J~~~ ;~~~1~/~;/~~~~Jtt;~/_~~/_;;;~y;~/;;J~;/t¢/t~; ~~~~Jtt_t/¢'/tJ~_X/~;_~J"~~' . 2. ~_~~~¢_;J~~/;flans submitted for review shall be accompanied by a letter requesting plan approval, identifying the type of plans submitted, the portion of the project involved, and indicating whether the plans are final or preliminary. Approval or disapproval shall be based uponl EXHIBIT - B Sheet 9 of 34 " PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Paqe 7 a. Completeness and accuracy of the plans in showinq the features required above, Farticularly th~ line of highest tidal action, Froperty lines, and the line 100 feet inland of toe line of highest tidal action, and any other criteria required by this amended p¢I¢¥~ !uthorization, b. Consistency of the plants ¢;¥i_;¥~/~~~ t~t¢;¢~t¥¢~ with the terms and conditions of this amended authorization p¢;¢tia ~ The provision of the amount and quality of J2ublic access to and along the shoreline and in and through the J2roject· to .the shoreline required by this authorization; d. Consistency with legal i.nstruments reserving J2ublic access and open space areas and consistency with any existing Commission permi tS l authorizations, or agreements: ~ Assuring that any fill in the Bay does not exceed this authorization and will consist of apJ2roJ2riate shoreline J2rotection materials as determined by or on behalf of the Commission; ~ Assurin2 that aJ2J2ropriate J2rovisions have been incorporated for safety in case of seismic event; !!!2 ~ COnsistency with the recommendations of the Oesiqn and Engineering Cri~eria Review Boards. In each instance, plan review shall be completed by, or on behalf of tbe COmmission, within 45 days after receipt of the plan~ to be reviewed, and signified by a letter specifically referring to the submitted plans that indicates whether the plans have been approved or disapproved. 3. Conformity with Final Approved Plans. All work, improvements, uses, public access and open space areas EXHIBIT· B Sheet 10 of 34 '; PERMIT NO. 11-91 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As ,Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 9 shall conform to the final approved plans. At the com21etion of each 2roject segment or phase, the a2propriate desIgn professlonal(s) of record shall certify in wri ting that, through personal knowledge, the work covered by the authorization has been performed in accordance with the approved design criteria and in substantial conformance with the aeeroved plans. No noticeable changes shall be made thereafter to any ftnal plans or to the exterior of any constructed structure, outside flxture, lighting,_ landscaping, or public access areas witbout first obtaining written approval of the change(s) by or on behalf of the Commission. . ..i!!. Discre2ancies Between Ap2roved Plans and Special Conditions;;' In case of any discrepancy between final aperoved plans and Special C!)nditions of this authorization Or legal Instruments approved pursuant to this authorization, the Special Condition or the legal instrument shall prevail. The permittee is responsible for assuring trat all plans accurately and fully reflect the Special Conditions of this authorization and any legal instruments submitted pursuant to this authorization. ~I ¢W~~w~j/~~/~~~(~y~~/'~~~jl//xtt~(/tt~~~/~~~~j/W~Y~ ~~~~/~~~(~y~~/~~(j~~~~/~~/~~¢t_~/¢~~~t~t~~/11rXr~' ~~/¢W~~W~/jW~~~/~~/~~~~/~~/j~¢W/~~~~j/~1~W~~~/tt(jt ~~~~1~t~w/~;t~~~~/~~,(~y~~/~t/~W~/,(~P¢j~~/¢W~~W~ ~1/~(/~~~~W~~t/~t/~W~/¢~~~JjjJ~~I//X,,(~y~~/~(/~Jjr ~,~(~y~~/jW~~~/~~/~~~~/~t~W1~/~S/~~yj/~t~~(/~W~ ,(~~j~~/¢~~~f~/W~j/W~~"/j~~¢1~~~~/'~(/~~~(~Y~~/~~~ j~~~~/~~/~~j~~/~~/i/ti"~t~w/~W~t/~W~/¢~~~W~ ¢~~,~t~j/~t~W/~wtj/~¢~~~~~/~~(¢Jt/~~~/~~~~~/"~~ ,~t(J¢~~~~~~y/~tt~¢t/~~~~t¢/~¢¢~jj'/~~~~j¢~,J"W' ~~;~/j~¢~,/~~~"/~~t~(I/~(/~tw_(/~~~~J¢/~;"_t1tjl 1.1 ¢d"'td(¢t't1/'iJ~W/";~(~Y~~/'~~~j.' ,.t~/"t~~j~jl/¢~~~(~¢~ j~~¢ttJ¢~~J~~jl/~~~/~~~/j~(~¢~~(~j/~"~/t~p(~y_~~"~j _t/~~~/;(dl~¢~/jJ~~/jW~tt/¢~~t~(~/~~/tW;/tt~~t/~t~"j , _;~(~y~~/p~(j~~"~/~~/tWJj/¢~"~1~t~~I//~~/jt(~¢~~(~j ~~tt/~~/pt~¢~~/"~(/~"Y/J¢;(dY~¢~~~/~"'~(~~~;~/tW~t EXHIBIT -B Sheet 11 of 34 / PERMIT NO. 11~81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 9 1¢/~~t/¢~;_,~t/J~~~~/_~~/I~~t¢_t;~/~~/t~;/_pp,¢y;~ 't~_~/p~_~¢I//X't;,/¢~~¢t,~¢tt¢~,/~~/~~tt¢;_~~; ¢~_~i;¢/t¢/t~;/;~t;,t~,/~,/_~t/Jt,~¢t~,;/¢~_~~/~; ~_~;'/~¢/_~~ltt~~_~/¢t,~¢t~,;¢/¢~_~~/~;/~~t~t'/~~' ~_~~/p_,~'/~p;~/JP~¢;'/~p;~/~~t;,'/~_~~¢¢_pt~B'/¢' p~~~¥¢/_¢¢;¢¢/_,;_¢/~;/~~t;,;~/~¥t~~~t/'I'Jt ~~t_t~t~i/~'¥tt;~/_pp'¢Y_1/~t/~,/~~/~;~_~,/~,/t~; ¢¢~~t¢¢t~~/p~,¢~_~t/t¢/~p_¢t_1/¢¢~~ttt~~/ttf~f~1 B. Water Quality 1. Construction Operationse All construction operations shall be performed to minimize roiling of the water and to prevent timbers, floats, or other construction material from drifting and presenting either a pollu- tion or navigational hazard. 2. Dewatering of the Dredge Spoils. Prior to the placement of any dredged spoils at Yacht Harbor point, a means for dewatering the spoils shall have been submitted to the Commission and approved pursuant to Special Condition II-A, above. The mechanism for dewatering the spoils must be sufficient to assure that any water returning to the Bay i~ free of sedi- ment and meets the Regional Water Quality Control Board's discharge requirements. 3. Monitoring. A water quality monitoring program shall be established by the permittee in consultation with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the State Department of Fish and Game and information obtained shall be reported, to the City of Palo Alto in a timely manner. c. ~';~Bt~B/~'/~;/~~jt/~_~~¢~/~~pl//t~;/~~¢t/1¢~~¢~/'¢~p/¢~_1~/~; ~';~i;i/_t/t~;/~;Bt __ t~i/~'/;_¢~/ __ ~~_1/~';~Bt~i/¢t¢1;'/p,t~,/t~/~';~it~B _pt/~t'f.;,/_,;_¢/~,/tti;/ti_'~'1 Permanent Marsh Restoration and Public Access Improvements. h Marsh Restoration and Public Access. By January 1, 1993, the permittee shall complete four of the 11.2 , acres of marsh restoration at Yacht Harbor Point, EXHIBIT -B Sheet 12 of 34 PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 10 restoration of the boat launch ramp to a wildlife corridor, and the approximately 0.66 acres of eublic . access improvements, as generally shown on Exhibits A and a, and pursuant to Special Condition II-A., ~cific Plans and Plan Review. 2. Additional 7.2 Acres. Under Amendment No. Six, the ~ermittee is authorized to restore ~n additional 7.2 acres at Yacht Harbor Point (originally required for publIc access) to tidal marsh. If restoration of the remaining 7.2 acres at Yacht Harbor Point does not commence by January 1, 1997, the permittee shall' improve the remaining 7.2 acres for public access ~urP2ses by June 1, 1997, as identified in, but not limited to, theSummarx Report, Baylands Masterplan and EIR, 1979. Implementation of the public access concepts ide~tified in the Summarx Report, Baylands 'Master Plan and ErR, 1979 are subject to: a. Special COndition II-A, Specific plans and Plan Review: !.!!.2 b. The recommendation of the Commissionts Design Review Board that ime1ementation of the public access concepts in the Baxlands Master Plan, including but not limited to the quantity, qualitx, and timing of public access area~ and improvements, constitutes maximum feasible E~b1ic access consistent with the McAteer Petris Act, the San Francisco Bay Plan, and the Commisslonts Public Access Design Guidelines. ~ Verification of Marsh Restoration. To verify that marsh restoration of the additional 7.2 acr~s at Yacht Harbor Point has commenced, the permittee shaU, on or before January 1, 1997, submit and receive afprova1, bX or on behalf of the Commission, the following: a 6 Wri tten documentation showing the Cit)' has secured, budgeted, or otherwise has available adequate funding, estimated at $750,000 to $1,000,000, to come1ete the additional 7.2 acres EXHIBIT -B Sheet 13 of 34 PERMIT NO. 11-81 {Issued on. August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992} AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 11 of marsh restoration at Yacht Harbor Point b~ January I, 19981 and b. Final matsh restoration. plans consistent with Special Condition II-H. D. Public Access 1. Existing 1~t_;J~_Public Access. All construction o~erations ~;_~gJ~g,/,~¢_~_tJ~~,/'~~/~tK_; j iiiiifiit_t,~/~~;~ shall be conducted.so as to neither substantially interrupt nor disturb existing public acce~s areas and improvements, and shall be performed in a manner which allows the passage of all public traffic through the construction zones to the Interpretive Center and launch ramp parking ar.ea wi th as little inconvenience and delay as possible. As required under BCDC Permit 4-68, the permittee shall continue to permanently maintain and keep open for public use the launch ramp parking area. ~ Interim Public Access. The City of Palo Alto shall continue to maintain and keep open the interim public access at the remaining 7.2 acre area or Yacht Harbor Point, as required under BCDC .Permit 11-73, including, but not limited to, the temporarx six-foot wide eublic .' access eathway I benches, and earkin9 area, until commencement. of marsh restoration, as verified under Seecial Condition II.C.· Once commencement of marsh restoration has .been verified bX or on b~half of the Commission, the applicant max close the interim public access at the remaining 7.2 acres of Yacht Harbor Point so that final marsh restoration improvements max be imelemented. ~~~tt~,~,~/p'~Xt¢/,¢¢,~~/~t . ~~¢Kt/ __ ;~¢;/1¢J~t/_K_XX/~'/~,t~t_t~,~/~t/_tt/tt~,~ ~y/'ttK,;/~~;yt~f/~~y/ptP'Xt~,_/¢;¢~~t~g/p~~XJ¢ ~¢¢,~_/~;_~_,/~;/¢~~~t;~¢tJ~f/t'~P_/¢;_t/~_¢K P~;'XJ~'~I 3. Buffer Strip. To minimize the possibility that placement of dredge spoils at Yacht Harbor Point will adversely affect public safety and use of existing EXHIBIT -B Sheet 14 of 34 " PSRMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 12 public access areas and improvements, the permittee shall not place dredge spoils on a 35-foot-wide strip around the perimeter of the entire spoils disposal site. This buffer strip shall either remain in its present condition, or be graded and improved pursuant to plans approved under p~t;~_~t/t¢ Special Condition II-A, and/or II-H~ _~¢;~I 4. Public Access Area. The aperoximately 28,000 square-foot-area, as generally shown on the attached Exhibit A, shall be made available exclusively to the public for unrestricted public access for walking, bicyclin2, sitting, viewin2, picknicking, and related eurposes eursuant to Special Condition 11-0-7. If the permittee wisheS to use the public access area for other than public access-purposes,· it -must obtain prior written approval by or on behalf of the Commission. 5. Open Space Area. The four acres of marsh restorati.on at Yacht Harbor Point, as generally shown on the attached ExhibitB, shall be made available exclusively to the pubUc for open. seace to remain eermanentlx unfilled and undeveloped pursuant to Special Condition Il-D-7. The permittee shall retain the right,. however, to repair, maintain, and reconstruct the marsh restoration improvements erovided the permittee obtains anx necessarx approvals for such work from the Commission. 6. Additional ".2' Acres At Yacht Harbor Point. !!. authorized in Amendment No. Six,. the permitt~e maX restore an additional 7.2 acres at Yacht Harbor Point to tidal marsh. The additional 7.2 acres of marsh restoration at Yacht Harbor Point, as generallx shown on Exhibit B,shall be made available exclusively to the public for open seace to remain permanently unfilled and undeveloeed pursuant to Special COndition II-D-7. The eermittee shall retain the right, however, to reeair, maintain, and reconstruct the ~arsh restoration improvements provided the eermittee obtains anx necessarl approval for such work from the EXHIBIT .. B Sheet 15 of 34 '\ PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX city of palo Alto Page 13 Commission. In the event t~e City does not commence construction of the marsh restoration, as provided for in Special Condition II-C, and the additional 7.2 acres at Yacht Harbor Point is developed for publi~ access, the permittee shall make the 7.2 acre area, as generally shown on" Exhibit'S, available exclusively to the public for unrestricted public access consistent with Special Condition Il-D-4 and pursuant to Special Condition II-D-7~ 7. Permanent Guarantee For Public Access and Open Space. Prior to January 1,1993, the permittee 'shall, by Instrument or instruments aoceptable to counsel. for the Commission, permanently guarantee such rights for th~ public to the new approximately 28,OOO-sguare-foot Eublic accessarea(s) required in Special.Condition 11-0-4, and the four acres of marsh restoration area ·required in Seecial Condition Il-D-S, to the exten t the eermittee is legally able to do so. Moreover, Prior ·to June 1, 1997, the eermitt~e shall, by instrument or instruments acceetable to counsel for the Commission, permanently guarantee such ri2hts for the eublic to the additional 7.2 acres marsh restoration site or 'public access area required in Special Condition II-D-6. The instrument (s) shall create rights in favor of the eublic which shall commence no"later than after completion of construction of any eublicaccess imerovement.s or marsh restoration required by this authorization.and prior to the use of any structures authorized herein. Such instrument shall be in a form that meets recordation requirements of Santa Clara county and shaH include a le2a1 descr1et1on of . the proper ty being restricted and a map ttlat clearly .shews and labels the line of hi2hest tidal action, the proeerty being restricted for public access, the le2al ' description of the eropertyand of the area bein2 restricted for eublicaccess and/or open seace, and other aeproeriate landmarks and topo2raehic features of the site, such as location and elevation of the toe . of bank. of any levees," any si2nificant elevation chan2es, and the location of nearest eublic street and EXHIBIT -B Sheet 16 of 34 .. " PERMIT NOo 11-81 (Issued on ~ugust 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 14 adjacent public access areas. Approval or disapproval of the ihstrument(s) shall occur within 30 da~s after submittal for approval and shall be based on the following: a. Sufficiency of the instrument(s) to create legally enforceable rights and duties to provide the publIc access area reguired by this authorization; ~ Inclusion of an exhibit to the instrument that clearly shows the area to be reserved with a legally sufficient description of the boundaries of such area;. and c. Sufficiency of the instrument to create legal rights in favor of the public for public. access and/or open seace that will run with the land. and be binding on any sUbseguent eurchasers, licensees, and users. h Recordation of the Instrument. Within 30 days after approval of the instrument(s), the eermittee shall record the instrument (s) and shall provide :evidence of recordin2 to the Commission. No changes shall be made to the instrument after approval without the express written consent by o~ on behalf of the Commission. ~ Improvements Within the Total public Access Area. !l January 1, 1993, the ~rmittee shall install the following improvements: a. A 3,282-square-foot, ei1e-supported and floating sailing station for launching small boats; ~ Sailing station support .facilities including a boat hose-off area, eublic telephone, enclosures for exIsting portable toIlets, a changing area, waste receetacles; bicycle racks, and a drinking fountain; ~ An aperoximate1y 1,8l0-foot-long and eight-foot-wide decomposed granite eathway, EXHIBIT -B Sheet 17 of 34 PERMIT NOo 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX C~ty of Palo Alto Page 15 10. 11. - three interpretive ob~ervation stations with wildlife habitat placards and six benches, and three vista points with seven benches, do An approximately 345-foot-10ng and four-foot-wide connector ~thway, ~ An approximately 3,970-square-foot picnic area with four picnic benches, four barbecues, two garbage cans, a drinking fountain, two benches, approximately 800 square feet of landscaping, and a 265-foot-1ong and five-foot~wide oyster she 11 pa thwaX , f.Sections of four-foot-high bo11ard fencing totaling 1,550 feet in length, and 500 fe~t of picket fencing; and ~ Four public access signs. Such improvements shall be consistent with the plans approved pursuant to Special Condition It.A of this amended authorization and shall substantially conform to the attached. Exhibits A and B. . Handicap Accessibility. All public access improvements authorized herein shall conform, to the maXimum extent feasible, with all applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations regarding ~andicap accessibility. Maintenance. The areas and improvements'within the total approximate-1x 28,OOO-square-foot publfc access area shall be permanently maintained by and at the expense of the permittee or its assignees. Suc~ maintenance shall include, but is not limited to repairs to all .path surfaces, replacement of any plant materials deposited wittiinthe access areas"and assuring that public access signs remain in place and visible. Such maintenance is limited to routine repairs and reconstruction that restores the public access areas and improvements to the plans. and EXHIBIT -B Sheet 18 of 34 PERMIT NOo 11-81 (Issued on August 25 8 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 16 s~cifications authorized herein anQ approved pursuant to Special Condi tion II-A. Wi thin. 30 days after notification by staff, the permittee shall 90rrect ~ny maintenance deficiency'noted in a staff inspection of the site. ~ Reasonable Rules on Use of Public Access Areas. !h! permittee may impose reasQnable rules and restrictions on the use of required public access areas provided such rules are first approved by or on behalf of the Commission and do not significantly aff,ct the public nature of the area nor unreasonably burden public use. Rules may include restrictin2 hours of use and delineatin2 appropriate behavior. E. ;~t~~~~~~/t~,t~Y~¢~~~¢/~'/X~¢~~/~~;~;/'~t~~I/;'t~~t~/~.~/y~~;¢ ¢'/~~~/¢¢~~~¢~~~~~/¢'/~;~~st~~/¢;/~t/~~~~_;tI11/1"t'/~~t¢~.;.;/t¢ ~_;1t;;'/~~;/¢t~t/¢'/'~1~/~X~¢/¢~_XX/¢¢¢,1~~~/~~~/t¢,;~;;¢~~~¢/¢'/~~~ _,,;¢~t¢_~;Xt/1X/_¢;.¢/~~~~~/_¢/X_¢~~/~_;~¢;/'~/~~/_¢/¢~X1.~/'¢;/I~/~~~ ~~~'~;~/'_1¢/~X~¢/~~Y1_~~¢/~¢~~;/'1_~'/~¢/I~/;~/¢~¢/¢~/~~;/~_~./¢'/~~; ¢ttft~_1/'.;¢t~'/t~¢1~~t~f/~~~/~¢~/11¢t~;~/~¢/~~;/'~~1t¢/~¢¢;¢¢ t¢,t¢Y;¢~~~¢/_~~/~~./;;¢~~;_~t~~/~'/J/¢t~t¢~~/¢'/'¢~;/_¢;;¢/~,/¢~;¢~, Minimum Fill. To minimize the placement of BaX fill for the construction of the proposed pedestrian/bicycle paths authorized herein, the permittee shall relocate the followin2 two sections of path, as generallX'shown on the at tached Exhibi t A, landward of the line of highe.st tidal action: an a proximatel 205-foot-Ion section between the north basin and the Interpret ve Center parking facilitXl and an approximatelx 90-foot-10ng section linking. the former Yacht Club with the Interpretive center Earkin2 fa9llity. Final relocation of the two sections of pat~shall be awroved, by or on behalf of the Commission, Eursuant to Seecial Condition II-A. " ~¢¢.¢¢t~t1t~t/~'/'~~1t¢/'~¢t1t~t;.'//~W.I¢~~¢~;~¢~/~~/¢'.;J~t¢~¢ J~~/¢~;j~/;;jt¢;_~t~~/~~~~¢;t~;~/~.;;t~/j~~X1/~./'.;'¢;¢;~/j~/~¢/~~/~.;¢t~ ~;/;J_j~S./¢'/~11/~~~1t¢/~;~ttt¢/~~;¢~f~/~~;/¢¢~jt;~¢tt¢~/~~~;/~¢/t~; t~~.;~;.~t;;/¢;~~;;/~~~/'~~1t¢/1_~~¢~/;_¢,/~;~t~S/_;'J/~t~~/~¢/1t~~1; t'¢~~;;~¥;~¢;/_~~/~;1_t/_¢/P¢¢¢t~1;' . _, F. Removal of Yacht Harbor Piers. Within 30 months of being notified of the-rermination of the last dredging performed pursuant to this amended permit, or the 'termination of the lease on the Yacht Harbor as it exists on the date of the original permit, whichever is earlier, all floats, docks, EXHIBIT· B Sheet 19 of 34 PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX city of Palo Alto Page 17 piers, and pilings associated with the existing Yacht Harbor shall be removed and disposed of outside the Commission's jurisdiction by the City of palo Alto~ provided, however, that minimal facilities may be maintained upon a determination by or on behalf of the Commission that such facilities would be limited to only those necessary for launching small boats and would not be used for purposes other than the temporary mooring of private vessels. In the event that, for any reason, the permittee is unable to complete all five authorized dredging cycles, or place 50,000 cubic yards of dredged sediment on the Yacht Harbor Point disposal site prior to the anticipated completion date of March 1, 1986, the County of Santa Clara shall notify the City of Palo Alto and BCDC of the last dredging when it determines that further dredging will not take place. ~I G. Scheduling of the Dredgin2. For the 1981-82 dredging cycle, dredging shall cease prior to July II, 1982. Dredging for the 1982-83 cycle shall not commence prior to OCtober 1, 1982. All remaining dredging cycles shall be confined to the period between August 1 through March 1. All dredging shall be completed by March 1, 1986. . tJ ~ Marsh Restoration Plan. Prior to the commencement of any ~ restoration work ¢¢/t~_/(_¢t~(~tl~¢/~' at Yacht Harbor Point ~_/¢~(¢~ and the boat launch ramp, ~~(¢~~¢t/t~/~I¢/~¢_¢~_~/~~t¢¥~, the permittee shall submit a marsh restoration plan and program, to be approved by or on behalf of the Commission.I/'¢(/t~_/(_¢t¢(~tl~¢/~¢~/_¢~_¢¢_¢_¢t/~'/~ "(¢_X/¢~¢¢K¢~¥¢9/~'/~~~/X_¢¢/~~¢/'¢~t/~¢(_¢/X~¢~t_~/~t/t~_/'~X~/XXt~ 1_¢~t/~_t~~(/,~¥¢t/_( __ ' plan approval may occur in two phases: the first phase to include the required four acres of marsh restoration at Yacht Harbor Point and the wildlife corridor at the boat launch ramp; and the second phase to include the additional 7.2 acres of marsh restoration at Ya'cht Harbor Point. The plan and program shall contain the following: 1. Site Conditions and Modifications. A topographic map of the site in one-foot contours a'nd a topographic map showing the proposed modifications shall be submitted. All elevations shall be relative to National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD). Typical oross-sections showing ." ~~~:hf~~.:.:·!~i:··~~fi~fl"~·b~i~~·~:~J:1?:;'···:-'~Y·Y~~~.~~-fl~if~t~~~:·,····· y. 9 PP. ", .. _"~ ..... ~_ ..... ""." ... _ .. _ ....... " ..... _.~., •. " ....... _"g ____ ._ .. _ .... ., '_.'~""."_ . ['!ltiosof typical horizontal .~9.vertical slopes for " existing 'andMpi'opos'ed'leve'e's'; channels, and sloughs shall be 'TdE!!ntifiecf;'" Proposed plant species along the cross-sections according to thei[, expected zone of EXHIBIT .. B Sheet 20 of 34 " PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 18 growth shall be shown. A vicinity map showing storm drains, the elevation of adjacent surrounding properties, and the limit of the lOO-year flood shall be included. Figures for the estimated tidal range related to Mean Higher High Water, Mean High Water, Mean Lower Low Water, Mean Sea Level, the maximum predicted tide, and the lOO-year tide shall also be included. 2. Levee Breaches. If any levee breaches are proposed, calculations for determining the size of any levee breach or pipe to be installed shall be shown. The amount of cut and fill, the amount of material to be placed to strengthen the levee, and the expected tidal exchange shall be indica~ed. The expected tidal range should showexpec·tations both inside and outside the levee breach. If plants will be used to protect the levee from erosion or undercutting, specify the type of plants. If plants will not be used, describe how the breach will be protected from~ erosion and under- cutting. A detailed drawing of any inlet-outlet structure to be placed, with a schedule of operation, shall be prepared. 3. Soil and Water Information. A report identifying the type of soils found at the site and the type of any fill to be placed at the site shall be submitted. Quantitative soil measurements of salinity, pH, organic content, and bulk density shall be included. Water analysis of salinity, pH, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), dissolved oxygen (DO), and, if appropriate, heavy metals shall be included. 4. Schedule. A schedule indicating' when fill, dred~ing or grading will occur, the time to be allowed .for settlement, the t.ime when levee breaches or inlet structures will begin to function and the time when planting will occur shall be included. An estimate of the extent of expected sedimentation over a ten-year period shall be included. S. Monitoring. The permittee shall be responsible for monitoring the site for ~ "y; years after the EXHIBIT .. B Sheet 21 of 34 PERMIT NO. 11-91 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 19 marsh restoration project has been completed. The per;i'ttee shall submit a written letter/reeort to the Commission on the results and findings of its 'monitoring erogram on a biennial basis commencin2 on January 1, 1995. Such monitoring and reporting shall include, but not be limited to, measuring the water quality, soil characteristics, plant survival and plant growth rates. Should adverse conditions be identified, the permittee shall take corrective action as specified by or on behalf of the Commission. ~, I. Debris Removal. All construction debris shall be removed to a location outside the jurisdiction of the Commission4 In the event that any material is placed in any area within the Commissionls jurisdiction, the permittee, its assigns, or successors in interests, or the owner of the improvements, shall remove such material, at its expense, within ten days after it has been notified by the Executive Director of such placement. III. Findings and Declarations This amended authorization is based upon the Commission's findings and declarations that the work authorized is consistent with the McAteer-Petris Act, the San Francisco Bay Plan, the Commission's Amended Management Program for San Francisco bay, and the california Environmental Quality Act for the following reasons: A. Use. Bay Plan Map No. 6 designates the project area as both an existing marina and a waterfront park priority use area. As the purpose of the original project!!! K. to maintain the former '~K.~K~~ marina, and as this amended authorization p~'¢K~ is conditioned to assure that the dredge spoil disposal site at Yacht Harbor Point will be restored to tidal marsh and public access improvements, consistent with the"natural setting of the Baylands, will be provided a10n2 the marsh eerimeter __ v_t~p,_/~./~/p~,~ at the completion of dredging, the proposed project is consistent wi~h the use requirements of the San Francisco Bay Plan. B. Dredging and SpoilS Disposal. The original ;,~~._~ project, consisting of maintenance dredging at the former ;~/_~¥.~¥~~ marina and disposal of the dredge spoils at an upland location, is consistent with the Bay Plan Policies on Dredging which specifically permits maintenance dredging and disposal at authorized upland locations. Conducting five separate annual dredgings will cause greater environmental disturbance than would result if EXHIBIT -B Sheet 22 of 34 PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 20 the permittee performed one larger scale dredging designed to provide adequa~e harbor depths for the next five years. This conclusion is based on the fact that five separate annual dredgings will delay the colonization of the dredged areas by marine invertebrates, and will increase water turbidity for a longer period of time, resulting in increased water temperatures and decreased amounts of dissolved oxygen. However"the Commission finds that the overall effect of such a small scale dredging proposal is not substantial and is offset by other benefits of the project as conditioned herein. The Commission recognizes the significant beneficial effects of closing the Yacht Harbor as provided in Special Condi tion II-!: ¢ and of restoring ,~~,¢'X~S four acres at Yacht Harbor point to tidal marsh, providing a wildlife habitat corridor at the boat launch ramp, constructing aeproximately 0.66 acres of public access improvements, and allowing the ermittee an 0, ortunity to restore an additional 7.2 acres at Yacht Harbor point to tidal marsh ¢¢~ Xit_~t/JlX'l.'fi/'t'fiJ~/~;',/'1.;'~~~/~it;.; ,~t~, as provided in Special Condition II-C and lI-D~. The Commission also recognizes that, given today's shortage of boat berths, boat owners at the Yacht Harbor will need some time to find alternative berthing arrangements. For all these reasons, the Commission finds that adverse environmental effects of dredging the Yacht Harbor in a series of five annual dredging cycles will be sufficiently mitigated, and the Commission can therefore find that the project conforms to the California Environmental Quality Act and the San Francisco Bay Plan. C. ~ater Quality. Special Condition II-B, herein, which requires that all construction operations be performed to minimize the roiling of waters, and that sediments and any pollutants be removed from water discharged to the Bay from the dredge spoils disposal site, assures that the project as authorized will not adversely effect the quality of Bay waters. D. Public Access and Public Benefi ts. The proposal to maintenance dredge Palo Alto Yacht Harbor has been before the Commission twice before. t~/tW;'/P;._t'/;'_/~¢¢'/t The Commission has been concerned with the project's impact on pUblic access, particu,larly spoils disposal within .the lOO-foot shoreline band. This is of particular concern because the Commission must find, in approving any project, that the project will not have an adverse impact upon present or possible future maximum feasible public access. For this reason, in the Commission's last permit for maintenance dredging at the Yacht Harbor, 11-72, a finding was included that the County of Santa Clara and the City of Palo Alto should prepare and adopt a comprehensive recreational plan for Palo Alto's Baylands. That plan, known as the 8aylands Master plan'; EXHIBIT -B Sheet 23 of 34 PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of palo Alto Page 21 has been completed and adopted. In that plan, four acres of Yacht Harbor Point are to be developed as a tidal marsh: the remaining seven acres of Yacht Harbor Point are to be developed as public access. Clearly the disposal of spoils in the IOO-foot shoreline band will have some unavoidable adverse effects on existing public access due to the unattractiveness of a dredge spoils disposal site, and the disturbance caused by such an activity. Also, allowing the placement of dredge spoils at Yacht Harbor Point will delay for at least seven years the future development of Yacht Harbor Point for public access and tidal marsh, as called for in the Baylands Master Plan. For these reasons, the permit, as ~/_~_vrJ( amended through Amendment No. Five, p_'¢'tlt¢'I¢_tvrt_vr~¢~/~,_ii'vri/¢tI1_t¢IKtJ(¢ tj¢~J(I_j,~¢, required~ that Yacht Harbor Point be developed in accord with the Baylands Master plan within ten years of the commencement of dredging, a time period consistent with that proposed in the 8aylands Master plan. And, to minimize and mitigate the project's adverse impact on existing public access, the t~ amended permit contained~ a requirement that a· 35-foot-wide buffer strip be maintained between the existing public access areas and the disposal site. With these conditions, the Commission found'vr~~ that the project would,t1not adversely affect present or possible future public accessat Yacht Harbor Point. Subsequently, the City of Palo Alto requested Amendment No. Three to further carry out the objectives of the Baylands Master Plan. The removal of the Yacht Club building and its ancillary structures and the southerly Sea Scout ancillary buildings along with the removal of all piers, floats, and gangways, excepting the Sea Scout docks and Sea Scout building, _vr~/J(~_ ,_~J(¢,_J('¢vrl¢tlJ(~_lt¢~,fj¢t_/~i,~~ are consistent with the Master plan. As provided in Amendment No. FiveL requested by the City, the existing Sea Scout docks will be removed in phases and will be completely removed no later than June 30, 19.91. During many stages of the tide, the docks rest on the mud at the bottom of the Yacht Harbor basin, .smothering and shading any benthic organisms that might attempt to live underneath, thereby drastically reducing the mudflat's habitat value. Removing the docks will allow the mud beneath to be recolonized by benthic organisms.' Material Amendment No. Six, r~uested ~y the City of Palo Alto, authorizes an alternative public access and marsh restoration plan than that required under· the original permit conditions. As noted above, the permit originally required that of the 11.2 ~cres at Yacht Harbor Point, four acres be restored to tidal marsh and the remaining seven acres be developed for EXHIBIT - B Sheet 24 of 34 PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 22 2ublic access by January 1, 1992. This requirement was s2ecifically set forth to offset the adverse impacts of dredging and dise?sing of the Spoils within the shoreline band. The alternative plan 2r02osed by the City provides 0.66 acres of public access im2rovements including a sailing station and sU2port facilities, pathwa~s, interpretive observation stations, and a picnic area, the required four acres of marsh restoration at Yacht Harbor Point, and restoration of the boat launch ramf to a wildlife corridor. The alternative 21an proposed by the City clearll results in a net:, reduction of 6.34 acres o~ required public access. Additionally, the alternative plan ,would delal implementation of the marsh restoration and public access until January 1, 1993. The Commission finds that it cannot allow such a'substantial reduction in reguired public 'access without significant offsetting public benefits. The permittee's alternative public access plan would allow the City of palo Alto an oP2ortu'nity to restore an additional 7.2 acres at Yacht Harbor Point (originally required for public access) to tidal marsh. Althou2h the additional 7.2 acres of marsh restoration is not consistent with the Baylands Master Plan, marsh restoration would provide the necessary public benefits to offset the 6.34 acre loss of fUblic access. However, at this time, the permittee will not voluntarily commit to restorin2 the additional 7.2 acres within 'a specific time feriod, as it has ,not yet secured the necessary funds. Furthermore, the citl does not propose the seven acres of additional marsh restoration as a means of offsetting the reduction in public access, as it maintains that its proposed alternative 0.66 acres of eublic acces,s exceeds that required in the original permit. Without some commitment on behalf of the City to restore the additional seven acres at Yacht Harbor Point to tidal marsh, the Commission ,and the public is only assured of receivln2 four acres of marsh restoration and 0.'66 acres of public access.. Because the CommisSion finds' that the public benefits of the prOposed alternative public access and marsh restoration plan, which inclUdes 4.2 acres of restoration, a wildlife habitat corridor, and 0.66 acres of public access, in combination with the additional 7.2 acres of marsh restoration, exceed that reguired under the ori2ina1 authorization, the CommillsiO'n wi 11 allow the permi ttee, as defined in Seecial Condition ll-C, up to six ye~rs to obtain the necessary fundin2 and restore the 7.2 acres at Yacht Harbor Point to tidal marsh. While the permittee att~mpts to secure funding for the additional 7.2 acres·of ma,rsh restoration, the permittee must continue to' provide interim public access at the 7.2 acre site, as required under Special Condition II-C. In the event the permittee cannot obtain the necessary funding for marsh restoration, the 7.2 acres must be develoeed as public access, as ori2inally intended and as required in Seecial Condition, EXHIBIT· B Sheet 25 of 34 PERMIT NO. 11-81 (Issued on August 25 f 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 23 II-C. Moreover, to ensure that the Eublic benefits are realized on a permanent basis, Special Condition 11-0 requires that the 0~66 acres of public access and the four acres of marsh restoration be permanently guaranteed for public benefit. Furthermore, the additional seven acres at Yacht Harbor Point: must be 2uaranteed either as open space or pub~ic access, dep!nding on how it is permanently developed. Special Condition II-J requires that all debris resulting from tW'/;'¢~Y_~/¢t/.t;~¢t¢;_. the construction activities be removed from ~¢¢~t,~/¢~t¢I~, the Commission's jurisdiction. ~¥tW/tW_._ As conditioned¢, the Commission finds that tW; F;¢S-¢t/¥¢/¢¢~¢I¢t_~t/~ltW/tW¢/~ltt'¢7~_t~_~~¢/~¢t_;/,~_~/_~~/tW_t the .proposed project will not adversely affect the Bay or present or possible future public access at Yacht. Harbor Point, and adequat;eli( mitigates for the adverse imE8cts associated with the dred2inSl and spoildisP2sal. t~/¢~~~ytt¥~g/¥t¢/;_~~_¢t/t¢;/~¢~~~'~t/~¢I/'YY"/tW¢/~Itt Y~_I¢_t __ /¥t./K~t¢~tK¢~/t¢/~FP~t/K~/tW;/t~t~;_/t¢;/_~tW¢;K~~t¥¢~/t¢/¥~¢t_t~ /t~_~~';/_¢¢KK~g/t~¢¥~I~¥¢¢/t¢;/~¢_/¥~/~_~~¢W¥~g/W_~~t¢_;;K_~/¢~¥~~¢_t¢/¢~¢W _¢/~~/t¢;¢¢/_~_/¢tW~;/¢¢_~~/~~t_;¢'_'t'/_~~¢~K"g/tW_/$¢~/$¢¢~t¢/t¢/¢¢~t¥~~, _/~;~K¢~/¢t/¥t¢/t¢~tW/~¢_t¥~g/F;¢g;_¢I//~W¢/~¢¢K¢/_';/p,¢P¢¢_~/t¢/~/pl~_t ¢~pp¢;t;_/¥~/_/¢~~~~;/tW_t/~¢~~_/F;_Y;~t/tW_~/tt¢¢/;;¢tK"gt¢~/~~;/~tt~/_t _pt/¢t_g_/¢'/tW;/tl_¢'/_~_/~¢;/¢'/t~;/_¢¢K¢/~¢~~~/~_/tK¢Kt;~/t¢/~_~~¢W¥~g ~_~_t¢_;;¥ __ /~¢_t¢/t¢/_Y¢K~/tW;/~;;_/t¢;/ ___ lt¥¢~_~/_;;_g¥~gl//~~ __ ;/¢~¢~ ¢4~_ytl¢~¢'/_/¢¢t1~/_¢¢Ky~g/t~¢¥~K~t/_¥g~t/~;/_PP;¢F;y_t_/_~_/_~/ __ ¢K~K¢~;_t tKy;/_pp1y¢_tK¢~/t¢;/¢~¢~/_/t_¢K~Ktt/¢_t/~_/'_;¢;_~tt/t_~_t;;_1 !.!.. Bay Fill. Under Material ~endment No. Six, the permittee is proposin2 to place approximately 10,542 square feet of Bal fill for two purposes: habitat enhancement and public access improvements. To construct a wildlife corridor, the permittee would remove a concrete boat launch ramp, backfill it with aEproximately 2,800 square feet of fill,and restore it tidal marsh. To construct a sailing statiOn for small boaters, the permittee would Elace aEproxima tely 3 (282 square feet of Elle sup??r ted and floa Hng fill. To construct public access pathways, the Eermittee would place al2proximately 4,460 square feet of earth fll1, primarily a six-inch decomposed granite surfacing. !he fill for the public access eathswould be placed in a~eas historically used for Eublic access trails that are alon2 the l2eriphery of marsh areas subject to automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic, have little or no ve2etation and habitat value, and are compacted. EXHIBIT - B Sheet 26 of 34 PERMIT HO o 11-81 (Issued on August 25g 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto page 24 The Commission finds that the fill for the wildlife corridor and the sailing' station is for a water-oriented' purpose! is the minimum fill , necessary, and there is no alternativ,e ueland location consis,tent with Section 66605 of the McAteer-PetrisAct and the San Francisco Bay Plan. Moreover, as conditioned under Special Condition II-E, the Commission finds that the fill for the eublic access eathways is minor fill for imeroving eublic access, is the minimum fill necessary, and there are no alternative upland locations consistent with Regulation Section 10701, Special Rules for Non-Water-Oriented Fills, Section 66605 of the McAteer-Petrie Act, and the San Francisco Bay Plan. ~I Fo Public Trust. By this amended permit, the Commission determines that the uses proposed for the areas subject to tidal action are consistent with the public trust. tl G. Environmental Impact Reeoet. The County of Santa Clara, the lead agency and at one time co-permittee for the project, apparently concluded that the project was either covered by the Environmerital Impact Report d,one for the previousXy Yacht Harbor dredging or was categorically exempt. Although the Commission finds that it is unlikely that the project could meet the standards established by the Resources Agency for categorical exemptions, the Commission recognizes that the Yacht Harbor dredging was substantially similar to that covered in the previous Environmental Impact Report. Therefore, the Commission finds that the determination by the lead agency and at one time co-permittee was within its discretion and satisfies the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Moreover, pursuant to Regulation Section 11501, Amendments No. One, Two, Three, and Five ~~~/~t¢t;¢~ authorized by this amended permit are K; categorically exempt from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report. As lead agency and eursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the Cit~ of Palo Alto adopted a Mitigated Ne9ative Declaration on March 18, 1991 for the improvements authorized in Amendment No. Six. ¢I ~ Conclusion. For 'all the above reasons, the,public benefits from the project clearly exceed any public detriment and maximum feasible public access consistent with the project will be provided. The Commission further. finds, 'declares, and certifies that the activities authorized herein are consistent with the Commission's Amended Management Program for San Francisco Bay, As approved by the Department of Commerce under the Federal Coastal zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. EXHIBIT· B Sheet 27 of 34 '. PERMIT NO~ 11-81 (Issued on August 2S v 1981v As Amended Through February 26 v 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 25 IV. Standard Conditions A. All required permissions from governmental bodies must be obtained before the commencement of work1 these bodies include, but are not limited to, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, the State Lands Commission, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the city and/or county in which the work is to be performed, when&ver any of these may be required. This amended permit does not relieve the permittee of any obligations imposed by State or Federal law, either statutory or otherwise. B. The attached Notice of Completion and Declaration of Compliance form shall be returned to the Commission within 30 days following completion of the work. C. Work must be performed in the precise manner and at the precise locations indicated in your applications and amendment requests, as such may have been modified by the terms of this amended permit and any plans approved in writing by or on behalf of the Commission. D. Work must be performed in a manner so as to minimize muddying of waters, and if diking is involved, dikes shall be waterproof. If any seepage returns to the Bay, -the permittee will be subject to the regulations of the Regional Water Quality Control Board in that region. E.The rights derived from this amended permit are assignable as provided herein. An assignment shall not be effective until the assignee shall have executed and the Commission shall have received an acknowledg- ment that the assignee has read and understood the original and amendment applica tions for th is amended permi t and the amended permi t itself and agrees to be bound by 'the terms and conditions of the amended permit, and the assignee is accepted by the Executive Director as being reasonably capable of complying with the terms of this amended permit. F. Unless otherwise provided in this permit, as amended, all the terms and conditions of this amended permit shall remain effective for so long as the amended permit remains in effector for so long as any use or construction authorized by this amended permit exists, Whichever is longer. G. Unless otherwise provided in this permit, as amended, the terms and conditions .of this amended permit Shall bind all future owners and future possessors of any legal interest in the land and shall run with the land. EXHIBIT -B Sheet 28 of 34 PERMIT NOo 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26, 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX City of Palo Alto Page 26 H. Unless otherwise provided in this permit, as amended, any work authorized herein shall be completed within the time limits specified in the amended permit, or, if no time limits are specified in the amended permit, within three years. If the work is not completed by the date specified in this amended permit, or, if no date is specified, within three years from the date of this amended permit, this amended permit shall become null and void. If this amended permit becomes null and void for a failure to comply with these time limitations, any fill placed in reliance on this amended permit shall be removed by the permittee or its assignee upon receiving written notification by or on behalf of the Commission to remove the fill. I. Except as otherwise noted, violation of any of the terms of this permit, as amended, shall be grounds for revocation. The Commission may revoke any permit, or amended permit, for such violation after a public hearing held on reasonable notice to the permittee or its assignee if the permi t, or amended permi t, has been effectively assigned. If this amended permi t is revoked, the CommiSsion may determine, if it deems appropriate, tha t all or part of any fill or structure placed pursuant to this amended permit shall be removed by the permittee or its assignee if the amended permit has been assigned. J. This permit, as amended, shall not take effect unless the permittee executes the original of this amended permit and returns it to the Commission within ten days after the date of the issuance of the amended permit. No work shall be done until the acknowledgment is duly executed and returned to the Commission. K. Any area subject to the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission under either the McAteer-Petris Act or the Suisun Marsh Preservation Act at the time the amended permit is granted or thereafter shall remain subject to that jurisdiction notwithstanding the placement of any fill or the implementation of any substantial change in use authorized by this a~ended permit. L. Any area not subject to the jurisdiction of the San.Francisco·Bay COnservation and Development Commission that becomes, as a result of any work or project authorized in this amended permit, 'subject to tidal action shall become subject to the Commission's ~bay~jurisdiction up to the line of highest tidal action. M. Unle'ss the Commission directs otherwise, this permit, as amended, shall become null and void if any term, standard condition, or special condi- EXHIBIT -B Sheet 29 of 34 • PERMIT NOo 11-81 (Issued on August 25, 1981, As Amended Through February 26 0 1992) AMENDMENT NO. SIX city of palo Alto page 27 tion of this amended permi tshall be found illegal or unenforceable through the application of statute, administrative ruling, or court determination. If this amended permit becomes null and void, any fill or structures placed in reliance on this amended permit shall be subject to removal by the permittee or its assignee if the amended permit has been assigned to the extent that the Commission determines that such removal is appropriate. Any uses authorized shall be terminated to the extent that the Commission determines that such uses should be terminated. Executed at San Francisco, California, on behalf of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission on the date first above written. Enc. 04l5R--02/26/92 ARP/JGJ/rr ~ ~. ALAN R. PENDLETON Executive Director cc: U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: Regulatory Functions Branch· San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, Attn: Certification Section Environmental Protection Agency, Attn: Clyde Morris, W-7-2 Baykeeper, Attn: Mike Herz City of Palo Alto, Attn: Bill Zaner . * * . * * * I< '* '* '* '* Receipt acknowledged, contents understood and agreed to: * Executed at Palo Alto City o.f Palo Alto -------------------------- On EXHIBIT -B Sheet 30 of 34 -- MARSH RESTORATION AREA en ::s'm CD>: CD::c ... -will .... - 0 .... .... 1 will ,. x '. -_ ... f'_' q.: .... "\ '" " .. .. .. ~ MUNDY MARSH .. -.... ... ... . .. • ... " ." -" ... .. .. .. r =:~ SANTINA &:: I R£\tSICM I I :=r THOMPSON.,NC. CAlt 1356 "'£LO" "AY. SUITE 280 • CONCORD. CA. 94520 1-1 ---'------+--1 PAW ALTO • BODe 8HOREUHE ..." /' " U 11 Ml\II£"" W 11 --- " " " ~~ I. I.;' n ;' MUNDY MARSH -- ~ I. AU. ELEVATIONS ARE NG\ID PUBLIC ACCESS AREAS SAWNC STA110N SITE PLAN CWFORNIA C' ,...", 2 ., .II ..... ....."" C!IOIII.OJ EXHIBIT-A 2/14/92 \. \~ ~ ft. .V . w !<C/) 0% O~ mo. g:; 0 til Z :::& til 5 i o a II '" ~ I >< ;. .... .. VI> .:. '" .. .. " '" d' ., (I) .. ...,: i! <1/ 2: .." ... EXHIBIT -B Sheet 32 of 34 .. ... '" C\I 01 ..... ~ '" .' >4' ~ ,... '" ....... '" .. N . " .. ~ '" oJ-.,- t/> <II tI ~ ~ ., o· ., '" .. ." '" .. .. '" II '" .. ... '" .. .. flo J'/ -= \ \ I t' .... : '. ·t .. '-"':" \ \ ·r • '. \ ~ ... ·,.w 'I .... .. .\, A, ; ...... ~-~~, ,/r ........ ,. ". ~m ::r -.... . CD"... ... ~ CD::I: ".f .. -Wal y ( ~-~/=ot:) L .. -i .. -... -.---------... -,. 1 ........ ~.~.~ W::::; .,_. _~.~ .. ::::..... t ~~~'I ~ ~ -v'-~\--.-......... ';w~PiCNiC-W:A _ .. _ c~ ,. .... ~--'-_ ._..<..:.J. ......... -.. ~\ .. ~.~~ .. -... -_ .. , -- W 0 ~~ .a::.. ...... ---... ..... IIlJIIICINf., DCIIiUIIIIfG ~IIIGIII&DIIIG I'UIIIIIIIG ® ~~~~~ WhfJP~o~ cl"'-~-==::1i 1355 111££0., WAy' SUITE 280 -CONCORD. CA •. 94620 I I-I PALO ALTO ___ IDII 11 €:J r-~ :=""':1"':':: :::.,.-_ ... - I • I .fb1!:!. " =:::.."":..- y·s 1t'-#fIIIDIIII'OU ~tjf' .. f/l#lI&fi\IIf. __ --....... !>' ~:af"~:.~-= r .. " :0\ ~ ... . ... ... . .- • .. .O' It! .. -c; ...... : ® BARBECUE .. HIlT to 5CN.£ .... ----.,., ..... N)I£$: " ......... ....,----...... ~ &_-r.=: .... ~ a. __ .... 1lI. -. r=' · 1:L?jE($ ® PICNIC TABLE lilT to 5CN.£ SAlUNG STATION PICNIC AREA ,..,. 6 til' ......... _ ... CAUFORNIA "C901l1.OJ EX HfBIT':";A: ~/1.4 fQ? ) ~';r-----------------~--------------------------------------~------~--~~ -.. --" ." •• 0" '10,... ••• '-..... iI" :~, --; .... ~ I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I ,'" I j I '" i : I I IN I I I Iii I I 't: J !i I .. it I ' ... I , !!; I .' iJ ... ., ttl '" ... I .~ ....... ~ ...... -.... -.... ~ ... ' ... " " " .. ' t· ... \, ., .. UI Z :; au I g (,) \ \ \ \ , " ' ~.: of ¥~i~~~~;'~ ! " i".1 , ! "t i i ! .,' .. I . ,. I f 11 ./' I , Sheet 34 of 34 ! II ; IJII·i I ~ $ i .. = Exhibit C LEGAL DESCRIPTION PUBLIC ACCESS EXHIBIT CM1 HARBOR PATHWAY, SAILING STATION 8& RELATED FACILITIES PARCEll That certain parcel of land situate in the City of Palo Alto} County of Santa Clara} State of California} being a strip of land 10 feet wide lying 5 feet on each side of a line, unless otherwise stated, described as follows: Beginning at a point being North 47° 55' 14" East 2554.46 feet from a City Monument on the center line of Embarcadero Road, said monument being 333,00 feet northeasterly along said centerline from the intersection of Embarcadero Road and Embarcadero Way} as shown on that certain Parcel Map entitled ((Parcel Map, Resubdivlsion of Lands of Bahr, Ledoyen, et. al., Embarcadero Way at Embarcadero Road} Known as Vactite site" filed June 8} 1971} in Book 284 of Maps at Page 40} Official Records of said County; THENCE, North 30° 03' 5811 East 14.69 feet; THENCE} North 43° 50' 46" East 36.32 feet; THENCE, North 41° 41' 32" East 89,81 feet to a point where said strip of land becomes 10 fe<et in width northwesterly and 5 feet in width southeasterly of said line for the follOWing three courses; North 31° 41' 16" East 37.75 feet; North 32° 09' 46" East 33.38 feet; North 35° 24' 40" East 133.25 feet to a point called ((A", said point being the beginning of a non-tangent curve, concave northeasterly having a radius of 200 feet and a radial bearing of North 27° 41' 5511 Easti THENCE, southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 05° 20' 00" an arc distance of 18.62 feeti THENCE} South 67° 38' 0111 East 57.62 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve} concave southwesterly and having a radius of 400.00 feet; THENCE} southerly along said curve through a central angle of 100 58' 51" an arc distance of 76.66 feet; Sheet 1 of 8 THENCE, South 56° 39' 10" East 155.93 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave northeasterly, and having a radius of 104.00 feet; THENCE, southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 32° 15' 0311 an arc distance of 58.54 feet; THENCE, South 88° 54' 1211 East 15.97 feet to a point where said strip of land becomes 35 feet in width northerly and 5 feet in width southerly of said line for the following two courses; South 88° 54' 12" East 12.77 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave southwesterly, having a radius of 64.00 feet; southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 18° 00' 0111 an arc distance of 20.11 feet; THENCE, southeasterly continuing along said 64-foot radius curve through a central angle of 47° 15' 16" an arc distance of 52.78 feet; THENCE, South 23° 38' 55" East 73.31 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave northeasterly, having a radius of 170.00 feet; THENCE, southerly and easterly along said curve through a central angle of 06° 09' 3011 an arc distance of 18.2tfeet to a point where said strip of land becomes 35 feet wide southwesterly and 5 feet wide northeasterly of said line for the following course; southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 11° OS' 25" an arc distance of 32.91 feet; THENCE, southeasterly continuing along said curve through a central angle of 14° 01' 17" an arc distance of 41.60 feet; THENCE, South 54° 53' 47" East 77.66 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave northeasterly, and having a radius of 200.00 feet; THENCE, southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 04° 27' 34n an arc distance of 15.57 feet; THENCE, South 59° 21' 21n East 61.76 feet to a point called liB", said point also being the beginning of a non-tangent curve, concave westerly, having a radius of 96.00 feet and a radial bearing of North 32° 04'27" East; THENCE, southerly along said curve through a central angle of 76° 291 39" an arc distance of 128.17 feet to a point of reverse curvature; Sheet 2 of 8 THENCE, along a curve, concave easterly} having a radius of 64.00 feet; through a central angle of 72° 04' 02" an arc distance of 80.50 feet to a point of compound curvature; THENCE} along a curve concave northeasterly and having a radius of 365.00 feet; through a central angle of 11 ° 14' 50" an arc distance of 71.65 feet to a point of compound curvature} THENCE} along a curve} concave northerly, having a radius of 29.00 feet} said strip of land becomes 35 feet in width southerly and 5 feet in width northerly of said line for the following course; easterly along said curve through a central angle of 45° 57' 32" an arc distance of 23.26 feet; THENCE} easterly along said curve through a central angle of 35° 32' 56" an arc distance of 17.99 feet to a point where said strip of land becomes 20 feet in width southeasterly and 5 feet in width northwesterly of said line for the following course; North 33° 44' 41" East 52.80 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave southeasterly and having a radius of 54.00 feet; THENCE, northeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 44° 24' 1111 an arc distance of 41.85 feet; THENCE, North 78° 08' 5211 East 44.75 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave northerly and having a radius of 80.00 feet; THENCE, easterly along said curve through a central angle of 25° 51' 38" an arc distance of 36.11 feet to a point where said strip of land becomes 25 feet in width southeasterly and 5 feet in width northwesterly of said line for the following two courses; North 52° 17' 14" East 26.05 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave northwesterly and having a radius of 210.00 feet; northwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 06° 56' 2811 an arc distance of 25.44feeti THENCE, continuing northwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 19° 28' 3611 an arc distance of 71.39 feet; THENCE, North 25° 52' 10" East 17.91 feet to a point where said strip of land becomes 25 feet in width southeasterly and 5 feet in width northwesterly of said line for the following course; North 25° 52' 1011 East 60.00 feet THENCE, North 25° 52' 10" East 15.14 feet to a point where said strip of land becomes 30 feet in width southeasterly and 5 feet in width northwesterly of said line for the following three courseSi Sheet 3 of 8 North 18° 31' 11" East 53.63 feet; North 30° 36' 03" East 43.39 feet to a point called "C"; North 30° 36' 03" East 14.22 feet to a point where said strip of land becomes 40 feet in width northwesterly and 5 feet in width southeasterly of said line for the following course· and distance; North 30° 36' 03" East 30.00 feet to the terminus of the strip of land. PARCEL 2 A strip of land 10 feet wide, lying 5 feet on each side ofthe line, unless otherwise stated, the centerline of which is described as follows: Beginning at point "A" as described in Parcell; THENCE, northwesterly along a curve, concave northeasterly with a radial bearing of North 27°41'55" East and a radius of 200.00 feet; through a central angle of 04°26'19" an arc distance of 15.49 feet; THENCE, North 5r51'38" West 1.09 feet, THENCE, l\Jorth 56°54'24" West 12.00 feet, THENCE, South 35°32'17" West 156.00 feet to the terminus of said strip of land. Excepting therefrom that which lies within said Parcell. PARCEL 3 A strip of land 10 feet wide, lying 5 feet on each side of the following described line unless otherwise stated; Beginning at point liB" as described in Parcell; THENCE, South 59° 21' 21" East, 75.00 feet to a point where said strip of land becomes 40 feet in width southwesterly and 5 feet in width northeasterly for the following course and distance; South 59° 21' 21" East 41.20 feet to the terminus of said strip of land. Excepting therefrom that which lies within said Parcell. Sheet 4 of 8 PARCEL 4 A strip of land 10 feet wide, lying 5 feet on each side of the following described line unless otherwise stated; Beginning at a point being South 59°23'57/ East 30.00 feet from a point c.alled 11(", as described in said Parcell; THENCE, South 590 231 5711 East 225.65 feet to a point where said strip of land widens to 55 feet southerly and 55 feet northerly for the following course and distance; South 76° 24' 37" East 30.00 feet to the terminus of said strip of land. Parcels 1,2, 3 and 4 contain 0.937 acres more or less. Said Parcels 1,2, 3 and 4 being a portion of that real property as described in the following recorded Deeds in said County: January 12, 1921, in Volume 532 of Deeds page 59; April 23, 1926, in Volume 400 Official Records, page 89; January 2, 1963, in Book 5847 Official Records, page 511. Said Parcels 1, 2, 3 and 4 are shown on attached plats (sheets 6, 7 and 8) and made a part hereof. END OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Sheet 5 ofS / RADIAL BEARING \{BAY MARSH ARFA-\ S 27'41'55" W\ / > ~ • \ \. POINT "A" -., .... -1---, " ~=04'26'19" R=200.00' L=15.49' ;-' / ~=05'20'~CJII R=200.00' L=18.62' N 57'51'38" W" " N 56'54'24" W / " / '--HARBOR PATHWAY / S 67'38'01" E 57.6~ ~ / ~=10'58'51" R=400.00' L~~~' '~LD :._._::._ ... ~O •• i ... j ( IN FEET) 1 inch = 80 ft. ~~_---N 3r41'16" E 37.75' HARBOR PATHWAY HARBOR PATHWAY '--BAY MARSH AR[A 36.32' N 30'03'58" E 14.69' ~~/L----- ; ';;j~O , POINT OF BEGINNING HORIZONTAL CONTROL POINT: ~CJ~ ~~ HARBOR PATHWAY CCS83 -FND CITY ~~~~ N 47"55'14" E 2554.46' ~g~~H~~~; f19~~~f~~fTES: <'\~ FOUND CITY EASTING: 6,093,455.01 ~ MONUMENT (1&2) ~~,~ N 42'52'10" E 333.0' (1) ~a ~ LEGEND: Ok .. -_ .. APPROXIMATE BCDC BAY REFERENCES: (1) 284 M 40 (2) CCS83 ')-JURISDICTION UNE* *LOCATION BASED ON ELEV. OF 5 FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA (MSL-O.44'). USL AND ELEVATION INFORMATION BASED API' OV MARSH RESTORATION GRADING PlANS BY SANTiNA AND lHOMPSON. INC., DATED 10/1992, PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF PALO ALTO. INFORMATION IN SAID DRAWINGS WAS NOT VERIFIED FOR ACCURACY BY eSG CONSULTANTS. PREPARED BY: CSG Consultants Inc. HARBOR PATHWAY (1 OF 3) CITY OF PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard, 3rd Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 Phone (650)522-2500 Fax (650)522-2599 DATE: 02/19/09 DRAWN BY: ST JOB NO. 08.327 EXHIBIT C-1. Sheet 6 of 8 r--------L'l=32' 15'03" R= 104.00' L=58.54' ,-----S 88·54'12" E 28.74' .I-----L'l=18·00'01" R=64.00' L=20.11' r---L'l=47'15'16" R=64.00· L=52.78' ~ 40 80 1--' b o L() tV) S 23'38'55" E 73.31' ( IN FEET) 1 inch = 80 ft. HARBOR PATHWAY PARCEL 1 __ --L'l=06'09' 30" R= 170.00' L= 18.27' ___ --L'l=11'05'25" R=170.00' L=32.91' ~--ll=14'01'17" R=170.00'L=41.60· S 54'53'47" E 77.66' L'l=04'27'34" R=200.00' L= 15.57' S 59°21'21" E 61.76' POINT "8" S 59'21'21" E 75.00' S59'21'21"E 41.20' / 2 PARC,rL 31") I 13 REFERENCES: (1) 284 M 40 (2) CCS83 L'l= 76'29'39" R=96.00· L= 128.71' . Ix -~ I (f) LEGEND: <D INTERPRATIVE OBSERVATION STATION L'l=72'04'02" R=64.00· L=80.50' <i> CHANGING FACIUlY ___ ... APPROXIMATE BCDC BAY JURISDICTION UNE* *LOCA110N BASED ON ELE.V. OF 5 FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL HARBOR P A THWA Y (M~L=O.44·). MSL AND ELE.VATION INFORMA110N BASED ON A 11'14'50" R 365 00' L 71 65' . APPROVED MARSH RESTORATION GRADING PLANS BY SANllNA AND t..\= =. ==. THOMPSON, INC., DATED 10/1992, PROVIDED BY THE CITY. OF ll-456 57'32" R-29 00' L -2326' PALO ALTO. INFORMATION IN SAID DRAWINGS WAS NOT VERIFIED --:. -. FOR ACCURACY BY CSG CONSULTANTS. HORIZONTAL CONTROL POI~I; CCS83 -FND CITY MONUMENT AT COORDINATES: NORTHING: 1 ;991.738.61 EASTING: 6,093.455,01 -·PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION (';5_ Cy '1 I:tI 'I;J( / (f) I I PREPARED BY: CSG Consultants Inc. HARBOR PATHWAY (2 OF 3) CITY OF PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA 1700 South AmRhlett Boulevard. 3rd Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 DATE: 02/19/09 JOe NO, 08,327 Phone (650)522-2500 Fax (650)522-2599 DRAWN BY: ST EXHIBIT C-1. Sheet 7 of 8 REFERENCES: (1) 284 M 40 (2) CCS83 HORIZONTAL CONTROL POINT: CCS83 -FND CITY MONUMENT AT COORDINATES: NORTHING: 1,991,738.61 EASTING: 6,093,455.01 ~ PARCEL 1 w HARBOR Uj PATHWAY t!:l U) POINT "c" 30.00' 14.22' S 59'23'57" E 30.00' "E 53.63' "E 15.14' 30.00' E 17.91' R=210.00· L=71.39' 10.00' L=25.44' 26.05' R=80.00' L=36'~"~~BAY MARSH AREA-.! LEGEND L=41.85' CD VISTA POINT I )' (/-BAY MARSH AREA---' 80 0 -4() 80 ~~ 1--1 ( IN FEET) 1 inch = 80 ft. ® FLOATING SAILING STATION @ BOAT HOSE -OFF AREA @ SAILING STATION SUPPORT FACILITIES I_I WILDLIFE CORRIDOR - - - -APPROXIMATE BCDC BAY JURISDICTION UNE* *LOCATION BASED ON ELE.V. OF 5 FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA lEVEL (MSl .. O.44'). MSL AND ElEVATION INFORMATION BASED ON APPROVED MARSH RESTORATION GRADING PlANS BY SANT1NA & THOMPSON, INC., DATED 10/1992. PROVIDED BY THE CIlY Of' PALO ALTO. INFORMATION IN SAID-DRAWINGS WAS NOT VERIFIED FOR ACCURACY BY CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION PREPARED BY: eSG Consultants Inc. 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard. 3rd Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 Phone (650)522-2500 Fax (650)522-2599 HARBOR PATHWAY (3' OF 3) CITY OF PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA DATE: 02/19/09 JOB NO. 08.327 DRAWN BY: ST EXt.llBIT C-1. Sheet 8 of 8 LEGAL DESCRIPTIOI\! OPEN SPACE EXHIBITC-2 MARSH RESTORATION AREA, PHASE 1 PARCEL 6 That certain parcel of land situate in the City of Palo Alto, County of Santa Clara, State of California, described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on a curve, concave northerly, having a radius of 860.00 feet with a radial bearing of South 21° 07' 22" West, said point of beginning being North 64° 51' 10" East 2248.69 feet from a City Monument on the centerline of Embarcadero Road, said monument being 333.00 feet northeasterly along said centerline from the intersection of Embarcadero Road and Embarcadero Way, as shown on that certain Parcel Map entitled "Parcel Map, Resubdivlslon of Lands of Bahr, Ledoyen, et. al.} Embarcadero Way at Embarcadero Road, Known as Vactite site" filed June 8, 1971, In Book 284 of Maps at Page 40, Official Records of said County; THENCE, easterly and northeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 73° 25' 44" an arc distance of 1102.16 feet to a point of non-tangency; -THENCE, North 67° 49' 46" West 191.10 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve; THENCE, southwesterly along a curve, concave northerly, having a radius of 211.85 feet and a radial bearing of South 47° 16' 06" East, through a central angle of 52° 06' 03" an arc distance of 192.6A feet to a point on a non-tangent curve, concave southeasterly, having a radius of 450.00 feet and a radial bearing of North 27° 14' 3811 East; THENCE, westerly and southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 1010 55' 08" an arc distance of 800.47 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing 5.99 acres more or less. Said Parcel 6 (HARBOR MARSH AREA) being a portion of that real property as described in the following recorded Deeds in said County: January 12, 1921, in Volume 532 of Deeds page 59; April 23, 1926, in Volume 500 Official Records, page 89; January 2, 1963, in Book 5847 Official Records, page 511. Sheet 10f3 Said Parcel 6 (MARSH RESTORATION AREA, PHASE 1) is shown on attached plat (sheet 2) and made a part hereof. END OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Sheet 2 of 3 I I I 150 POINT OF BEGINNING MARSH AREA 1 N 64'51'10" E 2248.69' FOUND CITY MONUMENT (1&2) EMBARCADERO RD. BAY MARSH AREA-\ ENCES: (1) 284 M 40 (2) CCS83 HORIZONTAL CONTROL POINT: CCS83 -FND CllY MONUMENT AT COORDINATES: NORTHING: 1.991.738.61 EASTING: 6.093.455.01 .. _____ APPROXIMATE BCDC BAY JURISDICTION LlNE* *LOCATION BASED ON my. OF 5 FEET N:JOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL (MSL=O.44'). MSL AND ELE.VATION INFORMAll0N BASED ON APPROVED MARSH RESTORATION GRADING PLANS BY SANllNA AND THOMPSON, INC., DATED 10/1992, PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF PALO ALTO. INFORMATION IN SAID DRAWINGS WAS NOT VERIFIED FOR ACCURACY BY CSG CONSULTANTS. PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION PREPARED BY: CSG Consultants Inc. 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard. 3rd Floor San Mateo. CA 94402 Phone (650)522-2500 Fox (650)522-2599 MARSH AREA -PHASE 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA DATE: 02/19/09 JOB NO. 08.327 DRAWN BY: ST EXHIBIT C-2. Sheet 3 of 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PUBLIC ACCESS EXHIBIT Ca 3 PICNIC AREA PARCEL 7 That certain parcel of land situate in the City of Palo Alto, County of Santa Clara, State of California, described as follows: BEGINNING at a point North 49° 09' 3411 East 2172.69 feet from a City lVIonument on the centerline of Embarcadero Road, said monument being 333.00 feet northeasterly along said centerline from the intersection of Embarcadero Road and Embarcadero Way, as shown on that certain Parcel Map entitled {{Parcel Map, Resubdivision of lands of Bahr, ledoyen, et. aL, Embarcadero Way at Embarcadero Road, Known as Vactite site" flied June 8, 1971, in Book 284 of Maps at Page 40, Official Records of said County; THENCE, North 58° 21' 54" West 86.00 feet; THENCE, North 31° 38' 0611 East 122.00 feet; THENCE, South 58° 21' 5411 East 86.00 feet; THENCE, South 31° 38' 06" West 122.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING .. Containing 0.24 acres, more or less. Said Parcel 7 being a portion of that real property as described in the follOWing recorded Deeds In said County: January 12, 1921, in Volume 532 of Deeds page 59; April 23,1926, in Volume 500 Official Records, page 89; January 2, 1963, in Book 5847 Official Records, page 511. Said Parcel 7 (PICNIC AREA) is shown on attached plat (sheet 2), and made a part hereof. END OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Sheet 1 of 2 REFERENCES: (1) 284 M 40 (2) CCS83 . HORIZONTAL CONTROL POINT: CCS83 -FND CITY MONUMENT AT COORDINATES: NORTHING: 1,991,738.61 EASTING: 6,093,455.01 50 0 25 50 ~L.--::1."=-_!-1 PICNIC AREA ( IN FEET) 1 inoh = 50 ft. POINT OF BEGINNING '----PICNIC AREA '-----N 49"09'34" E 2172.69' FOUND CITY '----MONUMENT (1&2) '---N 52"42'10" E 333.0' (1) PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION PREPARED BY: CSG Consultants Inc. PICNIC AREA CITY OF PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA 1700 South Amphlett Boulevard, 3rd Floor DATE'. 02/19/09 JOB NO. 08.327 San Mateo, CA 94402 1-~":":::'''''::'::!......:....:!.....:~-4--------:--:-:--J Phone (650)522-2500 Fax (650)522-2599 -DRAWN BY: ST EXHIBIT C-3, Sheet 2 of 2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT C-4 MARSH RESTORATION AREA, PHASE 2 PARCELS That certain parcel of land located in the City of Palo Alto, County of Santa Clara, State of California, described as follows: BEGINNING at a point being North 64°51'10" East 2248.69 feet from a City Monument on the center line of Embarcadero Road, said monument being 333.00 feet northeasterly along said centerline from the intersection of Embarcadero Road and Embarcadero Way, as shown on that certain Parcel Map entitled "ParcellVlap, Resubdlvision of Lands of Bahr, Ledoyen, et. aI., Embarcadero Way at Embarcadero Road, Known as Vactite site" filed June 8, 1971, in Book 284 of Maps at Page 40, Official Records of said County; THENCE, North 41°12'22" West 187.38 feet; THENCE, North 3r38'20" East 865.40 feet to a point on a curve, concave northerly, having a radius of 109.00 feet and a radial bearing of South 26°57'07" West; THENCE, southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 25°51'33" an arc distance of 49.19 feet; THENCE, South 88°54'12" East 28.74 feet to the be"ginning of a tangent curve, concave southwesterly, having a radius of 59.00 feet, southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 65°15'17" an arc distance of 67.20 feet; THENCE, South 23°38'55" East 73.31 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave easterly, having a radius of 175.00 feet; THENCE, southerly and southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 6°09'30" an arc distance of 18.81 feet; THENCE, along a radial bearing, South 60°11'35" East 30.00 feet to a curve, concentric with lest said curve, having a radius of 205.00 feet; THENCE, southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 1r05'25" an arc distance of 39.68 feet; THENCE, along a radial bearing, North 49°06'10" East 30.00 feet to a curve, concentric with lest said curve, having a radius of 175.00 feet; THENCE, southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 14°01'17" an arc distance of 42.83 feet; THENCE, South 54°53'47" East 77.66 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve, concave northeasterly, and having a radius of 205.00 feet; Sheet 1 of 3 THENCE, southeasterly along said curve through a central angle of 04"27'34" an arc distance of 15.96 feet; THENCE, South 59"21'21" East 61.69 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve, concave westerly, having a radius of 91.00 feet and a radial bearing of North 32"06'47" East; THENCE, southerly along said curve through a central angle of 76°27'19" an arc distance of 121.43 feet to a point of reverse curvature; THENCE, along a curve to the left, having a radius of 69:00 feet, through a central angle of 7r04'02" and an arc distance of 86.79 feet to a, point of compound curvature; THENCE, along a curve to the left, having a radius of 370.00 feet, through a central angle of 11 °14'50" an arc distance of 72.63 feet to a point of compound curvature; THENCE, along a curve to the left, having a radius of 34.00 feet, through a central angle of 07"51'16" an arc distance of 4.66 feet; THENCE, South 17°23'58/1 West 29.84 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve, concave northerly, having a radius of 211.85 feet and a radial bearing of South 46°25'32" East; THENCE, southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 51°15'29" an arc distance of 189.53 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve, concave southeasterly, having a radius of 450.00 feet and a radial bearing of North 27°14'38" East; THENCE, westerly and southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 10r55'08" and arc distance of 800.47 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said ParcelS contains 7.30 acres more or less. Said Parcel being a portion of that real property as described in the following recorded Deeds in said County: January 2, 1921, in Volume 532 of Deeds page 59; April 23, 1926, in VolUme 500 Official Records, page 89; January 2, 1963, in Book 5847 Official Records, page 511. Said ParcelS (MARSH RESTORATION AREA, PHASE 2) Is shown on the attached plat (sheet 3), and made a part hereof. END OF DESCRIPTION Sheet 2 of 3 7r/....,~ _.-•• ' RA'SIt\L BEARING II ~S:57'21"W"\ / I 0=25'51'33" R=109.00' L;::;49.19' S 88'54'12" E 28.74' - PREPARED BY: ", V I " " BA Y MARSH AREA""\. ----- 0=65'15'17" R=59.00' L=67.20' S 23'38'55' E 73.31' 0=06'09'30" R=175.00' L=18.81' S 60'11'35" W 30.00' 0=14'01'17" R;:::;175.00' ~.)_/ L=42.83' ~ RADIAL '0 '0 ~ BEARING C! ° ~ N32'06'47"E ~ ~ II ~ J 0:: '" = =to ~~ 0 ,.... \' ) ~t51oi.o r-v :::c-l"~ I ..... "o.q-II II II II Cl....JCl....J N 64'51'10" E ..... ___ .. APPROXIMATE BCDC BAY 2248.69' - -_ / JURISDICTION UNE* - - -J *LOCATION BASED ON ElEV. OF 5 FEET ABOVE ME'AN FOUND CITY SEA LEVEL (MSL=0,44'). !.ISL AND ELEVATION MONUMENT (1 & 2) INFORMATION BASEO ON APPROVED MARSH RESTORATION N 52'42'1Q"E 333.0' (1) GRADING PlANS BY SANllNA ANO THOMPSON, INC., DATED 10/1992, PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF PALO ALTO. INFORMATION IN SAID DRAWINGS WAS NOT VERIFIED FOR ACCURACY BY CSG CONSULTANTS. PLAT TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION CSG Consultants Inc. MARSH AREA -PHASE 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA 1700 South Amp'hlett Boulevard. 3rd Floor San Mateo. CA 94402 Phone (650)522-2500 Fax (650)522-2599 DATE: 02/19/09 DRAWN BY: ST JOB NO. 08.327 EXHIBIT C-4. Sheet 3 of 3 TO: 9." HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL-B~ FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DATE: MAY 18,2009 CMR:244:09 REPORT TYPE: CONSENT SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution to Establish a Pledge of Revenue as a Financial Assurance Mechanism for Post Closure Maintenance of the Palo Alto Landfill and Approval of a Pledge of Revenue Agreement with the California Integrated Waste Management Board for Post Closure Maintenance of the Palo Alto Landfdl RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council: 1. Adopt a resolution (Attachment A) establishing a pledge of revenue assurance for 30 years of post closure maintenance costs in an amount of $5.1 million (plus annual inflation adjustments) that would provide for performing maintenance, monitoring and reporting for the Palo Alto Landfill after the landfill is closed in accordance with the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) requirements; and 2. Authorize the City Manager or designee to approve the pledge of revenue agreement (Attachment B) made and entered into by and between the City of Palo Alto and the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) that will pledge future revenues to be received from refuse rate payers through utility billings to pay for the costs to perform these post closure maintenance activities for 30 years after the landfill closes. BACKGROUND In 1990, the City responded to new State requirements by approving a Resolution (No. 6919) that formally established a landfill closure/post closure maintenance reserve within the Refuse Enterprise Fund in accordance with State regulations. The purpose of establishing the reserve was to demonstrate to the State that the City could provide a source of funding that would ultimately fund the landfill's closure construction and 30 years of post closure maintenance activities. In 1993, the City approved Resolution No. 7192 that repealed Resolution No. 6919 eliminating the closure/post closure maintenance reserve and established a liability to recognize the costs to perform these activities. All of the funds in the reserve remained in the Refuse Fund in order to fully fund the liability (CMR:325:93). The change was made in response to the Governmental Accounting Standards Board requirement that all costs associated with the operation of a landfill CMR:244:09 Page 1 of3 must be recognized as a liability and that the total costs for closure/post closure maintenance activities must be fully captured by the time the landfill reaches its full capacity. The CIWMB accepted the City's liability assurance method as an equivalent Enterprise Fund method as long as it provided for funding that equals or exceeds the CIWMB funding requirements. Since 1993, the landfill has been filled to approximately 98 percent of its permitted capacity and in every year, funds have been added to the closure/post closure maintenance liability account to reflect the percentage of the landfill filled along with an inflation adjustment factor provided by the State. Recently, staff has contracted with a consultant who has prepared a final closure/post closure maintenance plan and cost estimate in response to Title 27 regulations requiring a final plan be prepared and submitted no later than two (2) years prior to closure. The post closure maintenance cost estimate for 30 years increased from $3.4 million to $5.1 million reflecting updated regulatory requirements mostly related to landfill gas collection, monitoring and reporting. DISCUSSION Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations, contains the regulations that specify standards for financial mechanisms of solid waste landfills. A financial assurance mechanism is an arrangement whereby a party facing a potential or certain liability pledges or deposits funds so that: 1) all anticipated costs will be covered; 2) all funds will be secure over time; and 3) all funds will be available when needed. Public Resources Code Section 43501 mandates that landfill operators establish "a trust fund or equivalent financial arrangement" as evidence of financial ability to pay for the costs of closure/post closure maintenance for their respective facilities. There are several mechanisms allowed for government entities to provide financial assurance. The City has chosen an enterprise fund for both the landfill's closure/post closure maintenance and corrective action. For an enterprise fund to provide proper financial protection, the fund (or a specific portion of the fund) must be dedicated to the closure/post closure maintenance and/or corrective action of a specific landfill, and the amount deposited must be tied to the cost estimates for that facility. To provide security over time and ensure funds are readily available, on each anniversary of the establishment of the fund, the balance must be increased by at least the amount determined by Section 22225(a) of the Regulations. In response to State requirements, staff recommends changing the landfill's post closure maintenance financial assurance mechanism from the Enterprise Fund account to a Pledge of (future) Revenues mechanism for the following reasons: 1) The primary advantage to changing to a Pledge of Revenue mechanism is that the City will not need to have all of the funds available in the Refuse Fund to cover the long-term liability of post closure maintenance prior to the landfill closure. In the current Enterprise Fund account mechanism, the City is required to annually certify to the State that all of the funds are available for the 30 year post closure maintenance costs. Changing to a Pledge of Revenue Mechanism will allow the City to collect post closure maintenance costs over a 30 year time period and will have a lesser impact on the rate payers. Post closure maintenance costs are expected to begin after certification of the closure in early 2013; and CMR:244:09 Page 2 of3 , 2) The process of reimbursement for post closure maintenance activities would be simplified. Currently with the Enterprise Fund mechanism, City staff is required to request approval from the State to withdraw fimds from the Refuse Fund for closure and post closure maintenance activities. With the Pledge of Revenue Assurance, the City would not need State approval. Once the attached resolution has been adopted, the City will need to enter into an agreement with the CIWMB to assure that adequate fimds are available to carry out the post closure maintenance of the Palo Alto Landfill. RESOUR<;E IMPACT The current "Enterprise Fund" financial assurance mechanism requires that the :full amount of the post closure maintenance liability be available ($5.1 million). Changing the post closure maintenance financial assurance mechanism to a Pledge of Revenue mechanism will allow the Refuse fimd time to produce revenue to obtain the funds necessary to cover this long term liability. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommendation does not represent changes to existing City policies. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Adoption of this resolution and entering into an agreement with the State is not a Project under Section 2lO65 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the activity will not cause either a direct physical change or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Resolution Attachment B: Agreement PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR:244:09 RON~ Manager, Environmental Control Programs /jL 1. KL}- GLENN S. ROBERTS Director of Public Works Page 3 of3 ATTACHMENT A NOT YET APPROVED Resolution No. ---Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto to Establish a Pledge of Revenue as a Financial Assurance Mechanism for Post Closure Maintenance of the Palo Alto Landfill WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto owns and operates the Palo Alto Landfill, a solid waste landfill, in conformance with the findings, conditions, prohibitions and requirements contained in Solid Waste Facilities Permit No. 43-AM-000I issued by, the County of Santa Clara, Department of Environmental Health serving as Local Enforcement Agency for the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB); and WHEREAS, Public Resources Code sections 43500 through 43610.1 and Title 27, California Code of Regulations (Regulations), Division 2, Subdivision 1, Chapter 6, require operators of solid waste landfills to demonstrate the availability of financial resources to conduct closure, post closure maintenance, and corrective action activities; and WHEREAS, on June 7, 1993 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 7192 which in part established the Landfill Closure and Postclosure Maintenance Liability account within the Refuse Enterprise Fund to demonstrate the City's availability of financial resources through an Enterprise Fund; and WHEREAS, sections 22228 and 22245 of the Regulations specify a Pledge of Revenue as an acceptable mechanism to demonstrate financial responsibility for financing post closure maintenance costs of a solid waste landfill; and WHEREAS, the City now desires to change this mechanism to a Pledge of Revenue. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: 1. The portion of the Landfill Closure and Postclosure Maintenance Reserve Liability account currently set aside for post-closure maintenance is hereby released and Resolution 6919 is hereby repealed to the extent it requires a separate liability account for Postclosure maintenance. 2. In place of the Postclosure Maintenance Reserve Liability account, the City of Palo Alto shall establish a Pledge of Revenue to demonstrate financial responsibility for post closure maintenance of the Palo Alto Landfill in accordance with sections 22228 and 22245 of the Regulations. The pledged revenue shall consist of refuse utility billings designated as net sales in the Refuse Budget. 3. Disbursement of funds for post closure maintenance shall be in accordance with the final closure plan, as approved by the CIWMB. 4. In the event the CIWMB determines that the City of Palo Alto has failed, or is failing, to perform post closure maintenance as required by law, the CIWMB may direct the 090226 jb 0130439 NOT YET APPROVED Director of Administrative Services (Treasurer) to pay to the Director of Public Works (City Engineer) from the pledged revenues sufficient funds to ensure post closure maintenance, who then shall be obligated to use such funds for post closure maintenance in accordance with the directives of the CIWMB. 5. The Director of Public Works is directed to produce an annual report for transmittal to the CIWMB, containing, as appropriate, a revised post closure maintenance cost estimate, prepared as specified by section 21840 of the Regulations concerning the Palo Alto landfill. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Assistant City Attorney 090427 jb 0130439 2 APPROVED: Mayor City Manager Director of Administrative Services ATTACHMENT B PLEDGE OF REVENUE AGREEMENT FOR POSTCLOSURE MAINTENANCE OF THE PALO ALTO LANDFILL This AGREEMENT is entered into this day 2009, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("CITY"), and the California Integrated Waste Management Board ("CIWMB") to establish a Pledge of Revenue to assure that adequate funds are available to carry out the Postclosure Maintenance of the Palo Alto Landfill. RECITALS: A. WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto owns and operates the Palo Alto Landfill, a solid waste landfill, in conformance with the findings, conditions, prohibitions and requirements contained in Solid Waste Facilities Permit No. 43-AM-000I issued by, the County of Santa Clara, Department of Environmental Health serving as Local Enforcement Agency for the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB); and B. WHEREAS, Public Resources Code sections 43500 through 43610.1 and Title 27, California Code of Regulations (Regulations), Division 2, Subdivision 1, Chapter 6, require operators of solid waste landfills to demonstrate the availability of fmancial resources to conduct closure, postclosure maintenance, and corrective action activities; and C. WHEREAS, on June 7, 1993 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 7192 which in part established the Landfill Closure and Postc1osure Maintenance Enterprise Fund Account within the Refuse Enterprise Fund to demonstrate the City's availability of fmancial resources through an Enterprise Fund; and D. WHEREAS, sections 22228 and 22245 of the Regulations specify a Pledge of Revenue as an acceptable mechanism to demonstrate financial responsibility for fmancing postclosure maintenance costs of a solid waste landfill; and E. WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto intends to pledge revenues from refuse rate payer fees paid monthly by residents and business within Palo Alto deposited into the Palo Alto Refuse Enterprise Fund; and F. WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto has determined that projected net revenues from the refuse rate payer fees during the thirty (30) year period of postclosure maintenance shall, during each year of this period, be greater than the yearly monitoring and postclosure maintenance costs contained in the most recent Cost Estimate for the Palo Alto Landfill, which has been submitted to the CIWMB in accordance with section 21840 of the Regulations. NOW THEREFORE, the City of Palo Alto and the CIWMB do agree as follows: SECTION 1. The City of Palo Alto hereby establishes a pledge of revenue to demonstrate financial responsibility for postclosure maintenance costs of the Palo Alto Landfill in accordance with sections 22228 and 22245 of the Regulations. 1 0312009 SECTION 2. The City of Palo Alto agrees to pledge net revenues from refuse rate payer fees as described herein. SECTION 3. The amount of the pledged revenue shall be equal to $168,655 per year for the 30 year period of postclosure maintenance, representing the most recent monitoring and postclosure maintenance cost estimate for the Palo Alto Landfill. It is agreed that the amount of this pledge may increase or decrease to match any adjustment to the identified cost estimate, which is mutually agreed to by the City of Palo Alto and the CIWMB. SECTION 4. If the City of Palo Alto ceases at any time to retain control of its ability to allocate the pledged revenue as identified herein to pay postclosure maintenance costs, the City of Palo Alto shall notify the CIWMB and the local enforcement agency and shall obtain alternate coverage within sixty (60) days after the control of funds lapses, pursuant to section 22245 of the Regulations. SECTION 5. In the event that CIWMB, RWQCB or LEA staff determines that the City of Palo Alto has failed, or is failing, to perform postclosure maintenance as required by law, the CIWMB, RWQCB and/or LEA staff shall confer with the City of Palo Alto and attempt to resolve the alleged violation. If no agreement is reached, the matter shall be presented to the CIWMB which shall give reasonable notice, hold a public hearing, and consider the testimony and documentation submitted by the CIWMB and/or LEA staff, the City of Palo Alto, and any interested parties, prior to making a determination in the matter. In the event the CIWMB then determines that the City of Palo Alto has failed, or is failing, to perform postclosure maintenance as required by law, the CIWMB may direct the Director of Administrative Services to pay the Public Works Director from the pledged revenues sufficient funds to ensure postclosure maintenance, who then shall be obligated to use such funds for postclosure maintenance in accordance with the directives of the CIWMB and RWQCB. II II II II II II II II II II II 2 0312009 SECTION 6. This Agreement shall become effective immediately, and is made and entered into by and between the City of Palo Alto and the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). STATE OF CALIFORNIA California Integrated Waste Management Board By: __________ _ Authorized Officer of the CIWMB APPROVED AS TO FORM By: __________ _ Authorized Counsel of the CIWMB 3 CITY OF PALO ALTO By: __________ _ City Manager ATTEST: By: __________ _ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: __________ _ Sr. Assistant City Attorney 0312009 TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DATE: May 18, 2009 REPORT TYPE: Reports of Officials DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CMR: 246:09 SUBJECT: Direction to Implement Recommendations of the Website Advisory Committee EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As part of the City's ongoing commitment to improve the City website, staff has enlisted a group of community volunteers to serve on the Website Advisory Committee with the goal of producing a set of recommendations to address concerns raised by citizens and enhance the overall website user-experience. The Website Advisory Committee, comprised of a select group of dedicated community volunteers, has met regularly during the past four months to develop a list of approximately 70 recommended items to improve the current City of Palo Alto website. The recommendations focus on creating a more user-friendly and interactive site that is compatible with rapidly changing technologies, such as Web 2.0 and mobile surfing. Some of the suggested fixes can be addressed in the short-term, while others are longer-term solutions and enhancements that require further analysis and additional resources to accomplish. The recommendations encompass (but are not limited to) adding valuable content that citizens frequently look for, as well as: • providing information on schools, health organizations and facilities, and volunteer opportunities • modifying the design to include greater background/text contrast and larger fonts to improve readability • reorganizing information for better search-ability and easier access to content Several members of the Committee have expressed a willingness to provide voluntary services to take immediate action on the recommended changes. Some efforts have already begun and changes have been implemented. For example, the City switched from WebTrends to the free Google Analytics tool for analysis of website metrics. This will save the City $5,000 annually. The collaboration between staff and the Website Advisory Committee has been an example of effective civic engagement. CMR:246:09 Page 1 of5 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council direct staff to work with members of the Website Advisory Committee to implement the recommendations in bucket one and to develop a plan for addressing the recommendations listed in buckets two and three. BACKGROUND The City of Palo Alto launched its new website in 2007 with all new features, structure and design. Concerns were voiced by community members on the search capability and user- friendliness of the new site. As part of its ongoing effort to enhance the City of Palo Alto website and meet the Council's civic engagement priority, the City enlisted a Website Advisory Committee, comprised of community volunteers, to provide recommendations to the Council on how to improve the City website. Since the October 29, 2009 initial meeting with potential committee members, the committee membership (see Attachment B) has been finalized and 20 hours of general meetings have been held since December. In addition to general committee meetings, subsets of the group have met to discuss and prepare recommendations within specific categories. These subcommittees are as follows: • Design -The subcommittee reviewed the website from a graphic design and layout perspective. • Content -The subcommittee reviewed the relevance and substance of information provided to users of the website. • Information Architecture -The subcommittee evaluated the structure, organization and search functionality ofthe information on the server. • Developer Coding & Technology -The subcommittee assessed the use of technology on the website. • Marketing & Analytics -The subcommittee considered the website's user statistics and future roadmap. The Committee has met with Civica, the web development contractor, to discuss the structure of the current website and to understand how the Committee's priorities and changes would need to be incorporated into a work plan. The entire Committee also reviewed the beta version of the upcoming utility customer billing website whi~h is part of the new utilities SAP system. Specific suggestions from the Committee, where possible, have been incorporated into the beta version that will be launched to the public in June. DISCUSSION The City of Palo Alto is committed to continuing improvements to its Internet presence as a vital source of information for those within the community, as well as the face of Palo Alto for everyone. The Website Advisory Committee has been meeting over the past four months both to evaluate the current City website and to evaluate potential solutions to user complaints and to envision ways to further enhance the capabilities of the website to meet the needs of the community. CMR:246:09 Page 2 of 5 The team has developed a set of recommended priontJes. The recommendations have been prioritized into three "buckets" and a "parking lot"-user feedback as well as existing web traffic data has been taken into consideration in categorizing the recommendations. The first bucket of recommendations contains high visibility, short-term items that can be addressed by staff, volunteers, or are within the scope of the current Civica contract (which does not require undergoing a new bidding process or contract revisions). These items add enhanced functionality to the website and improve the user experience. Staff expects to accomplish the recommendations in bucket one within three months with the assistance of members of the website committee. A condensed list of the bucket one recommendations is shown in the table below. The full list of recommendations and current status is provided in Attachment A. Item Number Area Addressed Recommendation Description Comments/Status Need for a planning tool to map Initiated phase one with the website I Release Roadmap out phases for long-term web committee plan; future phases will be development addressed in the IT Strategic Plan 2 Launch Plan Need process for moving from Initiated an incremental process for revising development to production the website; launch to be considered Information is too hard to find; I) The committee will provide a site map 3 IndeX/Site Map need an enhanced index and design for 4-column layout; 2) automating Pages site map the new site map may become a bucket 2 item, since Civica will need to be involved Elevate top viewed pages to home page especially those in Will be addressed with additional input from 4 Links Elevation "departments" and change to the website committee drop down menu on home page. Search Box in Missing sophisticated search Initiated. Search within search capability 5 added; additional modifications will be Banner capability discussed with the website committee. Color and Low color contrast between the Final decision needed, but most likely the 6 Contrast text and the background makes direction will be to have black text on a it difficult to read white background. 7 Font Size Font size is too small Final decision needed on specific font sizes, but the goal is to increase font sizes e-Government Initiated. Utilities online bill pay added in tools (making Expand opportunities to create May. Additional changes are needed to g payments online, online access to services and enhance the organization of online options filing police facilitate transactions on the page. The IT Strategic Plan will reports online, layout a plan for additional e-Government etc.) tools. Education Missing information on Initiated. Additional work w/Committee 9 Information schools, university, other needed. educational institutions Health 10 organizations and Missing information on health Initiated. Additional work w/Committee facilities organizations and facilities needed information CMR: 246:09 Page 3 of5 Volunteer Potential opportunity to list Initiated. Additional work wlCommit!ec II laformation ongoing volunteer opportunities needed in Palo Alto Phone directory on homepage Initiated. Phone directory link is on the 12 Contact List and contact us home page and the link will be added to the contact us page 13 Council Page Streamline access to bios with To be completed. direct link from pictures The second bucket of recommendations, while important, requires further analysis and discussion thereby necessitating more time to design and implement than the first group of pnontles. These include non-governmental content (e.g., entertainment, business, K-12 activities, organizations); nomenclature of uploaded documents; further data clean-up and standardization; enhancing the use of user statistics; and improving layout and aesthetics. The third bucket contains items that require more time or logically occur after other workflow items; these create additional functionality such as Wcb 2.0 capabilities and better site tracking. Some of these issues are tied to user feedback and data analysis, but are mentioned less frequently and have less impact than some of the other items in the first two groups. These items could incur further costs and resources. The parking lot is a list of improvements that has less visible impact on the local community, but would be beneficial in cleaning up data, tracking more detailed usage patterns on the website, and reaching out to the extended web community. Staff expects to rcturn to the City Cotmcil in the fall or earlier with a timeline and plan for addressing items contained in bucket two and three as well as with an update on the implementation of bucket 1 recommendations. RESOURCE IMP ACT Many of the recommendations for improving the website can be accomplished with current resources. These items are in bucket one. Other recommendations contained in buckets two and three may require funding commitments. As part of the Information Technology Strategic Plan, due in 2009-10, staff will identify needed funding for website improvements along with other City technology initiatives. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommendations included in this report will be incorporated into the upcoming information technology strategic plan that is planned to be presented to Council in 2009-10. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This is not considered a project under California Public Resources Code Section 21065 (California Environmental Quality Act). CMR:246:09 Page 4 of5 PREPARED BY: 'D ~frD RA~;R7i LILA YOUN Assistant Director, Administrative Services Management Fellow DEPARTMENT HEAD: LALOPEREZ Direetor, Administrative Services CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: -::-;-:-;:::::-::::tl::-=---F ATTACHMENT Attachment A: Website Advisory Committee Recommendations, Full List Attachment B: Website Advisory Committee Members CMR:246:09 Page 5 of5 Bucket I"" • I' .. '. '., Item Number Area Addressed I Roadmap Attachment A Website Advisory Committee Full List of Recommendations Recommendation N_eed for a planning tool to map out phases for long-term web development !Initiated phase one with the website committee plan; future phases will be addressed in the IT Strategic 1-::·"', -,' )-"' •. :,-·i'~: Initiated an incremental process for ";'\/ I ~. ,~~h "1"" .... process for moving from Plan Sub·Commlttee Marketing & Analytics Marketing & Analytics 2 LClUI 11..01 I Plan 1."le"v"e"lopmenl revising the website; launch to be -.--;':' ,'" ",-1\ -, to produclion considered Iy;','r-----+---------+----------------~------------~----------~ I-,-::>~/:--·-<,: 1) The committee will provide a site "., 3 Iin,de)USlite Map Pages "'~""<>"~'_' S 00 ar 0 In ; nee an automating the new site map may "".: 'erlhaneo,d index and site map Design 1 1;/,%.".::'.".,/.:,. I t h d t fi d d map design for 4·column layout; 2) :'~:_,::_:<: I' become a bucket 2 item, since 1~"F,:;",:(:;,:;;,i;j:'~'1:r--~~--~~=====-----~~~~::~~~~~~~11~CiV~lca'W~i:lI:ne:e:d:tO~b:e:in~V:OI:ve:d::~r-~====~====~1 ::::~-'::)' I ~ .~o~. viewed pages to home page 4 I those In "departments" and 1\A11i1 be addressed wllh additional Links elevation "h~nn<> I;' I:v~,',~, Marketing & Analytics """""t:!";; IV drop down menu on home 11"1"' ..... from the website committee page. :'.\:."i I Initiated. Search within search ':i{:'V' 5 Search Box In Banner '''oo'nn hi tl t d h b'l·t i '. ddded; additional ,m",,,,, '::I sop s ca e searc capa II y ~ wlli be discussed wilh Design Ithe website i <?; I nw Final decision needed, bul most ;~11ilif _____ 6 ____ -+C __ 01_0_r_an_d __ c_0_nt_ra_s_t __ ~_~ __ -'.:_C_o_lo_r_c_on_t_ra_s_t_b_en. __ e_e_n_t_he __ te_x_t_an_d __ +.11I~lk~eIIY_'t~he~d~lre_c_t_lo_n~w_I~II_be __ to __ ha~v~e __ ~ ________ D_eS_I_gn ______ ~ " the background makes It difficult to read Iblack text. on a white background, 1~lnal decision needed on specific 7 Font Size Font size Is too small Ifont sizes with the goal 10 increase Design :)/}W:\?!;:i.'; Ifont sizes overall. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 tools I (m.aklng" lonlin~:fil'~~ police Ireports online, etc.) Education information I Health I I and facilities Ivolunlteer Information I Co,ntact List Icouncil Page """"0'" Order IVISltors Expand opportunities to create online access to services and facilitate Missing information on schools, university, other educational institutions Missing information on health organizations and facilities ~' ""iol "ee' '"' ":1 to list ongoing "', , In Palo Alto Phone directory on homepage and Icontact us ""I.,eu, Utilities online bill pay added i May. Additional changes are needed to enhance the 10r!lanlzatll, >n of online options on the. ~~~e.~ The IT StrategiC Plan will ~YOUI a plan for additional e- IGo,vernmel""tt ,ools, nlti,,"". Additional work WI" needed. InlUolorl Additional work IW/(~Onnmllttee needed. ' ... , i work· i' ,needed I Phone directory link is on the page and the link wilt be added to the contact us page . .. . . i Phone directory link Is on Strea~lltne access to biOS With direct link the home page and the link will be Ifrom PIC ures added to the contact us page I i t':~~~I~~: Ilogically To be completed IMissl~g i':events e:c~n Need to be 'v, e"liv, IAdd link from visitors section to the new To be completed ~ ....... i, ""'"v' Palo Alto Visitor's Guide" . Developer Coding & Technology. Content Content Content Full Committee Content Design Content Content Page 1 of 4 Item Bucket Number Area Addressed 17 PDF File Names 18 Usable PDFs 19 Parks I 20 Neighborhoods 21 Cost/Benefit Metties 22 Emergency Preparedness 23 K-12 camp actlvities 24 Business .. 25 i Organization Chart " " 26 Trail Information til 27 Search Box 28 Content Organization 29 Page Layout 30 Primary Navigation 31 Visual Element in Banner 32 Redo CPA In Banner 33 Popul.r PDF Docs 34 Inside/Outside 35 Pollee Redundancy 36 What's Our Name 37 Cookies 38 High Interest Short Ufe Attachment A Website Advisory Committee Full List of Recommendations Recommendation Description Comments/Status Ali PDF file names should use consistent format for naming (descrlpUve title piuS To be completed date, etc,) Searchable, smaller, accessible PDFs To be completed Enhanced parks section -each park To be in!llated wlth coordinating listed. specific services/amenities Iprovided for eaCh department Update PalO Alto neighborhoods need pagelsectiOn to highlight neighborhood To be evaluated programs and maps, and content should be enhanced. Perform cosllbenefit ana~lysls of switch Completed, The City now runs from WebTrends to Google Anallllies Gooale An.llllles, Enhance emergency preparedness To be completed section Potential to list activities offered by To be evaluated Stanford, local .chools and Srd partl •• Business in PA, click on avallable property, get broughllo white page wllh white type On It (illegible), then must re~ Completed type same. information again on following website Add city or9 chart -hierarchical text with To be completed links to department website pages Enhance trafllnformation with maps and To be InlUated with coordinating pictures, department Search box shoUld be on every page of Completed the site Need to organize contenl by user needs rather than just city departmental To be completed organization Wasted and misused space on pages To be completed Potentia! to uSe navigation tabs or items To be completed with sUckv droD down menus 'Need visual element representing the City To be completed of Palo Alto In banner Wasted space by oversized ~jty of Palo To be completed Alto" name, and no branding logo Technical solution naadad to Idantlfy which PDF documents are rObe eYaluated with vendor viewedldownloaded Clearty Identify Internal and a>dernallP addresses and develop monitOring Initiated system Combine police home and police To be Initiated with coordinating information pages department Consolidate 3 legacy home page URLs to show up as main homepage in Google Completed Analytic. AnalysiS of how cooides are used on the site and how Google Analytlcs IdentUles To be completed new and returning visitors, Design updateable area of horne page for high interest documents such as courses Initialed which have short shelr life Sub-Committee Content information Architecture Content Content Marketing & Analytlcs Content Content Content Content Content Content Design DeSign Design D.slgn Design Marketing & Analytlcs Marketing & Analytlcs Marketing & Analytics Marketing & Analytlcs Marketing & Analytlcs Marketing & Analytics Page 2 of 4 Bucket Item Number Area Addressed Attachment A Website Advisory Committee Full List of Recommendations Recommendation i by department. Creek cam Sub·Committee Potential use of webcams to bring ....... ~ ;,. 39 Live webcam feeds pertinent up-Io-date visual information to QIII,I Fire Station 8 cam Developer Coding & ,":;c:-' ,l __________ +-______________ -+c::tiz:e~n:s ________________________ ~~~c'~"o""~o'''~=o~,u .. ~N~e~e~d~to~e~va!l~u_at_e __ _4-------T-e-ch-n-o-lo_g_y ____ ~ • ," i I use 01 webcams. : ,_'< ::, , 40 IVirtual meaningful IAIIOWS useful bookmarks, and URLs for Information Architecture -.'--,"-" --:-:' URLs IVlrtual dynamic web pages ,,;2,c·r-------+-------------+------------------------~------------------~---------------~ \(,~:'~',:\[~; IAd~ public works and utilities projects I ~j\iti:~! 41 IDl.IlJlI~ YYUI"'~ Projects ~~rd~~~:~nee~ :~~;a~Oe~ ~ ~~~~rogram ~o be Initiated with coordinating I r~'~~:;~~:I;o;~f street closures/detours due to I c I projects :':' Content Content 'ii,<:" l~t~,~:,::~~Content ""' needed lor project !,,'~i;;i:; 42 IS Metadata In Keywords field" O@;Xr __ -r ____ ~I~above~~~~~--------_+------~ {~:"~ ;,.\',::::: IEncod.:_~.X!~tl_n~g_Webslte with metadata !i·~t)X:.~i:)·'i 43 ~o<>r"h and Ac.cess I"'-'''''''''''hi,,~ content standards. Support Content ..... ..,~'''''', I;''''''"'''''' access of website content 1~~n0G:r--------~----------/----~I~c~--ate~dl--slln~ce-la~u~nc-h~0~I~n~e~w~w-e-b-sl-te----+_----------------------+_----------------~ 1;,):iA~:,:il~~; C,v I !Need for easlly-Idenllfiable filenames; 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 '----:1' Download I Useful also.for project "Virtual Meaningful Ilnlltlalled IURLS" above Mir, IE",ployee Directory Creek Monitor I ,Font Size '-1lr, links on City Icouncil . , shouid link directly to :.: ,.page,. not to Interim i J page that Idoesn't Include the actual documents Add directory -this used to be on the old PA webslle (indexed by last Iname and ~~~~~ek monitor I I data to the No ,to chanoe lont size To be Initiated with coordinating department ITO be evaluated ITo be evaluated fo be I I~:;:~~()~u:~s,e~s,of Web 2.0 Lack of Interactlvlty and modern It I I that epitomize Palo Alto ITo be completed Easy and quick page Every ~age should be accessed within 2 ITo be completed access Initiated with recent launch of new IPcltenltiallorWeb 2.0, personalized "'''''<><><> utility customer account access and ,.."''''''''''~ i settings tailored to bill pay. Additional applications to User login Content Content Content Content Deslon Developer Coding & Technology Developer Coding & Technology ,rlh,'rl, 'I" interests 11!~i;)f~tf\r~,---;5~2----1StrQh;;ct;;;~,1M flel;;;;ddai;;ln~i;;:;::~,~,Se se;;;;;arc;h'~.b~;;c;r;ea~t;;ln~g~S~y;st~e~m~a~tl~c--t~~ne~lt~:av:t:~:u~a-te-d-·----------------I~ln~l:or~m~a:I:lo~n~A~rc~h~lt:e~c~tu:re:-1 ~~~~~'"'-of structured Adop~ lexicon support to translate external 53 Ol;:Cllvll searc~' to internal metadata Initiated Information Architecture Sll~~~.1 ~;, a web page listing all the reports i;~~l,~f and for a meeting, or a web "iri"",1 dynamic web page I all documents associated with 54 ~~~:: 8.p-roperty-address across all bodies, or Initiated 1';':·i";';V ,-.--all document. associated with a topic 1(.: ::.<';'.:" across I J. Allows easIer 104~~Sr~;:~,r---:---i~~--~-----i~~;m""o,;","'ln,'~,gOvlcU,0;ntden"'l~msrOrmliula.IiPwle~u~s-es--~~~~~~--------_t--~~~~~~__l I'N~,f{\:{,; 55 Links removal pages ,rarely used links on landing ITo be completed Markellng & Analytlcs Information Architecture Page 3 of 4 Item Bucket Number Area Addressed ;.;.:fR 56 R, .i, Practices \ < ......• •• • 57 ·Ti'~·~,: Metrics Decision Ci ......• 58 Making :,..".' . ;:<> 59 Google Search 1~1f)I~~ii~~; 60 PDFs 61 Marketing Plan ':;;i:i i l,:' >:i'i! :;;1; 62 Revised Homepage ~ 63 I ~~r.~~,~~;:,olice and 64 Printable web pages 65 Breadcrumb trail -66 Data Clean Up 0 ..J tI) c: Icouncll Member Voting t! 67 co IRecord 0.. 68 Navigation consistency land ease 69 Palo Altans Attachment A Website Advisory Committee Full List of Recommendations Recommendation 1« •• , Ensure Ihallim.ely. I of mosl ~~~c~~~~:~ne~h~S~'~'"O'" 1 To be completed Dashboard (for websile "health"] whic~ is shared across all departments Initiated and Executive levels once/month Metrics Based Design decislon~making to be to explain to stakeholders Ira be evaluated n~'!'n~?_ not their page is not on landing page or persistent links Allow Internal Google search terms to be ported 10 Web Trends INot applicable now that the City is Ina longer using Web Trends Key historical PDFs made searchable ITO be completed Need Strategy and Tactics for Increasing I <?,ity coordination process I I I .OJ and community/press acceptance I rll, .1, needed in b!nn~;:u~;~~r"O; (I.e. rolallng plclures ITo be, I wilh olher ~:~er Alerts should be placed on Ihe ftrsl lamber al:~;~~o~~~~ p~~: for "'0"0 .. ou pages formated for easy ITO be completed nolnlinn I~::der i trail/breadcrumb trail to ITo be evaluated with vendor One Time Dala Scrub 10.ld~n~~_data anomalies, orphan pages, inconsistent To be evaluated nomenclature, technical Issues, tagging lissues, elc . Provide table of motions and how each !,:, I to be evaluated. Vo'ting results exist in minutes. Icouncil • v~ted Inconsistencies In font, justification (alignment); highlight active menu item; To be evaluated with other remove "previous page"; make I recommendations. menu/submenu fixed place (freeze pane) as user scrolls down Potential to list famous Palo Allans from To be evaluated IPalo Alto or >"v residing In Palo Alto Sub·Commlttee Marketing & Analytics Marketing & Analytics Marketing & Analytics Marketrng & Analytlcs Marketing & Analytlcs Full Content I r ~oding & Content Marketing & Analytics Content Marketing & Analytlcs Content Page 4 of 4 Attachment B WEBSITE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Community Volunteers: Philippe Alexis, Mark Eden, Sheri Furman, Carol Gilbert, Bob Harrington, Lori Heyman, Arthur Keller, Gaty Lindgren, Sean Momeny, John Raftrey, Joe Villareal, Dave Voelker Council Liaison: Sid Espinosa, Council Member (former Council Liaison: Pat Burt, Council Member) James Keene, City Manager; Lalo Perez, Director of Administrative Services; David Ramberg, Assistant Director of Administrative Services; Glenn Loo, Chief Information Officer; Chris Caravalho, Sr. Technologist; Kelly Morariu, Interim Deputy Manager; Linda Clerkson, Public Communications Manager; Julia Pollard, Administrative Assistant; Lila Youn, Management Fellow TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE DATE: MAY 18,2009 CMR: 254:09 REPORT TYPE: REPORTS OF OFFICIALS SUBJECT: . Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Foothills Fire Management Plan RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"), dated February 9, 2009, and the attached Foothills Fire Management Plan ("Plan"), dated January 15,2009. BACKGROUND The City first prepared and adopted a Foothills Fire Management Plan in 1982. The City'S consultants have prepared an updated Foothills Fire Management Plan, in response to Council direction to staff and in response to changes in the Foothills, laws and regulations, and input from residents, neighboring jurisdictions, and other community members. The Plan incorporates lessons learned from the Oakland Hills Fire of 1991 and other best practices, including working collaboratively with neighboring jurisdictions, police and fire agencies, and community partners. The objectives driving the recommendations in the Plan are: • Life Safety • Structure and Infrastructure Protection • Ignition Prevention • Fire Containment • Natural Resource Protection and Enhancement CMR: 254:09 Page 1 of 10 The components of the Plan are: • Fire Hazard Assessment: The consultant conducted a fire science review of fuel types, loads, topography, and other factors. The data were analyzed with various computer models and correlated on maps. • Regional Evacuation: The consultant surveyed 19 miles of City roadways, 12 miles of which are identified as critical evacuation routes, and most of which have prolongations or feed other road systems outside the City limits. • Review of Municipal Ordinances: The consultant found most City Municipal Codes related to the Foothills are adequate. Several updates were suggested. • Staffing of Fire Station 8: The consultant analyzed objectives and resources for response to fires in the Foothills. The recommendation in the Plan is to maintain current staffing levels for Fire Station 8 (~$200,000 in staff overtime and ancillary costs). Police officers (directed patrol) and Open Space Ranger staffing may need to be increased during high- risk conditions (viz., Red Flag). • Wildland Fire Management Recommendations and Mitigations: The consultant presents specified fire prevention treatments on City-owned lands and roads. An outside environmental consultant (TRA Environmental Sciences, Inc.) supplemented the evaluation of and incorporation into the Plan of best practices for recommended treatments. • Updates to Pearson-Arastradero Trails Master Plan and Foothills Trail Maintenance Plan: The consultant reviewed existing Plans and suggested updates. • CEQA Documentation: The consultant worked with the Planning Department and TRA Environmental Sciences, Inc. to develop the MND. • Implementation Plan and Potential Funding: The Plan presents an overview of funding strategies. The total five-year cost, beyond what the City currently spends, to implement the recommended projects is estimated at approximately $435,000. This report will not include a plan to address the funding implications of the recommendations. Staff will return to the Council at a later date with funding plan recommendations along with other implementation measures. While the nominal title of the Plan is fire management, the Plan necessarily includes law enforcement (evacuation, crime in the area, notification/warning and emergency public information, Block Preparedness Coordinator Program), natural resource management (Ranger staff), utilities (power lines, water supply, and related infrastructure), public works, and other topics. DISCUSSION This new Plan would replace the existing Foothills Fire Management Plan, dated 1982. The City retained Wildland Resource Management (Carol Rice) as the primary consultant to develop this updated Plan, working with staff from the City Manager's Office, the Open Space Park Rangers, the Fire Department, the Police Department, and other work groups. CMR: 254:09 Page 2 oflO Scope and Geography The Foothills are defined in the Fire Management Plan as lands on and to the west of Foothill Expressway and Junipero Serra Boulevard to the City limits on Skyline Boulevard. The focus of the Plan is on lands owned by the City and roadways, since the City has responsibility and direct control over such areas. The Plan identifies 51 areas where treatments are to be conducted. These treatment areas are found within Foothills Park, Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, and 12 miles of City roadways. The Plan also notes that the Foothills area includes a wide range of lands, buildings, and resources, such as: • Open Space and Parks: In addition to the City-managed Foothills Park and Pearson- Arastradero Preserve, there are other open space areas in the area, including the Montebello Open Space Preserve and the Los Trancos Open Space Preserve (managed by the Midpeninsula Open Space District). • Private Residences: There are roughly 200 homes in the City limits and hundreds more abutting or near the Palo Alto Foothills in neighboring jurisdictions in both San Mateo County and Santa Clara County. • Private Recreation Facilities: There are several private equestrian, golf, sports complexes in the Foothills. • Commercial Buildings: There are millions of square feet of commercial and industrial buildings in the Foothills (Stanford Industrial Park). • Stanford University: Stanford holds substantial lands in the Foothills. These have a direct nexus to the City for police and fire services. The Palo Alto Fire Department provides service to Stanford University under contract, including the Stanford Linear Accelerator (SLAC) in San Mateo County. The Palo Alto Police Department, in addition to providing primary response coverage to large portions of Stanford lands as well as mutual aid, provides 911 dispatch of the Stanford Department of Public Safety (Stanford Police) under contract. Outreach and Regional Cooperation The City should not and cannot plan or operate in isolation regarding the Foothills. The nature of jurisdictional boundaries, interrelationships, and inter-agency cooperation (mutual aid), as well as a specific goal to include non-governmental organizations in the planning process, resulted in three formal outreach sessions to the general public, a Council presentation in October 2008, a presentation to the Parks and Recreation Commission, and numerous other meetings with our neighbors, including, but not limited to: • Acterra • CALFIRE • Friends of Foothills Park • Los Altos Hills Fire District • Los Trancos County Water District CMR: 254:09 Page 3 of 10 • Los Trancos Woods Neighborhood • Menlo Park Fire District (including the Town of Atherton, City of Menlo Park, City of East Palo Alto) • Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) • P A Protect Our Open Space • Palo Alto Hills Neighborhood Association • Pony Tracks Ranch • Portola Pasture Stables • San Mateo County FireSafe Council • San Mateo County Sheriff • Santa Clara County Fire Dept • South Skyline Association • Stanford Community Residential Leaseholders (SCRL) • Stanford University • Town of Los Altos Hills • Vista Verde Community Association • Woodside Fire Protection District This outreach was not bounded merely by the need to collect opinions for the Plan. One key recommendation of the Plan is to form an ongoing working relationship with these neighbors, to increase the overall resilience of the Foothills against fires, natural disasters, crime, and other threats. The Plan recommends that the City continue and expand this collaboration. Similarly, the topic of evacuation necessitates inter-agency and private-public partnerships. While the Palo Alto Police Department is the lead agency' for evacuation planning and operations, other jurisdictions must coordinate in these processes. The Plan calls for the creation of a regional evacuation and response system for the Foothills: "Foothills Regional Emergency Response and Evacuation Plan (FREREP)." This plan would provide for standardized signage and evacuation route nomenclature and protocols. The Block Preparedness Coordinator (BPC) Program will be an integral component, as residents who are BPCs can open gates and serve as "eyes and ears" for first responders. The FREREP would also facilitate an "all hazards" approach, covering crime prevention, missing persons (lost child or person at-risk), and other issues affecting the Foothills region. Wildland Fire Management Recommendations and Mitigations There are approximately 330 acres of City land (out of approximately 2,000 acres) that are recommended to undergo some level of fire mitigation treatments. Such treatments will follow best management practices to reduce deleterious environmental impacts. In many cases, treatments can actually enhance resources (removal of non-native, invasive species). During the outreach meetings, staff found that many neighbors and residents did not have a clear understanding that "treatment" does not mean "clear cutting" or the removal of all flora and fauna. In reality, the reduction of fuel-load and methods to contain fires allows for the park-like aesthetic of the area to remain. CMR: 254:09 Page 4 of 10 Furthermore, certain current fire prevention treatments will be curtailed or eliminated. Treatments will also be staggered; not all 330 acres will be treated in a given year. While the total acreage under treatment is to increase from the current approximately 200 acres, the total acreage treated in a given one year period will decrease (in most cases, only 100 acres would be treated annually, according to the Plan, p. 46). For example, the City already performs annual weed abatement, mowing, and other fuel-load-reduction actions. The Plan now provides that some such treatments can be done on a rotational basis on up to five year intervals, as opposed to every year. Some areas will no longer be treated for fuel reduction (e.g., Madrone and Valley View fire roads in Foothills Park), since they are not tied to the objectives of the Plan. Implementation Plan The Plan presents a general framework to guide the City in planning and allocating resources to the Foothills. Staff is developing a Work Plan to implement the recommendations. At this point, since funding has not yet been identified, the Work Plan is constrained to elements that do not require substantial resources outside of existing budgets. Staff is working with Wildland Resource Management to investigate government grants, volunteer programs, Fire Safe Council funds, and other external means of financing or offsetting . costs. Any field activities (treatments) will be prioritized by their relation to life safety: fuel breaks, evacuation routes, perimeter treatments, and defensible space. However, several elements of the Work Plan do not require substantial funding (or can be performed at a slower rate using existing resources). Some of these elements include: • Use this Plan as the foundation for the proposed Foothills Regional Emergency Response and Evacuation Plan (FREREP) • Create Midpeninsula Foothills Emergency Forum (MFEF) • Municipal Code updates • Explore cooperative funding strategies: cost-sharing (or staff/resource sharing) with neighboring agencies (Los Altos Hills, Cal Trans, Woodside Fire Prot. Dist., etc.) • Update Geographic Information System (GIS) (new map layers/inputs from consultants) • Special Patrols (by Fire, Police, Rangers) during times of heightened risk (Red Flag, Fire Weather) • Conduct training, meetings, and drills for Block Preparedness Coordinators for neighborhood communication • Revise Trail Plans for Pearson-Arastradero Preserve & Foothills Park • Volunteer Program: develop plan for use of volunteers for treatment (perhaps thorugh Acterra, Fire Safe Council, etc.) CMR: 254:09 Page 5 of 10 • Educate and work with adjacent landowners (homeowners and businesses) to reduce hazards and improve coordination • Develop Joint Information Center (nC): work with neighboring jurisdictions to ensure that emergency public information (EPI) is co.ordinated. Training for Public Information Officers (PIOs) and other staff on: Community Alerting and Notification System (CANS), evacuation, KZSU 90.1 FM radio, the Emergency Alert System (EAS), etc. • Include Plan in the City Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) Staff will continue to develop the Work Plan and adapt it, based on funding and staffing strictures. RESOURCE IMPACT The total five-year cost to implement the recommended projects is estimated at slightly less than $700,000. Staff estimates that approximately $53,000 is currently spent annually for current treatments, which is $265,000 over five years, so net new funding required may be approximately $435,000. The largest cost, at slightly more than $400,000, is to manage 19 fire containment areas. The initial treatment for segments of major evacuation routes is estimated to cost about $192,960. To implement and maintain the policies and procedures recommended in the Plan, supplemental staff time will be required from the: • City Manager's Office • Open Space Park Rangers • Fire Department • Police Department • City volunteers Please refer to Section 5.4 of the Plan for the consultant's discussion of funding strategies. POLICY IMPLICATIONS Approval of this Plan is consistent with current City policies and regulations regarding fire prevention, evacuation, and related matters. This Plan also supports the three Council priorities of Environmental Protection, Economic Health of the City (e.g., protecting private business facilities as well as critical utilities), and Civic Engagement for the Common Good (e.g., partnership with neighborhoods and the Block Preparedness Coordinator Program). CMR: 254:09 Page 6 of10 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This Plan is a project subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQ A). A Mitigated Negative Declaration (February 9, 2009) was prepared and circulated for public comment from February 10, 2009, through March 11, 2009. The City has concluded that any adverse environmental impacts of the treatments proposed in the Plan can be fully mitigated to protect against any potential negative environmental impacts. The City retained the services of TRA Environmental Sciences, Inc., an independent biology and ecology consulting firm. This firm was also previously involved in the preparation and environmental review of the Foothills Park Trail Maintenance Plan (2004) and the Pearson- Arastradero Trail Management Plan (2001). TRA completed a full analysis of potential impacts to plants, animals, and other natural resources, and concluded that potential impacts could be adequately mitigated through implementation of best practices and mitigation measures which were incorporated into the MND. Recommended best practices and mitigation measures include: • Site inventory prior to treatment to determine the location of sensitive sites. Exploration into the use of knowledgeable volunteers to conduct a more detailed, site-wide survey is warranted. • Site planning and design to determine specific vegetation treatment actions based on fire management benefits, environmental impact, and required mitigation activities. • Protection during vegetation treatment using best management practices tailored to impacted sensitive resources. • Protection of disturbed environmentally sensitive areas following either specific fire management actions. • Prior to any treatment being started, a qualified biologist (or trained staff expert) shall work with personnel involved "regarding protected species and habitats in the project area, the limitations on areas that can be accessed on foot or with equipment, and the legal consequences of take of protected species or habitat." (Mitigated Negative Declaration (February 9, 2009), BIO-I, p. 2.) This recommendation is consistent with the approach adopted for trail improvements or maintenance as outlined in the Council- adopted Foothills Maintenance Plan (2004) and Arastradero Trail Management Plan (2001). While there are a myriad of sensitive plants, animals, and other resources in the Foothills area, the treatment areas do not necessarily impinge upon all types. For example, according to the Biological Impact Assessment (January 8, 2009), "There are no Palo Alto-designated heritage trees in the Foothills Fire Management Plan Update area." (p. 22) Sensitive environmental areas and habitats, in general, tend to be outside the priority treatment areas: 1) evacuation routes and 2) around buildings and certain public safety infrastructure. During the CEQA Public Comment Period, the City received comments from the public via letters, e-mail messages, and the City's web site. The Parks and Recreation Commission also provided comments at their February 24 meeting. CMR: 254:09 Page 7 aflO Key issues and concerns include the following: 1) Concern that the proposed measures may degrade the visual character of the area The City received public comments expressing concern that treatments would unreasonably alter the appearance of the park and preserve lands. There will be localized changes to the treatment areas: near roadsides, structures, and along Trappers Ridge. The changes along roadsides will be: • Mowed grass, creating a more uniform, tended, look • Shrubs under trees will be removed, creating a more open and park-like appearance. Views will extend further back from the roadside where topography of vegetation does not block the view. However, changes resulting from treatments will not adversely affect the visual character of the area: • Non-native plants are targeted for removal. • Native trees will not be cut down, in most cases, but will be "limbed up," meaning that lower branches will be trimmed to 8-feet height (or 1/3rd the height of short trees). • Views will extend farther back from the roadside, as foliage is trimmed back. In some cases, there will be more foliage. For example, the appearance of Trappers Ridge will change. Less will be mowed each year, with more grass allowed to grow along the ridge. The visitor will see more groups (or clumps) of shrubs in grass where either continuous grass or continuous shrubs now exist. Vegetation around structures will be managed to a greater extent. The structure may be more visible as shrubs are reduced in volume and lower branches of trees trimmed within 100 feet of the structure. Grass will be mowed within 30 feet of the structure, creating a more tended appearance. Such treatments are required by law. 2) Concern that treatment measures could result in more weedy plants and patches and create "increased fodder" for fires Treatments call for targeting removal of weedy plants within the management areas. Much of the mowing or grazing currently performed or done in the recent past in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve was, in fact, done at the request of Acterra in order to reduce the weedy plants and patches. Management of timing and techniques will be employed to provide a competitive edge to native plants at the detriment of weeds. Mitigation measures and best practices will be utilized to prevent any significant adverse impact to habitats, plants or animals. CMR: 254:09 80[10 Some plants that grow after the management has been performed can take advantage of the reduced competition. They grow later in the spring and during the summer. They may create more volume for a fire to bum, in some limited areas, but they also have a short window of conditions under which ignition can occur. Such fuels may have the potential to move rapidly, but have low flame lengths, meaning they are easier to extinguish, compared to the fuel types and loads currently in those areas. 3) Concern that treatments will create increased erosion and negative impacts to hillside habitats Actions to prevent erosion are called for in the ten listed mitigation measures that will take place in conjunction with the fuel management work. These measures include avoiding sensitive sites and operation when the soil is wet. Hillside habitats are maintained using best management practices used for other treatments, such as creating islands to prevent fire spread without adverse impact to flora and fauna in the area. Best practices also limit the creation of bare soiL In cases where such soil is exposed, staff will deploy measures to confine erosion. Work is also to be done along the roadside. In areas where erosion is possible from mechanized vehicles, heavy equipment is limited to work on the road surface only, with cutting performed by an articulated arm that does not cause accelerated erosion. 4) Concern that fire management may conflict with City plans and park designations Fuel management is already routinely conducted in both Foothills Park and Pearson- Arastradero Preserve and has been done for many years. The trails plans for each of the areas allow for work to be done to maintain public safety. For example, the Foothills Park Trails Maintenance Plan (January 29, 2002) identifies fuel breaks as part of the maintenance regimen. Best management practices to promote native vegetation are encouraged under current planning documents for both landholdings. Current codes and regulations require fuel management adjacent to roads, structures, barbeques and other locations. This work is not discretionary. Sections 4290 and 4291 of the California Public Resources Code, for example, mandate Defensible Space be established for structures in the Foothills. Parks and preserves are not exempt from such laws. 5) Concern that stream banks in Wild Horse Valley may not remain stable if shrubs are removed Shrubs will be trimmed back, but their roots will not be removed. The cutting operation will not necessarily involve soil surface disturbance. Shrub removal will result in a regrowth of the shrubs and new growth of grasses within months (see above for erosion CMR: 254:09 Page 9 of 10 control methods). The shrubs roots that provide soil stability are not disturbed. The new cover of grass foliage offers raindrop splash protection and grass roots offer greater surface soil holding capacity. Additionally, Mitigation Measure Geology 6 requires a buffer of 25-50 feet be maintained between operations and water bodies or designated riparian areas. Rainwater run-off barriers will be installed and managed in all treatment and operating areas. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update (Draft, January 15, 2009) Attachment B: Attachment C: Attachment D: Attachment E: PREPARED BY: Mitigated Negative Declaration (February 9,2009) Biological Impact Assessment (January 8, 2009) Public Comments (various from web site, e-mail, letter, etc.) Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commission, Feb. 24, 2009 KELLY MORARIU Interim Deputy City Manager lIif!J 11£ · ~ NIC MARIN RO Interim DIrector CffJunity Services Department ·lL~~ OFFICER KENNETH DUEKER Coordinator, Homeland Security Palo Alto Police Department Assigned to the City Manager's Office CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR: 254:09 Page 10 of 10 Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update WILDLAND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM DRAFT Submitted to: City of Palo Alto Attention: Kelly Morariu 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Submitted by: Wildland Resource Management, Inc. Wildland Resource Management 134 Journeys End Alamo, CA 94507 January 15, 2009 City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Part A - FIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT AND FUEL MANAGEMENT PLAN/ PROJECTS 1 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................................. 8 2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 12 2.1 Goals and Objectives .................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Planning History ........................................................................................................................................................... 14 2.3 Scope of the Plan .......................................................................................................................................................... 17 2.4 Planning Process ........................................................................................................................................................... 17 3 Existing Conditions................................................................................................................................................................. 19 3.1 Fire Hazard ................................................................................................................................................................... 19 3.1.1 Vegetation and Fire Fuels ................................................................................................................................. 19 3.1.2 Fire Behavior .................................................................................................................................................... 21 3.1.2.1 Fire Behavior Modeling .......................................................................................................................... 21 3.1.2.2 Spatial Input Files ................................................................................................................................... 21 3.1.2.3 User-Defined Inputs ................................................................................................................................ 22 3.1.2.4 FlamMap Results .................................................................................................................................... 23 3.2 Fire Suppression Capabilities ........................................................................................................................................ 27 3.3 Access ........................................................................................................................................................................... 28 3.4 Sensitive Resources ...................................................................................................................................................... 28 3.4.1 Social and Cultural Features ............................................................................................................................. 31 3.4.2 Environmental Features .................................................................................................................................... 31 3.4.2.1 Species and Wildlife ............................................................................................................................... 32 3.4.2.2 Soils and Geology ................................................................................................................................... 37 4 Fuel Management in City Parks .............................................................................................................................................. 39 4.1 Identifying Potential Treatment Areas .......................................................................................................................... 39 4.2 Establishing Project Objectives .................................................................................................................................... 39 4.3 Current Fuel Management Program .............................................................................................................................. 41 4.4 Project Description........................................................................................................................................................ 46 4.4.1 Scope of Recommended Fuel Management Projects ........................................................................................ 46 4.4.2 Project Description Summary ........................................................................................................................... 46 4.4.3 Project Objectives ............................................................................................................................................. 46 4.4.4 Priority .............................................................................................................................................................. 47 4.4.5 Project Locations............................................................................................................................................... 47 4.4.6 Project Dimensions and Post-Treatment Standards ........................................................................................... 53 4.4.7 Roadside and Driveway Fuel Modification for Safe Access and Egress ........................................................... 54 4.4.7.1 Specific Goal of Action ........................................................................................................................... 54 4.4.7.2 Location and Description of Projects ...................................................................................................... 54 4.4.8 Fuel Modification for Firefighter Safety Projects ............................................................................................. 57 City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 3 4.4.8.1 Specific Goal of Action ........................................................................................................................... 57 4.4.8.2 Location and Description of Projects ...................................................................................................... 57 4.4.9 Structure and Infrastructure Projects – Defensible Space ................................................................................. 57 4.4.9.1 Specific Goal of Action ........................................................................................................................... 57 4.4.9.2 Location and Description of Projects ...................................................................................................... 58 4.4.10 Ignition Prevention Fuel Management Projects ................................................................................................ 59 4.4.10.1 Specific Goal of Action ........................................................................................................................... 59 4.4.10.2 Location and Description of Projects ...................................................................................................... 59 4.4.11 Fuel Modification for Containment Ease .......................................................................................................... 59 4.4.11.1 Specific Goal of Action ........................................................................................................................... 59 4.4.11.2 Location and Description of Projects ...................................................................................................... 60 4.4.12 Fuel Modification for Ecosystem Health .......................................................................................................... 62 4.4.12.1 Specific Goal of Action ........................................................................................................................... 62 4.4.12.2 Location and Description of Projects ...................................................................................................... 62 4.4.13 Cooperative Fuel Management Projects for Offsite Fire Containment and Evacuation Ease ........................... 63 4.4.13.1 Specific Goal of Action ........................................................................................................................... 63 4.4.13.2 Location and Description of Projects ...................................................................................................... 63 5 Implementation Plan ............................................................................................................................................................... 64 5.1 Implementation Strategies ............................................................................................................................................. 64 5.2 Priorities ........................................................................................................................................................................ 65 5.3 Fuel Management Project Costs .................................................................................................................................... 66 5.3.1 Project Cost Estimates....................................................................................................................................... 67 5.4 Funding Strategies to Support Fuel Management ......................................................................................................... 71 5.5 Grant Opportunities ...................................................................................................................................................... 72 6 Treatment Standards and Methods .......................................................................................................................................... 74 6.1 Treatment Standards for Vegetation Types ................................................................................................................... 74 6.1.1 Prescription for Grasslands ............................................................................................................................... 74 6.1.2 Prescription for North Coastal Scrub and Chaparral ......................................................................................... 74 6.1.3 Prescription for Oak Woodlands ....................................................................................................................... 76 6.1.4 Prescription for Riparian Forest ........................................................................................................................ 76 6.1.5 Defensible Space Guidelines ............................................................................................................................. 77 6.2 Description of Treatment Methods ............................................................................................................................... 78 6.2.1 Summary ........................................................................................................................................................... 78 6.2.2 Timing of Treatments ........................................................................................................................................ 78 6.2.3 Hand Labor ....................................................................................................................................................... 79 6.2.4 Mechanical Treatments ..................................................................................................................................... 79 6.2.5 Grazing with Sheep and Goats .......................................................................................................................... 81 6.2.6 Broadcast Prescribed Burns .............................................................................................................................. 81 6.2.7 Eucalyptus Tree Removal ................................................................................................................................. 82 City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 4 6.2.8 Herbicide Application to Control Invasive Plants ............................................................................................. 83 6.3 Best Management Practices .......................................................................................................................................... 84 6.3.1 Hand Labor ....................................................................................................................................................... 84 6.3.2 Mechanical Treatments ..................................................................................................................................... 85 6.3.3 Grazing with Sheep and Goats .......................................................................................................................... 86 6.3.4 Broadcast Prescribed Burns .............................................................................................................................. 86 6.3.5 Herbicide Application ....................................................................................................................................... 87 P ART B – PO L I C Y REVIEW AND SUPPLEMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS 1 Evacuation and Refuge ........................................................................................................................................................... 89 1.1 Identification and Notification ...................................................................................................................................... 89 1.2 Regional Cooperation ................................................................................................................................................... 90 1.3 Temporary Refuge ........................................................................................................................................................ 90 2 Codes and Regulations ............................................................................................................................................................ 91 2.1 Existing Codes and Ordinances .................................................................................................................................... 91 2.1.1 Fire Code ........................................................................................................................................................... 91 2.1.2 Building Code ................................................................................................................................................... 93 2.2 Recommendations ......................................................................................................................................................... 93 2.3 Exterior Hazard Abatement .......................................................................................................................................... 95 2.3.1 For parcels of land one acre or less maintain parcel in complete abatement. .................................................... 95 2.3.2 For parcels larger than one acre in size ............................................................................................................. 96 3 Fire Protection – Station 8 ...................................................................................................................................................... 98 3.1 Description .................................................................................................................................................................... 98 3.2 Appraisal ....................................................................................................................................................................... 99 3.3 Recommendation ........................................................................................................................................................ 100 4 Trail Plan Update .................................................................................................................................................................. 101 4.1 Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Trails Management Plan (March 2001) ...................................................................... 101 4.1.1 Recommended Revisions ................................................................................................................................ 101 4.1.2 Existing Fire Mitigation and Fuel Management in the Arastradero Trails Management Plan ........................ 103 4.1.3 Vegetation Management ................................................................................................................................. 107 4.1.3.1 Brushing and Clearing Defined ............................................................................................................. 107 4.1.3.2 Techniques for Maintaining a Clear Passageway .................................................................................. 107 4.2 Foothills Park Trails Maintenance Plan (January 29, 2002) ....................................................................................... 109 4.2.1 Recommended Revisions ................................................................................................................................ 109 4.2.2 Existing Fire Mitigation and Fuel Management in the Foothills Park Trails Maintenance Plan ..................... 110 5 References ............................................................................................................................................................................ 113 City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: City of Palo Alto Overview. ............................................................................................................................................ 12 Figure 2: 1997 Fire Management Zones. ........................................................................................................................................ 16 Figure 3: Wildland Surface Fuels. .................................................................................................................................................. 20 Figure 4: Spatial Data Required for Fire Behavior Modeling. ........................................................................................................ 22 Figure 5: Comparison of Torching and Active Crown Fire. ........................................................................................................... 23 Figure 6: Crown Fire and Torching Potential. ................................................................................................................................ 24 Figure 7: Predicted Flame Length................................................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 8: Predicted Rate of Spread. ................................................................................................................................................ 26 Figure 9: Locations of Cultural and Environmental Sensitive Resources in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. .................................. 29 Figure 10: Locations of Cultural and Environmental Sensitive Resources in Foothills Park. ........................................................ 30 Figure 11: Sensitive Species Known or Potentially Occurring in Foothills Park or Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. ...................... 37 Figure 12: Soil Types in Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. .................................................................................. 38 Figure 13: Project Goals and Actions. ........................................................................................................................................... 40 Figure 14: Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Current Fuel Management Areas. .................................................................................. 42 Figure 15: Foothills Park Current Fuel Management Areas. .......................................................................................................... 43 Figure 16: Recent Treatments in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. .................................................................................................... 44 Figure 17: Recent Treatments in Foothills Park. ............................................................................................................................ 45 Figure 18: Listing of Project Locations. ......................................................................................................................................... 50 Figure 19: Proposed Treatment Locations in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. ................................................................................. 51 Figure 20: Proposed Treatment Locations in Foothills Park. .......................................................................................................... 52 Figure 21: Treatment Methods and Intervals. ................................................................................................................................. 53 Figure 22: Listing of Project Locations for Evacuation and Access. .............................................................................................. 55 Figure 23: Evacuation Routes External to Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. ....................................................... 56 Figure 24: Listing of Project Locations for Fire Fighter Safety Fuel Modification. ....................................................................... 57 Figure 25: Listing of Project Locations for Defensible Space. ....................................................................................................... 59 Figure 26: Listing of Project Locations for Ignition Prevention. .................................................................................................... 59 Figure 27: Listing of Project Locations for Containment Ease. ...................................................................................................... 61 Figure 28: Listing of Project Locations for Ecosystem Health. ...................................................................................................... 62 City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 6 Figure 29: Unit Costs for Fuel Reduction Treatment Methods. ...................................................................................................... 67 Figure 30: Funding Mechanisms. ................................................................................................................................................... 71 Figure 31: Initial Priority of Removal for Brush. ........................................................................................................................... 76 Figure 32: Pruning Example. .......................................................................................................................................................... 77 Figure 33: Pruning Example. .......................................................................................................................................................... 95 Figure 34: Shrub Spacing. .............................................................................................................................................................. 96 Figure 35: Fire Protection Resources. ............................................................................................................................................. 98 Figure 36: Emergency/Maintenance Access Points. ..................................................................................................................... 102 Figure 37: Vehicle Turn-around Design Summary. ...................................................................................................................... 109 City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 7 PART A – FIRE HAZARD ASSESSMENT AND FUEL MANAGEMENT PLAN/ PROJECTS City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 8 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fire Management Plan update process addresses a broad range of integrated activities and planning documents to address and mitigate the impacts of fire hazards in the Palo Alto Foothills Area. The area of interest includes the areas west of Foothills Expressway to the city limits of Palo Alto. Fire mitigation project areas include the boundaries of Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve within this area of interest. The Fire Management Plan Update addresses the following key items: • Fire Hazard Assessment • Regional Evacuation Routes • Review of Municipal Ordinances • Staffing of Station 8 • Wildland Fire Management Recommendations and Mitigations • Updates to Pearson-Arastradero Trails Master Plan and Foothills Trail Maintenance Plan • CEQA Documentation • Implementation Plan and Potential Funding Community Participation. Community participation in the development of the plan began with the refinement of the scope of work and selection of the consultant team. Three community meetings were held at key points in the planning process to gather continued input from the community. A stakeholder group made up of adjacent jurisdictions, neighborhood associations, special interest groups, volunteers etc. also participated in the planning process. An environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was undertaken by City Staff in conjunction with the plan development. Fire Hazard Assessment. There are many ways to assess fire hazard. Most utilize the three main factors of fuels, weather, and topography, with possible inclusion of elevation or fire history. Fire behavior was chosen as the means to assess fire hazard since it can identify locations where containment may be easiest, and where access may be precluded during the time of a fire. In addition, fire behavior outputs can identify locations where structures or natural resources may be unduly harmed by a wildfire, as well as locations where fire effects may be inconsequential to natural resources. Not every area identified as a potential fire hazard can be modified to produce low-intensity fires. Not only would this be too costly, but environmental impacts would also be unacceptable. Results of Fire Behavior Analysis. Fire behavior was analyzed for the entirety of the Foothills Area, including adjacent neighborhoods, property owned by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD), and Stanford University. Flame length, rate of fire spread and potential for crown fire were three characteristics considered in the analysis. The following are generalities observed: Flame lengths follow fuel types, with long flame lengths in chaparral and untreated grass, and short flame lengths in woodlands and mowed grass. The largest areas of long flames are located in Foothill Park and Monte Bello Open Space Preserve. Low fire spread rates were predicted in woodlands and forests, and fast City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 9 spread rates in untreated grass and chaparral. There is very little active crown fire predicted within the Foothills area, however, the potential for trees to torch is high throughout the treed portion of the Foothills area. Torching is caused by low-hanging limbs, or ladder fuels. Wildland Fire Management Recommendations and Best Management Practices Treatments were strategically placed to achieve the following goals: • Life Safety • Structure and Infrastructure Protection • Ignition Prevention • Fire Containment • Resource Enhancement Treatments were identified for 51 project areas. The most visible recommended set of projects will be to conduct roadside treatments along Page Mill Road, Arastradero Road, Los Trancos Road, and Skyline Boulevard. Other projects entail the continuation of mowing along trails and some boundaries, grazing along the selected segments of the perimeter of both Parks/Preserves, treatments to install and maintain defensible space around structures, treatments around barbeques to minimize the chance of ignitions, and treatments to bolster the success of fires containment efforts within the parks. Fuel management treatments can also enhance natural resources, through targeting non-native invasive plants as part of biomass removal – potentially with grazing animals, mechanical mowing and hand labor - and conducting prescribed fires in selected areas under conditions consistent with fire control. Best management practices are included for each treatment type, based on the sensitivity of the resource. These include practices that consider the timing intensity of the treatment, or selection of the type of treatment methods (e.g., whether the project would entail mowing or grazing, hand labor or mechanical equipment), the strata of treatment (e.g., whether the project would remove lower tree limbs, or instead involve grass mowing), and the scale of the treatment (e.g., to treat small or large patches). Review Recommendations Regarding Pearson-Arastradero Trails Master Plan and Foothills Trail Management Plan • Addition of fuel management and fuel reduction zones • Location of prescribed burns • Modify fuel break width for performance standards • Modify roadside treatment standards • Include fire hazard in regulatory, warning and education signs (especially prescribed fires) Regional Evacuation Routes The Palo Alto Police Department has responsibility within City limits for evacuation operations under state law. However, multiple jurisdictions will likely be involved in an event in the Foothills. Evacuation routes City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 10 should not be blocked anywhere, regardless of jurisdiction or ownership; this is especially important because most of the regional evacuation routes span multiple cities, ownership categories and protection jurisdictions. The following recommendations will help reach a reasonably safe condition along the regional evacuation routes. • Formalize agreements with adjacent landowners for ingress and egress routes (from parks) and offsite refuge areas • Develop partnerships to address regional evacuation routes from residential and public areas (Regional Evacuation Plan, Community Notification (multi-jurisdictional) and Unified Command) Analysis and Recommendations Regarding Staffing of Station 8 An analysis of the staffing level of Station 8 was conducted that considered the distribution and concentration of fire personnel and equipment in relation to the incidents. The recommendation was to maintain current staffing levels. Response times for incidents are significantly longer from other stations, even when considering mutual aid offered by other jurisdictions. The fire behavior analysis indicates the potential for fast-moving fires of high intensity, further justifying the current staffing levels. Review of Municipal Ordinances The existing code is comprehensive; only minor changes are recommended. These include: • Expand Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area (between Foothill Blvd & Highway 280) • Fire Protection Planning: Begin early in permitting process • Expand Defensible Space Requirements: Maintain roof free of materials • Expand Access Requirements: bridge load limits, parking restrictions • Additional guidance for Maintenance of Defensible Space • Ignition Source Control • Fencing • Signage • Mechanical Equipment Ignition Prevention • Restriction on Smoking at Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Implementation Plan and Potential Funding for Fire Management Recommendations Implementation of this plan will be managed by the City of Palo Alto staff, including the Fire Department, the Police Department (evacuation, notification, neighborhood preparedness coordinators), and Open Space (rangers). Volunteer groups, such as Acterra, Friends of Foothills, and other groups should continue to be involved and encouraged to help with the implementation. Further, the City should work with mutual aid government agencies and other stakeholders on an ongoing basis. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 11 Prioritization of Treatments The following is the priority of treatment types: 1. Life Safety 2. Structure and Infrastructure Protection 3. Ignition Prevention 4. Fire Containment 5. Resource Enhancement Cost Estimates The total five-year cost to implement the recommended projects is estimated at slightly less than $700,000. The largest cost, at slightly more than $400,000, is to manage 19 containment areas. The initial treatment for segments of major evacuation routes is estimated to cost almost $178,000. The use of California Youth Authority Crews may offer a means to reduce costs for the hand labor-based treatments. Without volunteers pre-treatment surveys and follow-up may cost $100,000 over the next five years. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 12 2 INTRODUCTION The Palo Alto Foothills consist of a mix of urban, semi-urban and open space lands on the eastern slope of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Within the city limits of Palo Alto, the Palo Alto Foothills area west of the Foothills Expressway and Junipero Serra Boulevard represents a Wildland Urban Interface area (WUI) with significant impacts to public safety, cultural and economic activities, and environmental and natural resource management. The Palo Alto Foothills Area includes two city-managed areas: Foothills Park and the Pearson- Arastradero Preserve. In an effort to implement an updated Fire Management program for the Foothills, the City of Palo Alto conducted a review of the fire hazards, mitigation activities, and environmental considerations for the area to develop recommendations for wildland fuels and fire management. Figure 1: City of Palo Alto Overview. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 13 2.1 Goals and Objectives The City of Palo Alto developed, maintains, and executes a Fire Management Plan focused on reducing losses from wildland fire. In support of this long-term objective, the City of Palo Alto initiated an update process for the Foothills Fire Management Plan to prepare recommendations for consideration and possible inclusion in future budgets. This Foothills Fire Management Plan update process focused on the three primary goals: • Develop recommendations for wildland fuels and fire management to reduce fire hazard in Palo Alto’s Wildland Urban Interface west of Foothill Expressway to an acceptable level of risk. o Review and incorporate the 1982 Foothills Fire Management Plan and 1997 staff update. o Identify appropriate management recommendations to reduce wildland fuel loads in the Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and Foothill Park. • Maintain ecological and aesthetic values of Foothill Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve consistent with fire reduction goals. • Provide a fuel management plan for Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve that is cost effective and sustainable for the City of Palo Alto. The Fire Management Plan update process involved a combination of City staff personnel from a wide cross section of city operations, stakeholders from across the Palo Alto area, and members of the Palo Alto community. In order to ensure that the fire management recommendations addressed environmental and cultural conditions that can affect resource and priority decisions, the update process included a series of specific objectives. • Assess fire hazards within the project area. Develop fuel classification, weather condition assumptions, and other fire hazard inputs used to model the fire hazards for the project area. • Develop wildland fire management recommendations. Identify both developed and sensitive natural resources at risk and develop treatment and best management practices to protect those resources. Prepare appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document. • Consider current refuge areas, ingress and egress routes and make recommendations for evacuation from residential and public areas. • Identify potential funding plans and external funding opportunities. • Update the Foothills Fire Management Plan incorporating input from the community. • Review and recommend appropriate revisions to existing City municipal ordinances pertaining to fire prevention. • Review and make appropriate recommendations to current levels of staffing, equipment and other response resources at Station 8 in Foothills Park. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 14 • Recommend revisions to the Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Trail Master Plan and Foothills Park Trail Maintenance Plan pertaining to firefighting access or vegetation management for fire hazard reduction along trail corridors. 2.2 Planning History The City of Palo Alto developed a Foothills Fire Management Plan in 1982. The 1982 Plan provides the planning framework for fire control activities for the City and the Palo Alto Foothills Area. The goal of the 1982 Fire Management Plan is “to reduce government costs and citizen losses from wildland fire by increasing initial attack success and/or protecting assets at risk through focused pre-fire management activities.” In 1997, the City of Palo Alto staff developed a draft update to this plan. Although the draft update was not formally adopted, the 1997 Draft Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan provides an updated framework and interim objectives for fire management within the Foothills Area. The 1997 Draft Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan identified four fire management objectives: 1. Identify fire pre-suppression, suppression and post-suppression activities to maintain or enhance the status quo, and prevent adverse impacts on people, structures and natural resources consistent with Palo Alto Fire Department’s fire protection mission. a. Prevent or reduce the threat of death or injury to foothills residents and visitors. b. Prevent or reduce loss or damage to structures and natural resources. 2. Suppress fire in the Hazardous Fire Area before it gets out of control. a. Perform effective initial attack, with Fire Station 8 staffed. b. Develop pre-fire suppression plans (initial attack to 4-hour effort). c. Incident Command System (ICS) training, focusing on multi-jurisdictional response and enhancing Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) skills and abilities in specific ICS positions. 3. Review and update evacuation routes out of the Hazardous Fire Area. 4. When feasible and as part of a regional effort, establish optimal fire frequencies, use pre-suppression control measures (including controlled / prescribed burns) to restore optimal fire regimes and for natural plant communities. The 1997 draft plan identified several hazard mitigation categories to meet Palo Alto’s Fire Management goal and objectives. • Fuel Management o Roadside clearance – Page Mill Road, Arastradero Road, Los Trancos Road and Skyline Boulevard were identified as evacuation routes as well as firebreaks. o Fuel Break/ Ignition Control system in Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 15 o Prescribed burning to reduce fuel load, re-establish a normal fire regime and educate and inform the public. High fuel loads, limited burn windows and requirements for pre-burn preparations have limited opportunities to date. • Pre-fire Actions o Foothills Park/ Pearson-Arastradero Preserve practices including visitor safety islands and evacuation plans, fire-safe park maintenance practices, daily weather taking (establish daily Burn Index), annual pre-fire season staff briefing, interagency training, use restrictions during critical fire weather. o Cooperative efforts with Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD), the Woodside Fire Protection District, and other partner agencies regarding construction of fuel breaks, identification of evacuation routes and interagency training, public information about evacuation pre-planning. o Private Dwellings and Open Land including fire codes for new development and public education and code enforcement. • Suppression and Post Suppression o Suppression capability including Foothills Fire Facility (Station 8); Mutual Threat Zone/ mutual aid/ automatic aid contracts; interagency/ ICS training. o Suppression Plan including maintenance of response cards, basing response on nationally-recognized fire danger rating indices, use any and all mutual aid resources to confine fires at initial attack, and to follow fire management zone pre-planning documents. o Post Suppression Plans. o Cultural Resources (no significant cultural resources exist in the City Limits, but potential always exists for discovery of new sites). The 1997 draft plan strategically divided the Hazardous Fire Area into eight fire management zones (FMZs) to merge individual property and resource concerns with fire control challenges (Figure 2). Each zone has a map showing boundaries, existing control lines and text description of activities to be considered by the Incident Commander, safety precautions and other tactical or site-specific information. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 16 Figure 2: 1997 Fire Management Zones. AP –Arastradero PreserveLTW –Los Trancos Woods FP/VH –Foothills Park Vista Hill FP/WVS –Foothills Park Wildhorse Valley SouthFP/WVN –Foothills Park Wildhorse Valley NorthCPM –Center Page Mill UPM –Upper Page MillMBE –Monte Bellow East City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 17 2.3 Scope of the Plan The Fire Management Plan update process addresses a broad range of integrated activities and planning documents to address and mitigate the impacts of fire hazards in the Palo Alto Foothills Area. The area of interest includes the areas west of Foothills Expressway to the city limits of Palo Alto. The fire mitigation project areas include the boundaries of Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve within this area of interest. The Fire Management Plan Update addresses the following key items: • Fire Hazard Assessment • Regional Evacuation Routes • Wildland Fire Management Recommendations and Mitigations • Recommendations for the Foothills Park Trails Maintenance Plan and the Pearson-Arastradero Trails Management Plan • Review of Municipal Ordinances • Staffing of Station 8 • Implementation Plan and Identification of Potential Funding 2.4 Planning Process The process used in developing the Update to the Foothills Fire Management Plan involved several departments of the City and many stakeholders. The consultants and City held three meetings with the stakeholders between April and September 2008. Invited Stakeholders included: • Acterra • Arrillaga Property: 500 Los Trancos Road • CAL FIRE • Friends of Foothills Park • Los Altos Hills Fire District • Los Altos Hills: ARES/RACES • Los Trancos Water District • Los Trancos Woods Neighborhood • Menlo Park Fire District • Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District • PA Protect Our Open Space • Palo Alto Hills Neighborhood Assoc • Pony Tracks Ranch • Portola Pasture Stables • San Mateo County FireSafe Council City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 18 • San Mateo County Sheriff • Santa Clara County Fire Dept • South Skyline Association • Stanford Community Residential Leaseholders (SCRL) • Stanford University • Town of Los Altos Hills • Vista Verde Community Association • Woodside Fire Protection District There were also three meetings with the community during the same time period. The meetings were held at the Interpretive Center at Foothills Park and at the Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club in Palo Alto. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 19 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Fire Hazard There are many ways to assess fire hazard. Most utilize the three main factors of fuels, weather, and topography, with possible inclusion of elevation or fire history. Fire behavior was chosen as the means to assess fire hazard since it integrates the effects of fuels, weather, and topography. Hazard assessments developed by the State and the California Fire Alliance were evaluated for potential use. However, the assessments were larger scale than appropriate for the purposes of this plan. The decision was made to use a more detailed, site-specific hazard assessment. Fire behavior predictions identify locations where containment may be easiest, and where access may be precluded during the time of a fire. In addition, fire behavior outputs can identify locations where structures or natural resources may be unduly harmed by a wildfire, as well as locations where fire effects may be inconsequential to natural resources. 3.1.1 Vegetation and Fire Fuels The Palo Alto Foothills contains a mix of potential wildland fire fuel regimes that, combined with the topography and weather for the regime, pose a potential risk for wildland fire (Figure 3). City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 20 Figure 3: Wildland Surface Fuels. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 21 3.1.2 Fire Behavior 3.1.2.1 Fire Behavior Modeling FlamMap is particularly well suited for the Foothill Fire Management Area fire assessment. FlamMap generates a spatial depiction of simulated fire behavior that may be used to assess relative hazards throughout the area. FlamMap is a computerized fire behavior prediction model developed by the USDA Forest Service at the Intermountain Forest Fire Research Laboratory.1 FlamMap was developed to predict fire behavior characteristics across a landscape. The first such landscape analysis of fire behavior characteristics was performed for the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Bay Area watersheds, then applied across the East Bay Hills after the Oakland Hills Fire. FlamMap is currently in the public domain. The heat transfer formulas in FlamMap are based on the software program, BEHAVE, which has been used in wildfire prediction since the 1970's. FlamMap uses the same heat transfer algorithms as BEHAVE along with numerous other algorithms to predict crown fire potential, ember distribution, effects of terrain on wind, direction and slope, and more. FlamMap allows prediction of fire behavior on a spatial basis, by modeling the locations of flame length, heat release, and rate of spread along with type of fire (crown fire, surface fire, or a fire that torches individual trees) throughout an entire area. FlamMap simulations assume the entire area is aflame under the same conditions at the same time to determine spatial differences in fire behavior. 3.1.2.2 Spatial Input Files The spatial data inputs to FlamMap characterize the terrain, weather, and fuels on the site with eleven different data layers. The spatial input data files are described in Figure 4. Figure 4: Spatial Data Required for Fire Behavior Modeling. Level Purpose Source Elevation (feet above sea level) This is necessary for adiabatic adjustment of temperature and humidity between elevations and for conversion of fire spread between horizontal and slope distances. USGS digital elevation models Slope (Percent of inclination from the horizontal) Slope is used to compute steepness effects on fire spread and solar irradiance. USGS digital elevation models Aspect (Azimuth values degree clockwise from north) Aspect is used to compute effects on fire spread and solar irradiance. USGS digital elevation models Fuel Model Fuel models, organized and described according to the FRAP 1 (FlamMap is available from Systems for Environmental Management, PO Box 8868, Missoula, MT, 59807, or from www.fire.org/tools.) City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 22 Level Purpose Source Fire Behavior Prediction System in terms of fuel volume, structure, and chemistry. The fuel models were mapped by CalFire in the Forest Resource Assessment Program (FRAP). Canopy Cover Canopy cover is necessary to compute shading and wind reduction factors. Canopy cover was mapped for the LandFire Program. LandFire Program Tree Height Tree height is used to compute spotting distance and crown fire characteristics. Decision rules regarding tree heights were applied to FRAP surface fuels. Crosswalk from FRAP surface fuels Crown Base Height or Height to Live Canopy Crown base height is an important parameter for determining the transition from surface fire to crown fire. This value incorporates the effects of ladder fuels in increasing vertical continuity and assisting transition to crown fire. Crown base height was mapped for the LandFire Program. LandFire Program Weather and Wind Weather is important to determine environmental conditions during the simulation. The weather data theme describes the maximum and minimum temperatures and relative humidity, and the time in which the maximum and minimum temperature occurs in order to dry and moisten fuels accordingly. Weather data that CalFire based fire-related policy decisions (defined as “average-bad” conditions) was used for this project. CalFire-defined weather for average bad fire danger Figure 4: Spatial Data Required for Fire Behavior Modeling. 3.1.2.3 User-Defined Inputs The model allows the user to customize fuel models or fuel moisture with special files2. Custom Fuel Model Files - custom fuels can be used to more accurately describe the types of fuel models found on the site. Custom fuel models use a standard fuel model as a base. In cases where especially flammable vegetation are present (eucalyptus and pines), the heat content of the dead and live fuels could be raised. In cases where the foliage are expected to be moister, the initial fuel moisture of the living material can be raised. Fuel volumes and heights in grazed grasslands can also be reflected in a cus t o m m o d e l . F o r the Palo Alto hazards assessment no custom fuel models were used. Fuel Moisture Files - defines the initial fuel moisture for each size class of fuels, for each fuel model. The moisture content of live woody fuels and live herbaceous fuels are similarly defined for each fuel model. This file specifies the moisture in the fuels of various sizes, and specifies how much moisture is in leaves. Based on this information, the weather files either dry out or add moisture to fuels depending on ambient conditions. The fuel moisture file used for the Palo Alto hazard assessment portrays the “average worst” fire danger as defined by CalFire. The “average worst” generally applies to the conditions that exist fewer than 10 percent of the time. It is also known as the 90th percentile weather conditions. 2 User-defined inputs could capture the effects of Sudden Oak Death through development of a custom fuel model and associated reduced fuel moisture. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 23 3.1.2.4 FlamMap Results Fire behavior was analyzed for the entirety of the Foothills area, including adjacent neighborhoods, property owned by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and Stanford University. Three factors are especially pertinent for prioritizing locations of high fire hazard: crown fire activity, flame length and rate of spread. Crown Fire Potential - Crowning activity indicates locations where fire is expected to travel through and likely consume the crowns. When a fire burns through tree crowns, countless embers are produced and are distributed, sometimes at long distances. These embers can start new fires, which can each grow and confound the finest fire suppression forces. For management purposes, prediction of torching or crown fire is highly correlated with fire severity. Crown fire activity is of concern wherever it occurs because of its impacts and the containment challenges. There is very little active crown fire predicted within the Foothills area, however, the potential for trees to torch is high throughout the treed portion of the Foothills area. Torching is caused by low-hanging limbs, or ladder fuels (Figure 5). The Crown Fire Potential across the Palo Alto area of interest is depicted in Figure 6. Figure 5: Comparison of Torching and Active Crown Fire. Flame Length - Flame length closely corresponds to fire intensity, which can predict fire severity. This factor most influences probability of house damage and ease of fire control. A flame length of eight feet is usually looked at as a cut-off point for decisions whether to attack the fire directly, or instead attempt control through indirect methods. Fire intensity was determined to be the most important factor in many studies of structural damage from fire. Flame lengths are often used as a proxy for fire intensity because they are highly correlated to fire intensity. Long flame lengths may justify treatment where they occur near sensitive values-at-risk. Flame lengths follow fuel types, with long flame lengths in chaparral and untreated grass, and short flame lengths in woodlands and mowed grass. The largest areas of long flames are located in Foothill Park and Monte Bello Open Space Preserve. Predicted Flame Length is depicted in Figure 7. Rate of Spread - The rate of spread is most closely associated with the ability to contain a fire. Rates of spread analyses point to the needs for increased access, detection, reporting, and fuel management to slow fire spread in strategic locations. Low fire spread rates were predicted in woodlands and forests, and fast spread rates in untreated grass and chaparral. Predicted Rate of Spread is depicted in Figure 8. Torching Active Crown Fire City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 24 Figure 6: Crown Fire and Torching Potential. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 25 Figure 7: Predicted Flame Length. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 26 Figure 8: Predicted Rate of Spread. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 27 3.2 Fire Suppression Capabilities The Department's response area in the WUI Fire Area covers nearly 10 square miles, from Skyline Boulevard in the Palo Alto foothills to Foothill Blvd and from Page Mill Road to Los Trancos Road. Approximately 200 residences and large business complexes (some of them exceeding a million square feet in area) are located in Palo Alto’s Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area. The City of Palo Alto Emergency Operations Plan (June 2007) notes that 11 health care facilities, 10 schools and 25 government-owned buildings are located in the wildland urban interface threat areas, along with 19 miles of roadway that are subject to high, very high or extreme wild fire threat. The Fire Department has 122 personnel organized in four areas: • Emergency Response (Operations) • Environmental & Safety Management (Fire Prevention Bureau) • Training & Personnel Management (Support) • Office of Emergency Services The Fire Department staffs seven full time stations located strategically throughout the City. To provide coverage in the sparsely developed hillside areas, an additional fire station in the foothills is operated during summer months when fire danger is high. The Fire Department facilities are located as follows: Fire Administration 250 Hamilton Avenue, City Hall Fire Station 1 301 Alma Street Fire Station 2 2675 Hanover Fire Station 3 799 Embarcadero Road Fire Station 4 3600 Middlefield Road Fire Station 5 600 Arastradero Road Fire Station 6 711 Serra Street, Stanford Fire Station 7 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park Fire Station 8 Foothills Park Rangers from the Open Space and Parks Division perform a vital service aiding fire suppression, providing detection, notification and initial size-up of fires, along with evacuation or reconnaissance. The Rangers offer detailed local knowledge, and support the Station 8 firefighters. Currently ten staff are fully trained and equipped for first response. There are four trucks with 150-200 gallons of water. The City of Palo Alto has secured many agreements that augment fire suppression capabilities. They participate in the California Master Mutual Aid Agreement and supporting separate agreements. During a City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 28 proclaimed emergency, inter-jurisdictional mutual aid will be coordinated at the County Operational Area (Santa Clara County OES, or EOC, if activated), or Mutual Aid Regional level whenever the available resources are: • Subject to state or federal control. • Subject to military control. • Located outside the requesting jurisdiction. • Allocated on a priority basis. The current Insurance Service Organization rating for the City of Palo Alto is ISO Class 2. 3.3 Access Regional access to the Foothills Area is provided by Highway 280, Foothill Expressway and Skyline Boulevard. Page Mill Road serves as a major north-south connector from Highway 280 to Skyline Boulevard. Los Trancos Road provides access along the western boundary of the Palo Alto Foothills Area from Alpine Road south to Los Trancos Woods. Page Mill Road and Los Trancos Road have several long sections that are steep, windy and narrow. Circulation is limited within the Foothills Area. Arastradero Road links the western and eastern portions. Alpine Road and Los Trancos Road provide access to portions of the western part of the City. Moody Road and Altamont Road are other important circulation routes in Los Altos Hills. 3.4 Sensitive Resources The Palo Alto Foothills Area includes a mix of social and environmental attributes that may be adversely affected by wildland fire or proposed fuel treatments and strategies. Areas that hold cultural or environmental significance enhance the quality of life in the City of Palo Alto and provide habitat for a variety of plant and wildlife species. These sensitive resources are valuable to the Palo Alto community and to the ecosystem; they should be protected and preserved. Actions are proposed that will reduce the risk of fire spreading to sensitive resources and otherwise minimize the damage to those resources. Social and cultural factors that may exist in the area affect fire management planning and include specific land uses such as agriculture and rangeland, the presence of public service utilities and structures, and the presence of historical or cultural artifacts. Environmental concerns include vegetation communities, wildlife habitat, soil and erosion conditions, and water and air quality. Figures 9 and 10 provide an overview of potential sensitive resource locations throughout the two parks. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 29 Figure 9: Locations of Cultural and Environmental Sensitive Resources in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 30 Figure 10: Locations of Cultural and Environmental Sensitive Resources in Foothills Park. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 31 3.4.1 Social and Cultural Features Social and cultural features are areas and activities that have a special community attribute or contribution ranging from the value of personal property to the functioning of public service and public safety operations. Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve are both open space areas dedicated for park, recreation and conservation purposes. They are generally undeveloped except for park amenities, utilities, public service and safety infrastructure, and roads and trails. The projects in this plan pertain directly to the lands within Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, and along the evacuation routes within the City limits of Palo Alto. The lands adjacent to the parks include residential and private property as well as public and private open space, and are affected by fire management through code modification, fire department staffing, and other non-project measures that reduce the risk of fire spreading to these resources along with minimizing potential damages. The residential and private property adjacent to the parks include: • Open space owned and managed by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and Stanford University • Private residences in the Town of Los Altos Hills, Town of Portola Valley, City of Palo Alto, Santa Clara County, and San Mateo County • Neighborhoods/associations such as Altamont, Los Trancos Woods, Vista Verde, Blue Oaks, Portola Valley Ranch, Palo Alto Hills, Montebello, South Skyline, and others • Privately-held recreation facilities, such as equestrian centers and the Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club • The site of what was a private research facility (the American Institute of Research) Both Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve contain utility lines and access roads that are used and maintained by the City of Palo Alto. The Pearson-Arastradero Preserve contains overhead electrical utility lines that enter the Preserve from Arastradero Road and extend along Arastradero Creek. South of Foothills Park, transmission lines run east-to-west across the southern edge of the park near Page Mill Road and Montebello. The Arastradero and Foothills parks contain several reservoirs, booster stations, and water and sewage lines. The external, aboveground portions of this infrastructure represent potential features that must be taken into consideration either as values at risk to wildland fire or included in fire mitigation treatment planning and execution. The primary structures within the two parks include the Foothills Park interpretive center, Pearson- Arastradero Gateway interpretive center, Fire Station 8, a maintenance complex, and three public restrooms. No significant cultural or historical sites have been found within the park areas. However, the Foothills area is similar to other areas in the Santa Cruz Mountains that have provided hunting, fishing, and encampments for Native American tribes. A potential exists for discovery of cultural or historic sites. 3.4.2 Environmental Features Environmentally sensitive areas are those that have specific characteristics which the community, State, or nation has determined to be worthy of protection or preservation. These can include the maintenance of a diverse plant and wildlife ecosystem or the protection of endangered or threatened species. The Palo Alto Foothills hold a specific environmental value within the City of Palo Alto as a conservation area as well as a mixed -use area supporting private and public activities. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 32 Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve consist of a mix of grassland, mixed evergreen, oak woodland, riparian areas (creek, lake), and chaparral. The two parks are located in the watershed of Los Trancos Creek and Arastradero Creek. Foothills Park contains the headwaters of Arastradero Creek and is downstream of Los Trancos Creek and contains Boronda Lake. The Arastradero Creek, an unnamed tributary to Arastradero Creek, and an unnamed tributary to Los Trancos Creek run through the Arastradero Preserve. The Pearson-Arastradero Preserve also contains a small lake, called Arastradero Lake, and John Sobey Pond. The Palo Alto Foothills contain several environmental areas that deserve specific consideration in the Fire Management Plan. These areas represent the combined contributions of unique wildland habitat capable of supporting a mix of wildlife, a diverse plant and wildlife population containing several protected and monitored species, and a mix of ecosystems ranging from riparian areas to serpentine soils. 3.4.2.1 Species and Wildlife The variety of environmental conditions in Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve provide habitat for a broad range of wildlife and plants – including some designated as protected or sensitive either by the State of California or the Federal government (Figure 11). The parks provide known habitat for two protected species and potential habitat for several others – particularly in the riparian zones and areas near Boronda Lake and Arastradero Lake. The California Red-Legged Frog and Steelhead Trout are known to inhabit Los Trancos Creek. In addition, the riparian areas, grasslands, and oak woodlands above Los Trancos as well as Boronda Lake may provide additional foraging and breeding habitat for the California Red-Legged Frog. Several species of sensitive plants and animals have been locally identified within the parks. In addition, the parks provide potential habitat for a variety of bird and plant species of concern, ranging from plants such as the Santa Clara Red Ribbon to mammals such as the San Francisco Dusky-footed Woodrat. The potential habitats for these species include the riparian and wetland areas along Los Trancos, Boronda Lake, Arastradero Lake, and John Sobey Pond; the serpentine soil areas identified in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve; and the Oak Woodland and Chaparral zones. In addition to these sensitive species, there are also plant species of local concern, such as Phacelia and bush poppies. The following is a table highlighting sensitive species that may be present in the parks. It is possible that additional sensitive species or habitat areas may be discovered in the future. Figure 11: Sensitive Species Known or Potentially Occurring in Foothills Park or Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. Federal Status California Status Asset Name Geographic Extent Mapping Location Endangered Endangered San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) POTENTIAL HABITAT - potential habitat in Boronda Lake; suitable habitat in Arastradero Lake. Boronda Lake, Arastradero Lake N/A Protected Ringtail (Bassariscus astutus) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Forage habitat in riparian zone; possible nesting in hollow trees in riparian zones. Los Trancos Creek provides most likely habitat. Los Trancos Creek City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 33 Federal Status California Status Asset Name Geographic Extent Mapping Location N/A Endangered Point Reye’s meadowfoam (Limnanthes douglasii sulphurea) POTENTIAL HABITAT - freshwater marsh occurs in Arastradero Lake; some wet areas in grassland near Arastradero Creek may provide habitat. Arastradero Lake, Arastradero Creek and tributary grasslands Endangered CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Contra Costa goldfields (Lasthenia conjugens) NOT LIKELY - Could possibly occur in wet areas in grassland, although the likelihood is very low. Endangered Endangered San Mateo thorn-mint (Acanthomintha duttonii) UNKNOWN - Info pulled from CNDDB Palo Alto topo map - not mapped. Species of concern DFG: Species of special concern Western pond turtle ( A c t i n e m y s m a rmorata) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential habitat in Boronda Lake, Los Trancos Creek, and Arastradero Creek; possible sighting in Arastradero Lake; habitat onsite includes Arastradero Creek, John Sobey Pond, Arastradero Lake, and the unnamed tributary to Los Trancos Creek. Boronda Lake, Los Trancos Creek, Arastradero Creek, John Sobey Pond, Arastradero Lake, Tributary for Los Trancos Creek Threatened DFG: Species of special concern California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) KNOWN and POTENTIAL HABITAT - potential breeding habitat at Boronda Lake, Los Trancos Creek and tributaries, John Sobey pond, and Arastradero Lake; foraging habitat in riparian zones, grassland, and oak woodland above Los Trancos Creek and tributaries; May occur on Los Trancos Trail. (1) Boronda Lake, Los Trancos Creek and tributaries, John Sobey Pond, Arastradero Lake (2) Riparian Zones (3) Grasslands, Oak Woodlands in vicinity of Los Trancos Creek (4) Los Trancos Trail Threatened DFG: Species of special concern California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) POTENTIAL HABITAT - breeding habitat may occur in the “bowl” near the top of the Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, which is in proximity to the unnamed tributary to Los Trancos Creek Unnamed tributary to Los Trancos Creek Threatened DFG: Species of special concern North Central Coast steelhead/sculpin stream KNOWN HABITAT - Los Trancos is a known steelhead stream. Los Trancos Creek Threatened DFG: Species of special concern Steelhead Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) KNOWN HABITAT - Los Trancos is a known steelhead stream. Los Trancos Creek N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Ben Lomond buckwheat (Eriogonum nudum var. decurrens) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Habitat present in chaparral and woodland. Chaparral, woodland City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 34 Federal Status California Status Asset Name Geographic Extent Mapping Location N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Big-scale balsamroot (Balsamorhiza macrolepis) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Habitat present in grassland and oak woodland. Grassland, Oak Woodland N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Delta tule pea (Lathyrus jepsonii) POTENTIAL HABITAT - fresh water marsh occurs in Arastradero Lake, and may occur in Arastradero Creek and the tributary to Arastradero Creek. Arastradero Lake, Arastradero Creek and tributary to Arastradero Creek N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Legenere (Legenere limosa) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential habitat along drainages, Boronda Lake. Boronda Lake N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Robust monardella or Round-headed coyote m i n t (Monardella villosa ssp. globosa) PRESENT/POTENTIAL HABITAT – Locally identified habitat present in woodland and chaparral. Every trail has either woodland or chaparral, or both habitats. Woodland and chaparral N/A CNPS: Plant of limited distribution Santa Clara red ribbons (Clarkia concinna automixa) PRESENT (Foothills)/POTENTIAL HABITAT - Habitat present in oak woodland areas along trails Oak Woodland N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Santa Cruz manzanita (Arctostaphylos andersonii) POSSIBLE HABITAT/NOT LIKELY - Low possibility in oak woodland and chaparral. Every trail has either woodland or chaparral, or both habitats. Oak woodland and chaparral N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Serpentine-based plants KNOWN - two areas of serpentine soil have been identified in Arastradero; one is in grassland and the other is in chaparral. No occurrences in Foothills although some soil/landcover data have noted potential areas. Areas of Serpentine Soil in Arastradero (Grassland, chaparral). Some potential areas in Foothills N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Dudley's lousewort (Pedicularis dudleyi) NOT LIKELY - Coniferous forest, maritime chaparral. These habitats are not present in Foothills Park. Endangered CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Showy Indian clover (Trifolium amoenum) NOT LIKELY (Foothills)/POSSIBLE (Arastradero) - Info pulled from CNDDB Palo Alto topo map, seeps in grassland. Threatened N/A Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis) NOT LIKELY - serpentine grassland areas either too small or not present City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 35 Federal Status California Status Asset Name Geographic Extent Mapping Location N/A CNPS: Plant of limited distribution Gairdner’s yampah (Perideridia gairdneri) KNOWN - in grassland, riparian areas of Arastradero. Riparian, Grasslands N/A CNPS: Plant of limited distribution Mexican mosquito fern (Azolla mexicana) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential habitat in Boronda Lake; Arastradero Creek from John Sobey Pond to Arastradero Lake Boronda Lake; Arastradero Creek from John Sobey Pond to Arastradero Lake N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA White-flowered rein orchid (Piperia candida) POSSIBLE HABITAT - Potential habitat along portions of Chamise, Coyote, Fern Loop, Los Trancos, Panorama, Toyon and Woodrat Trails. Oak Woodland N/A DFG: Species of special concern Long-eared owl (Asio otus) POTENTIAL HABITAT - May use oak woodland and riparian corridors in Foothills Park. Includes Chamise, Costanoan, Coyote, Fern Loop, Los Trancos, Panorama, Sunrise, Trappers, and Woodrat Trails. Oak Woodland, Riparian Zones N/A Species of special concern Big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential forage habitat. Oak Woodland, Riparian Zones N/A Species of special concern California myotis (Myotis californicus) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential forage habitat. Oak Woodland, Riparian Zones N/A BLM: Sensitive Long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential forage habitat. Oak Woodland, Riparian Zones N/A IUCN: Species of concern Long-legged myotis (Myotis volans) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential forage habitat. Oak Woodland, Riparian Zones N/A Species of special concern Mexican free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential forage habitat. Oak Woodland, Riparian Zones N/A IUCN: Species of concern Silver haired bat (Lasionycteris noctavigans) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential forage habitat. Oak Woodland, Riparian Zones N/A DFG: Species of special concern; BLM: Sensitive; IUCN: Species of concern; USFS: Sensitive Townsend’s western big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential forage habitat. Oak Woodland, Riparian Zones City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 36 Federal Status California Status Asset Name Geographic Extent Mapping Location N/A IUCN: Species of concern; BLM: Sensitive Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential forage habitat. Oak Woodland, Riparian Zones N/A DFG: Species of special concern; BLM: Sensitive; IUCN: Species of concern; USFS: Sensitive Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) POTENTIAL HABITAT - throughout Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. Oak Woodland, Riparian Zones Species of concern DFG: Species of special concern; BLM: Sensitive; IUCN: Species of concern; USFS: Sensitive Foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylei) POTENTIAL HABITAT - Potential habitat in Los Trancos Creek and tributaries. May occur on Los Trancos Trail; suitable habitat in Arastradero Creek and the unnamed tributary to Los Trancos Creek. Los Trancos Creek, Arastradero Creek, Tributary None Locally unusual BlueGrey Gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea) PRESENT – Locally identified in North Coastal Scrub, coyote brush. Arastradero Creek and Juan Bautista de Anza Trail N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Franciscan onion (Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum) POTENTIAL HABITAT – Habitat present in oak and mixed evergreen woodland, and grasslands. Oak Woodland, Grasslands, Evergreen Woodlands Species of concern DFG: Species of special concern: IUCN: Species of concern Saltmarsh common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa) POTENTIAL HABITAT – May use Boronda Lake. Riparian habitat, John Sobey pond and Arastradero Lake. Riparian Zones including Boronda Lake, John Sobey pond, Arastradero Lake N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA San Francisco collinsia (Collinsia multicolor) POTENTIAL HABITAT – Habitat present in oak woodland. Oak Woodland N/A DFG: Species of special concern; IUCN: Species of concern San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens) PRESENT/POTENTIAL HABITAT – Known to occur along Woodrat Trail. Nesting habitat in riparian vegetation and oak woodland, forage in all habitats on site. Woodrat Trail, restoration site near Arastradero Road, and Arastradero Creek Trail City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 37 Federal Status California Status Asset Name Geographic Extent Mapping Location N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis) POTENTIAL HABITAT (Arastradero)/KNOWN (Foothills) – Oak woodland and riparian; Foothill woodland, mixed evergreen forest and riparian. Occurs on site along the Los Trancos and Steep Hollow Trails. Los Trancos and Steep Hollow Trails in Oak Woodlands and Riparian areas N/A CNPS: Plant of limited distribution Forget-m e -not popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys myosotoides) POTENTIAL HABITAT (Foothills)/NOT LIKELY (Arastradero) – Habitat present in chaparral. Chaparral in Foothills N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Slender-leaved pondweed (Potamogeton filiformis) NOT LIKELY – Possibly in Arastradero Creek/Boronda Lake and unnamed creeks in the Preserve, presumed extinct in Santa Clara County; not known from San Mateo County. N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia/Hemizonia parryi ssp. Congdonii) NOT LIKELY (Foothills)/POSSIBLE (Pearson- Arastradero) – Info pulled from CNDDB Palo Alto topo map, seeps in grassland. N/A CNPS: Rare, threatened, or endangered in CA Fragrant fritillary (Fritillaria liliacea) NOT LIKELY (Foothills)/POSSIBLE (Pearson-Arastradero) – Info pulled from CNDDB Palo Alto topo map, seeps in grassland. Figure 11: Sensitive Species Known or Potentially Occurring in Foothills Park or Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. 3.4.2.2 Soils and Geology Soil erosion occurs when soil materials are worn away and transported by wind or water. The soils that comprise Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve include some soil and slope combinations that represent potential erosion hazards that could be accentuated by wildland fire events that remove significant portions of vegetation or some forms of fuel treatments that disturb ground cover. Figure 12 lists the potential erosion hazards posed by soil mapping units that comprise portions of the parks. Due to the presence of several highly and moderately erodible soil types, the areas that represent significant hazards from either fire or treatment are those with slopes in excess of 15 %. Soil Mapping Unit Soil Name Location Erosion Hazard Los Gatos-Maymen Complex (50-75% slope) Los Gatos Gravelly Loam Foothills Park & Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Very High Maymen Rocky Fine Sandy Loam Foothills Park Very High Los Gatos Clay Loam (15-30% slope) Los Gatos Clay Loam Foothills Park Moderate City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 38 Soil Mapping Unit Soil Name Location Erosion Hazard Los Osos Clay Loam (15-30% slope) Los Osos Clay Loam Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Moderate Azule Clay Loam (15-30%) Azule Loam Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Slight to Moderate Cropley Clay (2-9% slope) Cropley Clay Foothills Park Slight Pacheco Clay Loam Pacheco Clay Loam Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Slight Pleasanton Loam Pleasanton Loam Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Slight Figure 12: Soil Types in Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. Derived from STATSGO2 data and research from City of Palo Alto Trail Management Plans. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 39 4 FUEL MANAGEMENT IN CITY PARKS Not every area identified as a potential fire hazard can be modified to produce low-intensity fires. Not only would this be too costly, but environmental impacts would also be unacceptable. Fires that burn in un-treated areas will not benefit from treatment elsewhere. The exception is that the fire may be contained in the treated area, thereby never reaching the untreated area. 4.1 Identifying Potential Treatment Areas Selection of pre-fire fuel treatment areas is based on the probability of the event and the potential damage of that event. Factors taken into consideration are: • Need for enhanced access and egress: Actions to promote life safety and efficient emergency response is of utmost importance. Roadside treatments that aid safer access and evacuation have a high likelihood and magnitude of benefit. • Ignition locations: Treatments are located either where ignitions are likely to occur or could spread into (e.g. a grassy spot near a road, or near a barbeque). Even where an area would burn with great ferocity, if there is only a remote chance of ignition, it has a lower treatment priority. • Adjacency to improvements or other sensitive values at risk from wildfire: The closer the fuel source is to a structure, heavily used area, or environmentally sensitive area, the higher the treatment priority. Therefore, an area in the interior of a Park/Preserve, well removed from other vulnerabilities, should not be treated with the same priority as a hazardous situation near valuable and/or vulnerable resources. • Propensity of the treatment to aid containment: Treatments that facilitate access or create locations where containment is likely to be successful have greater benefit because they improve fire suppression success. Also, a fire that is easy to contain will be more likely to have fewer environmental impacts from the suppression action itself. In the end, the most intense fire, and possibly the largest potential fire size, may not be highest on the treatment priority list. This may be because the likelihood of the event coupled with the potential damage from the fire would not yield the highest risk. 4.2 Establishing Project Objectives Projects are justified by various objectives, spanning the need to keep fires from crossing boundaries, minimizing damage to developed areas, and minimizing damage to natural resources. Others comply with regulations, which themselves are intended to increase access, facilitate fire suppression and minimize resource damage. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 40 The following table (Figure 13) is an outline of project goals and actions: Project Goal Actions Maintain ability for safe access and egress and refuge during suppression activities • Roadside and driveway fuel modification to reduce fire intensity to allow for firefighting vehicles access and ensure safe passage for staff and visitors to pre- determined safety zones. • Improve access to potential wildfire locations to increase effectiveness of firefighting resources (road realignments, access upgrades) • Identify areas for potential use for firefighter safety and refuge during a fire (safety zones) Minimizing damage to developed areas • Reduce potential for ember production, • Manage fuels along borders with structures, anywhere around structures (within 100 feet) • Retrofit structures to make them more ignition-resistant • Enhance firefighting effectiveness • Reduce fuels around other facilities at risk (e.g. communications equipment, high use recreation areas) Reduce damage to structures and developed areas from wildfire near structures • Manage fuels per Defensible Space Guidelines to reduce flame length to 2 feet within 30 feet of structures Reduce potential for ignitions • Roadside fuel treatments • Reduce fuels around barbeque sites and selected electrical transmission lines • Ensure mechanical equipment has features to minimize ignitions • Conduct fuel management in a manner that prevents ignitions Facilitate containment and control of a fire • Strategically compartmentalize fuels in order to facilitate containment and control • Modify fuels to reduce fire intensity and allow firefighters better access to the fire, slow spread of fire and make firefighting actions more effective, • Modify fuels to allow for backfires Reduce the chance of damage to life and property by keeping fire from crossing boundaries – Participate in cooperative projects with adjacent landowners • Fuel management to compartmentalize the landscape • Fuel management along the borders of the Park/Preserve • Modification of the volume or structure of the fuels to reduce chance of ember production • Modification of the volume or structure of the fuels to enhance firefighting effectiveness Minimize damage to natural resources • Conduct pre-treatment surveys for sensitive species • Follow best management practices during fuel management • Fuel management around fire-sensitive areas to reduce fire intensity • Use of modified fire suppression in sensitive areas Fuel modification for ecosystem health • Reduce invasive species • Perform selected prescribed burns to promote fire-adapted native species Figure 13: Project Goals and Actions. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 41 4.3 Current Fuel Management Program Fuel Management is not new in the two parks. The two parks have a long history of managing vegetation to both promote fire safety and to enhance natural resources (Figures 14 and 15). In some cases, projects attain both goals. Previous projects in Foothills Park encompass discing along park boundaries, grazing with goats in Las Trampas Valley, maintenance of a mowed fuel break along various locations, including a broad fuel break sometimes 200-ft wide along Trappers Ridge, and more narrow fuel breaks along the Madrone Fire Road, Shotgun Fire Road, Pony Tracks Fire Road, and around Station 8. Fuel management in Pearson- Arastradero includes discing along park boundaries, mowing 14 different broad areas within the park, and maintenance of vegetation along park roads. Figures 16 and 17 highlight specific mowing and grazing areas for both parks from 2001 to 2008. Grading (of the fire roads) has been a component of the contract between Van der Steen General Engineering and Palo Alto for annual firebreak maintenance. Grading has been performed as part of this contract only in the last three years; low annual rainfall and erosion has not warranted grading. To minimize grading work, city employees from all departments are strictly prohibited from driving the bare soil roadways that do not have asphalt or compacted rock. Grading, as a component of the contract, is specified as only when necessary. Discing has been performed by City staff for the last 7+ years. After trials with several methods, the City found that a two discing cycles work best. The first cycle is performed when the threat of spring rains has diminished, drainages or low areas are dry, and annual grasses are still green. The depth of discing is less than 6-inches, and causes a disruption of the growth of the annual grasses (less biomass). The second cycle of discing is after the annual grasses have cured/dried but there is still some soil moisture. Discing is full depth or up to 10-inches. Completely dry soil makes traction nearly non-existent, which is a safety hazard for the equipment operator, and produces copious amounts of dust to the surrounding area during both discing and grading operations. Mowing is routinely conducted during the early summer by City staff for resource enhancement. Figure 16 indicates the areas within Pearson -Arastradero Preserve that are mowed at least annually. Approximately 200 acres are routinely mowed. Outside of the areas mowed for resource enhancement, large areas are mowed annually in Foothills Park as part of a fuel break. A fuel break is mowed on Trappers Trail, varying from 100-ft to 300-ft in width. Another area routinely mowed is along Pony Tracks Fire Road from the intersection of Los Trancos Trail to Page Mill Road. Most areas are less than 100-ft but the area between Pony Tracks and Los Trancos Trail can reach 300-ft in width. Grazing with sheep and goats is a relatively new component of the fuel management program within the City of Palo Alto Parks. Approximately 5 acres were grazed in 2007 in Las Trampas Valley in Foothill Park, the picnic areas near the road. Defensible Space is maintained near existing structures in Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. This employs the use of hand labor to limb trees and shrubs, cut grass, landscape with fire-resistant plants, and irrigate selected plants. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 42 Figure 14: Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Current Fuel Management Areas. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 43 Figure 15: Foothills Park Current Fuel Management Areas. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 44 Figure 16: Recent Treatments in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 45 Figure 17: Recent Treatments in Foothills Park. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 46 4.4 Project Description 4.4.1 Scope of Recommended Fuel Management Projects The scope of the projects encompasses the two parks in the foothills of Palo Alto: Foothills Park and Pearson- Arastradero Preserve. In addition, treatments along four roads extend outside the parks themselves but are confined to City boundaries or rights-of-ways: Page Mill Road, Arastradero Road, Los Trancos Road, and Skyline Boulevard. 4.4.2 Project Description Summary Fuel management is proposed on 330 acres of Foothills and Arastradero Parks to protect lives, enhance the safety of improvements in and around the parks and to enhance ecosystem health. Fuel management falls into the following categories: roadside treatments along potential evacuation corridors, creation and maintenance of firefighter safety zones, creation and maintenance of defensible space around structures in the parks, and treatments to aid containment of fires in and within the park. Treatments are performed on a rotational basis with intervals of approximately every five years, with an anticipated area of approximately 100 acres treated annually after the initial treatments are performed. Vegetation types that will be treated include: • Grasslands • North Coastal Scrub • Chaparral • Oak Woodland • Riparian Woodland (limited areas and limited treatment only) 4.4.3 Project Objectives Projects are justified by various objectives, spanning the need to keep fires from crossing boundaries, minimizing damage to developed areas and minimizing damage to natural resources. Others comply with regulations, which themselves are intended to increase access, or facilitate fire suppression. A variety of projects reduce the chance of damage to life and property. There are projects that keep fire from crossing boundaries, which could be in the form of fuel management to compartmentalize the landscape, or fuel management along the borders of the parks, or modification of the volume or structure of the fuels to reduce chance of ember production or enhance firefighting effectiveness. Other projects focus on minimizing damage to developed areas, and may be distinct from efforts to reduce fire size, particularly where fire growth is in the wildland. Methods to minimize damage to structures would encompass the following actions: stop ember production, manage fuels along borders with structures, anywhere around structures (up to 100 feet), retrofit structures to make them more ignition-resistant, and enhance firefighting effectiveness. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 47 While fire is a natural force in the foothills of Palo Alto, fuel management also aims to minimize damage to natural resources within the City of Palo Alto. This may include fuel management around sensitive areas such as riparian corridors, or use of fire where needed for resource management. The skillful application of controlled burning would be justified where fire exclusion is harmful, for example, where species require fire for seed germination, or where native grasslands experience brush encroachment, or where an unnatural accumulation of understory fuels (both live and dead) develops. Enhancing firefighting effectiveness, so that fire response can better apply or restrain fire’s impacts on sensitive natural resources may further justify projects. Finally, some projects are further justified by local regulations. For example, the City of Palo Alto regulations require installation and maintenance of 100-ft defensible space around structures, fuel management for a minimum width of 10-ft along roads, and maintenance of 13.5-ft high vertical clearance over roadbeds. 4.4.4 Priority Fuel management is not possible, nor advisable, on every acre of the wildlands in the two City parks. Not even all the areas of high hazard can be treated with a reasonable level of funding, so prioritization needs to occur. Finding the most effective location and scope is a challenge because of uncertainties around relative fire hazard, erosion, potential, ignition potential, cost of implementation, environmental impacts of the management itself, and social values attached to the project location. Selection of fuel treatment areas is based on several factors, including the probability of the event, the potential damage of that event, ignition locations, adjacency to improvements or other sensitive values at risk from wildfire, and the propensity of the treatment to aid containment. 4.4.5 Project Locations The following table (Figure 18) and maps (Figures 19 and 20) summarize the project locations. Each treatment location was selected to achieve a specific objective. Many treatments are associated with roadsides, structures and City Park/Preserve boundaries. Treatments for containment are strategically located at ridgetops, in places that have access, are not too steep for mechanical treatments, avoid riparian areas, and are not prone to soil erosion. Sections 4.4.7 through 4.4.13 provide additional information regarding project treatments by project type. Figure 18: Listing of Project Locations. Designation Project Description Life Safety Foothills Park F.F1 Firefighter Safety Zone 1 Trappers Ridge & Los Trancos Trail F.F2 Firefighter Safety Zone 2 Trappers Ridge & Madrone Fire Road F.F3 Firefighter Safety Zone 3 Trappers Ridge high point F.F4 Firefighter Safety Zone 4 Trapper Ridge south end City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 48 Designation Project Description F.E1 Evacuation Route - Page Mill Road Within PA City from Arastradero to southern Pony Tracks F.E2 Evacuation Route - Park Road Entrance to Maintenance Yard Las Trampas Valley F.E3 Evacuation Route - Park Northwest Interpretive Center to the 600-700 block of Los Trancos Road F.E4 Evacuation Route - Park Northeast Boronda Lake to Alexis Drive F.E5 Secondary Evacuation Route - Wildhorse Valley Wildhorse Valley from Towle Campground to Las Trampas Valley Pearson-Arastradero A.E1 Evacuation Route – Arastradero Road Arastradero Road Off-site PA.1 Evacuation Route Page Mill Road PA.2 Evacuation Route Arastradero Road PA.3 Evacuation on Los Trancos Road between Santa Clara County boundary and Oak Forest Court PA.4 Evacuation Route Skyline Blvd. Structure and Infrastructure Protection Foothills Park F.D1 Defensible Space Entry Gate and Restroom F.D2 Defensible Space Station 8 F.D3 Defensible Space Restrooms at Orchard Glen F.D4 Defensible Space Interpretive Center F.D5 Defensible Space Maintenance Shop Complex F.D6 Defensible Space Boronda Pump Station at Campground F.D7 Defensible Space Park Tank F.D8 Defensible Space Boranda Water Tank F.D9 Defensible Space Dahl Water Tank Pearson-Arastradero A.D1 Defensible Space Gateway Building and Restrooms A.D2 Defensible Space Pump Station City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 49 Designation Project Description A.D3 Defensible Space Corte Madera Water Tank Ignition Prevention Foothills Park F.I1 Ignition Prevention Lakeside Picnic Area F.I2 Ignition Prevention Shady Cove Picnic Area F.I3 Ignition Prevention Encinal and Pine Gulch Picnic Areas F.I4 Ignition Prevention Orchard Glen Picnic Area F.I5 Ignition Prevention Oak Grove Group Picnic Area F.I6 Ignition Prevention Towle Camp Containment Foothills Park F.C1 Containment Trappers Trail F.C2 Containment Pony Tracks south of Trappers Ridge F.C3 Containment Pony Tracks north of Trappers Ridge F.C4 Containment Bobcat Point F.C5 Containment North of Entry Gate F.C6 Containment Valley View Fire Road Pearson-Arastradero A.C1 Containment Property boundary adjacent to Liddicoat A.C2 Containment Property boundary adjacent to Stanford and Portola Pastures A.C3 Containment Redtail Loop Area A.C4 Containment Property boundary adjacent to Paso del Robles A.C5 Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen - north A.C6 Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen - south A.C7 Containment Property boundary west of Meadow Lark Trail A.C8 Containment Property boundary adjacent to former private research facility A.C9 Containment Property boundary adjacent to John Marthens Lane City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 50 Designation Project Description A.C10 Containment Arastradero Creek (to Juan Bautista trail) A.C11 Containment Meadow Lark to Juan Bautista Trail A.C12 Containment Meadow Lark south A.C13 Containment Bowl Loop Trial A.C14 Containment Arastradero to Rx fire area A.C15 Containment Acorn Trail A.Rx1 Containment Juan Bautista Prescribed fire north A.Rx1 Containment Acorn Trail Prescribed fire south Figure 18: Listing of Project Locations. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 51 Figure 19: Proposed Treatment Locations in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. January 2009 A D 2 A D 3 City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 52 Figure 20: Proposed Treatment Locations in Foothills Park. FI1 FI2 January 2009 FD8 FD1000 City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 53 4.4.6 Project Dimensions and Post-Treatment Standards The dimensions of the treatments follow in the table below (Figure 21). The treatments that will occur within the project area depend on the vegetation type and treatment method. The post-treatment standards for each treatment type and a description of the treatment methods are also included. Project Types Dimension Treatment Frequency Comments Roadside Treatments Major evacuation routes 30 feet on both sides of pavement edge Rotate 3-5+ years depending on fuel type Annual for first 10 feet with grass fuels Secondary evacuation routes 15 feet on both sides of pavement edge Rotate 3-5+ years depending on fuel type Defensible Space 100-ft from structure Annual Follow-up treatments may not be required annually Ignition Prevention 10-ft from barbeque Annual Firefighter Safety Zones 100-ft radius Annual Containment Fuel Breaks Area treatment Within 300-ft of ridgetop of Trappers Ridge Rotate 3-5+ years Areas designated goat grazing within park Rotate 3-5+ years Two designated potential prescribed burn units per map Rotate 3-5+ years Perimeter treatment Brush/understory In designated areas within 300 feet of park boundary Rotate 3-5+ years Grass Discing or mowing 15-45 feet from park boundary, as practical Annual Eucalyptus Removal Individual tree removal One time Follow up to ensure no stump sprouts Figure 21: Treatment Methods and Intervals. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 54 4.4.7 Roadside and Driveway Fuel Modification for Safe Access and Egress 4.4.7.1 Specific Goal of Action The most important goal for this set of projects is to reduce fire intensity near roads to allow firefighting vehicles to pass and ensure safe passage for staff and visitors to pre-determined safety zones, or safe locations out of the parks. In addition, the projects outside of the City parks/preserves are aimed at facilitating access and egress between different portions of Palo Alto’s wildland urban interface. 4.4.7.2 Location and Description of Projects Projects would be located along roads and driveways of varying width, depending on whether the road is a major or secondary evacuation route. • 10 feet where flames are predicted to be less than eight feet in length (generally in grassy locations and in oak woodlands), such as along Wildhorse Valley in Foothills Park. • 30 feet from pavement edge along major evacuation routes that are Page Mill Road, Los Trancos Road, Arastradero Road, Skyline Boulevard, and the road from the Foothills Park Entry Gate to the Maintenance Shop. Palo Alto should work cooperatively with Los Alto Hills, the Town of Portola Valley, CalTrans, San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, and other agencies to ensure vegetation along Page Mill Road, Arastradero Road, Los Trancos Road, and Skyline Blvd. are mowed, trees are maintained, and other treatments are implemented and sustained. Figure 22 lists the location and description of proposed safe access and egress projects. Figure 23 provides a graphical representation of major evacuation routes that are external to the two preserves. Designation Project Description Distance Treatment Method Foothills F.E1 Page Mill Road Within PA City from Arastradero to southern Pony Tracks 13,855 ft mowing, grazing, hand labor F.E2 Evacuation Route - Park Road Entrance to Maintenance Yard Las Trampas Valley 7,211 ft mowing, grazing, hand labor F.E3 Evacuation Route - Park North west Interpretive Center to the 600-700 block of Los Trancos Road 1,263 ft mowing, grazing, hand labor F.E4 Evacuation Route - Park North east Boronda Lake to Alexis Drive 2,618 ft mowing, grazing, hand labor City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 55 F.E5 Secondary Evac Route Towle Campground to Las Trampas Valley 2,818 ft mowing, grazing, hand labor Pearson-Arastradero A.E1 Evacuation Route Arastradero Road 6,337 ft mowing, grazing, hand labor Off-site PA.1 Page Mill Road From Foothill Park South to Skyline Blvd. 11,980 ft mowing, grazing, hand labor PA.2 Arastradero Road From Page Mill to Arastradero Pk, and from Arastradero Pk to Los Trancos 940 ft mowing, grazing, hand labor PA.3 Evacuation Route - Los Trancos Los Trancos Road between Santa Clara County boundary and Oak Forest Court 4,406 ft mowing, grazing, hand labor PA.4 Skyline Blvd. Skyline Blvd.3 7,907 ft mowing, grazing, hand labor Figure 22: Listing of Project Locations for Evacuation and Access. 3 CalTrans is responsible for treatments within the designated right-of-wa,y which is variable in width (generally 2- 30-ft). Regardless the City of Palo Alto is committed to conduct treatments on City lands adjacent to the road. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 56 Figure 23: Evacuation Routes External to Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. Vegetation maintenance on Highway 35 is the responsibility of CalTrans P A 3 City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 57 4.4.8 Fuel Modification for Firefighter Safety Projects 4.4.8.1 Specific Goal of Action This project goal is specific to the safety of firefighters during emergency response. In times of emergency, a safe refuge comprised of low fuels is vital. 4.4.8.2 Location and Description of Projects These projects would install and maintain four firefighter safety zones within Foothills Park. Specifically, they are located on the Trappers Trail fuel break, at Los Trancos Trail, Madrone Fire Road, at the high point on Trappers Ridge and the south end of Trappers Ridge. Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Foothills F.F1 Firefighter Safety Zone 1 Trappers Ridge & Los Trancos Trail > 1 acre mow, graze F.F2 Firefighter Safety Zone 2 Trappers Ridge & Madrone Fire Road > 1 acre mow, graze F.F3 Firefighter Safety Zone 3 Trappers Ridge high point > 1 acre mow, graze F.F4 Firefighter Safety Zone 4 Trapper Ridge south end > 1 acre mow, graze Figure 24: Listing of Project Locations for Fire Fighter Safety Fuel Modification. 4.4.9 Structure and Infrastructure Projects – Defensible Space 4.4.9.1 Specific Goal of Action • Reduce damage to structures, developed areas and critical infrastructure from wildfire by reducing flame length to two feet within 30 feet of structures by managing fuels per Defensible Space Guidelines in Section 1.6.8. In some cases, treatment will need to extend to 100 feet in order to reduce flames to two feet within thirty feet of a structure. • Minimize negative effects of fuel manipulation on wildlands • Reduce damage to wildlands from wildfire City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 58 4.4.9.2 Location and Description of Projects This vital suite of projects is located generally within 100 feet from structures that are currently in use, which includes entry gates, interpretive centers, restrooms, and maintenance or infrastructure facilities. Some of the projects are to protect the water and electrical services provided to the park. In addition, fire-resistant features should be installed when these structures are remodeled or repaired. The structures in the Parks/ Preserve can serve as a demonstration of the types of actions that should occur in private yards as part of compliance with local codes and ordinances. The following lists specify which structures need defensible space established and maintained annually: The area around structures is currently treated, however the actions recommended will bolster survivability of structures. Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Foothills F.D1 Defensible Space Entry Gate and Restrooms > 1 acre hand labor F.D2 Defensible Space Boranda Water Tank > 1 acre hand labor F.D3 Defensible Space Restrooms at Orchard Glen > 1/2 acre hand labor F.D4 Defensible Space Interpretive Center > 1 acre hand labor F.D5 Defensible Space Maintenance Complex > 1 acre hand labor F.D6 Defensible Space Boronda Pump Station at Campground > 1 acre hand labor F.D7 Defensible Space Park Tank > 1/2 acre hand labor, grazing F.D8 Defensible Space Station 8 > 1/2 acre hand labor, grazing F.D9 Defensible Space Dahl Water Tank > 1/2 acre hand labor, grazing F.D10 Defensible Space Oak Grove Restrooms > 1/2 acre hand labor, grazing Pearson-Arastradero A.D1 Defensible Space and Restrooms Gateway Building > 1 acre hand labor, mowing City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 59 A.D2 Defensible Space Corte Madera Pump Station > 1 acre hand labor, mowing A.D3 Defensible Space Water Tank > 1 acre hand labor, mowing Figure 25: Listing of Project Locations for Defensible Space. 4.4.10 Ignition Prevention Fuel Management Projects 4.4.10.1 Specific Goal of Action Ignitions from barbeques may occur in Foothills Park. Ignition prevention relies upon fuel management, coupled with education, signage, and enforcement of park rules regarding fire safety. Under extreme fire weather conditions, the parks may be closed to the public. The fuel management will consist of the following: • Follow standards for defensible space for a 30-ft radius from the barbeque site. • Remove vegetation to create a non-combustible zone for a 10-ft radius from the barbeque site. 4.4.10.2 Location and Description of Projects Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Foothills F.I1 Ignition Prevention Shady Cove Picnic Area > 1/4 ac hand labor F.I2 Ignition Prevention Encinal Picnic Area > 1/4 ac hand labor F.I3 Ignition Prevention Pine Gulch Picnic Area > 1/4 ac hand labor F.I4 Ignition Prevention Orchard Glen > 1/4 ac hand labor F.I5 Ignition Prevention Oak Grove Group Picnic Area > 1/4 ac hand labor F.I6 Ignition Prevention Towle Camp > 1/4 ac hand labor Figure 26: Listing of Project Locations for Ignition Prevention. 4.4.11 Fuel Modification for Containment Ease 4.4.11.1 Specific Goal of Action The specific goal of modifying fuels in the two parks is to compartmentalize fuels in order to facilitate the containment and control of a fire. The treatment areas are positioned in strategic locations, usually on a City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 60 ridgetop, with access, avoiding areas that would preclude the use of mechanical equipment such as steep slopes or riparian areas. Fuels are modified to reduce fire intensity and thus allow firefighters better access to the fire, making firefighting actions more effective. Fuel modification also creates more opportunities to backfire, which occurs during wildfires where fire suppression crews create large firebreaks in advance of the fire front. Fuel modification can also slow the spread of a fire, further enhancing fire control efforts. Where trees abut grasslands in the new fuel breaks, it is especially important to limb trees and remove shrubby understory from trees along the edge of the forest canopy in order to break vertical continuity between grass and tree canopy. This action will remove the “ladder fuels” that promote crown fires and hinder fire containment. 4.4.11.2 Location and Description of Projects In Pearson-Arastradero, the projects entail discing and mowing along the grassy perimeter of the preserve, and grazing in the shrubby areas that abut residences. Grazing of shrubby areas near residences need not occur every year, but rather on an approximate three-year rotation. Strips of grass along selected trails are likewise recommended for mowing to enhance containment and access. Two prescribed fires are recommended in the interior of the preserve as another means to remove fuels to reduce wildfire intensity and aid containment during a wildfire. In Foothills Park, a series of fuel breaks are recommended in shrubby fuels. In the fuel breaks, a rotation of treatments is recommended. The fire roads would be graded annually, and grass mowed within 10-3 0 f e e t o f the road. Additional mowing/brush cutting would extend to the break in topographic slope, which could be located as far away from the road as 200-ft. This type of mowing would occur in any one location approximately every 3 years; the intent is to maintain the area in a mixture of grass with less than 30 percent canopy cover of shrubs. While treatments may vary over time, the recommended rotation is between rest, mowing/brush cutting and grazing. Designation Project Description Acreage or Distance Treatment Method Foothills F.C1 Containment Trappers Trail 72.51 acres mowing, grazing F.C2 Containment Pony Tracks south of Trappers Ridge 2,975 ft mow annually 10-ft on either size of road, use a brush hog (or grazing animals) to mow areas to the break in slope both under wooded canopy and in grasslands with cover of coyote brush greater than 30% F.C3 Containment Pony Tracks north of Trappers Ridge 2,461 ft mowing, grazing F.C4 Containment Bobcat point 5.28 acres graze with goats City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 61 F.C5 Containment North of entry Gate 3.47 acres graze with goats F.C6 Containment Valley View Fire Trail 1,459 ft mowing Pearson-Arastradero A.C1 Containment Property boundary adjacent to Liddicoat 5.39 acres grazing, mowing A.C2 Containment Property boundary adjacent to Stanford and Portola Pastures 5,371 ft grazing, mowing A.C3 Containment Within Redtail Loop Trail, to entire eastern boundary of Preserve 48.72 acres grazing A.C4 Containment Property boundary adjacent to Paso del Robles 7.71 acres grazing A.C5 Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen - north 11.22 acres grazing A.C6 Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen - south 4.05 acres grazing A.C7 Containment Property boundary west of Meadow Lark Trail 9.71 acres grazing, mowing A.C8 Containment Property boundary adjacent to 1791 Arastradero Rd. 8.08 acres grazing (mowing is not possible) A.C9 Containment Property boundary adjacent to John Marthens 1,726 ft mowing A.C10 Containment Arastradero Creek to Arastradero Road 10,222 ft mowing, hand labor near riparian zone A.C11 Containment Meadow Lark to Juan Bautista Trail 8,893 ft mowing A.C12 Containment Meadow Lark 1,569 ft mowing A.C13 Containment Bowl Loop 1,388 ft mowing A.C14 Containment Arastradero to extended split RX1 and RX2 1,830 ft mowing A.C15 Containment Acorn Trail 1,218 ft mowing Figure 27: Listing of Project Locations for Containment Ease. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 62 4.4.12 Fuel Modification for Ecosystem Health 4.4.12.1 Specific Goal of Action Only a few projects that benefit ecosystem health as their primary justification have been identified in this phase; however, many of the other projects enhance natural resources while achieving other management goals. In all cases, the goal of the action is to restore a species distribution and volume of biomass to a condition of effective fire suppression through grazing and prescribed fire. The City should conduct fuel modification to reduce the invasion of coyote bush into grasslands and thus reduce expected heat output. The project located along Trappers Trail consists of mowing chaparral on a rotational basis every two-to three years. This will release native grasses, produce more food for wildlife and provide diversity of age and vegetation structure. Another project is to re-introduce fire in the grasslands of Pearson-Arastradero through prescribed burning a selected interior area on a rotational basis. In both cases, the objectives are to maintain grasslands and restore the native pattern of vegetation on the landscape. A third project to enhance ecosystem health is to graze, with sheep or goats, broad areas that are currently being mowed for grass and invasive weed management. Other fuel management projects also enhance ecosystem health. Reducing the amount and height of understory shrubs creates a vegetative structure that is more open at the forest floor, with less biomass and is vertically discontinuous; this mimics the pre-fire-suppression era. This would be done either with goat herds or with hand labor forces. 4.4.12.2 Location and Description of Projects Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Foothills F.C1 Containment Trappers Trail 72.51 acres mowing, grazing Pearson-Arastradero A.Rx1 Containment Juan Bautista Prescribe fire north 18.25 acres Rx fire, grazing A.Rx2 Containment Acorn Trail Prescribed fire south 24,45 acres Rx fire, grazing A.C3 Containment Within Redtail Loop Trail, to entire eastern boundary of Preserve 48.72 acres grazing, mowing Figure 28: Listing of Project Locations for Ecosystem Health. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 63 4.4.13 Cooperative Fuel Management Projects for Offsite Fire Containment and Evacuation Ease 4.4.13.1 Specific Goal of Action The goal of this project is to prevent a wildfire from spreading into the parks. The City should work with adjacent landowners to institute and maintain the vegetation in a condition that would facilitate containment and ease evacuation operations. Another cooperative project would be to work to reduce the frequency and impact of sudden oak death, particularly on the western edge of Palo Alto. 4.4.13.2 Location and Description of Projects Cooperation with neighbors is important in the installation and maintenance of fire-safe conditions on lands adjacent to or near the City parks. Most importantly, the enhancement of roadside treatments along Page Mill Road requires cooperation with several other landowners and agencies, as enumerated previously. Cooperative projects also include the formalization of agreements for passage through properties during time of emergency evacuation with public and private land owners and managers. The City should develop partnerships to address regional evacuation routes from residential and public areas, as detailed in the following section. Cooperative projects also include fuel management on City-owned open space adjacent to private structures. In some cases, such as on the western edge of Foothill Park east of Carmel and Ramona Road in Los Trancos Woods, access through private parcels would enable fuel management on City lands that would benefit both parties involved. Sudden Oak Death has been observed in many locations within the Foothills area. At this time the areas are small and consist of one or two trees. The urgency for treatment of these affected areas is related to its location. Dead trees near structures, City property boundaries and along roads should be treated first. For example, dead trees along evacuation routes would get higher priority than those in the middle of remote woodland. However, if entire stands die, or sudden oak death changes the fuel characteristics of the stand, the priority and potential treatments would change. The location and extent of stands affected by Sudden Oak Death should be monitored. Treatment should be consistent with the City policy regarding Sudden Oak Death. Treatments generally entail removal of dead material smaller than six inches in diameter. The trunks of the trees may remain if needed for wildlife habitat, however it is often difficult to retain just the larger material. The proximity of California bay to the foliage of oaks has been linked with the spread of Sudden Oak Death. Removal or trimming of bay trees to separate the foliage is another strategy to prevent further spread. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 64 5 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN However valuable and imperative the plan may be, implementation is the key to achieving the goals set forth by the plan. There are several recommendations that can facilitate implementation of the fire management plan. 5.1 Implementation Strategies The creation of an Implementation Team within the City staff will support implementation. The team would benefit from representatives that could help with project design, cost estimation and budgeting, evacuation planning, and community outreach. The team would include in its mission development of educational material for the community. Implementation Team should include staff from the City Manager's Office, the Fire Department (Chief, Operations, Fire Marshal, CERT), the Police Department (Chief, Homeland Security, Communications/Dispatch, PIO), the Planning Department, Open Space/Parks, Public Works, and Utilities. The City should support the formation of a Midpeninsula Foothills Emergency Forum (MFEF). The MFEF would collaborate on resource management issues. The scope would include pursuit of grants, equipment and resource sharing (such as mechanical equipment and expertise) and joint design of projects especially on City boundaries, or along co-owned/managed roads. The City should work with stakeholder/ partners on common issues. For example, Los Altos Hills, Stanford, Los Trancos Woods, Los Trancos Water Department, MROSD, and private neighbors all have concerns and potentially partial solutions for access and egress constraints. Each partner may have a particular asset to contribute, whether it is available funds or ready volunteers, or expertise in the subject of need. Collaboration creates a stronger base from which fruition of the plan can more readily occur. This interagency organization would be separate from the existing FireSafe Councils; participation would include CEO-level discussions and staff liaisons from each participating agency. The City should participate in local FireSafe Councils, in both Santa Clara County and San Mateo County4. FireSafe Councils can help in obtaining federal funds because the local FireSafe Councils have an already- written Community Wildfire Protection Plan, which is a prerequisite for national funding. Interagency collaboration is also fostered by FireSafe Councils. The local San Mateo FireSafe Council also facilitates access to the use of subsidized California-youth authority hand labor crews. These crews have a long track record of successful fuel management projects at surprisingly low costs. The San Mateo FireSafe Council also has a chipping program to alleviate the burden of disposing of biomass from fuel management projects. The City should also implement projects in City park/preserves through its regular budget process. The City has a history of fuel management that should be continued. Fuel management will continue to be funded through the normal budget process, to encompass continued mowing, occasional grazing, maintenance of defensible space around structures and resource enhancement projects. Funding specific prescribed burns is also expected through the budget process if not funded by grants or conditions tied to this project. For example, a prescribed burn in Alameda County was required as a mitigation measure for a necessary project to expand a facility near a creekbed. Similarly, projects that 4 Participation in the San Mateo County FireSafe Council would be as an interested party but not to take official action or receive any financial benefit. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 65 enhance natural resources can be used as mitigation measures for worthwhile projects that may have negative impacts. While it is not expected that the City would make a profit from natural resources, the value of its grasslands as feed could be used to offset the cost of using livestock as a resource management tool. Similarly, the City should make an effort to obtain value from wood recovered from dead tree removal, potentially though innovative wood-based art projects. The City has a rich bank of volunteer groups; projects could be implemented with the help of volunteer groups. Relationships with stakeholders such as Acterra, Friends of Foothills, 4-H, and other should be fostered. Roles for these groups could include the performance of pre-treatment surveys, construction and placement of raptor perches, support of grazing operations (movement of portable livestock fences or water sources), or distribution of educational and evacuation directional signs. Corporate volunteerism can be directed to fuel management projects. The adoption of new codes may be less obvious than the implementation of specific projects. Regardless, the adoption of recommended changes in the City code may have more long-lasting and far-reaching effects throughout the City. These recommendations should be pursued. Similarly, the continuation of Station 8 staffing should be viewed as a part of the implementation of this plan. 5.2 Priorities The priority of the projects has been emphasized earlier in this report. Life safety concerns – those focusing on egress and emergency response access – are the highest priority. The projects that address this objective should be immediately pursued. The maintenance of firefighter safety zones is similarly high in priority. Fuel management projects that prevent the ignition of structures are of the next highest priority. This would include the maintenance of defensible space around City structures and vital infrastructure facilities. These projects are mandated by law. Fuel management to prevent the spread of fires to off-site structures from City property are within a level of reasonable care expected from a City; these projects are also considered a type of containment project. Fuel management that promotes containment of fires within City property is next in priority. These projects support the response to infrequent, yet potentially catastrophic fires. In addition, these fuel management projects prevent the more ordinary events from becoming catastrophic. Projects that enhance natural resources are difficult to fund. However, fuel management offers occasions to both enhance natural resources and fire safety. Every fuel management project should be viewed as an opportunity to simultaneously enhance natural resources and promote fire safety. The following criteria (not ordered by importance) can help determine the schedule of recommended fuel treatment project: • Benefit of project in minimizing structure damage or chance of damaging wildfire. • Probability of damaging wildfire (based on fuel loading and vegetation structure). • Potential for ecological benefit (or damage without fire). City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 66 • Divergence of fuel loading and vegetation structure from natural conditions (i.e. deviation from natural fire regime). • A window of opportunity, based on funding timelines, availability of personnel or equipment, or other factors. • If using prescribed fire, some areas may need to be burned in a particular sequence to minimize the potential for escape. 5.3 Fuel Management Project Costs Costs are variable, depending on the project design, site features, access, requirements for insurance, traffic and fencing control, staging, move-in costs, bonding, administration, wage reporting and other city requirements, such as governing regulations, or resource restrictions (i.e. species of concern). Considering only the direct project-related costs, the unit costs of various treatment methods can vary dramatically between the types of treatment methods, but within the treatment methods as well. Similarly, the site conditions, weather, and other external factors that affect unit costs of some treatment methods are: • Height, density, species, and arrangement of existing vegetation; • Desired vegetation conversion and management objectives; • Size, accessibility, slope, soil stability, and vegetation types onsite; • Need for multiple treatment types at a site over a short period of time (cumulative costs); and • Planning and monitoring to develop follow-up treatment prescription. The following table describes unit costs associated with the treatment methods. Treatment Method Estimated Unit Cost ($ per Acre) Notes/Other Considerations Hand Labor Treatments Weed Whipping 1,500 Chaparral Brush Removal 2,140 a Hand-Pulling 2,000 Vista Pruning $1/linear ft / 50-250 b Roadside treatments – no shrubs Mosaic/Drip-Line Thinning $2/linear ft / 3,500 a Roadside treatments with shrubs Organic Mulch 575-1,600 b,c Same as chipping/mulching City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 67 Treatment Method Estimated Unit Cost ($ per Acre) Notes/Other Considerations Mechanical Treatment Grading 500-600 b,c Mowing 500-600 b,c Chipping/Mulching 575-1,600 b Roadside Mowing with Shrubs $1/linear ft Prescribed Burning Broadcast Burning 60-400 b Fixed costs are high, should use $25,000 per burn rather than per- acre costs Grazing Sheep 200 b Goats 500 Chemical Treatment Stump Application 200 Foliar Application 500 Figure 29: Unit Costs for Fuel Reduction Treatment Methods. a The Sea Ranch Association Fuels Management Implementation, 2002 confirmed 2008. b Applegate, Oregon Fire Plan. http://www.wildfireprograms.com/search.html?displayId=237 c Fire Plan, http://www.wildfireprograms.com/search.html?displayId=237 5.3.1 Project Cost Estimates The following is a compilation of cost estimates for the 51 recommended treatment areas in Pearson- Arastradero Preserve and Foothills Park, and along selected segments of major evacuation routes in the City of Palo Alto. The total five-year cost amounts to approximately $700,000. Costs of Firefighter Safety Zones = $800 annually The costs of each firefighter safety zone was estimated as $200 per zone, based on the cost to mow a grassy area of approximately one acre in size. Mowing costs of unobstructed grass are approximately $200/hr, which includes the cost of the machinery and operator, and a spotter. The production rate of area mowing is approximately one acre per hour. This cost does not include move-in costs, because it assumes the mowing for firefighter safety is part of a larger mowing contract. Because the safety zones need to be treated annually, the cost of treating all the firefighter safety zones is $800 per year. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 68 Costs of Initial Treatment along Evacuation Routes = $192,960 initial treatment, $86,400 total for the subsequent 4 years56 The treatment along roads identified as evacuation routes would include a mixture of machinery-based mowing (including mowing with an articulated brush-cutting head that cuts brush) and the use of hand labor. In circumstances where wider areas can be treated, grazing animals, principally goats, can be used to perform initial treatments along evacuation routes. The total length of evacuation routes is slightly more than 12 miles, or 63,740 linear feet, which encompasses those areas highlighted in blue on Figures 17 and 18 and in Section 4.4.7.2. The estimate of costs for this type of treatment assumes an operation that would use the machinery wherever possible as a cost containment measure. One can assume one-half of the length can be treated with machinery for the first 10-ft off the roadside. The remainder of the area would need to be treated by hand. Estimates are based on treating both sides of the road for 30-ft, or a 60-ft wide strip, or almost 24 miles of linear treatment. Treatment recommendations state that areas of oak woodland need be treated for only 10-ft in width because expected fire behavior is relatively calm; however, for cost estimates, every length of the roads were estimated being treated for 30-ft width. The most inexpensive treatment is roadside mowing of grassy areas with few shrubs or trees. This is expected to occur on approximately ¼ of the length of the roadside, for the first 10-ft off the road. Roadside mowing of grass expected to cost approximately $200/hour for the machinery, operator and spotter; production rates generally run around 300 linear feet per hour, or a little less than 18 hours to treat a mile. Production is reduced by the need to pick up the cutting head to move to a new site, and the need to avoid areas of trees. Using this production rate, mowing of approximately 108 hours, or for a cost of $21,600. The next most cost-effective treatment is use machinery to cut roadside shrubs within the first 10-ft of the road. Shrubs near the roads are more common, occurring on approximately ½ of the length of the roads. A cost of $200/hr for the machinery, operator and spotter is used. Production is reduced to 200 linear feet per hour, requiring 26.4 hours to cut brush for a mile. A little more than 316 hours would be required to treat the estimated 12 miles of shrubs, for a cost of $63,360. Machinery has the potential to start fires from causing sparks in dry vegetation. A dedicated fire watch for the operation during fire season is recommended, at an additional cost of $15,000, based on 214 hours of operation during fire season, assuming one-half of the machinery-based work is performed during fire season. The remainder of the treatments will require hand labor to remove shrubs, limb the lower branches of trees smaller than three inches in diameter. This would be required on ¼ of the first 10-ft of the roads, and the entirety of the remaining 20 feet off main evacuation routes. Hand labor crews with a supervisor typically cost $1200/day. The production rate for this type of tree limbing and shrub removal is one-tenth of an acre each day, or $10,000 per acre. Subtracting the areas treated with mechanical equipment, approximately 93 acres will need to be treated using hand labor crews, at a cost of $93,000. 5 Personal communication with J. Squadroni, of Environtech, January 2009, regarding roadside treatment costs. These cost were confirmed, based on worked performed by Environtech, including roadside treatments on Los Trancos Road in early 2000’s and in Carmel Valley m o r e recently. 6 Personal Communication with Mike Philbin, Central Coast Land Clearing, October, 2008. Cost estimates based on work performed in 2008 on roadside treatments in Carmel Valley and in Santa Cruz County. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 69 Government-subsidized hand crews that utilize people in the California Youth Authority system can result in dramatic cost reductions. Costs of hand labor crews can be reduced by a factor of ten. Maintenance would consist of mowing the first 10-ft from the pavement edge yearly, at an annual cost over the next four years of $21,000 per year. Costs of Maintaining Defensible Space around Park/Preserve Structures and Infrastructure = $17,800 Treatments to maintain defensible space around each of the structures and infrastructure facilities in the City Park/Preserve entail the use of hand labor to limb trees, remove shrubs under trees, and to mow grass. Some of the structures, such as the Gateway interpretive Center in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, have little tree cover so mowing would comprise the treatment. Others, such as the pumping station in Pearson-Arastradero will require a higher level of effort because of a greater volume of shrubs and trees within 100 feet of the structure. Limbing and shrub removal need to only be done on a five-year interval, however mowing is required annually. The treatments encompass the red solid circles on Figures 17 and 18 and those described in Section 4.4.9.2. Generally the area of treatments ranges from ¼ acre to 1 acre. Mowing of the area around the structures is estimated as $100/structure, performed annually. Using hand labor to remove shrubs under trees and to remove lower branches of trees is estimated as $1,500/acre, performed every five years. There are nine structures identified in Foothills Park, with a total estimated cost of $14,100 over the next five years; Pearson-Arastradero Preserve has four such structures, with an accompanying $3,700 cost for treatment during the next five years. Costs of Creating/Maintaining Containment Areas $403,486 Containment Areas in Foothills Park Treatments to enhance the actions to contain fires span two different shapes and sizes of treatments. Area treatments are recommended in Foothills Park for Trappers Trail, the Pony Tracks South of Trappers Ridge, the Bobcat Point Containment Zone and the area north of the Foothills Park Entry Gate. Shrubs and lower tree branches should be trimmed within the containment areas on a three-year interval of time. The grass in Trappers Trail and Pony Tracks South of Trappers Ridge will be mowed every three years, with the exception of a width of 30 feet on both sides of the graded trail. Shrubs in the Bobcat Point Containment Zone and the North of Entry Gate Containment Zone are recommended to be treated every five years. Grass in the other containment zones is to be mowed annually in order to bolster containment efforts during fire suppression. Trappers Trail Containment Zone – 72.5 acs. The cost estimate of treatment is based on a rotation of treatments on a three-year cycle, and an annual treatment of mowing of a band of grass for a 30-ft width on both sides of the graded trail. One third of the area would be mowed in any year. One-third grazed, and one-third left to re-grow. This rotational treatment will allow more forage and cover for wildlife, and provide greater diversity of plants and vegetation structure. The cost of grazing one-third of the area, or roughly 25 acres, is estimated at $500/acre, or a total annual cost of $12,500. Costs of grazing are estimated to be lower than other areas because grassy nature of the area will facilitate fencing. Mowing is similarly lower in cost, at $500/acre, or an annual cost of $12,500, also because of previous treatments on the site. The total annual treatment cost for this area would be $25,000, or $125,000 combined for the next five years. Pony Tracks South of Trappers Ridge Containment Zone – 7 a c . The cost estimate of treatment is also based on a rotation of treatments on a three-year cycle, and an annual treatment of mowing of a band of grass for a 30-ft width on both sides of the graded trail (if the area is not grazed). Because of the small size of the City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 70 treatment area, the entire area can be mowed one year, grazed another, and left to rest a third. Using mowing and grazing costs of $500/acre, the five-year cost of treatment would be $14,000. Pony Tracks North of Trappers Ridge Containment Zone – 2460 ft. The treatment cost is based on annual mowing along both sides of the graded trail. Using the production rate of 300 feet per hour and an hourly cost of $200/hr for an equipment operator and spotter, the cost of this treatment is estimated at $1640, or $8,200 for the next five years. Bobcat Point Containment Zone – 5.5 acs. Costs for grazing this treatment area with goats are estimated at $700/acre because the area has not been previously treated and fencing may be challenging. This would result in a cost of $3850. The treatment interval is recommended to be 5-y e a r s , s o t h e 5 -year cost of treatment would total $3,850. North of Entry Gate Containment Zone - 3.5 acs. This area is similar in its treatment recommendation to the Bobcat Point Containment Zone. Grazing costs are estimated at $700/acre, with a 5-year interval between treatments. The one-time treatment cost is $2,450, as is the 5-year treatment cost. Valley View Fire Trail Containment Zone – 1460 ft. The treatment cost is based on annual mowing along both sides of the graded trail. Using the production rate of 300 feet per hour and an hourly cost of $200/hr for an equipment operator and spotter, the cost of this treatment is estimated at $1,000, or $5,000 for the next five years. Containment Areas in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve In Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, fifteen areas are recommended for treatments to facilitate containment during fire suppression. Of these, seven are areas where grazing is recommended, with a total acreage of almost 95 acres. The size of the areas to be grazed ranges from slightly more than four acres to almost 50 acres. Of the area to be grazed, 54 acres is comprised of grass, with few fencing challenges. However, smaller areas that amount to 41 acres to the south and west on the Preserve border are shrubby and have not been previously treated. Given the variability of the condition, the cost for grazing is estimated at $500/acre, or a total initial cost of $47,500. The grassy areas should be grazed annually, at a cost of $135,000. The shrubby areas need by treated only once every five years, at a cost of $20,500. The five-year cost thus totals $155,500. Mowing the grass on both sides of graded trails is a recommended annual treatment. The linear length of this treatment is 26,846 feet, or slightly more than 5 miles. Using the production rate of 300 feet per hour and an hourly cost of $200/hr for an equipment operator and spotter, the cost of this treatment is estimated at $17,897, or $89,486 for the next five years. Two areas are recommended as suitable for a prescribed burn to facilitate containment and enhance natural resources. The costs for this treatment method are especially difficult to estimate because some of the operation serves as training. Often, adjacent agencies provide additional equipment and resources at no cost. A large portion of the costs associated with prescribed burning is involved in planning and obtaining the necessary permits, notification of appropriate agencies and the public and reporting of the results of the burn. Because of the uncertainty regarding the cost, an estimated cost of $25,000 per burn is set. An interval of 5 years is recommended, so a five-year cost for the two treatment areas would total $50,000. Costs of Conducting Pre-Treatment Surveys = $100,000 Pre-treatment surveys and post-treatment follow-up are part of the best management practices associated with the recommended treatments. The cost for the pre-treatment surveys and post-treatment follow-up is City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 71 estimated at $20,000/yr, or $100,000 for the total 5-year cost. This cost can be reduced if knowledgeable volunteers are involved in the survey or monitoring efforts. Estimates for the survey costs assume the City identifies treatments planned for the year and contracts with a biological consulting firm to perform targeted surveys in the treatment areas. 5.4 Funding Strategies to Support Fuel Management Multiple funding sources provide greater stability, more funds, increased continuity, more stakeholders, the potential to expand the scope of work. Each funding mechanism has unique requirements, strengths and weaknesses. Some are best suited for one-time expenditures such as capital improvements while others are aimed at ongoing maintenance activities. The “strings” attached to each mechanism should be considered. It is advisable to match funding mechanisms with priority projects. Figure 30: Funding Mechanisms. A key to expanding funding mechanisms is to demonstrate the value of the projects. Highlighting the value of fuel management is effectively done at a grass-roots level, through collaboration with stakeholders. This is especially important for mechanisms that require community-wide support through votes or donations of money or in-kind services. The discussion under Section 8.1 Implementation Strategies discusses the importance of partnering with other agencies, the use of volunteers to leverage City funds, and the funding of fuel reduction work through the normal budgeting process. This is the most common locally-controlled source of funds, often covering education, code adoption, and capital improvements. While this seems to be the most reliable long-term source of funds, even self-funding projects are vulnerable to a shift in priorities (because these projects need to compete with other community public service needs) or a downturn in economic markets. Funding projects with grants requires that the City match projects with funding sources. Creativity can yield surprising avenues for funding. For example, funds from Homeland Security may be justified to purchase equipment that washes off weed seeds from vehicles because of concerns about decontamination. In this case the same equipment can be used as a solution to disparate concerns. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 72 Bonds may be used for capital improvement projects, especially related to evacuation. These are typically used for very expensive capital improvements such as water supply and distribution or development/ enhancement of improved access. Last, assessment districts can fund specific fuel projects that address specific geographic regions for a specific period of time. For example, assessment districts may co-fund utilities and water improvements. Funding strategies should consider the total amount required, the schedule and duration of funds required, the focus of spending – whether it is capital or maintenance-related projects – the geographic area and the project types. Funding strategies also need to consider the effort required to obtain and administer the funds. Grants may require matching funds in the form of hard cash or in-kind services that can range from relatively simple to complex forms and justification. The National Database of State and Local Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Programs (www.wildfireprograms.usda.gov) presents how other communities have obtained funds and what they have done with those funds. Regardless of funding mechanism, several common challenges need to be considered. When raising money for long-term projects, it is critical to build in factors for inflation and cost-escalation. Raising funds for ongoing maintenance is more difficult than raising seed money for one-time demonstrations. 5.5 Grant Opportunities In the past ten years, an unprecedented amount of federal and state aid has been available for fire hazard reduction. Most federal aid is linked to proximity to federal lands, which may pose a disadvantage for the City of Palo Alto. One exception to this linkage is funding through the Department of Homeland Security. The California FireSafe Council website hosts a “one-stop-shopping” application process where an applicant can obtain an e-grant concept paper. However even this website does not cover all programs. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has a funding program that provides assistance to fire departments through its Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) and the Fire Prevention and Safety Grant Program. AFG is limited to fire departments, while the Fire Prevention and Safety Grants are open to a wider range of organizations. FEMA has two disaster mitigation programs: the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program ( H M G P ) a n d t h e P r e -Disaster Mitigation Program (PDM). HMGP funds are available to states after a disaster has been declared to mitigate future risk from any type of disaster. Amounts are linked to the total emergency funds. Funds from the PDM facilitate cooperation between state and local authorities with funds awarded competitively for both planning and project implementation activities at the state and local levels as a sub-grantee. This program addresses the more traditional agency focus of earthquakes and floods; the extent of funding for wildfire-related projects is yet to be determined. The State Fire Assistance includes supplemental appropriate allocation through the National Fire Plan, in addition to a regular appropriation distributed by formula to state foresters through the USDA Forest Service. These funds can be used to plan and implement hazard mitigation projects, including fuel management, prevention and mitigation education, and community hazard reduction. The process for obtaining funds is competitive and available nationwide, with 35 percent distributed among the states to meet firefighting preparedness and safety needs. Obtaining funds through grants often involve intricate application process or include administrative burdens associated with monitoring how funds are spent and complex reporting requirements. Using funds for ongoing projects is a concern because the sustainability of grant funding is sometimes questionable. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 73 Grant opportunities often become available for a short period of time. Requirements and levels of funding change annually. For example, the federal Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency recently announced a new policy for funding wildfire mitigation. On September 8, FEMA Mitigation Chief David Maurstad issued a policy that describes how the post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program ( H M G P ) a n d t h e P r e-Disaster Mitigation grant program (PDM) can be used for wildfire mitigation activities by eligible grant applicants. Activities eligible for funding under these grants include creation of defensible space through removing or reducing vegetation; the application of non-combustible building envelope assemblies, use of ignition- resistant materials, and proper retrofit techniques for structures; and hazardous fuels reduction vegetation management or thinning within two miles of at-risk structures. Check with your state Emergency Management Office or FEMA Regional Mitigation staff (http://www.fema.gov/about/regions/index.shtm) for more information about HMGP and PDM grants. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 74 6 TREATMENT STANDARDS AND METHODS 6.1 Treatment Standards for Vegetation Types For each vegetation type group, the resulting fuel bed characteristics after treatment are described7. Following the vegetation prescriptions, a set of guidelines for creation and maintenance of a fire safe area (defensible space) around residences and other improvements are recommended. In all vegetation types, preference for removal should be given to non-native invasive species. 6.1.1 Prescription for Grasslands • Mow or graze to no longer than 4 inches in height, or disc • Native grasses should be mowed to a height no shorter than 4 inches and may be mowed later in the year to accommodate seed ripening and seed distribution 8 • Maintain brush cover less than 30% o less than 20% where slope steepness is greater than 20% o Requires annual treatment, usually requiring treatment of all grass near structures within 2 weeks of starting to mow. • Alternatively, prescribed burn in late spring or early fall with a resulting cover of not less than 20% 6.1.2 Prescription for North Coastal Scrub and Chaparral • Mow/grind to cut and mulch shrub tops within treatment area; alternatively, • Create islands of less than 12 feet in diameter or 2 times the height of tallest shrub (whichever is smaller) can remain. Clumps should be natural in appearance including specimens of variable age classes 7 These standards/prescriptions were initially developed by Amphion, Inc. for use by the FEMA-funded East Bay Hills Vegetation Management Consortium (VMC). These standards/prescriptions have been reviewed and adopted by the following agencies in the consortium: Cities of Berkeley, Oakland, and Piedmont; East Bay Municipal Utility District; East Bay Regional Park District; University of California; Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory; and PG&E. As part of the review process, a Citizen’s Advisory Committee and a Technical Advisory Committee, which were comprised by a cross-section of members of the public, reviewed and commented on the standards. The reference is Amphion Environmental, Inc. 1995. Fire Hazard Mitigation Program and Fuel Management Plan for the East Bay Hills, prepared for the East Bay Hills Vegetation Management Consortium, Oakland, California. 8 Acterra is available to advise on the timing of native grass seed cycles, especially in relation to invasive weed seed cycles. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 75 • Distance between islands shall be greater than 2 times the height of tallest shrub or a minimum of 8 feet, whichever is greater • Retain between 20-30 percent of brush areas in brush crown cover • The removal of brush should be based on criteria which are listed in approximate order of importance to fuel management objectives: o Relative flammability - remove the most flammable species first. o Plant vigor - remove shrubs of low vigor, dying or dead shrubs. o Sprouting capability - remove species with sprouting capacity first. o Effects of plant species on soils - i.e. retain shrubs with slope-holding capacity, that increase soil nutrients (ceanothus). o Value for wildlife food and cover. o Aesthetic values. o The order of priority will change according to local conditions such as the relative abundance of each species. For example, where coffeeberry is not abundant, it may be placed high in priority to retain. Attempts should be made to maintain diversity of species. • Maintain a crown cover of less than 30% • Can convert to grass, especially in fuel breaks • Maintain less than 20% dead material in the shrub canopy • Protect oak, madrone, buckeye and trees shorter than 6 feet in height. Cut out shrubs below drip lines and within 6 feet from edge of tree canopy • Anticipate 3-5 year treatment cycle City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 76 Priority For Removal Follows: Remove Only If Necessary chamise coffeeberry coyote bush buckeye poison oak ceanothus Himalaya blackberry wild currant northern sticky monkey flower California blackberry coastal sage brush bush lupine scrub oak madrone manzanita toyon oaks Figure 31: Initial Priority of Removal for Brush. 6.1.3 Prescription for Oak Woodlands • Prune branches up to 3 inches in diameter for a height of 8 feet. Prune up to a maximum of 1/3 the height of trees that are less than 24 feet tall. • Maintain under 5 tons/acre of duff no deeper than 3 inches. • Leave all trees bigger than 8 inches diameter. Leave 1/3 of the trees under 8 inches to retain a range of size categories and species. Maintain a stand density of less than 50 trees per acre as long as canopy is still closed. • Can mulch site to a maximum depth of 2 inches to prevent invasion of noxious weeds. o Treatment cycle is from 7-10 years. 6.1.4 Prescription for Riparian Forest Avoid treatment. Where necessary: • Create or maintain an 8 feet vertical clearance between live needles and understory fuel. Remove all dead material. Prune branches up to 3 inches in diameter. Prune up to a maximum of 1/3 the height for trees less than 24 feet in height. • Maintain less than 10 ton/ac. Depth of duff no greater than 5 inches. • Mulch to between 2 and 5 inches in depth. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 77 o Treatment cycle is between 10-15 years. 6.1.5 Defensible Space Guidelines Palo Alto staff will be responsible for maintaining a 100 feet wide defensible space on all sides of any structure in the two parks. All dead plants and combustible materials shall be removed within 100 feet of each structure to establish and maintain a defensible space. Removal of combustible materials includes, but is not limited to, the following actions: • Cut grass and weeds to less than 4 inches. Cutting of native grass and wildflowers may be delayed until after seed set unless they form a means of rapidly spreading fire to any structures. • Remove all dead plant material from within 100 feet of each structure. This includes keeping the ground, roofs, decking, and balconies free of dead leaves, needles or other plant debris. This also includes removing from trees loose papery bark, and dead branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter, to 8 feet above ground. Remove all dead branches from within live ground covers, vines, and shrubs. Refer to Figure 1 explaining pruning. • All live vines and live branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter shall be cut up to a height of 8 feet above ground. Figure 32 provides a description of pruning best practices. Figure 32: Pruning Example. Prune branches to a height of 8 feet above the ground. In young trees, prune branches on the lower one-third of the height of the tree. Do not disturb or thin the tree canopy, as this promotes growth in the understory, which is more easily ignited. • Remove plants as necessary to break vertical continuity between ground covers, shrubs, trees, and decks or overhangs on buildings. Vertical separation is the distance from the top of shrubs or ground cover to adjacent trees, designed to minimize the spread of fire to the crown of trees or structure roofs. Vertical spacing should be a minimum of 8 feet or 2 times the height of the understory plants to the leaves or needles of adjacent overstory trees, decks or overhangs, whichever provides greater separation. For overstory trees under 24 feet in height, the minimum clearance can be reduced to 1/3 City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 78 of the overall height of the overstory tree provided this reduced clearance does not form a means of rapid transmission of fire. • In areas without a tree overstory, create shrub islands per the standard for north coastal scrub. Within 100 feet of improvements, grass between shrub islands should be mowed when cured (dry). • Remove all branches within 10 feet of any chimney or stovepipe including chimneys on adjacent properties. • Chipped materials can remain on the site provided the chipped mulch layer is no greater than 2 inches in depth. 6.2 Description of Treatment Methods 6.2.1 Summary Fuels can be removed on a large scale by prescribed burns, grazing animals, and mechanical treatment. In small open space areas and around structures, hand labor is effective in reducing the fuel load. Eucalyptus tree removal may be effective in specific locations of high risk. Fuels can be redistributed on a large or small scale through mechanical treatments, such as mowing, discing, or grading. In all the following treatments except hand labor, economies of scale are dramatic; the larger the project, the greater the efficiency. 6.2.2 Timing of Treatments The timing of the initial or follow-up treatments is important to achieve the desired fuel management performance standards and resource management objectives. Given the variable nature of fuels through changes in weather and season over time, the schedule of the treatment may often be just as important as the type of treatment selected. For example, treatments in grasslands typically take place when grass cures or dries out. Cutting grass too early will be ineffective, as the grass will usually grow back, negating the treatment. Conversely, cutting grass too late will leave the grass in a hazardous condition during periods of high fire danger. Fuel treatments also need to be conducted when the weather is not too dry or windy, as some treatment types - especially mechanical treatments - may inadvertently start fires. Timing the treatment methods appropriately can reduce potential impacts to special-status species or sensitive wildlife species. It is likely that there will be some months of the year when particular practices need to be implemented (e.g., pre-treatment nesting surveys or avoidance of breeding habitat) to avoid adverse affects to special-status species. Timing treatments to either control or avoid the spread of invasive plant species or insect pests is also critical. For example, treatments performed when plants have set or are setting seed will spread the seed whether it is a native plant or invasive weed. Treatments should therefore take advantage of differences in the timing of seeding of native plant species and avoid periods when invasive species are in seed. Pruning of pines and eucalyptus should be done when insect pests are not flying to minimize the associated spread and damage from these insects. Pruning should take place from November to April to minimize the susceptibility to bark beetles or red turpentine beetles. In most cases, the timing and method of treatment can be modified to accommodate local habitat needs and still reduce fire hazard to an acceptable level. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 79 6.2.3 Hand Labor Hand labor involves pruning, cutting or removal of weeds or shrubs either by hand or with hand-held equipment. This process is slow and expensive, but most selective and has little impact beyond the removal of the target plants. This technique generates considerable debris when pulling, pruning, and cutting vegetation. The debris is not always removed from the site due to the high cost of doing both the clearance and removal by hand. Not removing the debris, however, leaves a significant hazard, possibly greater than pre-treatment because the debris may be voluminous, dry, well aerated, and quite flammable. This method is most commonly used by residents to reduce fuel volume on private lands, or by hand crews on short-term contract with the City of Palo Alto to reduce hazard adjacent to improvements. Some expertise is required to work with trouble species such as poison oak, to prune oaks and control shrubs, and to identify new fuel hazards as they arise. Hand labor encompasses the operations of pruning and weed-whipping, tree removal, pruning, bark pulling, removal of dead wood within the tree/shrub canopy, litter removal and mulching, and establishing new plant material. Hand labor allows use of a wide variety of methods to reduce fuel load, including both chemical and mechanical treatments. Hand Labor - Pruning Trees and shrubs must be hand-pruned to vertically separate fuels. Pruning lower branches of trees is usually done with a hand-held pole saw (with or without a motorized chain saw attached). Lower branches on shorter trees can be pruned with loppers. Hand Labor - Weed-whipping Like mowing, weed whipping reduces fire hazard by reducing the fuel height. However, it is done by hand to avoid harming rock outcrops and desired small plants (such as oak regeneration and landscape material). This treatment is generally limited to small material such as grass or short herbs. Weed whipping may be accomplished any time of the year, and regardless of whether the material has cured. Weed whipping is performed with a hand-held, gas powered tool that cuts grasses and very thin woody material with a fast-spinning fishing-line type of cutter. Because this method is performed manually, it can be used to selectively remove certain vegetation. Most large woody stems are not cut by the treatment, however seedlings (such as oak seedlings) can be severely damaged. Treatments can be completed with greater care than the others (however the height to which plants are cut may be difficult to control if the operator is not experienced) and minimize soil disturbance and erosion. It is also often the only type of treatment possible on steep slopes and in wooded areas. The average weed whipping rate is 750 square feet/hour. The schedule for a skilled laborer should be tailored to the timing of their tasks. For example, selective weed whipping of annual grasses before they set seed while leaving native bunch grasses until after these plants set seed can shift the proportion of vegetative cover over time to more bunch grasses. This shift in type of grasses can shorten the length of time the landscape is prone to ignition. Similarly, thistle reproduction can be minimized by cutting while they are growing, but before they set seed. Pruning should be done from November to April; this schedule avoids spreading destructive bark beetles and/or other pathogens. The cost varies from $10,000 per acre to approximately $1,500 per acre, depending on the time of year, extent of project, and level of detail required. 6.2.4 Mechanical Treatments Mechanical treatments, including mowing, weed whipping, discing, and grading, rearrange rather than reduce the actual fuel load. Heavy machinery is usually used in flat areas where terrain and the presence of rocks or numerous trees do not prohibit travel. This type of machinery should not be used on slopes over 30% because of concerns for worker safety as well as erosion control and slope stability issues. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 80 Heavy machinery: attachments to tractors (brush hogs, flail, mowers, tiger mowers) Roadside mowing is a prime example of the use of heavy machinery with attachments. A variety of attachments serve numerous purposes. For example, a brush hog attachment cuts and breaks brush plants off and produces a mulch of the brush debris. Mowers that cut or flail grass and small woody plants are also attached to tractors. Attachments (such as mowers) with articulated arms that reach as far as 20 feet away from the tractor reduce the area over which the tracks must travel, and offer more maneuverability. These articulated arms also cut and/or break off material. Heavy machinery is a moderately fast, and a relatively inexpensive treatment. There is little control over which plants are cut, but machines can travel around isolated areas of concern. Heavy machinery should not be used when the ground is soft in order to prevent ruts and bared soil. Soil movement can be caused by all users on foot, bicycle, equestrian and vehicles (patrol vehicles and fire apparatus). Soil movement can be ruts or minor depressions, which will lead to large ruts or voids. This technique can be used at almost any other time of year, but is faster when done in the summer or fall when brush is brittle and grass has cured. It must not be used during times of high fire danger because the machines can start fires. The under-carriage of the machine and attachments should be washed off after use in areas of weed infestations. Grading and Discing involves stripping a swath of land bare of vegetation with a tractor and blade. It is very effective in producing fire trails 8 to 12 feet across and as a maintenance tool for access routes. Generally, grading is done mid-spring, by a contractor when there is still residual moisture in the soil, but after the threat of spring rains has diminished9. Costs are reasonable, (from $100 to $300 per acre) and relate to the size of the project and condition of trail surface. However, there are several disadvantages to this treatment. By removing all competing vegetation, grading creates an excellent establishment site for weedy species, which may be serious fire hazards. Untimely grading, for example, in mid-summer, can help sow seeds of weedy exotics, such as yellow star thistle, mustard and Italian thistle. In addition, annual grading causes soil disturbance and alters drainage patterns. Runoff, blocked from cross-drainage by the banks on either side of a graded fire trail, is redirected down the trail. This situation favors coyote bush and exotic grasses, leading to a shift in the grassland species composition. Grading spoils will need to be feathered into the sides or smoothed back into grading area annually. Discing involves cultivating or turning over the upper 10" of soil, and produces an uneven surface with a discontinuous fuel distribution and is appropriate only if mowing or grazing is not applicable that year or in a specific location. Rate of production is quite high; normally the operator can disc land parcels of two acres or less within one day. Discing is normally performed annually once grass has cured (so the grass will not grow back that season). A tractor with discer attachment can typically cultivate a swatch 15 feet wide in a single pass. While this is an effective barrier to surface fire spread, it is also an ideal disturbed area with prime growing conditions for weeds and distribution of their seeds. Surface erosion can be significant in areas prone to this process. 9 Residual soil moisture makes the soil pliable or workable, and allows the soil to compact. When grading is performed when the soil is completely dry, the soil is very difficult to work. Pearson-Arastradero has high clay content soils and causes premature soil movement unless the contractor supplements soil moisture with a water truck, which is an additional expense. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 81 6.2.5 Grazing with Sheep and Goats This method includes the intentional use of sheep and goats to consume vegetation thus reducing the amount or density of fuel. These types of livestock are not recommended to create a fuel break, but can be used to maintain this type of pre-suppression feature. Similarly, livestock can prevent grasslands from shrub encroachment, and an oak woodland free of significant understory. The option is effective where the plants are palatable to the animals selected. Control of the livestock and prevention of the impacts of overgrazing is critical to successful use of this technique. As a fuel management technique, livestock need not graze every year. Grazing can reduce or encourage weedy pest plants depending on the timing and intensity of grazing. A range management plan and a grazing monitoring program needs to be established to identify the impacts and ensure that the animals are removed once fuel management goals are met. Perennial grasses may require modifications from management of annual grasses using grazing animals. Because presence of healthy perennial grass stands has many benefits, these modifications are generally recommended. The benefits of perennial grasses are that they cure later in the season, which limits the opportunity for ignition. Mowing typically can be scheduled over a longer time period. Rotation of grazing animals is preferred over greater grazing pressure. Typically, perennial grasses react best when grazing is applied after seed maturation - from late spring through the fall. Goats may import seeds from another weedy site. The herd can be quarantined at goat herd’s ranch for three days where they will be fed alfalfa to clear out their systems. The herder can also use short-haired goats that will carry fewer seeds in their fur. The herding instinct of sheep and goats allows professional herders to range in very mobile bands without the installation and maintenance of permanent fences. Portable electric fences are commonly used to help control the herd and the outcome of their grazing. Goats will browse materials up to 6 feet above the ground creating a desirable vertical separation between the canopy and ground cover. However, measures must be taken to prevent girdling of trees by goats browsing on bark. Herd movement has the advantage of breaking off dead material in a stand as well as punching a humus layer into the soil (if the ground is somewhat moist) and thereby removing available fuel. Grazing treatments need to be repeated, however, following up or alternating with a different, complementary technique can extend its effectiveness. If work is needed to be done during May-July, scheduling can present a challenge because many clients in the greater area desire the service at that time. To minimize the negative effects of grazing on a specific plant, goats should graze after seed set of that particular plant. During initial fuel reduction treatments, goats may be most cost-effective in the late fall or early spring when demand for their services, and possibly price are reduced. Multi-year contracts, and contracts for larger areas typically lower the costs per acre. Providing a place where the herd can stay during the winter also lowers costs for treatment. Providing a water source for livestock is another way to reduce costs. Water sources can be as rudimentary as a plastic wading pool or a portable trough. A herd of 200-300 goats can generally treat one acre per day. Costs can vary from $300 to $1000 per acre with an average of $700 per acre, depending on fencing requirements as well as type and density of vegetation present. The cost includes transportation, the shepherd’s salary, supplements and healthcare for the goats, fencing and insurance. 6.2.6 Broadcast Prescribed Burns Prescribed burning reintroduces fire into the ecosystem as a "natural treatment" and can promote native flora and aid containment of fires by reducing fuel volumes. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 82 Prescribed burns are usually performed by the local fire protection district. CalFire may be willing to participate in a limited prescribed burning program as part of their hazard reduction efforts within the Vegetation Management Program, even though the project area would be outside the State Responsibility Area. If burns were conducted by CalFire, the State would not only assume liability, but also share costs. Regardless, it is likely that CalFire and other nearby fire protection districts and departments would offer mutual cooperation and/or assistance. Several precautions, such as installing firebreaks and notifying various agencies, must be taken before performing a prescribed burn. Treatment boundaries are often road and trail crossings, which reduces the number of fire breaks that need to be created by fire personnel, thereby reducing labor costs and time needed to prepare for the burn as well as minimizing the amount of surface soil disturbance and potential for soil erosion. Prescribed burning requires the development and approval of a prescription or burn plan, which is typically developed by the local fire protection district in consideration of fuel reduction requirements, local weather conditions, and available resources for fire management. The soot and smoke generated, as well as the chance of escape, make prescribed burns a public safety concern. Planning and coordination with interested parties must be an integral part of the program. Broadcast burning may occur throughout the year; however, it is usually conducted during late spring when the ground is still wet or during fall or winter after plants have completed their yearly growth cycle and their moisture content has declined. Spring burns are preferred by some fire staff to ensure a greater measure of public safety, however, there may be impacts to animal and plant reproduction activities. Fall burns are more closely aligned with the natural fire cycle found in California. If a prescribed burn were to be conducted in the fall, the period before leaves or new herbaceous material covers the slopes will be short (possibly a month or two). Prescribed burning can enhance the local grasslands and promote the abundance of wildflowers. Any small oaks or shrubs to be retained will need to be protected during the burn to prevent their mortality. While the abundance of wildflowers the subsequent years is an appealing sight, the burned area will be temporarily blackened. 6.2.7 Eucalyptus Tree Removal By removing eucalyptus trees their canopy no longer contributes to a fire in the form of a crown fire or ember production. Additionally the production of surface fuels is reduced since biomass production (branches, leaves, duff etc.) is decreased. This technique has positive impact on reducing spotting potential, heat output, spread rate and, potentially, ignitability depending upon what replaces the overstory. Tree removal varies from cutting of individual trees, to removal of entire overstory canopy. This process can be slow and expensive, but can be selective with limited impact beyond the removal of the target plants (depending upon scale of removal). Sometimes harvesting techniques can be qui t e r a p i d . I f t h e w h o l e t r e e i s not harvested, the technique generates considerable debris (from tree branches) that should be removed using machinery to haul. The boles of trees hauled away and other debris should be either hauled away or may be burned later as a part of a prescribed burn (pile or broadcast). A portion of debris may be left as a sort of erosion control measure and to cover bare spots. And bats may use eucalyptus trees as perches and nesting sites. Replacement perches and nesting platforms for raptors can be constructed, located, and installed prior to removal of the trees to minimize displacement of raptors. If the tree harbors a maternal bat roost, removal should be coordinated with the appropriate wildlife City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 83 agencies, including the California Department of Fish and Game and possibly the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Volunteers can locate and construct the raptor perches and nesting platforms, with guidance from suitable experts (e.g. Audubon Society or the Point Reyes Bird Observatory). Tree removal creates patches of disturbance by the removal operation. Subsequent treatment of the area is dependent upon the species that encroach into these patches. Removal of exotics or weed species on an annual basis should be anticipated until an acceptable stable vegetation type is re-established. Sprout removal is often required as a follow up treatment, involving the application of herbicides and/or other techniques such as grinding the stump or placing plastic over the stump. 6.2.8 Herbicide Application to Control Invasive Plants Using herbicides to control invasive plant species that exacerbate wildfire risk is used as part of an Integrated Pest Management10 program and in combination with other treatment measures (e.g., mowing, burning and hand removal). Application following another treatment method in which plants are trimmed or shortened can increase the effectiveness of the chemical treatment. Herbicides can also be used to kill herbaceous plants in exposed areas, such as roadside grass and weeds, and are typically applied while the grasses and weeds are still actively growing. Foliar treatments are generally not applied within seven days of significant rain because the herbicide may be washed off before it is effective, and not on windy days because of concerns for spray drift. The use of Garlon 4 Ultra herbicide can be used to treat areas of eucalyptus resprouting, removing the need to completely uproot or grind down the eucalyptus stump. Foliar application of Roundup to eucalyptus re- sprouts is another typical, successful chemical treatment, and can be used to eliminate small-diameter fuels in areas of high ignition risk. The use of a thistle-specific herbicide, Transline, is effective in controlling the spread of yellow star thistle, artichoke thistle, and bull thistle. Herbicides do not remove any vegetation from an area’s fuel load; the dead plant matter continues to exist at the site and could continue to be a fire hazard if not collected and disposed. Health, safety and environmental concerns have limited the widespread use of chemicals over the past 20 years, and repeated use of chemicals is not preferred due to the prevalence of unwanted species building resistance to herbicides. Additionally, concerns regarding water quality and other potential environmental impacts that may occur with prolonged use of and exposure to herbicides and other chemical applications further limit their frequent or widespread use as a treatment. Application of herbicides is typically performed by hand, and can include sponging, spraying, or dusting chemicals onto unwanted plants. Hand application provides flexibility in application and is ideally suited for small treatment areas. Roadside application of herbicides may employ a boom affixed to or towed behind a vehicle. Herbicide application requires specific storage, training and licensing to ensure proper and safe use, handling, and storage. Only personnel with the appropriate license are allowed to use chemicals to treat vegetation. Herbicide application is also only applied per a prescription prepared by a Pesticide Advisor licensed in that county. Personal protection equipment is essential to limit personnel exposure to chemicals. 10 Integrated Pest Management is a strategy that uses an array of biological, mechanical, cultural, and hand labor, to control pests, with the use of herbicides as a least-preferred method of control. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 84 6.3 Best Management Practices The protection and preservation of culturally and environmentally sensitive areas is one of the primary drivers for development of an updated Fire Management Plan. The development of a comprehensive plan not only protects these features from the affects of fire, but ensures that vegetation treatment, fuel management, or fire mitigation efforts are planned and executed in a manner that prevents potential additional adverse impact. The following steps are considered best management practices for the continued protection of environmental areas. These steps are ideally suited to on-going fire management planning and the execution of specific fire management actions described within this plan. • Detailed site inventory prior to treatment to determine the location of sensitive sites. Exploration into the use of knowledgeable volunteers to conduct a more detailed, site-wide survey is warranted. • Site planning and design to determine specific vegetation treatment actions based on fire management benefits, environmental impact, and required mitigation activities. • Protection during vegetation treatment using best management practices tailored to impacted sensitive resources. • Protection of disturbed environmentally sensitive areas following either specific fire management actions. The above vegetation treatment actions have been commonly used throughout the State of California. Through their implementation, a series of best practices has emerged to limit their adverse impact on the environment and to assist in the selection and planning of their application. 6.3.1 Hand Labor D u e t o the direct relationship of personnel to the environment in which they operate, hand labor can represent an approach that provides the least adverse impact to environmentally sensitive areas. However, specific fire management goals and the characteristics of the sensitive area or resource must be assessed to develop an actual work plan and associated activities. The following management practices and considerations should be implemented during site planning and project execution. • Provide or confirm adequate training, experience, and oversight to ensure that personnel are familiar with hand labor operations and planning, site conditions, potential and identified sensitive resources, and the identification of specific environmental features or conditions that must be avoided. • Avoid treatment actions during conditions that may affect water or run-off including during storms or severe weather or immediately following severe weather. • Avoid excessive foot or vehicle traffic on slopes, unimproved or non-designated trails, or outside of preexisting roads or access points. • Inspect areas for nesting birds to determine if activity should be postponed or adjusted by the establishment of a buffer area. • Clean all tools and equipment following actions and prior to movement into new environmental areas to prevent the spread of invasive or non-native plants. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 85 6.3.2 Mechanical Treatments Due to the potential for large equipment use, rapid action, and large-scale area operations, mechanical treatments can have significant adverse impacts on sensitive areas. As a result, pre-planning and site supervision are extremely important for any planned mechanical treatment actions. The following management practices and considerations should be implemented during site planning and project execution. • Provide or confirm adequate training, experience, and oversight to ensure that personnel are familiar with mechanical treatment operations and planning, site conditions, potential and identified sensitive resources, and the identification of specific environmental features or conditions that must be avoided. • Avoid treatment actions during conditions that may affect water or run-off including during storms, periods of precipitation, or immediately following severe weather. In addition, avoid scheduling any treatment actions during seasons with significant predicted precipitation. Cease operations or postpone planned operations including movement of vehicles or equipment during precipitation conditions that may combine with vehicle activity to cause damage to roads, trails, or adjacent land areas. • Plan treatment actions and equipment selection to minimize damage or alterations to existing soils. Determine locations of potentially erosive soils prior to treatment. Restrict operations that may adversely affect sensitive soil systems such as serpentine soil areas, erosion prone soils, or riparian zones. Restriction may include using road-based operations only, and avoiding riparian set-backs established by regulatory agencies. • Maintain a buffer of 25-50 feet between operations and water bodies or designated riparian areas. Avoid crossing drainage channels, run-off areas, or dry streambeds. Install and manage run-off barriers for rainwater in all treatment and operating areas. Restrict mechanical removal of trees to areas further than 50 feet from drainage channels. • Restrict vehicle traffic to preexisting roads or pre-planned access points based on equipment size and operations. Limit transport and support equipment to existing roads. Limit heavy equipment use t o slopes less than 30%. Install erosion control measures on all vehicle roads and traffic areas. • Maintain strict monitoring and control of fueling and maintenance operations. All maintenance actions that may produce spills should be executed in areas with secondary containment protection, away from any water bodies or drainage areas. Clean up of all spills should be done on-site, with materials ready for use. Inspection of equipment for new leaks and mechanical problems should be performed daily, prior to operations. • Inspect areas for nesting birds to determine if activity should be postponed or adjusted by the establishment of a buffer area. • Clean equipment following actions and prior to movement into new environmental areas to prevent the spread of invasive or non-native plants. • Plan operations around expected seeding conditions of targeted species (either prior to or sufficiently afterwards) to ensure efficiency of treatment action. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 86 • Cease actions during periods of high fire danger or during red flag conditions. Ensure that all mechanical equipment have approved spark arrestors and comply with California Public Resources Code (PRC) sections 4431, 4435, 4442, and 4437 to limit potential for ignition of incidental fires. • Maintain on-site fire suppression resources to include shovel, water pump, fire extinguisher, and two-way radio or communications for fire reporting. 6.3.3 Grazing with Sheep and Goats • One of the primary adverse impacts of grazing is over-grazing and the resulting exposure of bare ground. Over-grazing can increase the potential for soil erosion, water run-off and drainage, elimination of native plant species, and spread of non-native plants and weeds. Prepare a grazing management plan by a certified range specialist that specifies goals, stocking levels, grazing periods, installation of range improvements (such as water sources) to evenly distribute utilization of feed, and monitoring and performance criteria. • Develop a site-specific annual grazing plan that includes project-level plans for stocking, timing, and resource management goals. • Prior to introduction, all animals should be quarantined and fed weed-free forage to limit spread of invasive or unwanted plant species as well as prevent spread of livestock diseases. • Limit grazing to non-riparian areas. 6.3.4 Broadcast Prescribed Burns Prescribed burns can have significant impacts on sensitive areas both from environmental and cultural standpoint. The planning and execution of a prescribed burn must be carefully developed. A prescribed burn can adversely affect the duff layer, generate large and unpredicted amounts of smoke, and transition from a controlled event to one that is uncontrolled and dangerous. • Provide or confirm adequate training, experience, and oversight to ensure that personnel are familiar with broadcast prescribed burn operations and planning, site conditions, potential and identified sensitive resources, and the identification of specific environmental features or conditions that must be avoided. • Develop a smoke management plan describing desired outcomes and specific actions for onsite personnel including a test burn, continual evaluation of smoke dispersal, monitoring of wind patterns, and monitoring of potential visibility impacts to primary roads and highways. • Develop public safety plans to be executed throughout the prescribed burn cycle including press and information releases, signs and notifications, patrols on roads and access points, and development of a fire contingency plan. • Maintain a buffer between the prescribed burn area and water bodies or drainage into riparian zones. Buffers should be a minimum of 25 feet for 5% slopes, 75 feet for 5-10% slopes, and 250 feet for 10% or greater slopes. No prescribed fires should be ignited near streams or in riparian zones. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 87 • Plan the prescribed burn to minimize post-fire erosion into water bodies and drainages through natural barriers, proper construction of fire lines along contours, and proper erosion control barrier deployment. Minimize prescribed burning in areas with highly erodible soils. • Cultural and social sites and structures shall be excluded from burn area through planning, hand-lines, or other fire protection operations. On-site personnel will be briefed on locations and features of cultural or social sites to include incident command or response personnel. Avoid prescribed burns in areas with utility infrastructure, existing property or structures, or archeological sites. • Manage fuel moisture through pre-fire assessment and potential fuel modification. Prior to prescribed burn, remove ladder fuels into the tree canopy to increase safety and reduce torching. • Conduct prescribed burns only on designated burn days as authorized by BAAQMD. • Inspect areas for nesting birds to determine if activity should be postponed or adjusted. 6.3.5 Herbicide Application The application of herbicides for vegetation treatment should focus on the goal of applying the least amount of chemical required to achieve a desired outcome, consistent with the City of Palo Alto’s Integrated Pest Management policy. Best management practices for herbicide application are centered on limiting adverse or unintended impacts of herbicides due to run-off, wind-spread, or post-treatment exposure. • Provide or confirm adequate training, experience, and oversight to ensure that personnel are familiar with herbicide operations and planning, site conditions, potential and identified sensitive resources, and the identification of specific environmental features or conditions that must be avoided. Herbicide application is only applied per a prescription prepared by a Pesticide Control Advisor licensed in that county, and applied by a licensed Pesticide Control Applicator. • Develop public safety plans to be executed throughout the treatment cycle including press and information releases, signs and notifications, and fencing or area restrictions. • Develop a spill contingency plan and maintain strict monitoring and control of operations. Clean up of all spills should be done on-site, with materials ready for use. • Chemical treatments within habitat of California Red-legged Frog should be conducted according to U.S. District Court injunction and order covering 66 pesticides (Oct 2006) and subsequent EPA effects determinations. • Clean equipment following actions and prior to movement into new environmental areas. • Avoid treating areas adjacent to water bodies, riparian areas, and primary drainage access. Follow all herbicide labels and directions in determining applications near water resources or riparian habitats. Limit aerial application to greater than 100 feet from water resources. Limit ground and hand application to greater than 50 feet. • Avoid treating areas used for livestock operations or intended as grazing areas. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 88 PART B – POLICY REVIEW AND SUPPLEMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 89 1 EVACUATION AND REFUGE 1.1 Identification and Notification The complexity of jurisdictional boundaries and responsibilities necessitates that the City of Palo Alto participate in 1) a standing forum that includes all stakeholders and 2) creating of coordinated, regional plans. Emergency Public Information (EPI) is generally disseminated via broadcast radio (the Emergency Alert System and KZSU 90.1 FM), telephone and e-mail, two-way radio contact with neighborhood leaders and Disaster Service Workers Volunteers (via ARES/RACES ham radio and other systems), and via public address systems such as speakers on first responder vehicles. New mass-communication systems for telephone and e-mail have recently been deployed in local jurisdictions: • Palo Alto: Community Alerting Notification System (CANS) • Los Altos Hills: a similar systems to CANS • Stanford: also CANS • San Mateo County: a county-wide system, www.smcalert.info <http://www.smcalert.info/> • Santa Clara County: a county-wide system is pending These systems are currently not coordinated, An incident that starts in Palo Alto and spreads to Woodside could cause 1) a failure to notify all involved or affected and 2) inconsistent or conflicting information. The National Incident Management System (NIMS) provides that events where multiple jurisdictions are involved may establish a Joint Information Center (JIC) to coordinate the efforts of all Public Information Officers (PIOs). In addition, Open Space and Park Division radios lack adequate channels (especially tactical channels) for the growing need. This will be more crucial as affected agencies switch to digital communication systems. We recommend that a pre-plan for a Foothills JIC be created which would include notification procedures for all potentially-involved dispatch centers, and that the Open Space and Park Division radios be updated. A regional evacuation plan for the Foothills should also be created: "Foothills Regional Emergency Response and Evacuation Plan (FREREP)". This plan would provide for standardized signage and evacuation route nomenclature and protocols. The Palo Alto Police Department has developed a draft plan that could be an initial model. Furthermore, locked gates on evacuation routes must be properly labeled and signed and first responders (including, in some cases, authorized local residents) must have keys or other access methods. For example, the Los Trancos Road gate to the back of Foothills Park is not labeled. In another example: A Los Trancos Neighborhood Preparedness Coordinator could be issued a key and given an assignment to open that gate in the event of an emergency. Existing evacuation plans should be reviewed, updated as needed, and integrated into the FREREP. For example, the Los Trancos/Vista Verde Neighborhood evacuation plans are posted at the following location: City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 90 http://www.vistaverdeca.org/emergency_response_info.html The (private) Pony Tracks Ranch provides emergency vehicle egress (into Palo Alto via the "stub" of Alpine Rd. on to Page Mill) as well as a safe refuge area: http://www.vistaverdeca.org/about9.html 1.2 Regional Cooperation After the tragic Oakland Hills Fire of 1991, several local jurisdictions came together to form the East Bay Foothills Forum. The same underlying conditions and principles support the formation of a similar group in the Palo Alto area, which could perhaps be called "The Midpeninsula Foothills Emergency Forum (MFEF)". 1.3 Temporary Refuge Places of temporary refuge are located in areas of low hazard, in places that are regularly maintained (at least annually) in a low-fuel volume condition. Los Trampas Valley is the best example of a suitable location, however this site may also be used as by incident management teams during longer duration fires. To enhance the effectiveness of these temporary refuges, the park staff should perform an evacuation drill. The firefighters safety zones on Trappers Ridge are NOT temporary refuge areas for anyone but firefighters with proper training and equipment. There are opportunities for off-site refuge; private properties in the area could provide temporary refuge, but agreements between the City and property owners would need to be formalized. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 91 2 CODES AND REGULATIONS The 2007 California Building Standards Code became effective statewide on January 1, 2008. Included in the new code are the 2007 versions of the California Building Code (based on the 2006 International Building Code), and California Fire Code (based on the 2006 International Fire Code). With Ordinance 4975 and 4976, the City of Palo Alto adopted these codes and local amendments to the State model codes with supportive Findings of Fact, which were filed with the State Building Standards Commission. These codes became effective in Palo Alto on January 1, 2008. The codes are comprehensive and have included the key elements recommended by the model codes. 2.1 Existing Codes and Ordinances Codes related to wildland urban interface fires can be found in both the building code and fire code. 2.1.1 Fire Code Title 15 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code adopted the California Fire Code, 2007 Edition, including Appendices B and C, and Chapters 3, 4, 5 and 25 and Chapter 1 Appendix of the International Fire Code. Sections 15.04.520 – 15.04.587 address wildland urban interface fires. Key components of the fire code include: • Definition of the Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area: “…all areas west of Highway 280 and all other areas recommended as “Very High fire Hazard Severity Zone” by the director of CDF.” (Section 15.04.520). • Requirement for Preparation of Fire Protection Plan: Addition of section 4703.1 through 4703.4 requires a site specific wildfire risk assessment be prepared by an applicant when required by the fire code official. (Section 15.04.530) • Requirements for Defensible Space: Addition of section 4707.1 – 4707.2 define the requirements for an effective defensible space within 30 feet of buildings, with an additional defensible space 100 feet when required by fire code official due to site conditions. This section also defines corrective actions and the ability of the executive body to correct conditions and make the associated expense of such correction a lien upon the property. (Chapter 15.04.530). In addition, Section 15.04.130 adds Section 304.1.2.1 that provides authorization for the fire chief to cause removal of weed or combustible materials. • Access Requirements: Addition of sections 4714 through 4714.3 establishes access requirements for all driveways and fire apparatus roads. (Section 15.04.550) o Driveways require clearances of 12 feet wide and 13.5 feet high. The code requires turnarounds for driveways greater than 150 feet in length and turnouts and turnarounds for those greater than 200 feet in length and 20 feet wide. It requires that vehicle speed limits be posted on entrances to bridges, on driveways and private roads. o Fire apparatus roads require clearances of 20 feet width and 13.5 feet height. Dead end roads greater than 150 feet in length are required to have turnarounds. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 92 • In addition, Section 15.04.170 amends Section 504.4 to require that access control devices (including bars, grates, gates, electric or magnetic locks or similar devises that could inhibit rapid fire department emergency access) be approved by the fire code official and be provided with an approved means for deactivation or unlocking by the fire department. • Water Supply: Addition of sections 4715 through 47159 defines water supply requirements including water sources, hydrants, adequate water supply, obstructions, identification, testing and maintenance, clearance of fuel and standby power. (Section 15.04.560) • Automatic Fire Sprinklers: Addition of Sections 4716 through 467716.3 adds the requirement for new buildings to be provided with an approved automatic fire sprinkler. Existing buildings are required to provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler when modifications are made that increase the building area. (Section 15.04.570) • Requirements for Suppression and Control: Addition of Sections 4717 through 4717.3.5 add general requirements applicable to new and existing properties to provide necessary fire protection measures. These include vegetation control, maintenance of defensible space with measures that increase the requirements of Section 4707 (Section 15.04.530). These measures address (Section 15.04.580): o Trees: Maintain horizontal clearance of 10 feet from any structure. Pruning to remove limbs located less than 6 feet. Regularly remove deadwood and litter from trees. o Roadway Clearance: Clear brush or vegetative growth within 10 feet on each side of portions of fire apparatus access roads and driveways. o Electrical Transmission and Distribution Lines: Clearance requirements provided for the various line voltages between electrical lines and vegetation. o Access Restrictions: Provides the authorization for the fire code official to close WUI areas to entry (exceptions made for residents, and authorized police or fire personnel.) • Ignition Source Control: Additions of Sections 4717.4 through 4717.4.10 provide regulations to prevent the occurrence of wildfires. These sections address clearance from ignitions sources; smoking; equipment generating heat, sparks or open flames; fireworks; outdoor fires, outdoor fireplaces, permanent barbecues and grills; reckless behavior. (Section 15.04.584) • Control of Storage: Addition of Section 4717.7 provides additional requirements for storage of hazardous materials; liquefied petroleum gas installations; explosives and combustible materials. (Section 15.04.585). • Dumping: Additions of Section 4717.6 provides regulations related to dumping of waste material and ashes or coal. (Section 15.04.586) • Protection of Pumps and Water Storage Facilities: Addition of Section 4717.7 added regulations to increase the reliability of water storage and pumping facilities and protect such systems from intrusion by fire. (Section 15.04.587) • Land Use Limitations: Addition of Section 4717.8 places limits on land use to reduce the potential threat to life safety by requiring permits for temporary fairs, carnivals, public exhibitions and similar uses. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 93 • E me r g e ncy Communications: Section 15.04.190 requires, by the addition of Section 5.11.1, that new buildings or buildings expanding by more than 20%, or that change occupancy classification must provide an approved system or equipment that will allow for adequate emergency radio coverage. 2.1.2 Building Code Title 16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code adopted the California Building Code, 2007 Edition. In general these sections support the adopted Title 15 Fire Code. Key components of the building code that address wildland urban interface fire include: • Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Area: The same definition as in Title 15 applies and amends Section 702A of the California Building Code. (Section 16.04.140) • Sprinkler System: Section 903.2 is amended to provide an automatic sprinkler system throughout all buildings designated in the WUI Fire Areas (except any non-habitable structures accessory to a single family residence that have a gross floor area of 500 square feet or less). It also includes the requirement for modifications to existing structures that expand the gross floor area as listed in the Fire Code. (Section 16.04.150) • Roofing Requirements: Section 1505.14 amends the roofing requirements in the WUI Fire Area. A Class A fire retardant roof covering is required where more than 50% of the total roof area is replaced within any one year period, for new structures and in the alteration, repair or replacement of the roof of existing structures. Roofing requirements shall also comply with Section 704A.1. (Section 16.04.170) Chapter 7A of the California Building Code provides additional requirements for materials and construction methods for exterior wildfire exposure. It expands the roofing and attic ventilation requirements that came into effect for new buildings applying for a building permit after December 1, 2005. This portion of the code addresses: • Roofing assemblies, coverings, roof valleys and roof gutters. • Attic ventilation, eave or cornice vents and eave protection. • Exterior wall coverings, openings, vents, exterior glazing and window walls and exterior door assemblies. • Decking, floors and underfloor protection. • Ancillary buildings and structures. 2.2 Recommendations There are several areas that could be expanded to further improve safety in the Palo Alto WUI Fire Area. These could be done as code revisions to further enhance the code or as guidelines that are used in enforcement of existing codes. Other best practice measures may be incorporated into City contracts and used in public education: City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 94 • Expand Section 15.04.520, the Area Defined as Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Area, to include the lands between Foothill Expressway / Junipero Serra Boulevard and Highway 280. • Expand Section 15.04.530 General Requirements for WUI Fire Areas (4703.1 Fire Protection Plan Preparation) to require that Fire Protection Planning begin early in the planning/ permitting process so the location of access roads, driveways and structures can be influenced to increase fire safety and emergency response. Require the plan to also address implementation and funding of defensible space vegetation management (especially important for commonly held private open space). • Expand Section 15.04.540 Defensible Space (4707.1 General Item 5.) to include all ground, decking and balconies in addition to the specified “maintain roof of a structure free of leaves, needles or other dead vegetative growth.” • Expand Section 15.04.550 Access Requirements (4714.2 Driveways and 4714.3 Fire Apparatus Roads) to add standards related to gradient and horizontal and vertical curvature, bridge load limits, parking restrictions during high fire danger weather and requirements for emergency vehicle access. • Expand Section 15.04.580 General Requirements for WUI Fire Areas (section 4717.2 Vegetation Control) to provide additional guidance for Maintenance of Defensible Space (see following guidelines). • Expand Section 15.04.584 Ignition Source Control (section 4717.4.7 Outdoor Fires) to identify that abatement by burning is unlawful unless by permit and unless all other applicable permits are obtained from appropriate governing jurisdictions. Burn permits are only issued to working agricultural properties. • Fencing: Add a section requiring fences be constructed of either noncombustible material or of timbers with a minimum of one-inch nominal thickness. For example a typical fencing might consist of open wire mesh with four-inch posts and stringers that have a minimum one-inch nominal thickness. Fences should be designed with removal panels or gates so during a wildfire they do not convey fire to adjacent structures. • Signage: Add a section requiring street, road and building address signs to have a minimum letter height of 4 inches, be 1/2 inches thick, reflectorized, painted a color contrasting with the background color of the sign, mounted on non-combustible poles and visible within 100 feet traveling from both directions. • Mechanical Equipment Ignition Prevention: Requirements should be included in all City contracts for construction or maintenance work in the WUI Fire Area that address ignition prevention such as equipment (spark arrestor, overheating protection etc.), refueling, clearance of work area, cessation of work during periods of high fire danger weather and requirements for fire suppression equipment. This is becoming more critical for new diesel-powered vehicles because clean air/emission require exhaust particulate burning systems can more easily start fires if the vehicles are taken off-road. • Smoking: More stringent rules regarding smoking in Pearson-Arastradero Park are recommended. Restrictions should be similar to those in place at Foothills Park. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 95 2.3 Exterior Hazard Abatement The following information is provided as a set of guidelines that can be developed into educational material to facilitate compliance with existing codes. The code currently addresses treatments for exterior hazard abatement in a general way; this section provides more specificity regarding the spacing of vegetative fuels. 2.3.1 For parcels of land one acre or less maintain parcel in complete abatement. • For a distance of 30 feet a structure on slope steepness less than 30 percent grade, or 70 feet on slopes greater than 30 percent grade, from all property boundaries cut dry grass and non-woody vegetation to less than 3 inches yearly, no later than June 1. o This may require re-mowing if late season rains promote grass growth after the first cutting. o With prior approval of the Fire Department cutting of native grass and wildflowers may be delayed until after seed set provided they do not form a means of rapidly transmitting fire to any structures. • Leaves and humus may not exceed two inches in depth anywhere in a landscaped area; however, bare earth should not be exposed in over 50% of the site and no one bare patch should be larger than 15 square feet. • All dead vegetation (i.e. dry grass, leaves and humus) must be removed under trees and within shrubs, vines and semi-woody plants every year by June 1. • Dead branches must be removed from mature trees and all vines, to 8 feet above ground. Figure 33: Pruning Example. Prune branches to a height of 8 feet above the ground. In young trees, prune branches on the lower one-third of the height of the tree. Do not disturb or thin the tree canopy. This promotes growth in the understory, which is more easily ignited. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 96 • Limbs of trees and large-form shrubs that are smaller than three inches in diameter shall be pruned to provide clearance of three times the height of the understory plant material or 8 feet, whichever is higher. Trees shorter than 24 feet in height shall be pruned of the lower one-third branches (Figure 33). • The vertical distance between the ground and the lowest tree branches should be 3 times the height of any shrubs planted beneath the trees or 6 feet whichever is higher. Plants under trees should generally be shorter than 18 inches in height. Taller shrubs, including vines, semi-woody species and all chaparral species, may be near (six horizontal feet from tree crown) but not under trees. • Remove all dead trees deemed a fire hazard by the Fire Department. • Individual plants or shrub masses will be separated so that groupings/shrub masses will be no wider than two times the grouping height, or 120 square feet in area. Distinct groupings of shrubs (which includes vines, semi-woody species, all types of brush, and all chaparral species) will be designed to dampen the spread of fire. Alternatively, shrubs can be cut and maintained to a height of two feet. * Figure 34: Shrub Spacing. Design groups of plants small enough to provide horizontal separation between groups. This allows proper maintenance and helps slow the spread of fire. Each shrub or group of plants should measure no wider than two times its height, or less than 120 sq.ft. (or 6 ft x 20 ft). The space between groups should be greater than three times the height of the shrubs, or at least a 12 ft. distance • A vertical clearance of 5 feet shall be maintained between roof surface and portions of trees or other vegetation overhanging any building or structure. • Wood piles must be enclosed in a non-combustible storage unit. 2.3.2 For parcels larger than one acre in size • Maintain the area (space) within 100 feet of any structure on the parcel per the specific requirements for lots less than one acre in size. • Maintain the area (space) within 100 – 250 feet from any structure on the parcel per the following specific requirements: o Shrub masses will be separated so that groupings will be no wider than two times the grouping height, or 120 square feet in area. Distinct groupings of shrubs (which include vines, semi-woody species, all types of brush, and all chaparral species) will be designed to dampen the spread of fire. Alternatively, shrubs can be cut and maintained to a height of two feet. o All dead vegetation (i.e. dry grass, leaves and humus) must be removed under trees and within shrubs, vines and semi-woody plants every year by June 1. o Dead branches must be removed from mature trees and all vines, to 8 feet above ground. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 97 o Trees, and large tree-form shrubs, shall be pruned to provide clearance of three times the height of the understory plant material or 8 feet, whichever is higher. Limbs that are smaller than three inches in diameter are to be pruned up to eight feet off the ground, and in trees shorter than 18 feet, the lower one-third of the height of the tree. See Figure 33. o The vertical distance between the ground and the lowest tree branches should be 3 times the height of any shrubs planted beneath the trees or 6 feet whichever is higher. Plants under trees should generally be shorter than 18 inches in height. Taller shrubs, including vines, semi-woody species and all chaparral species, may be near (six horizontal feet from tree crown) but not under trees. • If a structure is within 100 feet of property boundary on adjacent lot, provide 30-foot firebreaks following as closely as possible to the property line and along one side of all fence lines. Fire breaks are a continuous strip of ground that is mowed to three-inch height, or disced, or dozed. • Remove all dead trees deemed a fire hazard by the Fire Department. • Trees on the top of ridges shall be maintained to limit torching, through pruning to provide clearance of three times the height of the understory plant material or 8 feet, whichever is higher. Limbs that are smaller than three inches in diameter are to be pruned up to eight feet off the ground, and in trees shorter than 18 feet, the lower one-third of the height of the tree as in Figure 33. • Within 15-feet of all public or private roadways or driveways, all grass must be mowed, disced or sprayed to 3 inches height. • In grasslands, 30-foot firebreaks and crossbreaks that divide the parcel into approximately 5-acre sections. Firebreaks and crossbreaks are a continuous strip of ground that is mowed to three-inch height, or disced, or dozed, following as closely as possible to the property line and along one side of all fence lines, ditches, and on top of all ridges. When terrain is too steep or rugged for a tractor, a hand-mowed firebreak may be required. • Active Pastureland: 15-foot wide firebreaks and crossbreaks are required if a sufficient number of animals are present to steadily reduce height of grass during the summer months to 3 inches or less by the end of August. If not active, 30-foot width is required. • Active Cropland: 15-foot wide firebreaks and crossbreaks required if crop is to be harvested by mid-June. If later, 30-foot width is required. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 98 3 FIRE PROTECTION – STATION 8 The following is a description, appraisal and recommendation regarding staffing of, equipment for and other response resources related to Station 8 in Foothills Park. Figure 35: Fire Protection Resources. 3.1 Description Fire Station number 8 of the Palo Alto Fire Department is located at 3300 Page Mill Road in Palo Alto, CA. It is a seasonal fire station that is only staffed during the daylight hours. This amounts to 12 hours per day. The period of time it is staffed is usually from July 1st to November 1st of each year. This is essentially the fire season for the area being protected and involves about 120 days of coverage. Whenever there is a declared high fire danger day or the burn index indicates an ignition threat the station may be staffed beyond the 12-hour period and outside of the fire season when appropriate. The staffing of the station currently includes 1 Captain, 1 Apparatus Operator/Engineer and 1 Firefighter. These positions are filled through overtime allocations rather than being post positions. Initially a fire response unit located at Foothill Park was staffed with only 2 persons. It was upgraded to 3 persons following the Arastradero Fire of 1985 in the lower foothills to be consistent with contemporary fire staffing practices and when Station #8 was constructed. Station 8 8 Mutual Aid Stations Plus: CalFire Saratoga Gap Station at Skyline and Big Basin Way City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 99 The apparatus that responds from this station is a Type III Engine Company. This is an apparatus that is primarily designed to respond to wildland fires instead of structure fires. This is similar to the types of companies used by major wildland agencies. The station provides an initial attack capability to an area that involves about 25 square miles of urban- wildland interface area. There are approximately 150 dwellings in the area, but that is not the primary risk. The fire history of this specific area is relatively free of major events in the past decades. The last reported major fire in the vicinity of the upper foothills was in 1912. Significant fires in the lower foothills (primarily light fuels) occurred in 1985, 1992, 2000 and 2007. However, that one factor creates an impact upon existing fuel loads. The lack of major fires in the past has resulted in fuel densities that may be ready to support a wide area fire. It has been estimated that the medium and high density fuels are about three times their normal density. The secondary response units into this area are deployed from the “El Monte” fire station of Santa Clara County Fire located to the north and the Palo Alto Stations #2 and #5. The County Fire Station is equipped with Type I and Type IV engines. Currently there is no direct link to this station in the dispatching of equipment. Depending upon who reports an emergency in the area the call could go directly to the City of Palo Alto or it could be routed through the Santa Clara County Communication Center and Palo Alto would then be notified. The standard response into this area varies upon the level of dispatch. On medium or high dispatch days the Palo Alto Fire Department responds Engine 8 to reports of wildland fires and supports it with another Type III (3 personnel) that is cross staffed by the truck company from Station #6 on the Stanford Campus, one Type I from Station #2 (3 personnel), 2 Type IV cross-staffed patrol units from Stations #2 and #6 (6 personnel), one Paramedic ambulance from Station #2 (2 personnel) and one Battalion Chief from Station #6. Furthermore, the dispatch system provides a brush unit from the Santa Clara County El Monte Fire Station in Los Altos Hills at Foothill Community College (4 personnel from 1000-1900 hours) and can respond an additional 4 Type I’s (12 personnel) and 3 Type IV Brush units (9 personnel). Lastly, the system has the depth to provide additional resources from other mutual aid entities in the same area (e.g. Cal Fire Ranger Unit resources located in Cupertino and San Martin). These include additional Type III units (3 or more), air assets, hand crew resources, bulldozers and command staff to complete an overhead requirement in the event of a major fire. Other Type 1, Type III and Type IV resources may be made available through the Santa Clara County Mutual Aid System. The City of Palo Alto does currently not have an adopted Standards of Cover document, but operates with an informal response goal of 5 to 6 minutes for attendance of at least 90% of its calls for service. The department also provides paramedic (advanced life support – ALS) response to the basic built out portion of the city within 8 minutes for at least 90% of those types of calls (these response goal benchmarks are exclusive of the foothills area). Station 8 has not normally been considered an ALS resource. In the past 2 years a priority has been established to staff Engine 8 with an ALS resource whenever possible. The staffing for the station is provided in the overtime budget. Last year the amount set aside to provide coverage was $200,000. 3.2 Appraisal The primary purpose of placing a wildland unit into this area is to prevent any ignitions from spreading beyond a reasonable fire perimeter before an adequate full fire alarm assignment and an effective response City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 100 force can be placed on the scene. The first 10 minutes of a wildland fire are critical to restricting the size of the ultimate fire. Depending upon the fuel type and density, the slope and aspect and the effects of wind upon a flame front, the period of time that it takes to get initial control of an incipient fire is very important. This is especially true in light fuels, when a fuel is running uphill and/or when fire conditions that consist of high temperatures, low humidity and wind conditions exist. The fire behavior assessment of the Foothills Area indicates a high potential for fast-moving fires. The secondary purpose of having the unit in place is to establish a point of control for the development of an incident command system in place to address the escalation of the fire, if it is not controlled in the first 10 minutes. The first purpose addresses the need for “distribution”. In the language of response coverage the distribution of resources is the placement of companies, based upon risk factors to be readily available to handle the first few minutes of fire or emergency control. The second purpose addresses the need for “concentration”. This terminology is used to describe the deployment of an adequate amount of resources to deal with the ultimate size of the fire. These two concepts are inter-related in that fires that are controlled early do not need as many resources to be eventually deployed. Therefore, early intervention is a form of cost avoidance. This is the basic operating assumption of all seasonal fire resources. Major wildland agencies such as Cal- Fire, the U.S. Forest Service and other wildland agencies use the concept of seasonal and part time staffing configurations to minimize fire size to as small an area as possible. 3.3 Recommendation The staffing of this station by utilization of overtime fire personnel is a reasonable method of addressing the risk and hazards in the area. It is a cost effective way of reducing the impact of potential wildland fires in the study area. The elimination of this company places the responsibility for initial attack upon fire companies that are more remote and therefore are more likely to have lengthy response times into the area. The staffing pattern of 3 fire fighters is the minimum for the safe and effective operation of an initial attack unit for a wildland fire. This station and its current staffing configuration should be retained in the future. In addition, staffing a police officer and maintaining a ranger staff presence in the Foothills Area during high fire risk days should be considered. This type of personnel offers extra fire detection capability and is available to assist with evacuation should an incident require that particular action. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 101 4 TRAIL PLAN UPDATE 4.1 Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Trails Management Plan (March 2001) The Trails Master Plan for Pearson-Arastradero Preserve recognizes that the preserve is located in the Hazardous Fire Area (Section 3.3). The plan identifies management objectives, strategies and recommended actions to meet Fire Department objectives. It recognizes the need to coordinate with the Fire Department to develop and implement a fire suppression plan that will maximize the safety of the users and the adjacent properties, without adversely impacting the natural environment. It includes fire prevention methods for firelines on the perimeter, as well as fuel reduction zones to compartmentalize the preserve for fire suppression in the event of a fire. 4.1.1 Recommended Revisions Since the Trails Master Plan was adopted in 2001, there have been new facilities developed at the Gateway Interpretive Center and a new access to Foothills Park. Fuel management recommendations take into account these new facilities, as well as recommend the following additions and modifications to the 2001 Trails Plan: • Addition of fuel management along the evacuation route (Arastradero Road) and management of defensible space around the Gateway Interpretive Center, parking lot and staging area to include projects A.E1 and A.D1, A.D2, A.D3 and A.D4. • Addition of fuel reduction zones within the interior of the preserve along existing trails for containment including projects A.C9, A.C10, A.C11 and A.C12. • The Master Plan identifies an option for the Fire Department to use controlled burns as a part of their wildland fire prevention plan. Two potential areas are recommended: Juan Bautista Prescribed Fire North (A.Rx1) and Acorn Trail Prescribed Fire South (A.Rx2). • Modify firebreak width and performance standards. • Addition of roadside treatment standards to Clearing and Brushing for those trails that also serve as emergency vehicle access for clearances of 13.5 feet vertical clearance and 10 feet horizontal clearance. • Addition to Regulatory, Warning and Educational Signs regarding fire hazard signs, education information on fuel management and prescribe fire. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 102 Figure 36: Emergency/Maintenance Access Points. Map depicts the emergency/maintenance access points of entry, trail travel routes to be maintained for use by the Fire Department and Utilities Department when servicing the Preserve. This map also shows disc lines and indicates those sensitive resource areas in the Preserve that should not be accessed by heavy vehicles. The map has been modified to incorporate the new facilities and associated modifications to fire control treatment areas. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 103 4.1.2 Existing Fire Mitigation and Fuel Management in the Arastradero Trails Management Plan Hazardous Fire Area: The Preserve is identified in the Hazardous Fire Area. (Section 3.3) Utilities: Access for maintenance and repair of existing utilities facilities is by all-weather surface roads that can accommodate heavy vehicles for repairs. Primary entrance is Gate B. Clearance of fuels for 10’ radius around poles having operable devises. Tree trimming is generally done every 2 to 3 years with ground clearing done annually. (Section 3.4) Management Objectives, Strategies and Recommended Actions. Objective is to coordinate with Fire Department to develop and implement a fire suppression plan that will maximize the safety of the users and the adjacent properties, without adversely affecting the natural environment (Section 4.5 and Map 4): • Access: Provide adequate access for Type 3 and 4 vehicles. • Fire Prevention Techniques: Use least environmentally intrusive prevention methods • Firebreak and Control Strategies: Prevent fires from spreading on adjacent properties as well as coming into the preserve. Firebreaks/disc lines should be implemented only where they serve their intended function in fire prevention and suppression. • Temporary Closures: Provide an option for park staff to close the Preserve when conditions such as high fire danger could pose a threat to the public. Access (Section 4.5 pg 4-9 and Section 7-2 pp 7-7-7-9). • Provide a 40 to 45 foot “drive” between Arastradero Road and Access Gates A and B to provide a safe place for Fire Department staff to safely park their Type 3 and 4 vehicles when opening the Preserve entry gates. o Ensure that all six access points can accommodate fire vehicles at all times. These access points include:  The parking lot  The access gate on Arastradero Road adjacent to the west of the parking lot  Gate A (access limited to the existing turn-around on the west side of the first concrete bridge spanning Arastradero Creek)  Gate B, which serves as the primary Utilities Department access  Gate C, which is located off John Marthens Lane  Gate D - Vista Hill Gate in Foothills Park (one-way uphill, except in emergency situations) o Close, restore and annually mow designated emergency access routes within the Preserve as needed to create a circulation route for Type 3 and 4 vehicles in the case of emergency. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 104 • Provide emergency turn-around capability where access roads dead-end (hammer-head configuration needed for vehicle turn-around). o To minimize potential impacts to the natural resources, these designated vehicle 'turn- arounds' will be the only acceptable turning points for motor vehicles within the Preserve. The final siting of new 'turn-arounds' (#2, 5 and 9) should be flagged prior to construction and the Open Space and Parks Division Manager should be advised of pending construction. Each turn-around should be clearly delineated and mapped to prevent removal of or impact to sensitive biological resources. Refer to Table 9 – Vehicle Turn-around Design Summary. o Recognizing that these turn-arounds are to be used for routine maintenance, construction and patrol. In special circumstances where larger fire trucks and over sized utility vehicles must access the Preserve, these vehicles may not be able to use the turn-arounds and will have to travel through the Preserve in a one way direction. In this case, it is recommended that the vehicles enter and leave through Gates B and D. In the case of a wildfire, public safety will override resource protection. In this case, the Fire Department may be required to override these vehicle guidelines to be able to suppress a fire. Refer to Map 36 Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access for: • Emergency/maintenance access points of entry. • Trail travel routes to be maintained for use by the Fire Department and Utilities Department when servicing the Preserve. • Disc lines. • Sensitive resource areas in the Preserve that should not be accessed by heavy vehicles. • Use a uniform maintenance gate at all major entry points with a universal locking device to facilitate routine and emergency access into the Preserve by multiple department staff. Fire prevention methods (Section 4.5 pg 4-9 and Section 7.5 Vegetation Management pg 7-39) • Fire prevention methods to be used at the Preserve include: o Establishing fire lines on the perimeters of open space lands, leaving the interior areas in their natural condition. These cover many of the recommended containment projects including: A.C1, A.C2, A.C3, A.C4, A.C5, A.C6, A.C7 and A.C8. o Posting signs indicating the severity of the fire danger (low, moderate, high, very high, and extreme) during the fire season. o Posting signs “No Fireworks” June 20 to July 10. o Use herbicides as approved by the Open Space and Parks Division Manager, where appropriate in implementing the wildland fire prevention plan. Refer to Map 4 Fire Protection & Emergency Access of the Trail Master Plan for disc lines and areas that are to be mowed annually to maintain emergency vehicle access through the Preserve. This map also indicates those sensitive resource areas in the Preserve that should not be accessed by heavy vehicles. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 105 Firebreak and Control (Section 4.5 pg 4-10 and Section 7.5 Vegetation Management pg 7-39) • Firebreaks should be disced 24 feet wide or 1 ½ times the fuel height adjacent to the road, structures and where they can compartmentalize an area to reduce the risk of a fire igniting and/or spreading. • Firebreaks should be eliminated where they are not providing any benefit to fire prevention or suppression. • Ideally discing should be performed twice a year, first in late spring and then when the disc lines have “cured.” • If new activities/developments occur inside or adjacent to the Preserve perimeters, then the location of the disc lines should be reevaluated and expanded as appropriate. In addition, though not currently used, maintain an option for the Fire Department to perform controlled burns in the future as part of their overall fire prevention plan. Temporary Closures (Section 4.5 pg 4-10) of the Trail Master Plan The City Fire Department in consultation with Open Space staff may close the Preserve when there is a threat to public safety. When such emergencies occur, the Fire Department is to notify the Police Department and the Open Space and Parks Division staff of emergency closures so they can notify the public. Emergency closures may occur when: • Weather conditions create a critical fire danger; • Arsonists are known to be present in the area; • Staff resources have been pulled away for other emergencies; and/or • Other threats to public safety are present or suspected. High Maintenance Trails - Clearing and Brushing (Section 6.2 Trails Maintenance System & Section 7.5 Vegetation Management) The trail clearing limits for down logs and tree limbing should be 10 feet high and 3 feet wide on each side of the trail. (Refer to Section 7, Figure 16 of the Trail Master Plan for trail clearing and brushing limits). Trail brushing limits for shrubby and herbaceous plant species extending into the trail should be 10 feet high and 3 feet wide on each side of the trail. These plants should be cleared to ground level. Clearing widths should be directed to providing clear passage and providing an average sight line of 100-feet. Low growing and slow growing shrubs and ground cover less than two feet in height should be left undisturbed. Specific Trail Recommendations for Trails (Section 6.4) • Acorn Trail - Segment 1 (Ac1): Maintain existing vehicle turn-around at booster pump station. Refer to Map 4 of the Trail Master Plan- Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access - Turn-around Point 3. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 106 • Arastradero Creek Trail - Segment 2 (ArC2): Providing a new vehicle turn-around in a hammerhead configuration near intersection of former Acorn Trail (now Route F) to accommodate Type 3 and 4 emergency fire vehicles. The turn-around area should be defined using the following: grading a level area and landscaping. Such vegetation should consist of native species, similar to nearby, existing vegetation and should be placed in a natural configuration to prevent the vegetation from creating an unsafe condition or adverse visual impact. The final siting of the turn-around should be completed under the advisement of the Open Space and Parks Division Manager. Refer to Map 4 of the Trail Master Plan - Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access – Turn-around Point 5. • Arastradero Creek Trail - Segment 3 (ArC3): Locate an emergency/maintenance vehicle turn-around in a hammerhead configuration at the existing gate on the east side of the trail. Move the gate back to accommodate Type 3 and 4 emergency fire vehicles. Improvements to the turn-around area should be confined to the existing, flat graded pad. Minimize annual pruning to area necessary to provide for vehicle access. Refer to Map 4 of the Trail Master Plan- Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access - Turn-around Point 6. • Corte Madera Trail - Segment 2(CM2): Mow the area at junction with Bay View Trail to provide room for Type 3 and 4 emergency vehicles to perform a hammerhead vehicle turn-around following procedures outlined in Section 7.2. Maintain a minimum cover of 2 inches to minimize potential erosion impacts. Refer to Figure 36 Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access - Turn- around Point 4. • Gateway Trail - Segment 1 (Ga1): Providing a 40 to 45 foot “driveway” between Arastradero Road and Access Gate A to allow a safe pull out for maintenance and emergency vehicles accessing the Preserve11. Design of maintenance drive must take into account the existing 10-foot wide crossing over a concrete culvert. The culvert is located approximately 28 feet from the edge of pavement. • Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail - Segment 2 (JB2): Develop turn-around in a hammerhead configuration to accommodate Type 3 and 4 emergency fire vehicles. Locate on west side of bridge in the area that is nearly flat and already contains hardened surfaces and non-native grassland. Avoid nearby riparian habitat and serpentine soils. Refer to Map 36 Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access - Turn-around Point 2. • Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail - Segment 4 (JB4): Mow an area near the junction of the Portola Pastures Trail to provide room for Type 3 and 4 emergency fire vehicles to turn-around following procedures outlined in Section 7.2. Maintain a minimum cover of 2 inches to minimize potential erosion impacts. Refer to Figure 36 Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access - Turn-around Point 10. • Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail - Segment 5 (JB5): Developing an emergency Type 3 and 4 vehicle hammerhead turn-around at the junction with Segment 4 of the Juan Bautista de Anza Trail. Improvements to the area should be confined, to the greatest extend possible, to the existing graded area at the trail junction. Refer to Map 4 - Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access – Turn-around Point 9. 11 Like many of the recommendations, this has already been accomplished. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 107 • Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail - Segment 5 (JB5): Providing a 40 to 45 foot “driveway” between Arastradero Road and Access Gate B to allow a safe pull out for maintenance and emergency vehicles accessing the Preserve. • Stanford Pastures Trail (SP): One year after the trail tread has been established mow an area near the boundary of the Preserve to provide room for Type 3 and 4 emergency fire vehicles to turn-around following procedures outlined in section 7.2. Maintain a minimum cover of 2 inches to minimize potential erosion impacts. Refer to Map 33 Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access - Turn-around Point 1. • Meadowlark Trail (MeL1): Develop a hammerhead vehicle turn-around for Type 3 and 4 emergency vehicles to turn-around near the old barn site. Improvements to the turn-around should be confined to the existing graded pad that formerly served as the driveway for the old barn. Refer to Map 33 Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access – Turn-around Point 7. • Woodland Trail Segment 1(Wo1): Maintain existing, paved vehicular turn-around that encircles the water tank for utility vehicles. Note that this turn-around is not suitable for Type 3 and 4 fire vehicles due to the tight turning radius around the tank. Refer to Map 4 - Fire Protection & Emergency & Maintenance Access – Turn-around Point 8. 4.1.3 Vegetation Management 4.1.3.1 Brushing and Clearing Defined Brushing and clearing constitutes the removal of vegetative materials as required to provide adequate vertical and horizontal clearance for safe passage along a trail. 4.1.3.2 Techniques for Maintaining a Clear Passageway Vegetation on the south sides of the trail should be pruned to allow passage, but should be preserved, as much as possible, to protect the aesthetic quality of the trail. Typically, vegetation is cleared to a height of 10 feet and 2 to 3 feet to either side of the trail edge to accommodate equestrian use. A minimum sight distance of 100 feet should be maintained, where feasible to facilitate safe shared use of the trail system. Good pruning practices should be followed, including cutting branches almost flush with the limb, and cutting stumps at ground level or below. Large limbs should be pruned almost flush with the trunk. Dead and dying limbs and snags, which may fall on the trail, should be removed. Typically, ground cover plants and low shrubs should not be removed except on the actual trail tread. Where specific trail segments (Refer to Section 6) recommend controlling invasive, non-native plants, the Arastradero Preserve Management Plan management strategies should be used. This means that vegetation management adjacent to the trails should be performed in a way that maximizes the safety of the users and minimizes adverse environmental impacts. Appropriate management techniques include in order of preference, control with “beneficial insects”, where they have been determined through study not to have detrimental environmental impacts, removal by hand pulling, or pruning with weed whips or (as a last choice) with chemicals. When weed whips are employed, a 2-inch minimum cover should be retained to minimize exposure of bare earth and resulting impacts from splash erosion and gullying. Herbicides should only be used as approved by the Open Space and Parks Division Manager. In addition, the chemicals must be applied in accordance with California State law and must adhere to the conditions set forth in the City’s “Integrated City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 108 Pest Management Plan” to ensure the safety of staff, visitors and wildlife and to reduce or eliminate the possibility of chemicals entering the creek. Where a trail is located on a side slope, the vegetation on the uphill side will be more intrusive and should be cut back more severely than on the downhill side. Low growing vegetation should be allowed to return to cut slopes to increase soil stability. Replant areas with vegetation indigenous to those areas or compatible with plantings already in place. Overhanging limbs should be cut back flush with the tree trunk, brush should be grubbed out and disposed of out of sight of the trail and scattered not stacked. Excess rock should be disposed of in the same manner as brush and limbs. All loose roots protruding over one inch above the trail tread should be cut out to at least 4 inches beyond the margins of the tread and to a depth of 4 inches below tread level and removed. Holes resulting from root removal should be filled and compacted with mineral soil and or rock, not exceeding 2 inches in diameter. Advance warning of all vegetation management activities in the Preserve shall be given to the Open Space and Parks Division Manager at least one week in advance of the work. Turn-around Existing Conditions Recommended Actions #1 Trail: SP Mowed grassland dominated by non-native plants Mow area near boundary of the Preserve for Type 3 & 4 emergency fire vehicles to turn-around. Maintain 2” min. grass cover. #2 Trail:JB2 Area is nearly flat & already contains hardened surfaces and non-native grassland Perform minor grading to develop hammerhead turn-around for Type 3 & 4 emergency fire vehicles on west side of bridge in the area that is nearly flat. Avoid nearby riparian habitat and serpentine soils. #3 Trail: Jct. ArC & Ac Existing hardened surface adjacent to lake & utility booster station. Maintain the existing vehicle turn-around at booster pump station. No grading or vegetation removal required. #4 Trail: CM2 Mowed grassland dominated by non-native plants Mow area at junction of Bay View Trail for Type 3 & 4 emergency fire vehicles to turn-around. Maintain 2” min. grass cover. #5 Trail:ArC2 Grassland dominated by non-native plants on opposite side of utility road from creek & does not affect creek zone Perform minor grading to develop hammerhead turnaround in area that is nearly flat near junction of Route F (now scheduled for closure) for Type 3 & 4 emergency fire vehicles. Define area with native vegetation in a natural configuration. Avoid nearby riparian habitat. #6 Trail: ArC3 Existing dirt driveway. No grading or vegetation removal required Locate at existing gate on the east side of the trail. Move gate back to accommodate Type 3 & 4 emergency fire vehicles. Confine turn-around area to existing graded pad. Minimize annual pruning to area necessary for vehicle access. #7 Existing drive to old barn site. No grading or Confine turn-around to existing graded pad that formerly served City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 109 Trail: MeL1 vegetation removal req. as the driveway for the old barn. #8 Trail: Wo1 Existing road around the water tank. Tight radius will not accommodate Type 3 & 4 vehicles Maintain existing, paved vehicular turn-around that encircles water tank for utility vehicles. #9 Trail: Jct. JB 4 & 5 Flat grassland area at junction of two trails. Minor grading may be necessary Perform minor grading to develop hammerhead turnaround at the junction Juan Bautista de Anza Trail Segs. 4 & 5. Confined work (to the greatest extend possible) to existing graded area at the trail junction. #10 Trail: JB 4 Mowed grassland Mow an area near junction with Portola Pastures Trail to provide room for Type 3 & 4 emergency fire vehicles to turn-around. Maintain 2” min. grass cover. Figure 37: Vehicle Turn-around Design Summary. Final siting of all turn–around to be approved by Open Space and Parks Division Manager prior to initiating any grading. 4.2 Foothills Park Trails Maintenance Plan (January 29, 2002) The Trails Master Plan for Foothills Park recognizes that the preserve is located in the Hazardous Fire Area (HFA) and Mutual Threat Zone (MTZ). The plan identifies the existing fuel break system but focuses on maintenance of the existing trails. 4.2.1 Recommended Revisions The following are recommended additions and modifications to the 2002 Trails Maintenance Plan: • Addition of fuel management along the additional evacuation routes to northwest (Interpretive Center to The 600-700 block of Los Trancos Road), northeast (Boronda Lake to Alexis Drive), and from Towle Campground along Wildhorse Valley to Las Trampas Valley. • Addition of four Firefighter Safety Zones along Trappers Ridge Trail at Los Trancos Trail, Madrone Fire Road and two highpoints (high point and south end); projects # F.F1, through F.F4. • Addition of annual maintenance of defensible space around the Interpretive Center, parking lot and staging area, campgrounds, pumping stations to include projects F.D1 through F.D8. • Addition of annual maintenance ignition reduction projects at picnic sites and campgrounds to include projects F.I1 through F.I7. • Addition of fuel reduction zones along existing trails for containment including projects F.C1 (Trappers Trail), F.C2 (Pony Tracks south of Trappers Ridge), F.C3 (Pony Tracks north of Trappers Ridge), F.C4 (Bobcat Point) and F.C5 (north of entry gate). • Modify tables for managing trails within specific vegetation types to accommodate fuel modification performance standards for the containment projects. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 110 • Addition to Regulatory, Warning and Educational Signs regarding fire hazard signs, education information on fuel management and prescribed fire. 4.2.2 Existing Fire Mitigation and Fuel Management in the Foothills Park Trails Maintenance Plan Staff Responsibilities (Executive Summary, page 104) The foothills parks are staffed by rangers that are based out of the Foothills Park office. Park rangers are responsible for patrolling, monitoring and maintaining Foothills Park. They oversee the fieldwork of the California Conservation Corps (CCC) work program, as well as other volunteer work programs at the Park. Rangers also lead guided nature walks and give nature slide shows. In addition, while the primary responsibility for fire and medical emergencies lies with the City Fire Department, rangers will typically be the first response team for fire and medical emergencies within the park. Park Maintenance/Utility/Emergency (e.g. fire) (Section 2.4 pg 2-5) There are three other entry points off Page Mill Road that maintenance and emergency vehicles use to provide access from Page Mill Road. These are labeled as Gates 2, 3 and 4. Gate 2 provides access to the Charlie Brown firebreak and Toyon Trail. Gate 3 provides access to the Park Reservoir, a 1.5 million gallon city water reservoir. Gate 4 provides access to the Trapper’s Fire Trail and to the southern portion of the Los Trancos Trail. In addition, utility vehicles and park maintenance/patrol vehicles wanting to access the Arastradero Creek Trail (Segment 3) within Arastradero Preserve enter Foothills Park and access this trail from Gate D. Gate D is located on the one-way road that leads from the Interpretive Center to Vista Hill in Foothills Park. There is also an access easement from Los Trancos Road in Portola Valley connecting to the service yard at the north end of the park. This easement is only accessible by park staff. Hazardous Fire Area (Section 2.4 pg 2-6): The Park is identified in the Hazardous Fire Area because of the tremendous vegetation fuel load and the potential for extended response times in the event of a fire due to limited access/egress into the park. The area has also been designated as a Mutual Threat Zone (MTZ) by agreement with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. This means that a fire within the City’s jurisdiction is a threat to the State’s jurisdiction and vice versa. Firebreaks (Section 2.4 page 2-6 – 2-8): To meet the City’s objective of “reducing government costs and citizen losses from wildland fire by increasing initial attack success and or protecting assets at risk through focused prefire management objectives” a fuel break system has been designed and implemented for Foothills Park. The main firebreak (by distance and location) is the Trapper’s Firebreak Trail. It is two miles long, essentially running along the spine of the park. There are also several smaller breaks that are maintained as access roads for fire response. These branching firebreaks, which are located throughout the park, and the Trappers Firebreak Trail, are graded and compacted to a width of 10 feet or greater to accommodate the City Fire Department’s Type 3 and 4 vehicles. These firebreak trails have the potential to be reduced in width, or substituted with shaded fuel breaks if environmentally desirable. (A shaded fuel break allows annual grasses to return to the land, but not medium or heavy fuels.) Evacuation (Section 2.4 Page 2–8): In addition to the firebreak trail network, “safety islands” have been identified in the park and an evacuation plan has been developed for the park. The primary evacuation route (as identified in the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan) is Page Mill Road. The main road through the park connects to an access easement that provides an alternate evacuation route between Page Mill Road and Los Trancos Road. City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 111 Natural Resources Management Objectives Adjacent to the Trail (Section 3.4 pg 304). Retaining native vegetation except in areas where City personnel determine that plants are creating a fire or safety hazard, or where vegetation is located within the tread of routinely maintained roads, trails and designated firebreaks Noxious Plants and Pathogens (Page 4-17 – 4-24): Control and prevention of non-native invasive plant species is recognized as quite important. Infestations of non-native invasive plant species have been found to alter ecosystem functions such as nutrient cycles, hydrology, and wildfire frequency. Non-native invasive plant species pose a complex problem, but the management of the spread is a key factor in preventing long- lasting and negative effects on the native ecosystem. The plan recognizes that trail maintenance activities need to address the fact that most of these species gain a foothold by invading soil that has been disturbed, such as through re-grading or vegetation clearing that results in the removal of ground cover plants adjacent to the trail tread. The plan includes a table of the non-native invasive plants of greatest ecological concern. (Table 4-6 page 4-18 – 4-24.) Sudden Oak Death (SOD) (page 4-24 – 4-25): Sudden Oak Death is caused by the pathogen Phytophthora ramorum that kills oaks and several other California woodland species found in Foothills Park. The pathogen appears to kill trees and shrubs swiftly and has greatly affected the visual integrity and diversity of the California Oak woodland as it is defined today. First discovered in California on Tan Oaks in 1995, it has now been confirmed in ten California counties, including Santa Clara County. Note: Information available on this SOD has expanded since the maintenance plan was developed in 2002. Trails Maintenance Program Development (Section 5.2 pg 5-2): Trail inspections are integral to all trail maintenance operations. Inspections should occur on a regularly scheduled basis, the frequency of which will depend on the amount of trail use, the location, age, and the types of structures and the types of soil/terrain. At a minimum, all trail and trail structures/features should be inspected at least once a year at the close of the winter “wet season”. All trail inspections should be documented in writing in a field log. Conditions that have the potential to be the most hazardous to the public, which should be watched for during field inspections, include: • Heavy fuel loads which could create a high or critical danger fire hazard in the park. Other Staff Duties Related to Park Protection & Trail Activities (Section 5.3 pg 5-9): While the primary responsibility for fire and medical emergencies lies with the City Fire Department, Park Rangers will typically be the first response team for fire and medical emergencies within the Park. Foothills Park Rangers have received various limited levels of fire fighting training and are dispatched as a resource to fires and other emergency calls. They are a valuable resource as they provide enhanced local knowledge of the area, and can be used to augment Engine Eight or to perform other tasks, such as evacuation or reconnaissance. The Palo Alto Fire Department has rated the Rangers control of public areas and Park maintenance practices, which augment the City’s fuel management system as outstanding (Palo Alto Draft Fire Management Plan, April 1997). Trail Maintenance Guidelines (Section 6 pages 6-1 – 6-81): Section 6.3 provides an overview in table format of the existing trail characteristics (Table 6-1 page 6-4 through 6-8). The tables currently do not include information regarding whether the trail segments are a part of the firebreak system. Section 6.5 (pages 6-10 through 6-21) includes management strategies for maintaining hiking trails. A series of tables provides a summary of managing trails within grasslands/ oak savanna (Table 6-2), chaparral (Table 6-3), mixed woodlands (Table 6-4) and bay woodlands (Table 6-5). These tables include treatments of the vegetation ground plan, middle plane and overhead canopy. They do not specifically address management practices to be used if the trail is a part of a fire containment area. Section 6-8 includes Vegetation City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 112 Management Recommendations text that expands upon the summary tables with additional descriptions and standards (pages 6-56 – 6-63). Trail Communication Tools (Section 6.11 pg 6-77 through 6-81): Trail signs include temporary/ permanent closures for hazards associated with critical fire danger (page 6-80). Interpretive trail guides and programs offer the opportunity to educate visitors about the biological diversity of Foothills Park and the importance of staying on trails to avoid damaging this unique resource (page 6-81). City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Draft (15 January 2009) 113 5 REFERENCES Acterra - Action for a sustainable earth, www.acterra.org, 3291 East Bayshore Rd., Palo Alto, CA 94303, meetings September 2008. Anderson, H.E. 1983. Aids to determining fuel models for estimating fire behavior. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report. INT-122. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration – Andrew Molera State Park / Pt Sur State Historic Park Water System Improvements, April 2006. California Native Plant Society, Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California, August 2001 City of Palo Alto, Final Arastradero Preserve Trails Management Program, 2001 City of Palo Alto, Final Foothills Park Preserve Trails Management Program, 2002 City of Palo Alto, Geospatial Information System Data, provided May 2008 Environmental Protection Agency, Frogs and Pesticide Hazards, December 2006 Finney, M.A. 2006. An overview of FlamMap modeling capabilities. USDA Forest Service Proceedings. RMRS-P-41. 213p. Grijalva, Ruben, Fire Chief, Martin, Bruce, Project Manager, Palo Alto Fire Department, Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan, April 1997 Ministry of Water, land, and Air Protection, British Columbia, Environmental Best Management Practices for Urban and Rural Land Development, June 2004 Natural Diversity Database, California Department of Fish and Game, Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List, July 2008 Natural Diversity Database, California Department of Fish and Game, Endangered, Threatened and Rare Plants List, July 2008 Natural Diversity Database, California Department of Fish and Game, Special Animals List, Feb 2008 Natural Diversity Database, California Department of Fish and Game, Endangered and Threatened Animals List, May 2008 Rothermel, Richard. 1983. How to Predict the Spread and Intensity of Forest and Range Fires, USDA Forest Service Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report INT-143. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. U.S. General Soil Map (STATSGO2) for California. United States Geological Survey, United States Department of Interior. The National Map LANDFIRE: LANDFIRE National Existing Vegetation Type (2006 September – 2008, May). City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment California Environmental Quality Act DRAFT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Date: February 9, 2009 Project Name: Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Project Location: The project area is located in the most southern region of the City of Palo Alto, in the northern part of Santa Clara County, west of U.S. Highway 280. The project area includes the two parks in the foothills of Palo Alto: Foothills Park and Pearson Arastradero Preserve. In addition, the project includes segments of Skyline Boulevard, Page Mill, Arastradero, and Los Trancos Road. Applicant: City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment Clare Campbell, Planner Owner: City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Project Description: The proposed 2009 update to Palo Alto Fire Management Plan proposes fuel management on approximately 330 acres of Foothills and Arastradero Parks to protect lives, enhance the safety of improvements in and around the parks and to enhance the natural resource ecosystem health. Fuel management fall into the following categories: roadside treatments along potential evacuation corridors, creation and maintenance of firefighter safety zones, creation and maintenance of defensible space around structures in the parks, ignition prevention, and treatments to aid containment of fires in and within the park. II. DETERMINATION In accordance with the City of Palo Alto’s procedures for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City has conducted an Initial Study to determine whether the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of that study, the City makes the following determination: The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby adopted. X Although the project, as proposed, could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect on the environment in this case because mitigation measures have been added to the project and, therefore, a MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby adopted. Page 1 of 4 The attached initial study incorporates all relevant information regarding the potential environmental effects of the project and confirms the determination that an EIR is not required for the project. In addition, the following mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project: BIO - 1: A qualified biologist or park staff trained to do so by a qualified biologist shall conduct a tail-gate training session to all relevant personnel who will be performing treatments regarding protected species and habitats in the project area, the limitations on areas that can be accessed on foot or with equipment, and the legal consequences of take of protected species or habitat. The training shall be repeated for new personnel coming to the project site. Dogs shall be prohibited from the project site. BIO - 2: Vegetation removal in any vegetation type from February 15 to August 31 shall require a survey for nesting birds by a qualified biologist or by park staff trained to do so by a qualified biologist and avoiding removal of nests in active use. If raptor nests are detected, a buffer area will need to be established around the nest in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. The buffer may be 250 feet. BIO - 3: Vegetation removal in areas of serpentine soil, oak woodland, chaparral, coastal scrub and riparian forest habitats shall require a survey for rare plant species by a qualified biologist/ botanist prior to vegetation removal. Known rare plant locations should be treated in a way that benefits the rare species. This may include limiting the area of treatment in order to provide a buffer around the plant(s), or may include selectively trimming competitive vegetation adjacent to the plant(s). Some species may benefit from disturbance; the specific actions to be taken should be determined in consultation with a botanist. The plant survey shall be performed during the bloom period. After surveys in the same locations over three separate years, subsequent surveys are not necessary in that area unless there a newly listed plant species could occur in the habitat. This should be determined by consulting the California Department of Fish and Game. BIO - 4: Vegetation removal, including dead and downed debris, shall require a survey for presence of San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat by a qualified biologist or by park staff trained to identify woodrat houses by a qualified biologist. If woodrat houses are found, disturbance should be avoided and a minimum five-foot buffer should be provided around the house. If, for public safety reasons, it is necessary to move the house, the process must be coordinated with the California Department of Fish and Game. All relevant workers shall receive instruction regarding woodrat houses prior to their start of work. BIO - 5: Prior to the removal of any tree that is 12 inches or more in diameter breast height, a survey for perennial bat roosts and, during the breeding season from February 15 to August 31, raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified biologist or park staff trained by a qualified biologist to identify these resources is required. If present, removal cannot continue without CDFG guidance. BIO - 6: Discing within 500 feet of a lake, pond or creek, shall require a biological survey to determine impacts to California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, San Francisco garter snake and Western pond turtle and whether permits are required from the USFWS/CDFG. BIO - 7: Discing in grassland shall require a pre-construction survey for American badger, California red- legged frog and burrowing owl by a qualified biologist. BIO - 8: Trimming of coast live oaks shall follow the City’s Tree Ordinance (Title 8). Coast live oak or Valley oaks that are 11.5 inches in diameter or more measured at 54 inches above grade may not be removed without a permit, and may not be pruned such that more than 25 percent of the crown is removed or the tree is left unbalanced. BIO - 9: Wetlands mapped in Pearson Arastradero Preserve shall be avoided when weed-whipping or mowing. Modify the Fire Management Plan Best Management Practice that requires that a grazing plan be prepared to include protection of drainages and wetlands from the impacts of grazing animals. BIO - 10: For treatments in Foothills Park or on Page Mill Road along the Park border, a pre-work survey for stands of locally important plants shall be conducted, and the plants avoided as long as it does not impair public safety. Field crews shall be educated about the sensitivity of these plant species. For additional information, see Table 3 in Appendix A of the Biological Assessment (Source Reference #5). BIO - 11: For proposed treatments, clean all tools and equipment following actions and prior to movement into new environmental areas to prevent the spread of invasive or non-native plants. BIO - 12: Measures shall be taken to clean equipment, tires, and shoes to prevent the spread of Sudden Oak Death, and that any materials infected with the disease be disposed of in accordance with State or County Agricultural Commission guidelines. To reduce the possibility of spreading the disease, it is recommended that Page 2 of 4 work not be done in wet or muddy conditions, and that infested areas be avoided to the extent feasible. Additional guidelines are available from the County Agricultural Commissioner. BIO - 13: A qualified biologist shall be present onsite to monitor all treatment work. The biological monitor shall have the authority to stop work if deemed necessary to protect state or federally protected species, and shall work directly with the City staff. Prior to the start of work each day, the monitor shall thoroughly inspect the treatment area and adjacent habitat areas to determine if any protected species are present in the area and shall remain onsite through out the day while work activities are occurring. If a protected species is encountered, the onsite biological monitor shall determine whether treatment activities are remote enough from the animal that it will not be harmed or harassed. BIO - 14: Treatment equipment and materials shall be staged in an already disturbed area such as improved trails or existing roads. BIO - 15: Prior to introduction, all grazing animals shall be quarantined for three days and fed weed-free forage to limit spread of invasive or unwanted plant species, as well as prevent spread of livestock diseases. BIO - 16: Grazing shall be limited to non-riparian areas. BIO - 17: Maintain a buffer between the prescribed burn area and water bodies or drainage into riparian zones. Buffers should be a minimum of 25 feet for 5% slopes, 75 feet for 5-10% slopes, and 250 feet for 10% or greater slopes. No prescribed fires shall be ignited near streams or in riparian zones. BIO - 18: Herbicide treatments within habitat of California Red-legged Frog shall be conducted according to U.S. District Court injunction and order covering 66 pesticides (Oct 2006) and subsequent EPA effects determinations. BIO - 19: Avoid herbicide treatments in areas adjacent to water bodies, riparian areas, and primary drainage access. Follow all herbicide labels and directions in determining applications near water resources or riparian habitats. Limit aerial application to greater than 100 feet from water resources. Limit ground and hand application to greater than 50 feet. Geology - 1: The City shall conduct treatment actions in a manner that avoids erosion and adverse affects on sensitive soil systems by avoiding treatment in sensitive soils and potentially erosive soil areas. This mitigation measure shall be implemented through development of a study that identifies all potentially erosive soils prior to beginning treatment actions and development of an erosion control plan subject to review and approval of City Staff that restricts treatment operations that may adversely affect the sensitive soil systems. Geology - 2: Avoid treatment actions during periods of precipitation, or immediately following severe weather. Geology - 3: (Hand Labor) Avoid excessive foot or vehicle traffic on slopes, unimproved or non-designated trails, or outside of preexisting roads or access points. Geology - 4: (Mechanical). In addition to avoiding treatment actions during periods of precipitation, or immediately following severe weather, avoid scheduling any treatment actions during seasons with significant predicted precipitation. Cease operations or postpone planned operations including movement of vehicles or equipment during precipitation conditions that may combine with vehicle activity to cause damage to roads, trails, or adjacent land areas. Geology - 5: (Mechanical) Plan treatment actions and equipment selection to minimize damage or alterations to existing soils. Geology - 6: (Mechanical) Maintain a buffer of 25-50 feet between operations and water bodies or designated riparian areas. Avoid crossing drainage channels, run-off areas, or dry streambeds. Install and manage run-off barriers for rainwater in all treatment and operating areas. Restrict mechanical removal of trees to areas further than 50 feet from drainage channels. Geology - 7: (Mechanical) Restrict vehicle traffic to preexisting roads or pre-planned access points based on equipment size and operations. Limit transport and support equipment to existing roads. Limit heavy equipment use to slopes less than 30%. Install erosion control measures on all vehicle roads and traffic areas. Geology - 8: (Grazing) The City shall conduct grazing operations in a manner that avoids over-grazing and prevents erosion by appropriately limiting the intensity and scope of grazing. This mitigation measure shall be implemented through development of a grazing management plan prepared by a certified range specialist that specifies goals, stocking levels, grazing periods, installation of range improvements (such as water sources) to evenly distribute utilization of feed, and monitoring and performance criteria to address the potential erosion conditions created by over-grazing. Geology - 9: (Grazing) Develop a site-specific annual grazing plan to be approved by a certified range specialist that includes project-level plans for sticking, timing, and resource management goals. Page 3 of 4 Geology -10: (Burns) The City shall conduct prescribed burns in a manner that minimizes post-fire erosion into water bodies and drainage through the use of natural barriers, fire lines along contours, erosion control barrier deployment, and avoidance of areas with highly erodible soils. This mitigation measure shall be implemented through development, prior to conducting a prescribed burn, of a prescribed burn erosion control plan (or included in the prescribed bum plan) subject to review and approval by City Staff. Hazards -1: All treatment methods involving fueling and maintenance operations shall be strictly monitored and controlled. This mitigation measure shall be implemented by conducting all maintenance actions that may produce spills should be executed in areas with secondary containment protection, away from any water bodies or drainage areas; cleaning up all spills shall be done on-site, and clean-up materials shall be maintained on site so they are readily available for use. Inspection of equipment for new leaks and mechanical problems should be performed daily, prior to operations. Hazards -2: Cease actions during periods of high fire danger or during red flag conditions. Ensure that all mechanical equipment have approved spark arrestors and comply with California Public Resources Code (PRC) sections 4431, 4435, 4442, and 4437 to limit potential for ignition of incidental fires. Hazards -3: Maintain on-site fire suppression resources to include shovel, water pump, fire extinguisher, and two-way radio or communications for fire reporting. Herbicide Application Hazards -4: The City shall conduct herbicide application in a manner that uses the least amount of chemical required to achieve a desired outcome; the herbicide treatment shall be consistent with the City of Palo Alto's Integrated Pest Management policy. Hazards -5: Provide or confnm adequate training, experience, and oversight to ensure that personnel are familiar with herbicide operations and planning, site conditions, potential and identified sensitive resources, and the identification of specific environmental features or conditions that must be avoided. Herbicide application shall only be applied per a prescription prepared by a Pesticide Control Advisor licensed in Santa Clara County, and applied by a licensed Pesticide Control Applicator. Hazards -6: The City shall conduct herbicide application in a manner that protects public safety by informing the public of treatment and restricting access, when deemed appropriate. This mitigation measure shall be implemented through development of a public safety plan, which shall include requirements for press and information releases, signs and notifications, and guidelines for fencing or area restrictions, and shall be subject to review and approval of the Pesticide Control Advisor and the Directors of Community Services and Fire Department, and the terms of which shall be executed throughout the treatment cycle .. Hazards -7: The City shall conduct herbicide application in a manner that protects against and minimizes damage from spills by maintaining strict monitoring and control of operations, and providing for clean up of all spills to be done on-site, with clean-up materials readily available for use. This mitigation measure shall be implemented through development of a spill contingency plan subject to review and approval of the Pesticide Control Advisor and the Directors of Community Services and Fire Department. Hazards -8: Chemical treatments within habitat of California Red-legged Frog shall be conducted according to U.s. District Court injunction and order covering 66 pesticides (Oct' 2006) and subsequent EPA effects determinations. Hazards -9: Clean equipment following actions and prior to movement into new environmental areas. Hazards -10: Avoid treating areas adjacent to water bodies, riparian areas, and primary drainage access. Follow all herbicide labels and directions in determining applications near water resources or riparian habitats. Limit aerial application to greater than 100 feet from water resources. Limit ground and hand application to greater than 50 feet. Hazards -11: A void treating areas used for livestock operations or intended as grazing areas. ~ 02.~O~m ~ner Date Page 4 of4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. PROJECT TITLE Foothills Fire Management Plan Update 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment 250 Hamilton Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94303 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER Clare Campbell, Planner City of Palo Alto 650-617-3191 4. PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS City Manager’s Office City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94303 Contact: Kenneth Dueker 5. APPLICATION NUMBER Not Applicable 6. PROJECT LOCATION The project area is located in the most southern region of the City of Palo Alto, in the northern part of Santa Clara County, west of U.S. Highway 280. The project area includes the two parks in the foothills of Palo Alto: Foothills Park and Pearson Arastradero Preserve. In addition, the project includes segments of Skyline Boulevard, Page Mill, Arastradero, and Los Trancos Road. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 1 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 1: City of Palo Alto › Pearson Arastradero Preserve  Foothills Park ›  Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 2 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 2: Foothills Park Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 3 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 3: Pearson Arastradero Preserve Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 4 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration 7. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION The project area, Foothills Park and Pearson Arastradero Preserve, is comprised of three land use designations that are described in the Palo Alto 1998 – 2010 Comprehensive Plan. There are no proposed changes in the use; the existing park use is an appropriate use for these land use designations. Foothills Park is designated as Public Park. This land use provides for open lands whose primary purpose is active recreation and whose character is essentially urban. These areas have been planted with non-indigenous landscaping and require a concerted effort to maintain recreational facilities and landscaping. Pearson Arastradero Preserve is designated as Publicly Owned Conservation Land and Streamside Open Space. The Publicly Owned Conservation Land designation provides for open lands whose primary purpose is the preservation and enhancement of the natural state of the land and its plants and animals. Only compatible resource management, recreation, and educational activities are allowed. The Streamside Open Space designation describes the corridor of riparian vegetation along a natural stream. Hiking, biking, and riding trails may be developed in the streamside open space. The corridor will generally vary in width up to 200 feet either side of the center line of the creek. 8. ZONING The project area, Foothills Park and Pearson Arastradero Preserve, has the base zoning of Public Facility (PF). In addition to this base zoning, Pearson Arastradero has an added zoning overlay of Site and Design (D) that requires proposed development projects to undergo a more critical design review. The PF zone district is designed to accommodate governmental, public utility, educational, and community service or recreational facilities. There are no proposed changes in the use; the existing park use is an allowable use in this zone district. 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Palo Alto developed a Fire Management Plan in 1982. The 1982 Plan provided the planning framework for fire control activities for the City and the Palo Alto foothills area. The goal of the 1982 Plan was “to reduce government costs and citizen losses from wildland fire by increasing initial attack success and/or protecting assets at risk through focused pre-fire management activities.” In 1997, the City of Palo Alto staff developed a draft update to the 1982 Plan. Although the draft update was not formally adopted by the City Council, it provided an updated framework and interim objectives for fire management within the foothills area. The City of Palo Alto initiated an update process for the Foothills Fire Management Plan (Plan) that involved a combination of City staff personnel from a wide cross section of city operations, stakeholders from across the Palo Alto area, and members of the Palo Alto community. The Palo Alto Foothills consist of a mix of urban, semi-urban and open space lands on the eastern slope of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Within the city limits of Palo Alto, the Palo Alto Foothills area west of the Foothills Expressway and Junipero Serra Boulevard represents a Wildland Urban Interface area (WUI). The City’s Fire Department’s response area in the WUI Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 5 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration covers nearly 10 square miles, from Skyline Boulevard in the Palo Alto foothills to Foothill Boulevard and from Page Mill Road to Los Trancos Road. Approximately 200 residences and large business complexes (many of them exceeding a million square feet in area) are located in Palo Alto’s WUI. The City’s Emergency Operations Plan (June 2007) notes that 11 health care facilities, 10 schools and 25 government-owned buildings are located in the wildland urban interface threat areas, along with 19 miles of roadway that are subject to high, very high or extreme wild fire threat. The Plan addresses fire hazard protection within Foothills Park and Pearson Arastradero Preserve, which represent the majority of the Wildland Urban Interface fire area, as well as the major evacuation routes in proximity to these parks. The proposed 2009 update to Palo Alto Fire Management Plan (Plan) proposes fuel management on approximately 330 acres of Foothills and Arastradero Parks to protect lives, enhance the safety of improvements in and around the parks and to enhance the natural resource ecosystem health. Fuel management fall into the following categories: roadside treatments along potential evacuation corridors, creation and maintenance of firefighter safety zones, creation and maintenance of defensible space around structures in the parks, ignition prevention and treatments to aid containment of fires in and within the park. Fuel management is justified by various objectives, spanning the need to keep fires from crossing boundaries, minimizing damage to developed areas and minimizing damage to natural resources. Other fuel management complies with regulations, which themselves are intended to increase access, or facilitate fire suppression. A variety of fuel management practices reduce the chance of damage to life and property. There are techniques that keep fire from crossing boundaries, which could be in the form of fuel management to compartmentalize the landscape, or fuel management along the borders of the parks, or modification of the volume or structure of the fuels to reduce chance of ember production or enhance firefighting effectiveness. The proposed Plan also addresses several issues aside from the proposed fuel management strategies for the Foothills. These other components are contained in a section of the Plan that includes recommendations related to administration of the Plan, including consistency between the Foothills Park Trails Maintenance Plan and the Pearson Arastradero Trails Management Plan, review of Municipal Ordinances, review of staffing of Fire Station 8, suggested implementation plan, and identification of potential funding . Those policy recommendations are purely administrative and do not amount to activities for which it is foreseeable that a direct or indirect change in the physical environment would result. Therefore, the environmental impacts that are discussed in this checklist refer specifically to the components of the Plan that address physical changes to the project area as a result of the proposed fuel management strategies for the Palo Alto Foothills. Fuel Management Not every area identified as a potential fire hazard can be modified to produce low-intensity fires. Not only would this be too costly, but environmental impacts would also be unacceptable. Fires that burn in un-treated areas will not benefit from treatment elsewhere. The exception is that the fire may be contained in the treated area, thereby never reaching the untreated area. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 6 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Identifying Potential Treatment Areas Selection of pre-fire fuel treatment areas is based on the probability of the event and the potential damage of that event. Factors taken into consideration are: • Need for enhanced access and egress: Actions to promote life safety and efficient emergency response is of utmost importance. Roadside treatments that aid safer access and evacuation have a high likelihood and magnitude of benefit. • Ignition locations: Treatments are located either where ignitions are likely to occur or could spread into (e.g. a grassy spot near a road, or near a barbeque). Even where an area would burn with great ferocity, if there is only a remote chance of ignition, it has a lower treatment priority. • Adjacency to improvements or other sensitive values at risk from wildfire: The closer the fuel source is to a structure, heavily used area, or environmentally sensitive area, the higher the treatment priority. Therefore, an area in the interior of a Park/Preserve, well removed from other vulnerabilities, should not be treated with the same priority as a hazardous situation near valuable and/or vulnerable resources. • Propensity of the treatment to aid containment: Treatments that facilitate access or create locations where containment is likely to be successful have greater benefit because they improve fire suppression success. Also, a fire that is easy to contain will be more likely to have fewer environmental impacts from the suppression action itself. In the end, the most intense fire, and possibly the largest potential fire size, may not be highest on the treatment priority list. This may be because the likelihood of the event coupled with the potential damage from the fire would not yield the highest risk. Current Fuel Management Program The two parks have a long history of managing vegetation to both promote fire safety and to enhance natural resources. In some cases, projects attain both goals. Previous projects in Foothills Park encompass discing along park boundaries, grazing with goats in Las Trampas Valley, maintenance of a mowed fuel break along various locations, including a broad fuel break sometimes 200-ft wide along Trappers Ridge, and more narrow fuel breaks along the Madrone Fire Road, Shotgun Fire Road, Pony Tracks Fire Road, and around Fire Station 8. Fuel management in Pearson Arastradero includes discing along park boundaries, mowing 14 different broad areas within the park, and maintenance of vegetation along park roads. Grading of the fire roads has been a component of the contract between Van der Steen General Engineering and Palo Alto for annual firebreak maintenance. Grading has been performed as part of this contract only in the last three years; low annual rainfall and erosion has not warranted grading. To minimize grading work, city employees from all departments are strictly prohibited from driving the bare soil roadways that do not have asphalt or compacted rock. Grading, as a component of the contract, is specified as only when necessary. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 7 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Discing has been performed by City staff for the last 7+ years. After trials with several methods, the City found that a two discing cycles work best. The first cycle is performed when the threat of spring rains has diminished, drainages or low areas are dry, and annual grasses are still green. The depth of discing is less than 6-inches, and causes a disruption of the growth of the annual grasses (less biomass). The second cycle of discing is after the annual grasses have cured/dried but there is still some soil moisture. Discing is full depth or up to 10-inches. Completely dry soil makes traction nearly non-existent, which is a safety hazard for the equipment operator, and produces copious amounts of dust to the surrounding area during both discing and grading operations. Mowing is routinely conducted during the early summer by City staff for resource enhancement. Approximately 200 acres are routinely mowed. Outside of the areas mowed for resource enhancement, large areas are mowed annually in Foothills Park as part of a fuel break. A fuel break is mowed on Trappers Trail, varying from 100-ft to 300-ft in width. Another area routinely mowed is along Pony Tracks Fire Road from the intersection of Los Trancos Trail to Page Mill Road. Most areas are less than 100-ft but the area between Pony Tracks and Los Trancos Trail can reach 300-ft in width. Grazing with sheep and goats is a relatively new component of the fuel management program within the City of Palo Alto Parks. Approximately 5 acres were grazed in 2007 in Las Trampas Valley in Foothill Park, the picnic areas near the road. Defensible Space is maintained near existing structures in Foothills Park and Pearson Arastradero Preserve. This employs the use of hand labor to limb trees and shrubs, cut grass, landscape with fire-resistant plants, and irrigate selected plants. Proposed Treatment Areas The plan identifies 56 specific areas that are a priority for treatment. The areas generally fall into the following five categories based upon the treatment proposed: roadside treatments, defensible space, ignition prevention, firefighter safety zones, and containment fuel breaks. Each treatment location was selected to achieve a specific objective. Many treatments are associated with roadsides, structures and City Park/Preserve boundaries. Treatments for containment are strategically located at ridgetops, in places that have access, are not too steep for mechanical treatments, avoid riparian areas, and are not prone to soil erosion. Figure 4: Treatment Areas Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Foothills Park Treatment Locations Evacuation Routes F.E1 Page Mill Road Within PA City from 9.54 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 8 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Foothills Park Treatment Locations F.E2 Evacuation Route -Park Road Entrance to Maintenance 5.96 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor F.E3 Evacuation Route -Park North west Interpretive Center to 0.57 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor F.E4 Evacuation Route -Park North east Boronda Lake to Alexis Drive 1.21 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor F.E5 Secondary Evac Route Towle Campground to 0.97 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor F.E6 Los Trancos Southwest corner of 6.07 acres Hand labor Firefighter Safety Zone F.F1 Firefighter Safety Zone 1 Trappers Ridge &LosTrancos 0.72 acre mow, graze F.F2 Firefighter Safety Zone 2 Trappers Ridge &MadronFire 0.72 acre mow, graze F.F3 Firefighter Safety Zone 3 Trappers Ridge high point 0.72 acre mow, graze F.F4 Firefighter Safety Zone 4 Trapper Ridge south end 0.72 acre mow, graze Defensible Space F.D.1 Defensible Space Entry Gate 0.72 acre hand labor F.D.2 Defensible Space Station 8 0.72 acre hand labor F.D.3 Defensible Space Restrooms at Orchard Glen < ½ acre hand labor F.D.4 Defensible Space Interpretive Center 0.11 acre hand labor F.D.5 Defensible Space Maintenance Complex 0.72 acre hand labor F.D.6 Defensible Space Boronda Pump Station at 0.72 acre hand labor F.D.7 Defensible Space Dahl Water Tank < 1/2 acre hand labor, grazing F.D.8 Defensible Space Boronda Tank < 1/2 acre hand labor, grazing F.D.9 Defensible Space Park Tank < 1/2 acre hand labor, grazing Ignition Prevention F.I.1 Ignition Prevention Shady Cove Picnic Area < 1/4 ac hand labor F.I.2 Ignition Prevention Encinal Picnic Area < 1/4 ac hand labor F.I.3 Ignition Prevention Pine Gulch Picnic Area < 1/4 ac hand labor F.I.4 Ignition Prevention Orchard Glen < 1/4 ac hand labor F.I.5 Ignition Prevention Oak Grove Group Picnic < 1/4 ac hand labor F.I.6 Ignition Prevention Towle Camp < 1/4 ac hand labor Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 9 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Foothills Park Treatment Locations Containment F.C1 Containment Trappers Trail 72.51 acres mowing, grazing F.C2 Containment Pony Tracks south of 1.37 acres mow annually 10-ft on either size of road,use a F.C3 Containment Pony Tracks north of 1.13 acres mowing, grazing F.C4 Containment Bobcat point 5.28 acres graze with goats F.C5 Containment North of entry Gate 3.47 acres graze with goats F.C6 Containment "Valley View Fire Trail" 3.35 acres mowing Treatment Standards The proposed clearances of the treatments follow in the table below. The treatments that will occur within the project area depend on the vegetation type and treatment method. Figure 5: Treatment Methods and Treatment Intervals Fuel Treatment Types Dimension Treatment Frequency Comments Roadside Treatments Major evacuation routes 30 ft on both sides of pavement edge Rotate 3-5+ years depending on fuel type Secondary evacuation routes 15 ft on both sides of pavement edge Rotate 3-5+ years depending on fuel type Annual for first 10 feet with grass fuels Defensible Space 100-ft from structure Annual Follow-up treatments may not be required annually Ignition Prevention 10-ft from barbeque Annual Firefighter Safety Zones 100-ft radius Annual Containment Fuelbreaks Within 300-ft of ridgetop of Trappers Ridge Rotate 3-5+ years Areas designated goat grazing within park Rotate 3-5+ years Area treatment Two designated potential prescribed burn units per map Rotate 3-5+ years Perimeter treatment Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 10 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration - Brush/understory In designated areas within 300 ft of park boundary Rotate 3-5+ years - Grass Discing or mowing 15- 45 ft from park boundary, as practical Annual - Eucalyptus Removal Individual tree removal One time Follow up to ensure no stump sprouts Timing The timing of the initial or consecutive treatments is important to achieve the desired fuel management performance standards and resource management objectives. Given the variable nature of fuels through changes in weather and season over time, the schedule of the treatment may often be just as important as the type of treatment selected. For example, treatments in grasslands typically take place when grass cures or dries out. Cutting grass too early will be ineffective, as the grass will usually grow back, negating the treatment. Conversely, cutting grass too late will leave the grass in a hazardous condition during periods of high fire danger. Fuel treatments also need to be conducted when the weather is not too dry or windy, as some treatment types, especially mechanical treatments, may inadvertently start fires. Timing the treatment methods appropriately can reduce potential impacts to special-status species or sensitive wildlife species. It is likely that there will be some months of the year when particular practices need to be implemented (e.g., pre-treatment nesting surveys or avoidance of breeding habitat) to avoid adverse affects to special-status species. Timing treatments to either control or avoid the spread of invasive plant species or insect pests is also critical. Treatments should take advantage of differences in the timing of seeding of native plant species and avoid periods when invasive species are in seed. Pruning of pines and eucalyptus should be done when insect pests are not flying to minimize the associated spread and damage from these insects. Pruning should take place from November to April to minimize the susceptibility to bark beetles or red turpentine beetles. In most cases, the timing and method of treatment can be modified to accommodate local habitat needs and still reduce fire hazard to an acceptable level. Methods Fuels can be removed on a large scale by prescribed burns, grazing animals, and mechanical treatment. In small open space areas and around structures, hand labor is effective in reducing the fuel load. Eucalyptus tree removal may be effective in specific locations of high risk. Fuels can be redistributed on a large or small scale through mechanical treatments, such as mowing, discing, or grading. In all the following treatments but hand labor, economies of scale are dramatic; the larger the project, the greater the efficiency. 1. Hand Labor Hand labor involves pruning, cutting or removal of weeds or shrubs either by hand or with hand- held equipment. This process is slow and expensive, but most selective and has little impact beyond the removal of the target plants. This technique generates considerable debris when pulling, pruning, and cutting vegetation. The debris is not always removed from the site due to Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 11 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration the high cost of doing both the clearance and removal by hand. Not removing the debris, however, leaves a significant hazard, possibly greater than pre-treatment because the debris may be voluminous, dry, well aerated, and quite flammable. This method is most commonly used by residents to reduce fuel volume on private lands, or by hand crews on short-term contract with the City of Palo Alto to reduce hazard adjacent to improvements. Some expertise is required to work with trouble species such as poison oak, to prune oaks and control shrubs, and to identify new fuel hazards as they arise. Hand labor encompasses the operations of pruning and weed- whipping, tree removal, pruning, bark pulling, removal of dead wood within the tree/shrub canopy, litter removal and mulching, and establishing new plant material. Hand labor allows use of a wide variety of methods to reduce fuel load, including both chemical and mechanical treatments. Pruning Pruning Trees and shrubs must be hand-pruned to vertically separate fuels. Pruning lower branches of trees is usually done with a hand-held pole saw (with or without a motorized chain saw attached). Lower branches on shorter trees can be pruned with loppers. Weed Whipping Like mowing, weed whipping reduces fire hazard by reducing the fuel height. However, it is done by hand to avoid harming rock outcrops and desired small plants (such as oak regeneration and landscape material). This treatment is generally limited to small material such as grass or short herbs. Weed whipping may be accomplished any time of the year, and regardless of whether the material has cured. Weed whipping is performed with a hand-held, gas powered tool that cuts grasses and very thin woody material with a fast-spinning fishing-line type of cutter. Because this method is performed manually, it can be used to selectively remove certain vegetation. Most large woody stems are not cut by the treatment, however seedlings (such as oak seedlings) can be severely damaged. Treatments can be completed with greater care than the others (however the height to which plants are cut may be difficult to control if the operator is not experienced) and minimize soil disturbance and erosion. It is also often the only type of treatment possible on steep slopes and in wooded areas. The average weed whipping rate is 750 square feet/hour. The schedule for a skilled laborer should be tailored to the timing of their tasks. For example, selective weed whipping of annual grasses before they set seed while leaving native bunch grasses until after these plants set seed can shift the proportion of vegetative cover over time to more bunch grasses. This shift in type of grasses can shorten the length of time the landscape is prone to ignition. Similarly, thistle reproduction can be minimized by cutting while they are growing, but before they set seed. Pruning should be done from November to April; this schedule avoids spreading destructive bark beetles and/or other pathogens. 2. Mechanical Treatments Mechanical treatments, including mowing, weed whipping, discing, and grading, rearrange rather than reduce the actual fuel load. Heavy machinery is usually used in flat areas where terrain and the presence of rocks or numerous trees do not prohibit travel. This type of Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 12 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration machinery should not be used on slopes over 30% because of concerns for worker safety as well as erosion control and slope stability issues. Heavy Machinery Heavy machinery generally means tractors with attachments, such as brush hogs, flail, mowers, and tiger mowers. A variety of attachments serve numerous purposes. For example, a brush hog attachment cuts and breaks brush plants off and produces a mulch of the brush debris. Mowers that cut or flail grass and small woody plants are also attached to tractors. Attachments (such as mowers) with articulated arms that reach as far as 20 ft away from the tractor reduce the area over which the tracks must travel, and offer more maneuverability. These articulated arms also cut and/or break off material. Heavy machinery is a moderately fast, and a relatively inexpensive treatment. There is little control over which plants are cut, but machines can travel around isolated areas of concern. Heavy machinery should not be used when the ground is soft in order to prevent ruts and bared soil. Soil movement can be caused by all users on foot, bicycle, equestrian and vehicles (patrol vehicles and fire apparatus). Soil movement can be ruts or minor depressions, which will lead to large ruts or voids. This technique can be used at almost any other time of year, but is faster when done in the summer or fall when brush is brittle and grass has cured. It must not be used during times of high fire danger because the machines can start fires. The under-carriage of the machine and attachments should be washed off after use in areas of weed infestations. Grading and Discing Grading and discing involves stripping a swath of land bare of vegetation with a tractor and blade. It is very effective in producing fire trails 8 to 12 feet across and as a maintenance tool for access routes. Generally, grading is done mid-spring, by a contractor when there is still residual moisture in the soil, but after the threat of spring rains has diminished. Residual soil moisture makes the soil pliable or workable, and allows the soil to compact. When grading is performed when the soil is completely dry, the soil is very difficult to work. Pearson Arastradero has high clay content soils and causes premature soil movement unless the contractor supplements soil moisture with a water truck, which is an additional expense. There are several disadvantages to this treatment type; by removing all competing vegetation, grading creates an excellent establishment site for weedy species, which may be serious fire hazards. Untimely grading, for example, in mid-summer, can help sow seeds of weedy exotics, such as yellow star thistle, mustard and Italian thistle. In addition, annual grading causes soil disturbance and alters drainage patterns. Runoff, blocked from cross-drainage by the banks on either side of a graded fire trail, is redirected down the trail. This situation favors coyote bush and exotic grasses, leading to a shift in the grassland species composition. Grading spoils will need to be feathered into the sides or smoothed back into grading area annually. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 13 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 6: Proposed Treatment Areas for Foothill Park Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 14 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Figure 7: Proposed Treatment Areas for Pearson Arastradero Preserve Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 15 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Discing involves cultivating or turning over the upper 10" of soil, and produces an uneven surface with a discontinuous fuel distribution and is appropriate only if mowing or grazing is not applicable that year or in a specific location. Rate of production is quite high; normally the operator can disc land parcels of two acres or less within one day. Discing is normally performed annually once grass has cured (so the grass will not grow back that season). A tractor with discer attachment can typically cultivate a swatch 15 feet wide in a single pass. While this is an effective barrier to surface fire spread, it is also an ideal disturbed area with prime growing conditions for weeds and distribution of their seeds. Surface erosion can be significant in areas prone to this process. 3. Grazing with Sheep and Goats The grazing method includes the intentional use of sheep and goats to consume vegetation thus reducing the amount or density of fuel. These types of livestock are not recommended to create a fuel break, but can be used to maintain this type of pre-suppression feature. Similarly, livestock can prevent grasslands from shrub encroachment, and an oak woodland free of significant understory. The option is effective where the plants are palatable to the animals selected. Control of the livestock and prevention of the impacts of overgrazing is critical to successful use of this technique. As a fuel management technique, livestock need not graze every year. Grazing can reduce or encourage weedy pest plants depending on the timing and intensity of grazing. A range management plan and a grazing monitoring program needs to be established to identify the impacts and ensure that the animals are removed once fuel management goals are met. Perennial grasses may require modifications from management of annual grasses using grazing animals. Because presence of healthy perennial grass stands has many benefits, these modifications are generally recommended. The benefits of perennial grasses are that they cure later in the season, which limits the opportunity for ignition. Mowing typically can be scheduled over a longer time period. Rotation of grazing animals is preferred over greater grazing pressure. Typically, perennial grasses react best when grazing is applied after seed maturation - from late spring through the fall. Goats may import seeds from another weedy site. The herd can be quarantined at goat herd’s ranch for three days where they will be fed alfalfa to clear out their systems. The herder can also use short-haired goats that will carry fewer seeds in their fur. The herding instinct of sheep and goats allows professional herders to range in very mobile bands without the installation and maintenance of permanent fences. Portable electric fences are commonly used to help control the herd and the outcome of their grazing. Goats will browse materials up to 6 feet above the ground creating a desirable vertical separation between the canopy and ground cover. However, measures must be taken to prevent girdling of trees by goats browsing on bark. Herd movement has the advantage of breaking off dead material in a stand as well as punching a humus layer into the soil (if the ground is somewhat moist) and thereby removing available fuel. Grazing treatments need to be repeated, however, following up or alternating with a different, complementary technique can extend its effectiveness. If work is needed to be done during May-July, scheduling can present a challenge because many clients in the greater area desire the service at that time. To minimize the negative effects of Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 16 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration grazing on a specific plant, goats should graze after seed set of that particular plant. During initial fuel reduction treatments, goats may be most cost-effective in the late fall or early spring when demand for their services, and possibly price are reduced. Multi-year contracts, and contracts for larger areas typically lower the costs per acre. Providing a place where the herd can stay during the winter also lowers costs for treatment. Providing a water source for livestock is another way to reduce costs. Water sources can be as rudimentary as a plastic wading pool or a portable trough. 4. Broadcast Prescribed Burns Prescribed burning reintroduces fire into the ecosystem as a "natural treatment" and can promote native flora and aid containment of fires by reducing fuel volumes. Prescribed burns are usually performed by the local fire protection district. CalFire may be willing to participate in a limited prescribed burning program as part of their hazard reduction efforts within the Vegetation Management Program, even though the project area would be outside the State Responsibility Area. If burns were conducted by CalFire, the State would not only assume liability, but also share costs. Regardless, it is likely that CalFire and other nearby fire protection districts and departments would offer mutual cooperation and/or assistance. Several precautions, such as installing firebreaks and notifying various agencies, must be taken before performing a prescribed burn. Treatment boundaries are often road and trail crossings, which reduces the number of fire breaks that need to be created by fire personnel, thereby reducing labor costs and time needed to prepare for the burn as well as minimizing the amount of surface soil disturbance and potential for soil erosion. Prescribed burning requires the development and approval of a prescription or burn plan, which is typically developed by the local fire protection district in consideration of fuel reduction requirements, local weather conditions, and available resources for fire management. The soot and smoke generated, as well as the chance of escape, make prescribed burns a public safety concern. Planning and coordination with interested parties must be an integral part of the program. Broadcast burning may occur throughout the year; however, it is usually conducted during late spring when the ground is still wet or during fall or winter after plants have completed their yearly growth cycle and their moisture content has declined. Spring burns are preferred by some fire staff to ensure a greater measure of public safety, however, there may be impacts to animal and plant reproduction activities. Fall burns are more closely aligned with the natural fire cycle found in California. If a prescribed burn were to be conducted in the fall, the period before leaves or new herbaceous material covers the slopes will be short (possibly a month or two). Prescribed burning can enhance the local grasslands and promote the abundance of wildflowers. Any small oaks or shrubs to be retained will need to be protected during the burn to prevent their mortality. While the abundance of wildflowers the subsequent years is an appealing sight, the burned area will be temporarily blackened. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 17 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration 5. Eucalyptus Tree Removal By removing eucalyptus trees their canopy no longer contributes to a fire in the form of a crown fire or ember production. Additionally the production of surface fuels is reduced since biomass production (branches, leaves, duff etc.) is decreased. This technique has positive impact on reducing spotting potential, heat output, spread rate and, potentially, ignitability depending upon what replaces the overstory. Tree removal varies from cutting of individual trees, to removal of entire overstory canopy. This process can be slow and expensive, but can be selective with limited impact beyond the removal of the target plants (depending upon scale of removal). Sometimes harvesting techniques can be quite rapid. If the whole tree is not harvested, the technique generates considerable debris (from tree branches) that should be removed using machinery to haul. The boles of trees hauled away and other debris should be either hauled away or may be burned later as a part of a prescribed burn (pile or broadcast). A portion of debris may be left as a sort of erosion control measure and to cover bare spots. And bats may use eucalyptus trees as perches and nesting sites. Replacement perches and nesting platforms for raptors can be constructed, located, and installed prior to removal of the trees to minimize displacement of raptors. If the tree harbors a maternal bat roost, removal should be coordinated with the appropriate wildlife agencies, including the California Department of Fish and Game and possibly the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Volunteers can locate and construct the raptor perches and nesting platforms, with guidance from suitable experts (e.g. Audubon Society or the Point Reyes Bird Observatory). Tree removal creates patches of disturbance by the removal operation. Subsequent treatment of the area is dependent upon the species that encroach into these patches. Removal of exotics or weed species on an annual basis should be anticipated until an acceptable stable vegetation type is re-established. Sprout removal is often required as a follow up treatment, involving the application of herbicides and/or other techniques such as grinding the stump or placing plastic over the stump. 6. Herbicide Application Using herbicides to control invasive plant species that exacerbate wildfire risk is used as part of an Integrated Pest Management1 program and in combination with other treatment measures (e.g., mowing, burning and hand removal). Application following another treatment method in which plants are trimmed or shortened can increase the effectiveness of the chemical treatment. Herbicides can also be used to kill herbaceous plants in exposed areas, such as roadside grass and weeds, and are typically applied while the grasses and weeds are still actively growing. Foliar treatments are generally not applied within seven days of significant rain because the herbicide may be washed off before it is effective, and not on windy days because of concerns for spray drift. 1 Integrated Pest Management is a strategy that uses an array of biological, mechanical, cultural, and hand labor, to control pests, with the use of herbicides as a least-preferred method of control. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 18 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration The use of Garlon 4 Ultra herbicide can be used to treat areas of eucalyptus resprouting, removing the need to completely uproot or grind down the eucalyptus stump. Foliar application of Roundup to eucalyptus re-sprouts is another typical, successful chemical treatment, and can be used to eliminate small-diameter fuels in areas of high ignition risk. The use of a thistle-specific herbicide, Transline, is effective in controlling the spread of yellow star thistle, artichoke thistle, and bull thistle. Herbicides do not remove any vegetation from an area’s fuel load; the dead plant matter continues to exist at the site and could continue to be a fire hazard if not collected and disposed. Health, safety and environmental concerns have limited the widespread use of chemicals over the past 20 years, and repeated use of chemicals is not preferred due to the prevalence of unwanted species building resistance to herbicides. Additionally, concerns regarding water quality and other potential environmental impacts that may occur with prolonged use of and exposure to herbicides and other chemical applications further limit their frequent or widespread use as a treatment. Application of herbicides is typically performed by hand, and can include sponging, spraying, or dusting chemicals onto unwanted plants. Hand application provides flexibility in application and is ideally suited for small treatment areas. Roadside application of herbicides may employ a boom affixed to or towed behind a vehicle. Herbicide application requires specific storage, training and licensing to ensure proper and safe use, handling, and storage. Only personnel with the appropriate license are allowed to use chemicals to treat vegetation. Herbicide application is also only applied per a prescription prepared by a Pesticide Advisor licensed in that county. Personal protection equipment is essential to limit personnel exposure to chemicals. 10. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING The two parks, Foothills (1400 acres) and Pearson Arastradero (609 acres), make up approximately 2000 acres of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Foothills Park ranges in elevation from about 600 to 1800 feet above mean sea level and for Pearson Arastradero, from 300 to 750 feet above mean sea level. Both parks are heavily vegetated and contain various plant communities and a diversity of habitat for abundant wildlife. The surrounding land uses are open space (public and private), private residences in the Town of los Altos, City of Palo Alto and Santa Clara County, and a private golf course/country club. 11. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES • Department of Fish and Game • Santa Clara County Agricultural Commission • Bay Area Air Quality Management District Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 19 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. [A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e. g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e. g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).] 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) “(Mitigated) Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, “Earlier Analysis,” may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (C)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 20 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS The following Environmental Checklist was used to identify environmental impacts, which could occur if the proposed project is implemented. The left-hand column in the checklist lists the source(s) for the answer to each question. The sources cited are identified at the end of the checklist. Discussions of the basis for each answer and a discussion of mitigation measures that are proposed to reduce potential significant impacts are included. A. AESTHETICS Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 1, 4 3 b) Have a substantial adverse effect on a public view or view corridor? 1, 2-Map L4, 4 3 c) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? 1, 2-Map L4,4 3 d) Violate existing Comprehensive Plan policies regarding visual resources? 1, 2, 4 3 e) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1,4 3 f) Substantially shadow public open space (other than public streets and adjacent sidewalks) between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. from September 21 to March 21? 1, 2, 4 3 DISCUSSION: The Plan specifies 56 treatment areas (Figures 6 & 7) and associated fuel management categories: roadside treatments along potential evacuation corridors, creation and maintenance of firefighter safety zones, creation and maintenance of defensible space around structures in the parks, fire ignition prevention, and treatments to aid containment of fires in and within the park. The proposed fuel treatment methods (e.g. grazing, mowing, discing) are confined to a specific dimension, as detailed in Figure 5, for each of the treatment areas. The Comprehensive Plan designates Arastradero and Page Mill Road and Skyline Boulevard as scenic routes; Skyline is also a State Scenic Highway. The proposed fuel treatment methods (hand labor, mechanical, grazing, prescribed burns, eucalyptus removal, and herbicides) would not significantly degrade the existing visual character of the parks or road segments. The fuel treatment method that may have a temporary visual impact to the Pearson Arastradero Preserve would be the prescribed burns. The Plan calls for two areas, see Figure 7, in Pearson Arastradero Preserve to be treated with prescribed burns on a 3-5+ year rotation. After the burn occurs, the area will be blackened, but only for a temporary period. Prescribed burning is known to enhance the local grasslands and promote an abundance of wildflowers. All treatment areas are confined to a limited dimension to attain basic fire safety. Much of the area that is proposed for treatment has undergone fuel Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 21 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration management treatments on a periodic basis since the original 1982 fire management plan was adopted and the expansion of treatment areas is not anticipated to create a significant aesthetic impact. Mitigation Measures: None Required B. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? 1, 3, 4 3 b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 1, 2-Map L9, 4 3 c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? 1, 4 3 DISCUSSION: The project area is not located in a “Prime Farmland,” “Unique Farmland,” or “Farmland of Statewide Importance” area, as shown on the maps prepared for the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. The project area is not zoned for agricultural use, and is not regulated by the Williamson Act. Mitigation Measures: None Required C. AIR QUALITY Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct with implementation of the applicable air quality plan (1982 Bay Area Air Quality Plan & 2000 Clean Air Plan)? 1, 4 3 b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation indicated by the following: i. Direct and/or indirect operational Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 22 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact emissions that exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) criteria air pollutants of 80 pounds per day and/or 15 tons per year for nitrogen oxides (NO), reactive organic gases (ROG), and fine particulate matter of less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10); 1, 4 3 ii. Contribute to carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations exceeding the State Ambient Air Quality Standard of nine parts per million (ppm) averaged over eight hours or 20 ppm for one hour( as demonstrated by CALINE4 modeling, which would be performed when a) project CO emissions exceed 550 pounds per day or 100 tons per year; or b) project traffic would impact intersections or roadway links operating at Level of Service (LOS) D, E or F or would cause LOS to decline to D, E or F; or c) project would increase traffic volumes on nearby roadways by 10% or more)? 1, 4 3 c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 1, 4 3 d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial levels of toxic air contaminants? 1, 4 3 i. Probability of contracting cancer for the Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI) exceeds 10 in one million 1, 4 3 ii. Ground-level concentrations of non- carcinogenic TACs would result in a hazard index greater than one (1) for the MEI 1, 4 3 e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 1, 4 3 f) Not implement all applicable construction emission control measures recommended in the Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Guidelines? 1, 4 3 Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 23 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration DISCUSSION: The proposed fuel management treatments (hand labor, mechanical equipment, grazing, prescription burns, herbicide application, eucalyptus tree removal) are generally low to no impact on the overall air quality, with exception of the prescribed fires. All prescribed burns must go through a permit review process with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) before a burn is permitted. The BAAQMD will determine whether it is a burn day, and has the authority to permit burning when the prescription has been reached. The burn day determination maximizes the dispersal and dilution of smoke. Prescribed fires may be executed on non-burn days as necessitated by logistic concerns. Logistic concerns may include expected end-of-season precipitation, availability of personnel, or narrow prescriptions. The Prescribed Fire Incident Commander will conduct a test burn to determine if smoke dispersal requirements in the Smoke Management Plan are being met prior to starting ignition of the burn plot. Based on the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s thresholds, it is not anticipated that the project would affect any regional air quality plan or standards, or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. Mitigation Measures: None Required D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 1, 2-Map N1, 4, 5 3 b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, including 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? 1, 2-Map N1, 4, 5 3 c) 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? 1, 2-Map N1, 4, 5 3 d) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or as defined by the City of 1, 2, 4, 5 3 Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 24 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact Palo Alto’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 8.10)? e) Conflict with any applicable Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 1, 2, 4,5 3 DISCUSSION: Foothills Park and Pearson Arastradero Preserve provide habitat for a broad range of wildlife and plants, including some designated as protected or sensitive either by the State of California or through Federal designation. The Foothills Fire Management Plan will not result in adverse impacts to any special-status species with mitigation incorporated. The special-status species that are known to occur in the Foothills Fire Management Plan area are Steelhead, San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat, white-tailed kite, arcuate bush mallow, and western leatherwood. Suitable habitat for several others exists, but their presence has not been verified. The Plan will not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. The amount of vegetation that will be trimmed represents a minor amount of the riparian zone, and will not result in the permanent removal of riparian habitat. Adverse effects to arroyo willow riparian are not expected. Measures to protect wetland values from mowing and grazing are recommended (see measure BIO-8). The Plan incorporates mitigation so as to not have an adverse impact on wetlands. Wetlands occur in Pearson Arastradero Preserve and at Boronda Lake in Foothills Park. Implementation of the Foothills Fire Management Plan will not result in the removal or filling of wetlands, and will not affect their hydrology. Wetlands could be affected by the following treatments: A.E. 1 (Arastradero Road adjacent to the Preserve to be treated with mowing, grazing and hand labor), A.Rx. 1 and A.Rx.2 (prescribed fire in the middle of the Preserve), A.C.3 (grazing the grassland on the parking lot side of the Preserve), and A.C.11 (mowing Meadow Lark to Juan Bautista Trail). Measure BIO-9 is proposed to be included in the Fire Management Plan, which is to avoid mowing or weed-whipping wetlands, and to incorporate wetland protection measures in the grazing management plan required in the fire management plan. The Plan does not propose activities in stream courses that would impede any fish passage and does not require the construction of any structures that would block wildlife movement. The area that the Plan covers is not within an area subject to a Habitat Conservation Plan or any similar approved planning document. Activities proposed in the Foothills Fire Management Plan are subject to the City of Palo Alto’s municipal code with regard to tree removal. Trimming or removal of coast live oak trees are subject to the requirements of Title 8, which include limits on trimming to less than 25 percent of the tree canopy and that the trimming not unbalance the tree. The Fire Management Plan may result in the removal or trimming of protected trees. Measure BIO-8 is included to require that trimming follow the tree preservation ordinance. With this measure included, the Fire Management Plan will comply with local ordinances protecting biological resources. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 25 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration In order to reduce the impacts from the proposed fuel management treatments, the following mitigations are proposed to reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures: BIO - 1: A qualified biologist2 or park staff trained to do so by a qualified biologist shall conduct a tail-gate training session to all relevant personnel who will be performing treatments regarding protected species and habitats in the project area, the limitations on areas that can be accessed on foot or with equipment, and the legal consequences of take of protected species or habitat. The training shall be repeated for new personnel coming to the project site. Dogs shall be prohibited from the project site. BIO - 2: Vegetation removal in any vegetation type from February 15 to August 31 shall require a survey for nesting birds by a qualified biologist or by park staff trained to do so by a qualified biologist and avoiding removal of nests in active use. If raptor nests are detected, a buffer area will need to be established around the nest in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. The buffer may be 250 feet. BIO - 3: Vegetation removal in areas of serpentine soil, oak woodland, chaparral, coastal scrub and riparian forest habitats shall require a survey for rare plant species by a qualified biologist/ botanist prior to vegetation removal. Known rare plant locations should be treated in a way that benefits the rare species. This may include limiting the area of treatment in order to provide a buffer around the plant(s), or may include selectively trimming competitive vegetation adjacent to the plant(s). Some species may benefit from disturbance; the specific actions to be taken should be determined in consultation with a botanist. The plant survey shall be performed during the bloom period. After surveys in the same locations over three separate years, subsequent surveys are not necessary in that area unless there a newly listed plant species could occur in the habitat. This should be determined by consulting the California Department of Fish and Game. BIO - 4: Vegetation removal, including dead and downed debris, shall require a survey for presence of San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat by a qualified biologist or by park staff trained to identify woodrat houses by a qualified biologist. If woodrat houses are found, disturbance should be avoided and a minimum five-foot buffer should be provided around the house. If, for public safety reasons, it is necessary to move the house, the process must be coordinated with the California Department of Fish and Game. All relevant workers shall receive instruction regarding woodrat houses prior to their start of work. BIO - 5: Prior to the removal of any tree that is 12 inches or more in diameter breast height, a survey for perennial bat roosts and, during the breeding season from February 15 to August 31, raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified biologist or park staff trained by a qualified biologist to identify these resources is required. If present, removal cannot continue without CDFG guidance. BIO - 6: Discing within 500 feet of a lake, pond or creek, shall require a biological survey to determine impacts to California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, San Francisco garter snake and Western pond turtle and whether permits are required from the USFWS/CDFG. 2 A “qualified biologist” is a person with demonstrated ability to identify special-status plant and/or animal species in the San Francisco Bay Area. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 26 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration BIO - 7: Discing in grassland shall require a pre-construction survey for American badger, California red-legged frog and burrowing owl by a qualified biologist. BIO - 8: Trimming of coast live oaks shall follow the City’s Tree Ordinance (Title 8). Coast live oak or Valley oaks that are 11.5 inches in diameter or more measured at 54 inches above grade may not be removed without a permit, and may not be pruned such that more than 25 percent of the crown is removed or the tree is left unbalanced. BIO - 9: Wetlands mapped in Pearson Arastradero Preserve shall be avoided when weed-whipping or mowing. Modify the Fire Management Plan Best Management Practice that requires that a grazing plan be prepared to include protection of drainages and wetlands from the impacts of grazing animals. BIO - 10: For treatments in Foothills Park or on Page Mill Road along the Park border, a pre-work survey for stands of locally important plants shall be conducted, and the plants avoided as long as it does not impair public safety. Field crews shall be educated about the sensitivity of these plant species. For additional information, see Table 3 in Appendix A of the Biological Assessment (Source Reference #5). BIO - 11: For proposed treatments, clean all tools and equipment following actions and prior to movement into new environmental areas to prevent the spread of invasive or non-native plants. BIO - 12: Measures shall be taken to clean equipment, tires, and shoes to prevent the spread of Sudden Oak Death, and that any materials infected with the disease be disposed of in accordance with State or County Agricultural Commission guidelines. To reduce the possibility of spreading the disease, it is recommended that work not be done in wet or muddy conditions, and that infested areas be avoided to the extent feasible. Additional guidelines are available from the County Agricultural Commissioner. BIO - 13: A qualified biologist shall be present onsite to monitor all treatment work. The biological monitor shall have the authority to stop work if deemed necessary to protect state or federally protected species, and shall work directly with the City staff. Prior to the start of work each day, the monitor shall thoroughly inspect the treatment area and adjacent habitat areas to determine if any protected species are present in the area and shall remain onsite through out the day while work activities are occurring. If a protected species is encountered, the onsite biological monitor shall determine whether treatment activities are remote enough from the animal that it will not be harmed or harassed. BIO - 14: Treatment equipment and materials shall be staged in an already disturbed area such as improved trails or existing roads. BIO - 15: Prior to introduction, all grazing animals shall be quarantined for three days and fed weed-free forage to limit spread of invasive or unwanted plant species, as well as prevent spread of livestock diseases. BIO - 16: Grazing shall be limited to non-riparian areas. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 27 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration BIO - 17: Maintain a buffer between the prescribed burn area and water bodies or drainage into riparian zones. Buffers should be a minimum of 25 feet for 5% slopes, 75 feet for 5-10% slopes, and 250 feet for 10% or greater slopes. No prescribed fires shall be ignited near streams or in riparian zones. BIO - 18: Herbicide treatments within habitat of California Red-legged Frog shall be conducted according to U.S. District Court injunction and order covering 66 pesticides (Oct 2006) and subsequent EPA effects determinations. BIO - 19: Avoid herbicide treatments in areas adjacent to water bodies, riparian areas, and primary drainage access. Follow all herbicide labels and directions in determining applications near water resources or riparian habitats. Limit aerial application to greater than 100 feet from water resources. Limit ground and hand application to greater than 50 feet. Significance after Mitigation: Less Than Significant E. CULTURAL RESOURCES Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Directly or indirectly destroy a local cultural resource that is recognized by City Council resolution? 1, 2-Map L7, 4 3 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5? 1, 2-Map L8, 4 3 c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? 1, 4 3 d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 1, 2-Map L8, 4 3 e) Adversely affect a historic resource listed or eligible for listing on the National and/or California Register, or listed on the City’s Historic Inventory? 1, 2-Map L7, 4 3 f) Eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory? 1, 4 3 DISCUSSION: There are no known archaeological or human remains located in this area. It is unlikely that the Native Americans would have established permanent camps away from the Bay, with its abundant food source. However, they probably did travel to the foothills to hunt and gather plant material. If, during any treatment activities, any archaeological or human remains are encountered, all activity shall cease and a qualified archaeologist shall visit the site to address the find. The Santa Clara County Medical Examiner and Native American Heritage Commission of the State of California shall be notified in order to receive the appropriate direction on how to proceed. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 28 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Mitigation Measures: None Required F. GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. 1, 4 3 ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 2-Map N10, 4 3 iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 2-Map N5, 4 3 iv) Landslides? 2-Map N5 3 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 1, 4 3 c) Result in substantial siltation? 1, 4 3 d) 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 on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? 2-Map N5, 4 3 e) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? 2-Map N5, 4 3 f) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 1, 4 3 g) Expose people or property to major geologic hazards that cannot be mitigated through the use of standard engineering 1, 2-Map N5, 4 3 Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 29 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact design and seismic safety techniques? DISCUSSION: The entire state of California is in a seismically active area. The proposed Plan would not expose people to substantial adverse risks of loss, injury, or death since the proposed project does not include habitable construction of any kind. However, the project area is located in an area that would experience a range of weak to very violent shaking in the event of a major earthquake. The area also has the potential for earthquake induced landslides especially where sloped, and surface rupture along fault traces. The two parks have soils that vary in degrees of potential erosion hazard (see Figure 8). The proposed fuel treatments (hand labor, mechanical equipment, grazing, prescription burns, herbicide application, eucalyptus tree removal) in themselves create some degree of erosion potential due to the disturbance of the existing vegetation and surface area. Erosion control methods and stormwater pollution protection measures should be used where appropriate. The purpose is to control sediment and minimize potential water quality impacts. The following mitigation measures must be followed to address potential soil erosion impacts to a less than significant threshold. Figure 8: Soil Types in Foothills Park and Pearson Arastradero Preserve Soil Mapping Unit Soil Name Location Erosion Hazard Los Gatos Gravelly Loam Foothills Park & Pearson Arastradero Preserve Very High Los Gatos-Maymen Complex (50-75% slope) Maymen Rocky Fine Sandy Loam Foothills Park Very High Los Gatos Clay Loam (15- 30% slope) Los Gatos Clay Loam Foothills Park Moderate Los Osos Clay Loam (15-30% slope) Los Osos Clay Loam Pearson Arastradero Preserve Moderate Azule Clay Loam (15-30%) Azule Loam Pearson Arastradero Preserve Slight to Moderate Cropley Clay (2-9% slope) Cropley Clay Foothills Park Slight Pacheco Clay Loam Pacheco Clay Loam Pearson Arastradero Preserve Slight Pleasanton Loam Pleasanton Loam Pearson Arastradero Preserve Slight Mitigation Measures: Geology - 1: The City shall conduct treatment actions in a manner that avoids erosion and adverse affects on sensitive soil systems by avoiding treatment in sensitive soils and potentially erosive soil areas. This mitigation measure shall be implemented through development of a study that identifies all potentially erosive soils prior to beginning treatment actions and development of an erosion control plan subject to review and approval of City Staff that restricts treatment operations that may adversely affect the sensitive soil systems. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 30 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Geology - 2: Avoid treatment actions during periods of precipitation, or immediately following severe weather. Geology - 3: (Hand Labor) Avoid excessive foot or vehicle traffic on slopes, unimproved or non- designated trails, or outside of preexisting roads or access points. Geology - 4: (Mechanical). In addition to avoiding treatment actions during periods of precipitation, or immediately following severe weather, avoid scheduling any treatment actions during seasons with significant predicted precipitation. Cease operations or postpone planned operations including movement of vehicles or equipment during precipitation conditions that may combine with vehicle activity to cause damage to roads, trails, or adjacent land areas. Geology - 5: (Mechanical) Plan treatment actions and equipment selection to minimize damage or alterations to existing soils. Geology - 6: (Mechanical) Maintain a buffer of 25-50 feet between operations and water bodies or designated riparian areas. Avoid crossing drainage channels, run-off areas, or dry streambeds. Install and manage run-off barriers for rainwater in all treatment and operating areas. Restrict mechanical removal of trees to areas further than 50 feet from drainage channels. Geology - 7: (Mechanical) Restrict vehicle traffic to preexisting roads or pre-planned access points based on equipment size and operations. Limit transport and support equipment to existing roads. Limit heavy equipment use to slopes less than 30%. Install erosion control measures on all vehicle roads and traffic areas. Geology - 8: (Grazing) The City shall conduct grazing operations in a manner that avoids over-grazing and prevents erosion by appropriately limiting the intensity and scope of grazing. This mitigation measure shall be implemented through development of a grazing management plan prepared by a certified range specialist that specifies goals, stocking levels, grazing periods, installation of range improvements (such as water sources) to evenly distribute utilization of feed, and monitoring and performance criteria to address the potential erosion conditions created by over-grazing. Geology - 9: (Grazing) Develop a site-specific annual grazing plan to be approved by a certified range specialist that includes project-level plans for sticking, timing, and resource management goals. Geology - 10: (Burns) The City shall conduct prescribed burns in a manner that minimizes post-fire erosion into water bodies and drainage through the use of natural barriers, fire lines along contours, erosion control barrier deployment, and avoidance of areas with highly erodible soils. This mitigation measure shall be implemented through development, prior to conducting a prescribed burn, of a prescribed burn erosion control plan (or included in the prescribed burn plan) subject to review and approval by City Staff. Significance after Mitigation: Less Than Significant Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 31 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration G. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Note: Some of the thresholds can also be dealt with under a topic heading of Public Health and Safety if the primary issues are related to a subject other than hazardous material use. Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routing transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 1, 4 3 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 1, 4 3 c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 1, 4 3 d) Construct a school on a property that is subject to hazards from hazardous materials contamination, emissions or accidental release? 1, 4 3 e) 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? 1, 2-Map N9, 4 3 f) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 1, 4 3 g) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working the project area? 1, 4 3 h) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 1, 2-Map N7, 4 3 i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 1, 2-Map N7, 4 3 j) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment from existing hazardous materials contamination by exposing future occupants or users of the site to contamination in excess of soil and ground water cleanup goals developed for the site? 1, 4 3 Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 32 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration DISCUSSION: The proposed Plan includes fuel treatment methods (mechanical equipment, prescribed burns, herbicide application) that could potentially have significant hazardous impacts. The Plan includes mechanical treatments that require on-site fueling and maintenance, creating a potential for spills and leakage. The use of mechanical equipment in a high fire danger condition also creates the potential for sparks to ignite a fire. The use of herbicides could potentially have environmental impacts if strict protocols for use are not in place or followed. Mitigation measures are provided to reduce impacts from the mechanical and herbicide uses to a less than significant level. Although the use of prescribed fires to manage fuel could potentially have impacts, the BAAQMD has strict guidelines that regulate this activity to a less than significant level of impact. As a Best Management Practice, the City will develop public safety plans to be executed throughout the prescribed burn cycle, including press and information releases, signs and notifications, patrols on roads and access points, and development of a fire contingency plan. Mitigation Measures: Hazards - 1: All treatment methods involving fueling and maintenance operations shall be strictly monitored and controlled. This mitigation measure shall be implemented by conducting all maintenance actions that may produce spills should be executed in areas with secondary containment protection, away from any water bodies or drainage areas; cleaning up all spills shall be done on-site, and clean-up materials shall be maintained on site so they are readily available for use. Inspection of equipment for new leaks and mechanical problems should be performed daily, prior to operations. Hazards - 2: Cease actions during periods of high fire danger or during red flag conditions. Ensure that all mechanical equipment have approved spark arrestors and comply with California Public Resources Code (PRC) sections 4431, 4435, 4442, and 4437 to limit potential for ignition of incidental fires. Hazards - 3: Maintain on-site fire suppression resources to include shovel, water pump, fire extinguisher, and two-way radio or communications for fire reporting. Herbicide Application Hazards - 4: The City shall conduct herbicide application in a manner that uses the least amount of chemical required to achieve a desired outcome; the herbicide treatment shall be consistent with the City of Palo Alto’s Integrated Pest Management policy. Hazards - 5: Provide or confirm adequate training, experience, and oversight to ensure that personnel are familiar with herbicide operations and planning, site conditions, potential and identified sensitive resources, and the identification of specific environmental features or conditions that must be avoided. Herbicide application shall only be applied per a prescription prepared by a Pesticide Control Advisor licensed in Santa Clara County, and applied by a licensed Pesticide Control Applicator. Hazards - 6: The City shall conduct herbicide application in a manner that protects public safety by informing the public of treatment and restricting access, when deemed appropriate. This mitigation measure shall be implemented through development of a public safety plan, which shall include requirements for press and information releases, signs and Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 33 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration notifications, and guidelines for fencing or area restrictions, and shall be subject to review and approval of the Pesticide Control Advisor and the Directors of Community Services and Fire Department, and the terms of which shall be executed throughout the treatment cycle.. Hazards - 7: The City shall conduct herbicide application in a manner that protects against and minimizes damage from spills by maintaining strict monitoring and control of operations, and providing for clean up of all spills to be done on-site, with clean-up materials readily available for use. This mitigation measure shall be implemented through development of a spill contingency plan subject to review and approval of the Pesticide Control Advisor and the Directors of Community Services and Fire Department. Hazards - 8: Chemical treatments within habitat of California Red-legged Frog shall be conducted according to U.S. District Court injunction and order covering 66 pesticides (Oct 2006) and subsequent EPA effects determinations. Hazards - 9: Clean equipment following actions and prior to movement into new environmental areas. Hazards - 10: Avoid treating areas adjacent to water bodies, riparian areas, and primary drainage access. Follow all herbicide labels and directions in determining applications near water resources or riparian habitats. Limit aerial application to greater than 100 feet from water resources. Limit ground and hand application to greater than 50 feet. Hazards - 11: Avoid treating areas used for livestock operations or intended as grazing areas. Significance after Mitigation: Less Than Significant H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 1, 4 3 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-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 1, 2-Map N2, 4 3 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 manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? 1, 4 3 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 substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? 1, 4 3 Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 34 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 1, 4 3 f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 1, 4 3 g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 1, 4 3 h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 1, 2-Map N6, 4 3 i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involve flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam or being located within a 100-year flood hazard area? 1, 2- Map-N6, 4 3 j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 1, 4 3 k) Result in stream bank instability? 1, 2-Map N2, 4 3 DISCUSSION: The potential impacts to water quality are associated with the potential hazards previously identified in this document related to fuel treatment methods and possible erosion risks. The mitigations that would address this potential impact to a less than significant level are the same as those listed for the geology section of this initial study. Mitigation Measures: See Geology Mitigation Measures 1-10 and Hazards Mitigation Measures 1, 4-10 Significance after Mitigation: Less Than Significant I. LAND USE AND PLANNING Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? 1, 4 3 b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 35 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 1, 2, 4 3 c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 1, 2, 4 3 d) Substantially adversely change the type or intensity of existing or planned land use in the area? 1, 2, 4 3 e) Be incompatible with adjacent land uses or with the general character of the surrounding area, including density and building height? 1, 2, 4 3 f) Conflict with established residential, recreational, educational, religious, or scientific uses of an area? 1, 2, 4 3 g) Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance (farmland) to non-agricultural use? 1, 3, 4 3 DISCUSSION: The proposed Plan does not propose adding or changing the existing land uses of the area and would not divide any existing community. The project area is not located within a local coastal program, or habitat conservation plan. Fuel management in the Foothills is compatible with maintaining the health and safety of the public parks. Mitigation Measures: None Required J. MINERAL RESOURCES Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 1, 2, 4 3 b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 1, 2, 4 3 Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 36 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration DISCUSSION: The City of Palo Alto has been classified by the California Department of Conservation (DOC), Division of Mines and Geology (DMG) as a Mineral Resource Zone 1 (MRZ-1). This designation signifies that there are no aggregate resources in the area. The DMG has not classified the City for other resources. There is no indication in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan that there are locally or regionally valuable mineral resources within the City of Palo Alto. Mitigation Measures: None Required K. NOISE Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 1, 2, 4 3 b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibrations or ground borne noise levels? 1, 2, 4 3 c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 1, 2, 4 3 d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 1, 2, 4 3 e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 1, 2, 4 3 f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 1, 4 3 g) Cause the average 24 hour noise level (Ldn) to increase by 5.0 decibels (dB) or more in an existing residential area, even if the Ldn would remain below 60 dB? 1, 4 3 h) Cause the Ldn to increase by 3.0 dB or more in an existing residential area, thereby causing the Ldn in the area to exceed 60 dB? 1, 4 3 i) Cause an increase of 3.0 dB or more in an existing residential area where the Ldn currently exceeds 60 dB? 1, 4 3 j) Result in indoor noise levels for residential development to exceed an Ldn of 45 dB? 1, 4 3 k) Result in instantaneous noise levels of greater Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 37 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact than 50 dB in bedrooms or 55 dB in other rooms in areas with an exterior Ldn of 60 dB or greater? 1, 4 3 l) Generate construction noise exceeding the daytime background Leq at sensitive receptors by 10 dBA or more? 1, 4 3 DISCUSSION: The project area is located in the Foothills, where there are limited residential and commercial uses in proximity to the park perimeter. The proposed fuel treatment methods will occur within open space areas of the parks and are not anticipated to have any affects on sensitive receptors. The potential noise sources would emanate from mechanical equipment and grazing goats or sheep, and those would be temporary in duration. Mitigation Measures: None Required L. POPULATION AND HOUSING Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 1, 4 3 b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 1, 4 3 c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 1, 4 3 d) Create a substantial imbalance between employed residents and jobs? 1, 4 3 e) Cumulatively exceed regional or local population projections? 1, 4 3 DISCUSSION: There is no development associated with the Plan; it would not create any new population and housing impacts for the City. The Plan addresses fuel management in the existing City parks. Mitigation Measures: None Required Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 38 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration M. PUBLIC SERVICES Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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: a) Fire protection? 1 3 b) Police protection? 1 3 c) Schools? 1 3 d) Parks? 1 3 e) Other public facilities? 1 3 DISCUSSION: The implementation of the proposed Plan would not require new public services. There is no development associated with the Plan; it would not create any new population and housing that would need additional services. The Plan addresses fuel management in the existing City parks. Mitigation Measures: None Required N. RECREATION Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 1 3 Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 39 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 1 3 DISCUSSION: The use of existing recreational facilities would not be impacted by the implementation of the proposed Plan. The project is designed to enhance fire safety in the parks; it would not generate new users and does not require new or expanded recreational facilities. Mitigation Measures: None Required O. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact 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)? 1, 2, 4 3 b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 1, 4 3 c) Result in change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 1, 4 3 d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 1, 4 3 e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1, 4 3 f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 1, 4 3 g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., pedestrian, transit & bicycle facilities)? 1, 4 3 Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 40 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact h) Cause a local (City of Palo Alto) intersection to deteriorate below Level of Service (LOS) D and cause an increase in the average stopped delay for the critical movements by four seconds or more and the critical volume/capacity ratio (V/C) value to increase by 0.01 or more? 1, 4 3 i) Cause a local intersection already operating at LOS E or F to deteriorate in the average stopped delay for the critical movements by four seconds or more? 1, 4 3 j) Cause a regional intersection to deteriorate from an LOS E or better to LOS F or cause critical movement delay at such an intersection already operating at LOS F to increase by four seconds or more and the critical V/C value to increase by 0.01 or more? 1, 4 3 k) Cause a freeway segment to operate at LOS F or contribute traffic in excess of 1% of segment capacity to a freeway segment already operating at LOS F? 1, 4 3 l) Cause any change in traffic that would increase the Traffic Infusion on Residential Environment (TIRE) index by 0.1 or more? 1, 4 3 m) Cause queuing impacts based on a comparative analysis between the design queue length and the available queue storage capacity? Queuing impacts include, but are not limited to, spillback queues at project access locations; queues at turn lanes at intersections that block through traffic; queues at lane drops; queues at one intersection that extend back to impact other intersections, and spillback queues on ramps. 1, 4 3 n) Impede the development or function of planned pedestrian or bicycle facilities? 1, 4 3 o) Impede the operation of a transit system as a result of congestion? 1, 4 3 p) Create an operational safety hazard? 1, 4 3 DISCUSSION: The proposed Plan does not create significant numbers of new trips into the Foothills. The activities required to complete the proposed fuel treatments are temporary in duration and will be spread out over time; some treatments are proposed annually, while others are proposed every 3-5 years. Thus, it is not anticipated that the implementation of the Plan would result in a significant traffic impact. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 41 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Mitigation: None Required P. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 1, 4 3 b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 1, 4 3 c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 1, 4 3 d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 1, 4 3 e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? 1, 4 3 f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? 1, 4 3 g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 1, 4 3 h) Result in a substantial physical deterioration of a public facility due to increased use as a result of the project? 1, 4 3 DISCUSSION: The implementation of the proposed Plan would not require new services. There is no development associated with the Plan; it would not create any new population and housing that would need additional services. The Plan addresses fuel management in the existing City parks. Mitigation Measures: None Required Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 42 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration Q. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Issues and Supporting Information Resources Would the project: Sources Potentially Significant Issues Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 1, 2, 4, 5 3 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)? 1, 4, 3 c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 1, 4 3 DISCUSSION: As detailed in the Biological Resources section of this document, there are potential impacts to sensitive wildlife species. These impacts can be reduced to levels less than significant. Please refer to the Biological Resources section of this document for details. The Foothills Fire Management Plan provides guidelines for fuel management practices in order to protect lives, enhance the safety of improvements in and around the parks, and to enhance the natural resource ecosystem health. The proposed fuel treatments all have specific considerations to take into account when applied. The treatments that potentially have more impacts are regulated by state and local agencies to ensure proper protocols are followed before implementation. With the oversight of the regulatory agencies, the project is not anticipated to have substantial adverse effect on humans, wildlife or plants. Global Climate Change Impacts Global climate change is the alteration of the Earth’s weather including its temperature, precipitation, and wind patterns. Global temperatures are affected by naturally occurring and anthropogenic generated atmospheric gases, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. These gases allow sunlight into the Earth’s atmosphere, but prevent radiative heat from escaping into outer space, which is known as the “greenhouse” effect. The world’s leading climate scientists have reached consensus that global climate change is underway and is very likely caused by humans. Agencies at the international, national, state, Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 43 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration and local levels are considering strategies to control emissions of gases that contribute to global warming. There is no comprehensive strategy that is being implemented on a global scale that addresses climate change; however, pursuant to Senate Bill 97 the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) is in the process of developing CEQA guidelines “for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions.” OPR is required to “prepare, develop, and transmit” the guidelines to the Resources Agency on or before July 1, 2009. The Resources Agency must certify and adopt the guidelines on or before January 1, 2010. Assembly Bill 32 requires achievement by 2020 of a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to 1990 emissions, and the adoption of rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions. By 2050, the state plans to reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. While the state of California has established programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, there are no established standards for gauging the significance of greenhouse gas emissions; these standards are required to be in place by 2012. Neither CEQA nor the CEQA Guidelines provide any methodology for analysis of greenhouse gases. To determine whether the proposed project would have a significant impact on global climate change is speculative, particularly given the fact that there are no existing numerical thresholds to determine an impact. However, in an effort to make a good faith effort at disclosing environmental impacts and to conform with the CEQA Guidelines [§16064(b)], it is the City’s position that based on the nature of this project with its nominal increase in greenhouse gas emissions, the proposed project would not impede the state’s ability to reach the emission reduction limits/standards set forth by the State of California by Executive Order S-3-05 and AB 32. For these reasons, this project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change associated with greenhouse gas emissions. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 44 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration SOURCE REFERENCES 1. Project Planner’s knowledge of the site and the proposed project 2. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 1998-2010 3. Palo Alto Municipal Code, Title 18 – Zoning Ordinance 4. Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update, prepared by Wildland Resource Management, Inc., January 15, 2009 5. Biological Impact Assessment; Foothills Fire Management Plan, prepared by TRA Environmental Sciences, Inc., January 8, 2009 Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Page 45 of 46 Mitigated Negative Declaration 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 revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although ~he proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARA TION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Declaration Page 46 of46 Mitigated Negative Biological Impact Assessment Foothills Fire Management Plan Palo Alto, California January 8, 2009 Prepared for The City of Palo Alto Prepared by TRA Environmental Sciences, Inc. Menlo Park, California Biological Impact Assessment Foothills Fire Management Plan Palo Alto, California January 8, 2009 Prepared for City of Palo Alto Clare Campbell, Planning Prepared by TRA Environmental Sciences, Inc. 545 Middlefield Road, Suite 200 Menlo Park, California 94025 Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page i TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Project Location .................................................................................................................. 1 Summary of the Foothills Fire Management Plan .......................................................................... 5 1.1. Treatment Types ............................................................................................................. 5 1.1.1. Defensible Space..................................................................................................... 5 1.1.2. Ignition Prevention.................................................................................................. 6 1.1.3. Containment............................................................................................................ 6 1.1.4. Evacuation............................................................................................................... 7 1.1.5. Firefighter Safety Zones ......................................................................................... 8 1.1.6. Eucalyptus Trees..................................................................................................... 8 1.2. Treatments in Foothills Park........................................................................................... 8 1.2.1. Entry gate, Boronda Lake, and main park road from the entry gate to Shady Cove picnic area (F.D1, F.E2).......................................................................................................... 8 1.2.2. Shady Cove, Encinal, Pine Gulch and Orchard Glen picnic areas and the main park road from Shady Cove to the Interpretive Center (F.I1, F.I2, F.I3, F.I4, F.D3, F.E2)... 9 1.2.3. Las Trampas Valley, including the main park road, the interpretive center, the Oak Grove group picnic area, the maintenance complex and a restroom associated with the picnic area, and the road from the interpretive center to the Hewlett property (F.E2, F.D4, F.I5, F.D5, F.E3)................................................................................................................... 12 1.2.4. Treatment areas in the northeast part of Foothills Park including an evacuation route from Boronda Lake to Alexis Drive, Fire Station 8, Boronda Water Tank, and two containment sites (F.E4, F.D2, F.D8, F.C4, F.C5)............................................................... 13 1.2.5. Wild Horse Valley (F.E5, F.I6, F.D6).................................................................. 13 1.2.6. Trappers Trail, Pony Tracks, Valley View and Firefighter Safety Zones on Trappers Trail........................................................................................................................ 14 1.3. Treatments in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve................................................................ 14 1.3.1. Gateway Facility and portions of the preserve northeast of Arastradero Road (A.D1, A.D2, A.C1, A.C2, A.C3 .......................................................................................... 14 1.3.2. Main part of the Preserve, southwest of Arastradero Road (A.C4, A.C5, A.C6, A.C7, A.C8, A.C9, A.C10, A.C11, A.C12, A.C13, A.C14, A.C15, A.Rx1, A.Rx2, A.D3, and A.D4).............................................................................................................................. 14 1.4. Evacuation Routes ........................................................................................................ 15 1.4.1. Arastradero Road (PA.2, AE.1)............................................................................ 15 1.4.2. Page Mill Road (PA.1).......................................................................................... 16 1.4.3. Skyline Boulevard (PA.4)..................................................................................... 16 1.4.4. Los Trancos Road ................................................................................................. 16 2.0 Federal, State and Local Biological Regulations.............................................................. 16 2.1. Introduction................................................................................................................... 16 2.2. Federal........................................................................................................................... 17 2.2.1. Endangered Species Act (ESA)............................................................................ 17 2.2.2. Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)..................................................................... 17 2.2.3. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act ................................................................. 18 2.2.4. Clean Water Act.................................................................................................... 18 2.3. State............................................................................................................................... 19 2.3.1. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)................................................... 19 2.3.2. California Endangered Species Act (CESA)........................................................ 20 2.3.3. California Fish and Game Code............................................................................ 21 2.3.4. State Water Resources Control Board/Regional Water Quality Control Board... 21 Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page ii TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 2.4. City of Palo Alto ........................................................................................................... 22 3.0 Biological Setting.............................................................................................................. 23 3.1. Vegetation Communities .............................................................................................. 23 3.2. Special-status Species ................................................................................................... 25 3.3. Erosive Soils ................................................................................................................. 34 3.4. Invasive Plant Species................................................................................................... 35 4.0 Impacts.............................................................................................................................. 36 5.0 Mitigation.......................................................................................................................... 40 5.1. Best Management Practices Included in the Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update 40 5.2. Additional Biological Mitigation Measures or Modifications to BMPs....................... 43 6.0 Response to CEQA Checklist Biology Questions ............................................................ 44 7.0 References......................................................................................................................... 47 Appendix A. Tables......................................................................................................................49 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 Potential Special-status Species of Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve 20 Table 3-1 Soil Types in the Palo Alto Foothills Area................................................................... 34 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Project Location................................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2 Foothills Fire Plan Area, Part A ....................................................................................... 3 Figure 3 Foothills Fire Plan Area, Part B ....................................................................................... 4 Figure 4 Proposed Treatment Locations in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve .................................. 10 Figure 5 Proposed Treatment Locations in Foothills Park ........................................................... 11 Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 1 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 1.0 Project Location The Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update addresses fire management on city-owned property in the foothills area of the City of Palo Alto (Figures 1, 2, and 3). The foothills area extends from Foothill Expressway/Junipero Serra Boulevard to Skyline Boulevard. In general the area contains a mixture of urban, rural and open space lands. The Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update prescribes vegetation management in two city-owned open space areas, Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, and on evacuation routes within city limits along Arastradero Road, Page Mill Road, Los Trancos Road, and Skyline Boulevard. Pearson-Arastradero Preserve is located on Arastradero Road between Page Mill Road and Alpine Road. Foothills Park is located on Page Mill Road, and is contiguous with Pearson- Arastradero Preserve. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 2 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Figure 1 Project Location ... Pearson-Arastradero Preserve * Foothills Park Source: StreeMap USA Data Map: TRA, December 2008 \ r .. _ .. _' , . _; -'z:'i!:" "'/. i '. , '"r", ! I .' :-, -./ N o 7,000 14,000 28,000 /I. .............. oc=============o·, Feet ~ • Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 3 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Figure 2 Foothills Fire Plan Area, Part A • * ••• Pearson-Ara stradero Preserve Foothills Park ~""""""~""""""-============================iFeet E"acuation Routes 0 3,250 6,500 13,000 Source: California Spatial Information Library { CaSIL) Map: TRA, December 2008 N A Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 4 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Figure 3 Foothills Fire Plan Area, Part B * Foothills Park • •• Evacuation Routes ~""""~~~""""~~;====================="',iFeet o 2,700 5.400 10.800 Source: California Spatial Information Library ( CaSIL) Map: TRA, December 2008 N A Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 5 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Summary of the Foothills Fire Management Plan The City of Palo Alto has updated an existing fire management plan to address vegetation, ignition prevention, defensible space and evacuation routes on city-owned land in the foothills. The area addressed in the plan includes Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, as well as evacuation routes along Page Mill Road, Los Trancos Road, Arastradero Road, and Skyline Boulevard within city limits. Currently, the City uses mowing, discing, hand labor (to trim trees and shrubs) and grazing (sheep/goats) to reduce fuel loads and provide fire breaks in the Park and Preserve. The updated fire management plan includes hand labor (weed-whipping, trimming with saws), grazing, and mowing, and introduces prescribed burning in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. It converts most of what is currently disced to being mowed or grazed instead. It also introduces vegetation trimming within 30 feet of the roadway edge along three major evacuation routes, and requires coordination with neighboring jurisdictions. It recommends that grasses be trimmed after they have cured (i.e., summer), and that pruning occur between November and April when the chance of insect infestation is lower (at least for pines and eucalyptus). The plan also recommends that areas infested with invasive species not be trimmed at seed set in order to reduce the amount of seed that is spread around by management activities. 1.1. Treatment Types The updated fire management plan is organized according to treatment type, and includes four treatment types, called 1. Defensible Space, 2. Ignition Prevention, 3. Containment, 4. Evacuation, 5. Firefighter Safety Zones, and 6. Eucalyptus. It also specifies locations where the treatments would be applied. The treatment types are summarized as follows, and the locations are described in sections 2.2 and 2.3 further below. 1.1.1. Defensible Space These activities apply to areas around structures and critical infrastructure, including entry gates, interpretive centers, restrooms, maintenance, water tanks, and pump stations. They entail cutting and removing vegetation within 100 feet of the structure. The method depends on the vegetation type. Grassland will be weed-whipped or mowed to a height of 4 inches or less. All dead plant material within 100 feet of the structure will be removed, including dead leaves, needles, plant debris, loose papery bark, and dead branches within live ground covers, vines, and shrubs. In the woodland branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter within 8 feet of the ground will be removed. Plants will also be removed as necessary to break vertical continuity between ground covers, shrubs, trees and structures. The duff will be maintained no deeper than 3 inches. All trees bigger than 8 inches in diameter will be left, and at least one-third of the trees less than 8 inches in diameter will be left to retain a range of size categories and species. In heavily wooded areas the trees may be thinned to a density of less than 50 trees per acre, however the structure of the remaining woodland is more important than the absolute density of the trees (C. Rice, pers. comm.). The structure should prevent shrubs from transferring fire from the ground up into the Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 6 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 canopy of the trees. It is also important to keep the tree canopy dense enough to prevent or hinder the growth of shrubs in the understory. The work will be done with hand labor, grazing, and mowing. The work will be done annually in grassland and 3 to 10 years in woodland, coastal scrub, and chaparral. Some defensible space work is currently done at the interpretive center and Fire Station 8 in Foothills Park, and at the Gateway Facility in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. 1.1.2. Ignition Prevention These activities apply to barbeque sites in 6 picnic areas in Foothills Park. A ten-foot radius around each barbeque will be raked to bare earth. In addition, the area within 30 feet of each barbeque will be trimmed and thinned as defined for Defensible Space. All of the barbeque sites are in woodland. The treatment will be done with hand labor to treat grasses and downed debris on an annual basis, and to trim trees and shrubs as necessary every 3 to 5 years. The trimming and raking work within 30 feet of each barbeque would be a new activity. No ignition prevention management is proposed for Pearson-Arastradero Preserve in the plan, however, the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department maintains a power line along Arastradero Creek in the preserve which is a possible ignition source. The Utilities Department clears vegetation around each pole annually, and this is expected to continue. 1.1.3. Containment These activities are intended to compartmentalize fuels so it is easier to contain and control a fire. Several methods are used. In Foothills Park, a series of fuel breaks will be maintained in grassland, coastal scrub and chaparral. These breaks border existing graded roads along Trappers Trail, Pony Tracks Trail, and Valley View Fire Trail. In addition, two areas northeast of the entry gate will be mowed or grazed; one is at Bobcat Point, and the other is on the slope adjacent to homes on Altamont Circle. No treatments are specified for Shotgun, Madrone or Charley Brown fire roads in this update. These fire breaks will only be maintained as service roads in the future, including roadside grass mowing and grading to prevent erosion (as in the past). The brush and tree trimming done in the past will not be done unless it is required to clear the road. The roads are graded annually for access (not just for fire). Trappers Trail is currently mowed annually for a distance of 100 to 200 feet from the road. The Fire Management Plan Update proposes to reduce the area of annual mowing along Trappers Trail from 100-200 feet to 10-30 feet. The remaining area that has been mowed in the past will be mowed every three years (two years rest, one year mow), in order to encourage a grassland with no more than 30 percent cover of shrubs to grow in this area. The reason this break is so wide is that it is located at the top of a long slope of chaparral, and a fire in the chaparral could have very long flame lengths. A larger break is needed in order to be able to fight a fire in the chaparral and to provide for firefighter safety (C. Rice, pers. comm.). The treatment along the Pony Tracks Trail and the Valley View Fire Trail is to annually mow ten feet on either side of the road, and every three years to mow to the topographic break in slope (about 50 feet from the road), with the intent of maintaining a brush cover of 30 percent or less. These trails are currently mowed in this manner. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 7 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 In Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, containment entails mowing a ten-foot wide swath of grassland around the perimeter of the preserve within 15 to 45 feet of the park boundary, grazing where coastal scrub, woodland or chaparral are near homes, mowing grassland along selected trails for a width of 10 feet on either side of the trail, mowing/grazing 48.7 acres of grassland northeast of Arastradero Road, and prescribed burning/grazing in 42.7 acres of grassland southwest of Arastradero Road. The grassland treatments would occur annually, and the scrub, woodland and chaparral treatments would occur every 3 to 5 years. A strip that is currently disced near the Preserve border at Liddicoat Circle would continue to be disced annually if grazing has not created a fuel-free zone (C. Rice, pers. comm.). An area near the Preserve border at Paseo del Roble Drive would change from being disced to being grazed. Currently the perimeter and a center ridge are disced, so the Fire Management Plan Update would reduce the area that is disced and would introduce grazing and prescribed burning. A total area of about 43 acres would be burned. The treatment along the road that borders Arastradero Creek would include mowing for fifteen feet on the grassland side of the road and selective hand treatment of vegetation on the creek side of the road. 1.1.4. Evacuation These treatments are intended to reduce fire intensity next to roads to allow firefighting vehicles to pass and to ensure safe passage to people trying to reach safety zones or leave the area. The treatment extends 30 feet out from each roadway edge along the primary evacuation routes, and 15 feet from one edge of the secondary evacuation route. The riparian vegetation along Buckeye Creek, which borders one side of the secondary evacuation route, is dominated by coyote brush. This vegetation will be treated consistent with riparian treatments near Arastradero Creek in order to maintain creek bank stability. Some dead material will be removed from the top of the creek bank, but no work would occur in the creek channel. The treatment methods include mowing, grazing and hand labor and occur in grassland, woodland, and coastal scrub. Grassland would be mowed or grazed annually to a height of 4 inches or less for ten feet from the road edge. Woodland would be grazed or would be trimmed by hand so that branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter within 8 feet of the ground are removed. Plants will also be trimmed as necessary to break vertical continuity between ground covers, shrubs, trees and structures. The duff will be maintained no deeper than 3 inches. All trees bigger than 8 inches in diameter will be left, and at least one-third of the trees less than 8 inches in diameter will be left to retain a range of size categories and species. Remove only those small trees that could enable a fire to extend to the tree canopy. In heavily wooded areas the trees may be thinned to a density of less than 50 trees per acre, however the structure of the woodland is more important than the density, with the goal of preventing fire from extending from the ground through shrubs or vines into the canopy (Carol Rice, pers. comm.). As currently required by fire code, a vertical clearance of 13.5 feet will be maintained over the roadbed. This clearance is mostly already in place. Within Foothills Park the primary evacuation routes are the park road that extends from the entry gate around Boronda Lake and through Las Trampas Valley to the maintenance facility, the road from Boronda Lake to Alexis Drive in the northeast part of the park, and the road from the Interpretive Center to the Hewlett property in the northwest part of the park. There is a secondary evacuation route in Wild Horse Valley that extends from the Towle Campground to the main park road. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 8 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Other primary evacuation routes include Arastradero Road from Page Mill Road to the city limit, Page Mill Road from Arastradero Road to Skyline Boulevard, and portions of Skyline Boulevard within city limits. The evacuation routes are not currently treated on city-owned land, so these treatments would be new. 1.1.5. Firefighter Safety Zones These treatments provide areas where firefighters can find refuge during a fire event. Four firefighter safety zones are proposed along the Trappers Trail fuel break in Foothills Park. These areas have a 100-ft radius and are mowed or grazed annually. The treatment will affect about 4 acres of grassland/coastal scrub, and occurs in areas along Trappers Trail that are currently mowed annually. 1.1.6. Eucalyptus Trees The Fire Management Plan provides direction for trimming or removal of eucalyptus trees, but does not specify any particular trees for removal. The Fire Management Plan identifies that raptors may use eucalyptus trees as perches and nesting sites, and that replacement perches or nesting platforms can be installed prior to removal of the trees. The existing and planned activities are summarized below. They are organized by general area, and explain how the specific treatments would be applied within those areas. The treatment locations are shown on Figures 4 and 5. 1.2. Treatments in Foothills Park 1.2.1. Entry gate, Boronda Lake, and main park road from the entry gate to Shady Cove picnic area (F.D1, F.E2) This area includes a structure (the entry gate) and a major evacuation route (the main park road), that are subject to the measures required for Defensible Space and Evacuation. Treatments will be completed within 100 feet of the entry gate, and extend 30 feet from either edge of the roadway. The entry gate is surrounded by pavement, but the 100 foot distance extends into grassland and woodland. Under this treatment prescription, the grassland within 30 feet of the structure would be weed-whipped, the pavement would be cleared of leaves or other flammable debris, and the woodland would be trimmed. Trimming in the woodland would be done by hand, with the goal of reducing the chances that a fire started in the understory could extend into the tree canopy. This generally means removing branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter within 8 feet of the ground and trimming or removing understory plants as necessary to break vertical continuity between ground covers, shrubs, trees and structures. These measures would be new. A 20-foot clearance is mowed around the restroom near the entry gate approximately every other year. This restroom is in woodland, and the treatment area would extend out 100 feet from the structure. The evacuation route is bordered by primarily grassland, some woodland, a small patch of chaparral, and Boronda Lake. The grassland would be mowed, grazed or weed-whipped within Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 9 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 10 feet of a structure annually to achieve a height of 4 inches or less. The grassland is dominated by non-native annual grasses, so specific measures for native grasses are not necessary. The woodland would be trimmed as described above for the entry gate. The chaparral is on a roadcut and would be left in place to prevent erosion. These measures would mostly be new; a seven- foot swath of grassland is mowed along the roadside from the entrance gate to Vista hill, and every two years trees along the main park road are trimmed for tall vehicle clearance. 1.2.2. Shady Cove, Encinal, Pine Gulch and Orchard Glen picnic areas and the main park road from Shady Cove to the Interpretive Center (F.I1, F.I2, F.I3, F.I4, F.D3, F.E2) These picnic areas contain barbeques that will be treated for ignition prevention. There is also a restroom that will be treated as defensible space. The area around each barbeque would be completely cleared for a ten foot radius, then the woodland vegetation would be trimmed by hand out to a 30 foot radius to remove all dead material and live branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter below 8 feet, and to remove understory plants as necessary to break vertical continuity between ground covers, shrubs, trees and structures. The area around the restroom is woodland, which would be trimmed in the same way but for a radius of 100 feet rather than 30 feet. The main park road in this area is bordered by woodland and grassland with shrubs (along the dam). This vegetation would be subject to mowing/grazing and hand labor for a distance of 30 feet from either side of the road. The grasses would be treated annually and the woodland would be treated every 3 to 5 years. Past efforts in these areas have included grazing with goats near the picnic areas, mowing a 20-foot clearance around the Orchard Glen picnic area, roadside tree trimming every 2 to 5 years for large/tall vehicle clearance. Trimming 30 feet out from the edge of the road and from the barbeques would be new. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 10 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Figure 4 Proposed Treatment Locations in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Pearson-Arastradero PreserveTreatment Plan 11 No ......... , 2001 _ACI2~ Treatment Plan • Oofonolblo SP". + SafMyZ"". 1'\3'- .-ACI3 _ SUpt>ort Oo.lgnolod Ev"",uollon and/Of Ace.os Ro"'. _ EncuallDfl Rollin O"'~ld. P .. k~ Containment Support Gnu Mow ",..scrlbld Burn A,~"',~.,o P,nor ... /V Trails Roads Allo of: City SUfi, " AC10-, - I I / .-,..,.,,-_. __ ._ ..... _""_""'''.OM'UN .... ,.' .... , ..... "'. __ n ..... Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 11 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Figure 5 Proposed Treatment Locations in Foothills Park Foothills Park Treatment Plan -Part 4 of 4 Tr&ah .... ", Plan .&. ..... ..., """""",, • """M' ........ + """.,.ton. _"" ......... h"u ... "" on_''''''~'''' ~, .. " .. "" R ..... ,.. ..... "'. Conlairrnenl SuppDfI ~. .""' ......... ~-... 0 •• Sourcn : 01: Clly Siall. , , ___ J I Palo Allo CKy lImll~ I I I I I 1 ____ _ ._.,,-_. __ .--..... . _-,_ ... " .... '""-... ... .,.<., ........ u -,~- Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 12 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 1.2.3. Las Trampas Valley, including the main park road, the interpretive center, the Oak Grove group picnic area, the maintenance complex and a restroom associated with the picnic area, and the road from the interpretive center to the Hewlett property (F.E2, F.D4, F.I5, F.D5, F.E3) This area will be treated for evacuation, defensible space and ignition prevention. The main park road is bordered on one side by an irrigated meadow, and on the other by grassland and woodland. The treatments would occur in the grassland and woodland, and would include mowing, grazing and hand labor within 10 feet of the road edge to keep the grass at 4 inches or less in height, and to remove branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter within 8 feet of the ground, and remove understory plants as necessary to break vertical continuity between ground covers, shrubs, trees and structures. Currently in this area the grassland along the road is mowed in a 4-ft width annually, the parking between the Interpretive Center and the Oak Grove group picnic area is mowed/weed-whipped around the roadside boulders for aesthetics, there is occasional tree trimming (2-4 year cycle) to limb up for visual/patrol needs and vehicle clearance, and the trees in the parking areas are trimmed for the same reasons along with hazard tree prevention. The Oak Grove group picnic area contains a barbeque. The area within 10 feet of the barbeque will be raked clean annually, and vegetation within 30 feet of the barbeque will be kept clean of dead debris, the trees will be limbed up 8 feet from the ground, and the understory plants will be removed as necessary to prevent spread of a fire from the ground into the canopy of the trees. Vegetation trimming would be done by hand, and would likely be necessary every three to five years. Currently the grasses in the barbeque area are mowed or weed-whipped, the leaves are raked annually around the large barbeque, and brush and tree limbs are cleared. The interpretive center, the maintenance complex, and the restroom associated with the Oak Grove group picnic area will be treated as defensible space. These buildings are in grassland and woodland. Grass within 30 feet of these buildings will be mowed, grazed, or weed-whipped to keep the grasses at less than four inches in height. Woodland vegetation within 100 feet of these buildings will be mowed, grazed, or trimmed by hand to remove dead debris, to remove branches 3 inches in diameter or less up to 8 feet from the ground, and to remove understory plants that can spread fire from the ground into the canopy. This will be done annually, although the trimming may only be necessary every 3 to 5 years. Currently the vegetation is trimmed to provide defensible space immediately around the buildings, to about 30 feet; this would extend the treated area to 100 feet. The one-way road that leads from the back of the interpretive center uphill to the Hewlett Property and the edge of Pearson-Arastradero Preserve is in grassland and woodland. Grass within 30 feet of the roadway edge will be mowed or weed-whipped to keep the grasses at less than four inches in height. Other vegetation will be mowed or trimmed by hand to remove dead debris, to remove branches 3 inches in diameter or less up 8 feet from the ground, and to remove understory plants that can spread fire from the ground into the tree canopy. The grasses will be treated annually, and the woodland may only need treatment every 3 to 5 years. Currently the roadsides are mowed annually with a flail mower, in a swath up to 7 feet wide. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 13 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 1.2.4. Treatment areas in the northeast part of Foothills Park including an evacuation route from Boronda Lake to Alexis Drive, Fire Station 8, Boronda Water Tank, and two containment sites (F.E4, F.D2, F.D8, F.C4, F.C5) This area includes grassland, woodland and chaparral vegetation. There are also landscape trees around Boronda Water Tank. The evacuation route is in grassland and will be mowed, grazed or weed whipped annually to keep the grass height at 4 inches or less within 10 feet of the edge of the road. Currently the roadside form Fire Station 8 to Alexis Drive is mowed every 2 to 3 years in a swath up to 7 feet wide, and portions of the grassland are also disced annually. Roadside tree trimming also occurs every 2 to 5 years for large/tall vehicle clearance. Under the Fire Management Plan the mowed area would be increased, the discing would be removed, and tree trimming would increase to extend 30 feet from the edge of the road, rather than immediately above the road. Fire Station 8 and the Boronda Water Tank will be treated as defensible space, which means the vegetation within 100 feet of the structure will be trimmed. Fire Station 8 is already kept clear of vegetation within 100 feet. Vegetation around the water tank that will be trimmed includes woodland, grassland, landscaping, and possibly chaparral. Grazing and hand labor will be used to keep grasses at 4 inches or less in height, to remove dead branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter within 8 feet of the ground, and to remove understory plants as necessary to break vertical continuity between ground covers, shrubs, trees and structures. If it is necessary to modify the chaparral, the chaparral may be mowed, shortened or, alternatively, plants can be selectively removed to create shrub islands that are less than 12 feet in diameter (or twice the height of the tallest shrub, whichever is smaller) and are at least eight feet apart (or twice the height of the tallest shrub, whichever is greater). Currently the vegetation around the water tank is not managed, so these activities will be new. The containment treatments in this portion of the park (F.C4 and F.C5) are located where the park boundary is adjacent to homes, and include Bobcat Point. The vegetation type is grassland, woodland, and chaparral. The proposed treatment method is grazing with goats. One area (F.C5) is currently disced where there is grassland. Grazing with goats would be a new method in this area and grassland, woodland and chaparral would be newly grazed. 1.2.5. Wild Horse Valley (F.E5, F.I6, F.D6) Wild Horse Valley has three treatments, including a secondary evacuation route, defensible space around a pump station, and ignition prevention. The evacuation route is a dirt road that extends along Buckeye Creek and passes through woodland, grassland and coastal scrub. Because this is a secondary evacuation route, vegetation within 15 feet of the edge of the road will be trimmed along one side, and the other side will be left untreated because it is a creek bank. Treatment methods include mowing, grazing and hand labor. Grasses will be cut to 4 inches or less annually. Woodland will be trimmed so that branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter within 8 feet of the ground are removed. Understory plants will also be removed as necessary to break vertical continuity between ground covers, shrubs, trees and structures. Where it is not in the riparian zone, the coastal scrub will be mowed, or alternatively, plants can be selectively removed to create shrub islands that are less than 12 feet in diameter (or twice the height of the tallest shrub, whichever is smaller) and are at least eight feet apart (or twice the height of the tallest shrub, whichever is greater). Currently the Wild Horse Valley road is mowed in a 7-foot swath along the edge of the road, and about 5-7 acres of the valley floor are Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 14 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 mowed to control yellow star thistle and tall grasses. Roadside tree trimming is also done every 2 to 5 years for large/tall vehicle clearance. The Towle Campground at the upper end of Wild Horse Valley contains barbeques that are a potential ignition source. The campground is in woodland. The area within 10 feet of the barbeques will be cleared and raked annually. The area within 30 feet of the barbeques will be trimmed as for defensible space, which includes removing branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter within 8 feet of the ground and removing understory plants as necessary to break vertical continuity between the ground and the tree canopy. Past treatments in this area have included grazing with goats, mowing/weed whipping of grasses near the barbeques, and some clearing of brush and tree limbs near the barbeques. The Boronda Water Tank pump station is also located at the Towle Campground. It is in woodland. It will be treated as defensible space, which means that the woodland will be trimmed within 100 feet of the structure so that branches smaller than 3 inches in diameter within 8 feet of the ground will be removed, dead vegetation is removed, and understory plants that connect ground cover with the tree canopy, and thus can serve as ladder fuels, are removed. Currently the woodland in this area is not trimmed, and this work would be new. 1.2.6. Trappers Trail, Pony Tracks, Valley View and Firefighter Safety Zones on Trappers Trail The treatments located along Trappers Ridge on the west side of the park include containment and firefighter safety zones, and have been previously described (see containment, above). The treatments will occur in grassland and chaparral and are limited to areas that are currently mowed annually except for small areas to the south that will be treated for the first time. 1.3. Treatments in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve 1.3.1. Gateway Facility and portions of the preserve northeast of Arastradero Road (A.D1, A.D2, A.C1, A.C2, A.C3 Treatments in this area include defensible space around the Gateway Facility and the restrooms, and containment treatments in the rest of this side of the Preserve. The vegetation is grassland, and the treatment methods include mowing or weed-whipping annually to maintain grass height at 4 inches or less within 100 feet of the Gateway Facility buildings, mowing a 10-ft swath around the Preserve boundary (or grazing the entire area), grazing the grassland inside the perimeter area, and discing a 10-ft wide fuel break along the border with Liddicoat Circle. Currently the vegetation is mowed around the Gateway Facility annually for a distance of 30 feet, and the entire perimeter is disced, including wide swaths adjacent to homes and adjacent to a eucalyptus wind break on the border with Stanford lands. 1.3.2. Main part of the Preserve, southwest of Arastradero Road (A.C4, A.C5, A.C6, A.C7, A.C8, A.C9, A.C10, A.C11, A.C12, A.C13, A.C14, A.C15, A.Rx1, A.Rx2, A.D3, and A.D4) On the southwest side of Arastradero Road the treatments include containment, prescribed fire, and defensible space. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 15 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Containment in this portion of the Preserve is described in detail above, under Containment. This treatment will affect grassland, woodland, and the riparian corridor along Arastradero Creek where selective trimming will be done by hand. Grazing will be used along the preserve boundary with Paseo del Roble (A.C4) rather than discing because this area contains serpentine soils. The area is currently disced; it cannot be mowed because the slope is too steep for the mowing equipment. The defensible space treatment will be used around a pump station and a water tank; these treatments will affect grassland and woodland, and will be new. Willow riparian vegetation within 100 feet of the pump station will not be removed, but other vegetation will be. Currently, discing is done between Gate B (on Arastradero Road about a quarter-mile west of the Preserve parking lot) along the ridgetop east paralleling the Meadow Lark Trail, from Gate C (John Marthens Lane) east towards the Corte Madera Water Tank, and from Gate C south following the perimeter and then east towards Arastradero Creek. This would no longer occur. Trailside mowing and/or weed whipping is done along all trails in the Preserve annually, and the width varies from 1 to 4 feet. Under the Fire Management Plan this would be increased to 10 feet, and would be done annually. Prescribed fire is proposed in two grassland locations in the middle of the Preserve that are currently mowed or grazed. The burns would occur in late spring or early fall with a resulting cover of not less than 20%, and would occur no more often than every 3 to 5 years. The intent is to promote the growth of native plant species. A fall burn is more closely aligned with the natural fire cycle in California, and several native plant species are likely adapted to such a regime. Treatment boundaries in these two locations are mowed grassland along trails and the road along Arastradero Creek. Additional firebreaks for these areas are not required; if additional “cut-off” places are to be installed, they can be mowed prior to the burn or implemented using Class A foam. A prescription or burn plan will be prepared prior to this treatment, which will address fuel reduction requirements, local weather conditions, and available resources for fire management. This treatment would be new. 1.4. Evacuation Routes The treatment for evacuation routes is described above under Evacuation. 1.4.1. Arastradero Road (PA.2, AE.1) The vegetation along Arastradero Road from Page Mill Road to the city limit includes willow riparian, grassland, coastal scrub, woodland, and eucalyptus. The grassland would be mowed or weed-whipped within 10 feet of the edge of the pavement. Woodland and coastal scrub within 30 feet of the road edge would be trimmed by hand to remove branches less than 3 inches in diameter within 8 feet of the ground, remove dead debris, and trim or remove understory plants to prevent fire from extending up into the tree canopy via the understory. The willow riparian area along Arastradero Creek would be left untreated. Eucalyptus would either be trimmed and cleared of loose bark and debris, or would be entirely removed. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 16 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Currently the edge of the roadway is mowed (2-5 feet) annually for motorist and bicyclist sight clearance and safety. 1.4.2. Page Mill Road (PA.1) The vegetation along Page Mill Road is dominated by woodland, but also includes some grassland and chaparral. The woodland and chaparral within 30 feet of either side of the road would be trimmed by hand to remove branches less than 3 inches in diameter within 8 feet of the ground, and understory plants would be trimmed or removed to prevent spread of fire into the canopy. Dead vegetation and debris would also be removed. The chaparral could also be mowed or cut into islands at least eight feet apart. Grassland within 10 feet of the road would be kept at a height of 4 inches or less. Treatment methods could include hand labor, mowing, and grazing. Currently approximately 3.5 to five miles of Page Mill Road is mowed 2 to 5 feet from the road edge, and PG&E trims vegetation to keep utility lines clear. 1.4.3. Skyline Boulevard (PA.4) The vegetation along the portions of Skyline Boulevard that are in the city limits includes grassland, woodland, and a small amount of chaparral. These areas would be treated as described for Page Mill Road, above. These treatments would be new. 1.4.4. Los Trancos Road Los Trancos Road is located along the jurisdictional boundaries between Portola Valley, Palo Alto, and Santa Clara County, and treatment along this corridor will be coordinated between the jurisdictions. Vegetation within 30 feet of the edge of the roadway will be treated using mowing, grazing and hand labor, as described under Evacuation, above. These treatments would be new. 2.0 Federal, State and Local Biological Regulations 2.1. Introduction Biological resources in California are protected under federal and state laws. The laws that pertain to the biological resources found in Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve include the: • U.S. Endangered Species Act (protecting species listed by the federal government as threatened or endangered); • U.S. Clean Water Act (protecting water quality and wetland habitat). • U.S. Migratory Bird Treaty Act (protecting most U.S. birds); • U.S. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (protecting these eagles); • California Environmental Quality Act (mitigating the environmental effects of human- initiated development); • California Endangered Species Act (protecting species listed by the state as rare, threatened, or endangered under Fish and Game Code 2050 et seq); Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 17 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 • California Department of Fish and Game Code (Sections 1600-1607 that protect stream bed, bank and channel; 3500-3516 that protect nesting birds and fully-protected birds; 4700 and 5050 that protect fully-protected mammals, reptiles and amphibians). In addition, the City of Palo Alto has a tree preservation ordinance and municipal code that governs open space districts. 2.2. Federal 2.2.1. Endangered Species Act (ESA) The United States Endangered Species Act (ESA) is administered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS for all species but fish and NOAA Fisheries for fish species). The federal ESA provides protection for species included on the endangered species list (known as “listed species”). In particular, the federal act prohibits "take". "Take" is defined by the ESA as "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect a federally listed, endangered species of wildlife, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct." Federal regulations also define take to include the incidental destruction of animals in the course of an otherwise lawful activity, such as habitat loss due to development. Under those rules the definition of take includes significant habitat modification or degradation that actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or shelter (50 CFR Section 17.3). Take may be allowed under a permit by either Section 7 or Section 10(a) of the ESA. The permit is issued under Section 7 if another federal agency funds or issues a permit for the project (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for example). The permit is issued under Section 10(a) if there is no federal involvement in the project. The federally listed species protected by the ESA that have been documented to occur in Foothills and Pearson/Arastradero Parks or adjacent areas are the California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii), California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis), Marin western flax (Hesperolinon congestum), San Mateo thornmint (Acanthomintha duttonii), and San Mateo woolly sunflower (Eriophyllum latilobum). The habitats of these species include creeks, ponds, wetlands and adjacent upland habitat, and serpentine soils. The governing agency is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, except for steelhead, which is addressed by NOAA Fisheries. 2.2.2. Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) The Migratory Bird Treaty Act implements various treaties and conventions between the U.S. and Canada, Japan, Mexico and the former Soviet Union for the protection of migratory birds. Unless permitted by regulations, the Act provides that it is unlawful to pursue, hunt, take, capture or kill; attempt to take, capture or kill; possess, offer to or sell, barter, purchase, deliver or cause to be shipped, exported, imported, transported, carried or received any migratory bird, part, nest, egg or product, manufactured or not. In short, under the MBTA it is illegal to remove vegetation containing nests that are in active use, since this could result in killing a bird or destroying an egg. This would also be a violation of CDFG code (see section 3.3.3, below). Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 18 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 2.2.3. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act Under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act it is unlawful to import, export, take, sell, purchase, or barter any bald eagle or golden eagle, or their parts, products, nests, or eggs. “Take” includes pursuing, shooting, poisoning, wounding, killing, capturing, trapping, collecting, molesting, or disturbing. Exceptions may be granted by the USFWS for scientific or exhibition use, and for cultural use by Native Americans. However, no permits may be issued for import, export, or commercial activities involving eagles. 2.2.4. Clean Water Act The Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) is the primary federal law regulating water quality. The implementation of the Clean Water Act is the responsibility of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. That agency depends on other agencies, such as the individual states and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), to assist in implementing the Act. The objective of the Clean Water Act is to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters”. Section 401 and 404 apply to project activities that would impact waters of the U.S. (creeks, ponds, wetlands, etc). The California State Water Resources Control Board enforces section 401 of the Clean Water Act (see below) and the USACE enforces Section 404. Clean Water Act, Section 401: Any applicant for a Federal permit to impact waters of the U.S. under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, including Nationwide permits (NWP) where pre- construction notification is required, must also provide to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers a certification from the State of California. The “401 Certification” is provided by the State Water Resources Control Board through the local Regional Water Quality Control Board. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) recommends the application be made at the same time that any applications are provided to other agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or NOAA Fisheries. Application is not final until completion of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., CEQA certification). The application to the RWQCB is similar to the pre-construction notification that is required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (see discussion of Section 404, below). It must include a description of the habitat that is being impacted, a description of how the impact is proposed to be minimized and proposed mitigation measures with goals, schedules, and performance standards. Mitigation must include a replacement of functions and values, and replacement of wetland at a minimum ratio of 2:1, or twice as many acres of wetlands provided as are removed. The RWQCB looks for mitigation that is on site and in-kind, with functions and values as good as or better than the water-based habitat that is being removed. Clean Water Act, Section 404: As part of its mandate under the Clean Water Act, the EPA regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into “Waters of the U.S.” under Section 404 of the Act. “Waters of the U.S." include territorial seas, tidal waters, and non-tidal waters in addition to wetlands and drainages that support wetland vegetation, exhibit ponding or scouring, show obvious signs of channeling, or have discernible banks and high water marks. The EPA also regulates excavation and changes in drainage. The discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. is prohibited under the Clean Water Act except when it is in compliance with Section 404 of the Act. Enforcement authority for Section 404 was given to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which it accomplishes under its regulatory branch. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 19 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 The Fire Management Plan does not require direct impacts in streams, but there are wetlands in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve in the area of treatments A.E.1, A.Rx.1, A.Rx2, A.C.3, and A.C.11. No state and federal permits will be necessary if recommended avoidance and protection measures are included. Creeks, ponds and wetlands are also considered a sensitive habitat under CEQA, and can support listed species. 2.3. State 2.3.1. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) CEQA (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq.) requires public agencies to review activities which may affect the quality of the environment so that consideration is given to prevent damage to the environment. Under the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 C.C.R. Sections 15000 et. seq.), Section 15307, actions taken by regulatory agencies for the protection of natural resources such as the Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan are categorically exempt. However, if the project is located in a sensitive environment, an ordinarily insignificant project may actually have significant effects. Thus, under the Guidelines a project is not categorically exempt if it “may impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.” Pursuant to the Guidelines, any project contributing to significant cumulative impacts or that has a reasonable possibility of causing a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances cannot be exempt. The state maintains a list of sensitive, or “special-status”, biological resources, including those listed by the state or federal government or the California Native Plant Society as endangered, threatened, rare or of special concern due to declining populations. Projects that directly impact these resources may not qualify for a categorical exemption. For example, discing that could cause “take” of a burrowing owl (California Species of Concern) would not qualify for a categorical exemption under CEQA. The CEQA Guidelines contain a checklist of questions to gauge whether a project will result in significant impacts. The response to these questions is included in section 6.0 of this document. During CEQA analysis, the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) is usually consulted. The CNDDB relies on information provided by the California Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Native Plant Society, and the Audubon Society among others. Under CEQA, the lists kept by these and any other widely recognized organizations are considered when determining the impact of a project. CEQA Guidelines Section 15380 defines endangered, threatened, and rare species for purposes of CEQA and clarifies that CEQA review extends to other species that are not formally listed under the state or federal Endangered Species Acts but that meet specified criteria. The state and federal governments keep lists of such “special-status” species which are reflected in the CNDDB. Many of these species are not listed under either Endangered Species Act but are currently tracked to determine if listing is necessary. Thus they are not specifically protected by the state and federal Endangered Species Acts. They are only protected through measures imposed as a result of CEQA review. The California Native Plant Society has a list of plants that are considered to be rare, threatened, or endangered in a portion or all of their range; these plants may not have been listed by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 20 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Wildlife Service, but they are considered sensitive under CEQA. The California Department of Fish and Game is a trustee agency and is solicited for its comments during the CEQA process unless a project is exempt. The state also maintains a list of fully-protected species, as described in section 3.3.3, below. Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve provide habitat for several Special-status species (see the discussion in section 4.0), however few of them have been confirmed present there (Table 3-1): Table 2-1 Potential Special-status Species of Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Animals Plants San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat* Pallid bat Red bat American badger Ringtail San Francisco garter snake Western pond turtle California red-legged frog California tiger salamander Rainbow trout/steelhead* White-tailed kite* Northern harrier Sharp-shinned hawk Cooper’s hawk* Golden eagle Burrowing owl Long-eared owl Loggerhead shrike* Yellow warbler Saltmarsh common yellowthroat Tri-colored blackbird Arcuate bush mallow* Choris’ popcorn flower Crystal Springs lessingia Dudley’s lousewort Fountain thistle Fragrant fritillary Franciscan onion Kings Mountain manzanita Marin western flax San Francisco campion San Francisco collinsia San Mateo thornmint Santa Clara red ribbons Santa Cruz Mountains manzanita Western leatherwood* White-flowered rein orchid Wooly-headed lessingia * confirmed present 2.3.2. California Endangered Species Act (CESA) CESA (Fish and Game Code 2050 et seq.) establishes the policy of the State to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance threatened or endangered species and their habitats. CESA mandates that State agencies shall not approve projects that would jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species if reasonable and prudent alternatives are available that would avoid jeopardy. No state-listed plant species are known to occur in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, Foothills Park, or the immediate vicinity. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 21 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 2.3.3. California Fish and Game Code CDFG is authorized under the California Fish and Game Code, Sections 1600-1607 to develop mitigation measures and enter into Streambed Alteration Agreements with applicants who propose projects that would obstruct the flow of, or alter the bed, channel, or bank of a river or stream in which there is a fish or wildlife resource, including intermittent and ephemeral streams. No such activities are necessary under the Fire Management Plan. Sections 3500-3516, 4700, 5050 and 5515 address Fully Protected species. Prior to the passage of CESA, the classification of Fully Protected was the State’s initial effort to identify and provide additional protection to those animals that were rare or faced possible extinction. Subsequently, many Fully Protected species have been listed under the state and/or federal Endangered Species Acts. The only exceptions are golden eagle, white-tailed kite, trumpeter swan, northern elephant seal, and ringtail. Fully Protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time and no licenses or permits may be issued for their take except for collecting these species for necessary scientific research and relocation of the bird species for the protection of livestock. State Fully Protected species that may occur in Foothills Park and Pearson- Arastradero Preserve are the San Francisco garter snake, white-tailed kite, and ringtail. Nesting birds, including raptors, are protected by the California Fish and Game Code section 3503, which reads, “It is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto.” In addition, under Fish and Game Code section 3503.5, “it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders 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”. Passerines and non-passerine landbirds are further protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. As such, the CDFG typically recommends surveys for nesting birds that could potentially be directly (actual removal of trees/vegetation) or indirectly (noise disturbance) impacted by project-related activities. 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. This code applies to work proposed under the Fire Management Plan. 2.3.4. State Water Resources Control Board/Regional Water Quality Control Board The State Water Resources Control Board is a five-member board that sets statewide policy related to water quality, coordinates and supports regional water quality control boards, and reviews petitions that contest regional board actions. There are nine regional water quality control boards statewide; the City of Palo Alto is under the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Each regional board has nine board members and a staff. Each regional board sets water quality standards, waste discharge requirements for its region, determines compliance with those standards, and takes enforcement action. The regional board issues and enforces permits for discharge of treated water, landfills, stormwater runoff, filling of any surface waters or wetlands, dredging, agricultural activities and wastewater recycling. In Palo Alto, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board would be concerned with stormwater runoff and activities that directly impact creeks, ponds or wetlands. Also see the discussion under federal Clean Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 22 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Water Act, above. None of the activities associated with the Fire Management Plan are expected to require authorization from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2.4. City of Palo Alto Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 8). The City of Palo Alto tree preservation ordinance protects coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), and designated heritage trees. Under the ordinance, coast live or valley oaks that are 11.5 inches in diameter (36 inches circumference), and redwoods that are 18 inches in diameter (57 inches circumference), measured at 54 inches above grade, are protected. Removal of a protected tree is prohibited except when the tree is dead, hazardous, is crowding another protected tree or constitutes a public nuisance. In some cases a protected tree can also be removed if it affects a single-family residence or a non-residential building. A permit is required to remove a protected tree, and replacement is normally required. The ordinance also prohibits pruning of more than 25 percent of the crown of a protected tree within one calendar year or unbalancing the tree. Heritage trees are individual trees of any size or species that are specifically designated as a heritage tree by the city council. There are no Palo Alto-designated heritage trees in the Foothills Fire Management Plan Update area. Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.28 Special Purpose (PF, OS and AC) Districts. The Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and Foothills Park are subject to the municipal code governing open space and public facility districts. The districts have the following purposes that apply to these parks (section 18.28.010): (a) Public Facilities District (PF) The PF public facilities district is designed to accommodate governmental, public utility, educational, and community service or recreational facilities. (b) Open Space District (OS) The purpose and intent of this district is to: (1) protect the public health, safety, and welfare; (2) protect and preserve open space land as a limited and valuable resource; (3) permit the reasonable use of open space land, while at the same time preserving and protecting its inherent open space characteristics to assure its continued availability for the following: as agricultural land, scenic land, recreation land, conservation or natural resource land; for the containment of urban sprawl and the structuring of urban development; and for the retention of land in its natural or near-natural state, and to protect life and property in the community from the hazards of fire, flood and seismic activity; and (4) coordinate with and carry out federal, state, regional, county, and city open space plans. In the “Additional OS District Regulations”, the “removal of trees shall be permitted only as provided in Title 8” (which is tree protection, as described above). No other provisions apply to the Fire Management Plan because it does not include development of structures. The Fire Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 23 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Management Plan helps to meet several of the purposes of the regulations, including 1, 2, and 3 listed above. 3.0 Biological Setting 3.1. Vegetation Communities The foothills of the City of Palo Alto are located on the eastern slope of the Santa Cruz Mountains (Figures 1, 2, and 3). The terrain transitions from low rolling foothills in Pearson- Arastradero Preserve to steep slopes in Foothills Park. Dry conditions in the summer and fall affect the type and location of vegetation found within the foothills. The area is drained by both intermittent and perennial streams, including Los Trancos Creek (perennial), Arastradero Creek (perennial), Buckeye Creek (intermittent), and an unnamed tributary to Los Trancos Creek (intermittent) (see more discussion about creeks under Creek/Riparian Forest below). The Santa Cruz Mountains has two life zones, the Upper Sonoran and Transition, both of which are found within the foothills of the City of Palo Alto (Thomas, 1961). The Upper Sonoran is composed of chaparral, grassland and foothill woodland. The Transition is composed of coastal strand, coastal scrub, redwood forest, mixed evergreen forest, and grassland. The distribution of these communities is determined by the availability of water. Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve contain several general plant communities/habitat types, which are described below: chaparral, coastal scrub, grassland, mixed evergreen forest, oak woodland, serpentine soils, creek/riparian forest, lake, and irrigated meadow. The following descriptions are based on the Flora of the Santa Cruz Mountains (Thomas 1961), Description of Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland 1986), A Manual of California Vegetation (“MCV”) (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995), and the Jepson Manual (Hickman, 1993). The community names are from the Flora of the Santa Cruz Mountains (with a translation to the MCV provided), and the plant names are from the Jepson Manual. Pearson-Arastradero Preserve is dominated by grassland (native and non-native), but also contains oak woodland, coastal scrub, wetland and aquatic/riparian vegetation. Foothills Park is dominated by oak woodland and mixed evergreen forest, and also contains chaparral, coastal scrub and aquatic/riparian vegetation. The woodland in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and Foothills Park is dominated by coast live oak. As elevation increases, the oaks tend to give way to a mix of evergreens, including madrone, bay laurel, tan oak, and buckeye. For the purposes of this analysis, these two woodland types were combined into “woodland” because the impacts and protection measures are not well differentiated between the two types, and it is simpler to apply the protection measures without having to determine which woodland type is present. Chaparral (MCV: Chamise series) Found primarily in Foothills Park, this vegetation community occupies steep, dry south-facing slopes. It is not usually uniform in growth and is found on rocky soils. Composed of broad-leaved sclerophyll1 shrubs usually 5-14 ft tall. Dominant species is chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), but this type may also include 1 Sclerophyll means the leaves are tough and grow close together along the stem. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 24 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 manzanita (Arctostaphylos spp.), scrub oak (Quercus berberidifolia), California-lilac (Ceanothus spp.), redberry (Rhamnus crocea ssp. crocea), coffeeberry (Rhamnus californica ssp. californica), and holly-leafed cherry (Prunus ilicifolia ssp. ilicifolia). Coastal Scrub (MCV: Coyote brush series) Usually less than six feet tall and found in dense thickets on windy exposed sites with shallow, rocky soils, coastal scrub is found in both Pearson- Arastradero Preserve and Foothills Park. Characteristic species include: coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), sagebrush (Artemisia californica), California-lilac (Ceanothus thyrsiflorus), California bee plant (Scrophularia californica), blackberry (Rubus ursinus), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), poison oak (Rhus diversiloba). Grassland (MCV: Foothill needlegrass series; California annual grassland series). Grasslands within Foothill Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve are mostly non-native species due to urban development and a long history of agriculture. However, stands of native grasses are present in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, and the Preserve also contains areas of serpentine grassland (see discussion of serpentine, below). The native grasslands are dominated by perennial bunch grasses, primarily needlegrass (Nasella pulchra, N. lepida), but also including blue wild rye (Elymus glaucus). California annual grasslands in the foothills in general are dominated by annual grasses and herbaceous plants as well as containing the perennial bunchgrasses mentioned above. The non- native species out-number native species. Characteristic species in annual grasslands include oatgrass, annual agoseris (Agoseris heterophylla), oat (Avena fatua), golden brodiaea (Brodiaea lutea), ripgut grass (Bromus diandrus), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), barley (Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum), foxtail barley (H. jubatum), California poppy (Eschscholzia californica), Ithuriel’s spear (Tritileia laxa), soap plant (Chlorogalum pomeridianum), Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum), needlegrass, California fescue (Festuca californica) and six- weeks fescue (F. dertonensis). Mixed Evergreen Forest (MCV: various series within Mixed Live Oak Forests). This community lies adjacent to creek/riparian forests on drier sites. It is found in the upland and western portion of Foothills Park and southwestern portions of Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. This community has many different subordinate communities like oak-madrone, fir-tanbark, oak- buckeye, tanbark oak-madrone but these stands are intermittent and small in extent and area. It is dominated by broad-leafed trees, 30 – 90 feet tall. The mixed evergreen forest in the foothills contains a mix of tree species including coast live oak, Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), tan oak (Lithocarpus densiflorus), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica) and black oak (Quercus kelloggii), with minor components of big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) and Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii). The shrub layer is minimal but includes saplings, western sword fern (Polystichum munitum), California hazel (Corylus cornuta var. californica), poison oak, and broom species. Oak Woodland (MCV: Coast live oak series). Oak woodland is a highly variable woodland that can be dominated by blue, coast live or interior live oaks. It consists mainly of dense woodlands with shrubby understories. Characteristic species include coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Q. lobata), blue oak (Q. douglasii), black oak (Q. kelloggii), interior live Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 25 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 oak (Q. wislizenii), California buckeye, ceanothus species, California bay laurel, holly-leafed cherry, bitter cherry (P. emarginata), toyon, and tan oak (Lithocarpus densiflorus). Creeks/Riparian Forest (MCV: Coast live oak series; Arroyo willow series). In the foothills area, this vegetation is found on Los Trancos Creek, Arastradero Creek, Buckeye Creek (a tributary to Los Trancos Creek), and an unnamed tributary to Los Trancos Creek in Pearson- Arastradero Preserve. In many places the vegetation along the creek is not markedly different from adjacent, upslope vegetation, and is dominated by coast live oak, coyote brush, or mixed evergreen forest. The riparian designation typically extends 50 feet from the top of the creek bank. Serpentine Soils. The underlying geology and the soil types in the foothills are an important consideration with regard to special-status plant species. In this area, soils that come from serpentine bedrock are low in nutrients and have a high calcium: magnesium ratio. As a result, these soils support a high number of native plants that have adapted to grow in them. Non-native grasses that can out-compete native species elsewhere do not grow well in serpentine soils without fertilizer. Several special-status plants are now only found growing in serpentine soils. Two areas of serpentine soils are mapped in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, and none are mapped in Foothills Park. Several special-status plants known to occur in the region, either historically or currently are found on serpentine soils. The micro-habitat description for these plants is described in Table 1 in Appendix A, and more discussion of these species is provided in section 4.2. Lake (Bulrush-Cattail series). This habitat type occurs at Boronda Lake in Foothills Park and John Sobey Pond and Arastradero Lake in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. It includes wetland vegetation such as broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), narrowleaf cattail (T. angustifolia) and tule or bulrush (Scirpus spp.). Boronda Lake is the largest of the three water bodies. It is a perennial man-made lake with a well-developed margin of cattails and tules. It flows into Los Trancos Creek. Arastradero Lake is next largest. It is also man-made with a dam on Arastradero Creek and is perennial. It is surrounded by willow riparian vegetation, and has a margin of cattails and tules. John Sobey Pond lies between Boronda and Arastradero Lakes. It is a smaller man-made impoundment on Arastradero Creek, and is surrounded by willow riparian forest. It dries completely in low- rainfall years. Irrigated meadow (No MCV designation). Foothills Park contains a non-native grass, irrigated meadow in Las Trampas Valley. The meadow extends from the Pine Gulch and Orchard Glen picnic areas to the Oak Grove Group Picnic Area, and lies between the main park road and Buckeye Creek. 3.2. Special-status Species The plant and animal special-status species historically known to occur in within a five-mile radius of Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and Foothills Park were researched through the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). A table of special-status species considered in this analysis is included in Appendix A (Table 1). Some species that were considered are not expected to occur in the habitat that exists in the Park or Preserve, or the database records are Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 26 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 over fifty ears old. The special-status species of concern for this impacts analysis are described below, in alphabetical order. American badger (Taxidea taxus, California Species of Special Concern). This is an uncommon species, but has a widespread range throughout the west. Badgers prefer to live in dry, open grasslands, fields, and pastures. They are found from high alpine meadows to sea level. Prey includes pocket gophers, ground squirrels, moles, woodrats, deer mice, and voles. Badger has been found to occur within 5 miles of the town center; the last observation was in 1981 near the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. It could occur in grassland or oak savanna where there is friable soil. Suitable habitat occurs in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. Bats. The pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus, California Species of Special Concern) and red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii, California Species of Special Concern) are listed as state species of concern. All bat species are also protected under CDFG code. The pallid bat prefers rocky outcrops, cliffs, and crevices with access to open habitats such as grassland or oak savanna for foraging. It is very sensitive to disturbance of roosting sites. Such sites are essential for metabolic economy, juvenile growth and as night roosts to consume prey. This species was observed in Woodside in 1960, according to the CNDDB. It is also known to occur to the north of Town in the Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve. Suitable habitat occurs in both the Preserve and the Park. The red bat is a migratory species and is generally found in the Bay Area in the winter. It is a solitary roosting species that primarily uses trees as roost sites. Maternity roosts are colonial. The roost sites are often in edge habitats, adjacent to streams, fields or urban areas, and may be from 2 to 40 feet above ground. Red bats eat a variety of insects, mainly moths, crickets, beetles and cicadas. It forages over open areas, and requires a source of water (Zeiner et al., 1990). Suitable habitat for this species occurs in both the Preserve and the Park. Some species that are otherwise not protected by the ESA or CESA and do not have a special CDFG or Fish and Game Code designation (e.g., fully protected) may still, under CEQA, be determined to be significantly impacted by a project. Considered nongame mammals, bats are protected by CDFG Code 4150, which reads “all mammals occurring naturally in California which are not game mammals, fully protected mammals, or fur-bearing mammals, are nongame mammals. Nongame mammals or parts thereof may not be taken or possessed except as provided in this code or in accordance with regulations adopted by the commission.” The CEQA planning process provides the main protection for bat roosts and maternity colonies. If a project were to destroy or disturb a roosting site for a bat maternity colony it could significantly impact the local and/or regional population of the species. Although loss of an individual bat would likely be considered an insignificant impact, loss of a roost site where multiple individuals are present would be considered significant, particularly for those listed as California species of special concern. This is because roost sites may be limited in availability and often have very specific habitat and/or microclimate conditions. When a roost site is lost, individuals may not be able to find an alternate roost in sufficient time for protection from the elements before expiring. Because the type of roost varies among species, the survey requirements also differ. A summary of habitat requirements is provided in Table 2 in Appendix A. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 27 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 For the eleven bat species that are expected to occur in the area listed in Table 2., roost habitats include tree cavities, caves, buildings, leaves of large trees/shrubs, rock piles, tree bark, and mines. Most occur year round. Breeding occurs in the winter and young are generally born May to July. In some cases the roosts are obvious by sight or smell; in other cases an acoustic survey is necessary. Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia; California Species of Special Concern). Burrowing owl is a yearlong resident of open, dry grassland and desert habitats and also occurs in grass, herbaceous plant and open shrub stages of pinyon-juniper and ponderosa pine habitats. It eats mostly insects, but also small mammals, reptiles, birds, and carrion. It uses ground squirrel burrows for cover and nesting. Burrowing owl is known to occur at the Palo Alto Baylands and in the Stanford foothills near Felt Lake. Suitable habitat occurs in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii; Federally Threatened and California Species of Special Concern; CRLF hereafter). The California red-legged frog occurs in grassland, riparian woodland, oak woodland, and coniferous forest but requires quiet freshwater pools, slow-flowing streams, and freshwater marshes with heavily vegetated shores for breeding. These frogs typically stay near the shore hidden in vegetation rather than in open water. Red- legged frogs frequently occupy seasonal bodies of water, and in some areas these habitats may be critical for persistence. It is speculated that CRLF may lie dormant during dry periods of the year or during drought, utilizing animal burrows to estivate. CRLF are thought to disperse widely during autumn, winter, and spring rains. Juveniles use the wet periods to expand outward from their pond of origin and adults may move between aquatic areas from summering habitat to breeding locations. Frogs disperse through many types of upland vegetation and use a broader range of habitats outside of the breeding season. California red-legged frogs have been observed to make long-distance movements that are straight-line, point to point migrations rather than using corridors for moving in between habitats. Dispersal distances are considered to be dependent on habitat availability and environmental conditions (USFWS 2008). Other important microhabitat features include overhanging vegetation, such as willow boughs that contact the water, overhanging banks formed by tree-root masses and retreat sites at water levels that are close to relatively deep, still water. Adult CRLF are strongly associated with these microhabitats during surface activity (Jennings and Hayes, 1994). CRLF are known to occur in Matadero Creek, Deer Creek, San Francisquito Creek, at Lawler Ranch, in Corte Madera Creek (at the end of Bear Gulch Road), and southeast of La Honda in privately owned ponds. They could also occur in Los Trancos Creek and Sausal Creek in Portola Valley. A reconnaissance survey of John Sobey Pond and Arastradero Lake for CRLF was done in 1998 by experts Rich Seymour and Mike Westphal. They found that both ponds are inhabited by bullfrogs (a predator on red-legged frog), and deduced that CRLF is absent or occurs in very low numbers. John Sobey pond was found to more closely resemble pool and sag pond habitat found elsewhere in the coast range, whereas Arastradero lake was found to be atypical California habitat and a source for non-native predators and competitors of native amphibians. Their report (Seymour and Westphal, 1998), recommends modifications to Arastradero Lake to improve habitat quality, allowing John Sobey Pond to dry regularly to control the bullfrog population, Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 28 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 prohibiting the use of mosquitofish, and undertaking an eradication program to reduce the bullfrog population. California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense, Federal Threatened, California Species of Special Concern; CTS hereafter). CTS was listed by the USFWS as federally Threatened in September 2004. CTS range from the Sierra Nevada crest (just west of it) to the outer coast range and from Sonoma and Yolo counties on the north to Santa Barbara County in the south. CTS require a mosaic of habitats consisting of seasonally filled pools located in or near grasslands or oak woodlands. Semi-permanent ponds, reservoirs, and portions of slow-moving, seasonal creeks may also be used. For most of the year, CTS live in the burrows of ground squirrels, gophers, and other rodents in open wooded or grassy areas. However, they may also use man-made structures such as underground utility boxes and drainage pipes. They do not emerge to breed every year. The only known population of CTS on the peninsula occurs on Stanford lands near Lagunita. It was also reported to occur on Albion Avenue in Woodside in 1962. Suitable habitat for CTS is present in Arastradero Preserve, but it has never been observed there. Long-eared Owl (Asio otus; California Species of Special Concern). The long-eared owl frequents dense, riparian and live oak thickets near meadow edges, as well as nearby woodland and forest habitats. It eats mostly voles and other rodents, occasionally birds, and other vertebrates. It may be found in oak woodland, oak savanna, mixed evergreen forest, redwood forest, and creek-riparian habitats. It 1987 it was observed nesting in the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, to the southwest of the Park and Preserve, which was the first confirmed breeding location in Santa Clara County. Suitable breeding habitat occurs in both Pearson- Arastradero Preserve and Foothills Park. Saltmarsh common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa; California Species of Special Concern). The saltmarsh common yellowthroat mostly breeds and winters in wet meadow, fresh emergent wetland, and saline emergent wetland habitats in areas around the south end of San Francisco bay. It eats insects, especially caterpillars and other larvae; also spiders and seeds. Breeding pairs were observed in the marsh at the south end of Searsville Lake in 1976 and 1985. The habitat at the lake includes dense freshwater marsh vegetation with willows and cattails as the dominant plant species. Breeding habitat is present at Arastradero Lake and Boronda Lake. Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus; California Species of Special Concern). The loggerhead shrike is a medium-sized songbird that breeds and forages in open areas with short vegetation, such as pastures and open woodlands. It eats insects, amphibians, small reptiles, small mammals, and birds. It uses its strong beak to capture its prey, and then impales the prey on a thorn or barbed wire in order to hold it while eating it. It is known to occur at Stanford, and is expected to occur in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter coopersii; California Department of Fish and Game Watch List). The Cooper’s hawk is a medium-sized hawk that lives in forest habitats. It prefers dense canopied evergreen and deciduous forests or riparian zones. Its main prey item is birds. It is known to occur at Stanford, and is expected to occur in both Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and Foothills Park. Sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus; California Department of Fish and Game Watch List). The sharp-shinned hawk prefers coniferous, mixed evergreen forests and riparian forest. It is a Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 29 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 winter resident of the Bay Area, and is not expected to breed here. It preys on birds. It is known to occur at Stanford, and suitable habitat is present in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and Foothills Park. Raptors (birds of prey). Birds of prey are also protected by California Fish and Game Code, as noted earlier. This includes any raptor, regardless of whether it is a special-status species. Raptors known to breed in the area include loggerhead shrike, white-tailed kite, northern harrier, sharp-shinned hawk, Cooper’s hawk, red-shouldered hawk, red-tailed hawk, golden eagle, American kestrel, prairie falcon, barn owl, western screech-owl, great horned owl, northern pygmy-owl, and northern saw-whet owl (Sequoia Audubon Society, April 2006). The Park and Preserve contain suitable breeding habitat for raptors in mixed evergreen forest, oak woodland, grassland, aquatic and creek/riparian forest vegetation types. San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens; California Species of Special Concern). The San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (SFDW) is one of eleven subspecies of the dusky-footed woodrat that live throughout California and the arid west. The range of the San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat includes the coastal belt of San Francisco as far north as the Golden Gate, as far east as Walnut Creek in Contra Costa County and Niles Canyon in Alameda County, and south at least until the UC Santa Cruz campus (Hooper 1944). Although the dusky- footed woodrat is generally considered common throughout its range, their complex social structure makes them sensitive to disturbance (Santa Cruz Mountains Bioregional Council, 2004). The SFDW, a nocturnal mammal, occurs in a variety of brushy and wooded areas that provide cover from aerial and ground predators. Suitable SFDW habitat within the Santa Cruz Mountains includes forests that contain Douglas-fir, manzanita, tan oak, coast redwood, and willow species (Bankie, 2005). They are typically not found within open habitats such as grassland, but will traverse through such habitat for mating or range expansion even at the expense of temporary vulnerability to predators. The SFDW eats primarily woody plants, including leaves, flowers, nuts and berries. Specific food sources used throughout the Santa Cruz Mountains include coast live oak, coffeeberry, blackberry, gooseberry, poison oak, and honeysuckle. It is an opportunistic feeder, and has been observed to use non-native species as a primary food source, although these species are in the same genus as native plants known to be used by SFDW (TRA staff observation). The SFDW builds stick structures (houses) for nesting that average five feet long and four feet in height. SFDWs are typically found living in colonies of 3 to 25 houses. These elaborate dwellings help protect the SFDW from seasonal temperature extremes and predators. Various chambers can be found within the houses, each serving a different purpose for its resident SFDW including food storage, nesting, and latrine. Other wildlife such as amphibians, reptiles and invertebrates also live in active SFDW houses without harm to or from SFDW. It is common for one SFDW to use several houses. However, some female SFDWs will occupy the same house for their entire lifespan, at which time one of her female offspring take over the house. Consequently, some SFDW houses are actively used for as long as 30 years (SCMBC, 2004). Male and female woodrats do not share nests; however, a female will share the nest with her litter for several months. A male woodrat territory typically overlaps 1 to 5 female woodrat territories but no other male territories. However, female territories will overlap with each other. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 30 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Territory size varies greatly but male territories are typically larger than female territories. Male territories range from 0.3 to 0.6 acres and female territories range from 0.1 to 0.5 acre. Both Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and Foothills Park contain SFDW in woodland, creek/riparian forest, coastal scrub and chaparral habitats. Ringtail (Bassariscus astutus; California Fully Protected). Ringtails occur across the arid west usually at elevations from sea level to 1400 meters. They are solitary, nocturnal and secretive, and are known to occur in rocky areas in chaparral, oak woodland, riparian woodland, and conifer forests, with a home range up to 336 acres. Ringtail is similar to a raccoon in appearance, but smaller, and has a fox-like face and cat-like body. Its tail is generally longer than its body. They are excellent climbers. Ringtails eat small animals (rodents, birds, reptiles, and amphibians), carrion, and nuts and berries. Ringtails establish permanent dens in rock outcrops or tree hollows. Litter size ranges from two to four, and there is one litter per year. The CNDDB has no reported sightings of ringtail in the local area, but both the Park and Preserve contain suitable habitat for this species and are within its known range. San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia; State and Federally Endangered and California Fully Protected). Historically, the San Francisco garter snake (SFGS) occurred in scattered wetland areas on the San Francisco Peninsula from approximately the San Francisco County line south along the eastern and western bases of the Santa Cruz Mountains, at least to the Upper Crystal Springs Reservoir, and along the coast south to Año Nuevo Point and Waddell Creek in Santa Cruz County (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2005). The species currently appears to be limited to small areas within this historic range; primarily along the San Mateo County Coast and near the San Francisco International Airport. SFGS is a highly aquatic species found in or near densely vegetated freshwater ponds with adjacent open hillsides where they can bask, feed, and find cover in rodent burrows. Temporary ponds and other seasonal freshwater bodies are also used. Emergent and bankside vegetation such as cattails (Typha spp.), bulrushes (Scirpus spp.) and rushes (Juncus spp. and Eleocharis spp.) are preferred and used for cover. The area between stream and pond habitats and grasslands or bank sides is used for basking, while nearby dense vegetation or water often provides escape cover. A critical component for San Francisco garter snake is the presence of suitable prey, including Pacific tree frog (Pseudacris regilla) and ranid frogs (California red- legged frog and/or bullfrog). The snakes breed during the spring and females deposit their eggs near the water during the summer. The males are thought to disperse to drier areas at this time. Throughout the fall, the adults may occupy burrows in adjacent grasslands while juveniles remain near the water. Although very little information is available regarding dispersal and movements through upland habitats, a percentage of young and sub-adults likely disperse and colonize new ponds. Urbanization destroyed the majority of prime habitat for the snake, and continues to fragment remaining habitat and eliminate habitat linkage corridors. Illegal collection of the SFGS, CRLF population decline, and the introduction of the American bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) have also led to its decline. Suitable habitat for this species is very limited in the area. An intergrade form occurs in Woodside just north of Searsville Lake. It is unknown if the intergrade is more closely related genetically to the common garter snake or to the SFGS. Habitat for SFGS is present at Boronda Lake in Foothills Park and along Arastradero Creek in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, but the likelihood of occurrence is low. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 31 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 The Central California Coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss, Federal Threatened, California Species of Special Concern). Steelhead is an anadromous fish that is federally listed as Threatened. Steelhead is native to coastal streams from Baja California to Alaska and parts of Asia. Adult steelhead migrate from the ocean into streams in the late fall, winter, or early spring seeking out deep pools within fast moving streams to rest prior to spawning. Steelhead spawn in shallow water gravel beds and the young typically spend the first one to two years of their lives as residents of their natal stream. San Francisquito Creek is thought to support one of the most robust winter steelhead runs of any creek system flowing into San Francisco Bay, but information is not available to enumerate the size of the adult run or the number of juvenile fish rearing in the system. Within San Francisquito Creek, Los Trancos Creek, and Bear Creek, steelhead adult spawn, eggs incubate, juvenile steelhead rear year-round, and steelhead smolts outmigrate during the spring months. Young steelhead generally rear in the creeks for one to two summers. The most important spawning and rearing habitat for steelhead in the San Francisquito Creek system is in Los Trancos Creek, San Francisquito Creek (from Searsville Reservoir to Junipero Serra Boulevard), and Bear Creek; however, steelhead will rear in any part of the system that has water year-round (Alan Launer, Stanford University, pers. comm.). Limiting factors for steelhead within the San Francisquito Creek Watershed include migration and movement barriers, sedimentation, low summer flows, and lack of instream shelter. Searsville Dam is a major barrier to upstream migration for steelhead, and cuts off approximately one-third of the upper watershed to steelhead access. Water diversion facilities are also partial barriers for steelhead migration and movement; however, most of these have been modified or are in the process of being modified through agreements with CDFG and NOAA Fisheries. San Francisquito Creek has been designated as “impaired for sediment” by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB, 2006). A 2006 study of watersheds in Santa Clara County found that in 25% of the watersheds the biggest limiting factor for steelhead was the lack of rearing habitat for juvenile steelhead (Jones and Stokes, 2006). Los Trancos Creek was among those creeks where lack of rearing habitat was found to be a limiting factor. This is the result of pool filling by fine sediment, which is likely at least partially influenced by bank instability in the upper watershed. In addition, the natural confined channel structure of Los Trancos Creek, and the lack of instream structure such as woody debris, likely result in steelhead young being flushed downstream during high flow events. Steelhead may be found in Los Trancos Creek in Foothills Park and within city limits along the Los Trancos Road evacuation route. Western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata; California Species of Concern). Western pond turtle ranges in size from 3.5 to 7 inches and is the only freshwater turtle native to the San Francisco Bay Area. It occurs in ponds, small lakes, marshes, streams and irrigation ditches with abundant vegetation. It is also found in marshes, streams, rivers, reservoirs and occasionally brackish water. The Western pond turtle feeds on aquatic plants (such as pond lilies), beetles, aquatic invertebrates, fishes, frogs and carrion. It uses basking sites such as partially submerged logs, rocks, mats of floating vegetation or open mud banks, as well as underwater retreats to hide from predators and humans. Females deposit their eggs in nests in banks or in the case of foothill streams, in upland areas away from the stream. Nests have been observed in many soil types, from sandy to very hard, and have been found up to 400 meters (1300 feet) from the Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 32 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 water. Certain fish species, bullfrogs, garter snakes, wading birds and some mammals prey on hatchlings and juveniles. Western pond turtle is known to occur in low numbers in San Francisquito Creek and in higher numbers in ponds on Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District lands. There are no sightings of Western pond turtle in the Preserve or Park in the CNDDB, but suitable habitat exists in the creeks and ponds. Special-status serpentine plants. As noted in the discussion of soils, above, serpentine has chemical properties that favor native plants. Because of this, non-native annuals are less likely to out-compete the native plants, and this has resulted in several plants becoming more or less confined to areas of serpentine. The following list describes special-status serpentine plants known to occur within 5 miles of the Park and Preserve. Most of these have a very limited distribution, and are not likely to occur in the Park or Preserve. Serpentine soils and habitat are present in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and provide potential habitat for some of these species: • Fountain thistle (Cirsium fontinale var. fontinale, Federal Endangered, State Endangered, CNPS 1B), found at the southern end of Crystal Springs Reservoir and in Edgewood Natural Preserve in moist areas in serpentine soil. The likelihood of occurrence in the Preserve is very low, due to habitat limitations. None of the mapped areas of serpentine contain seeps. • Crystal Springs lessingia (Lessingia arachnoidea, CNPS 1B), occurs on grassy slopes in serpentine soil in coastal sage scrub, valley and foothill grassland, and cismontane woodland habitats. The closest known occurrence is at Edgewood Natural Preserve. This plant could occur in serpentine grassland in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. • Franciscan onion (Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum, CNPS 1B), was found and mapped on Jasper Ridge in 1968. Its microhabitat is clay soils, often on serpentine, on dry hillsides in woodland and grassland. The only other records in the CNDDB are in 1985 and 1902 on Matadero Creek and in Woodside. The likelihood of occurrence in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve is low, but cannot be entirely ruled out. • Marin western flax (Hesperolinon congestum, Federal Threatened, State Threatened, CNPS 1B), is known to occur at Edgewood Natural Preserve in serpentine grassland with needlegrass, squirreltail, soap plant, blue dicks and buckwheat. It was also found in Woodside Glens (between I-280 and Canada Road) in serpentine grassland and at Stulsaft Park in Redwood City in serpentine grassland, growing with mariposa lily, clarkia, buckwheat, California poppy, tarplant and prickly lettuce. This plant is very rare and the likelihood of its occurrence in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve is extremely low, but suitable habitat is be present. • San Mateo thornmint (Acanthomintha duttonii, Federal Endangered, State Endangered, CNPS 1B), occurs on serpentinite vertisol clays in relatively open areas. Formerly known to occur near the Menlo Country Club and Emerald Lake in Redwood City, this plant is now only known to occur in the Edgewood Natural Preserve area. The likelihood of this plant occurring in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve is extremely low due to its restricted range and habitat requirements. • White-rayed pentachaeta (Pentachaeta bellidiflora, Federal Endangered, State Endangered, CNPS 1B), is only known from one location on the peninsula, in the triangle west of Edgewood Natural Preserve on lands owned by the San Francisco Water Department. It grows in open serpentine grassland. The likelihood of this plant occurring in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve is extremely low due to its restricted range and its habitat requirements. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 33 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 • Fragrant fritillary (Fritillaria lileacea, CNPS 1B), grows at Edgewood Natural Preserve in serpentine grassland in association with needlegrass, soap plant, clarkia, morning glory, delphinium, shooting star, vetch, California poppy, peppergrass, rye grass and yarrow. The CNDDB summarizes the habitat for this species as valley and foothill grassland, coastal prairie, and grassland patches in coastal scrub, often on serpentine but various soils reported, usually clay. It is also known from near Farm Hill Boulevard. The CNDDB attributes a herbarium specimen from 1894 labeled as “hills about Stanford University” to Jasper Ridge, but notes that “other hills in the area may also support suitable habitat”. The likelihood of this plant occurring in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve is low due to its rarity, but cannot be ruled out. • White-flowered rein orchid (Piperia candida, CNPS 1B), is reported in the CNDDB as occurring in the Los Trancos Open Space Preserve (about 2.6 miles southeast of town limits) on serpentine soils in mixed evergreen forest and coniferous forest. The likelihood of this plant occurring in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve is nil, since all of the mapped serpentine is in grassland habitat. Other Special-status Plants. There are also special-status plants in the area that are not confined to serpentine soils. These include the following: • Arcuate bush mallow (Malacothamnus arcuatus, CNPS 1B), is a chaparral species that has historically been found in Jasper Ridge, along Los Trancos Creek, near La Honda, at Edgewood Natural Preserve, and in Arastradero Preserve. It grows in gravelly alluvium in chaparral in association with grasses and coyote brush. This species is known to be present in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and there is a program underway to increase the population size through propagation. It has been planted in several locations in the Preserve and occurs near treatments A.C. 3, A.D. 2, A.C. 10, and ARx2. • Choris’ popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys chorisianus var. chorisianus, CNPS 1B), grows in grassland patches in chaparral and coastal scrub; its nearest observation to date is at Crystal Springs Reservoir, to the north. There it grows in the moist soil of a meadow surrounded by oaks and madrones. The likelihood this species occurs in the Park or Preserve is low due to its specific habitat requirements, but its presence cannot be ruled out. • San Francisco campion (Silene verecunda ssp. verecunda, CNPS 1B), is reported to historically occur at Edgewood Natural Preserve in serpentine grassland. It is also found on mudstone or shale and in sandy soils in coastal scrub, grassland, and chaparral. The likelihood this species occurs in the Park or Preserve is low due to its specific habitat requirements, but its presence cannot be ruled out. • Santa Clara red ribbons (Clarkia concinna ssp. automixa, CNPS List 4), is an annual plant that grows in woodland and chaparral. It has been observed near Stevens Creek reservoir in mixed evergreen forest similar to that in Foothills Park, along Page Mill Road, along Skyline Boulevard, and along Los Trancos Road. This species could be present in Foothills Park or along the evacuation routes. • Western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis, CNPS 1B), is a shrub that grows on cool, moist slopes in woodland and creek/riparian habitat. It is known to occur along Los Trancos Road, at Jasper Ridge, in Foothills Park, at Edgewood Natural Preserve, and in La Honda Creek Preserve. It grows in mixed evergreen forest dominated by madrone, black oak, coast live oak, poison oak, and bay laurel. It grows in association with coffeeberry, manzanita, bay laurel, buckeye, elderberry, tan oak, bitter cherry, ribes and toyon. This Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 34 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 species is known to occur in Foothills Park and along Los Trancos Creek, and suitable habitat is present in Pearson- Arastradero Preserve. • San Francisco collinsia (Collinsia multicolor, CNPS 1B), is known to occur in Edgewood Natural Preserve, where it grows in mixed evergreen woodland in association with western leatherwood. Suitable habitat for this plant occurs in Foothills Park and Pearson- Arastradero Preserve as well as along the Page Mill Road, Skyline and Los Trancos Road evacuation routes, but its likelihood of occurrence is considered low. • Kings Mountain Manzanita (Arctostaphylos regismontana, CNPS 1B), is known to grow in manzanita chaparral and Douglas-fir forest. It has been found along Kings Mountain Road, in the Teague Hill Open Space Preserve northwest of Tripp Gulch in Woodside, and near Sierra Morena in the El Corte Madera Open Space Preserve. Suitable habitat for this species occurs in Foothills Park and along Page Mill Road and Skyline Boulevard, but its likelihood of occurrence is low. • Santa Cruz Mountains Manzanita (Arctostaphylos andersonii, CNPS 1B), grows in boradleaved upland forest, chaparral and north coast coniferous forest. It is known from Skyline Boulevard at the junction of Kings Mountain Road and Skyline, and to the north on Skyline. Suitable habitat is present in Foothills Park and along the evacuation routes on Page Mill Road and Skyline Boulevard. Plant communities of concern. In addition to specific species, the CNDDB identifies plant communities that are of concern due to declining distribution. Those that pertain to the Foothills Fire Management Plan are serpentine bunchgrass, arroyo willow riparian and wetland. Serpentine bunchgrass is identified in the CNDDB as occurring at Edgewood Natural Preserve and Jasper Ridge, and it may also occur in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. Arroyo willow riparian occurs along Los Trancos Creek and Arastradero Creek. Wetland occurs in Pearson- Arastradero Preserve and at Boronda Lake in Foothills Park. In addition to these special-status species and plant communities, the Friends of Foothills Park has identified, through observation of trail maintenance activities, a list of native plants which are slow to regenerate along a trail once they are damaged or removed or which are unusual sights within the park. These are primarily perennial, low-growing plant species. They are listed in Table 3 in Appendix A. 3.3. Erosive Soils The City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update states that soils with a slope in excess of 15 to 30 percent represent significant hazards from either fire or treatment (2008). According to the soil survey for Santa Clara County (NRCS 1968), there are three soil types found within the City of Palo Alto Foothills that are a high erosion hazard (see table below). They are Maymen Rocky Fine Sandy Loam Eroded, Maymen Fine Sandy Loam Eroded, and Los Gatos-Maymen. These soils occur along the evacuation routes and in both the Park and the Preserve. Table 3-1 Soil Types in the Palo Alto Foothills Area Soil Series Soil Name Location Erosion Hazard Los Gatos Los Gatos-Maymen Soils (LkG3) (50-75% slope) Foothills Park & Pearson- Arastradero Preserve High Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 35 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Soil Series Soil Name Location Erosion Hazard Los Gatos Clay Loam (LgE) (15-30% slope) Foothills Park & Pearson- Arastradero Preserve Moderate Los Gatos Clay Loam, Eroded (LgE2) (15-30% slope) Foothills Park & Pearson- Arastradero Preserve Moderate Los Osos Los Osos Clay Loam (LoE) (15-30% slope) Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Moderate Azule Azule Silty Clay Loam (AvD2) (15-30% slope) Pearson-Arastradero Preserve Slight to Moderate Cropley Cropley Clay (CrC) (2-9% slope) Foothills Park Slight Maymen Rocky Fine Sandy Loam, Eroded (MfG2) (50 – 75% slope) P.A. 1 treatment High Maymen Maymen Fine Sandy Loam, Eroded (MeF2) (15 -50% slope) P.A. 1 treatment High (on sections with > 30% slope) Madonna Loam (MbE2) (5 – 30 % slope) P.A. 1 treatment Moderate Madonna Madonna Loam (MbE) (15 – 30% slope) P.A. 1 treatment moderate 3.4. Invasive Plant Species Invasive species are moved from one region of the world to another, usually by human activity. They have a competitive advantage due to a lack of predators and crowd out native vegetation and wildlife. In California roughly 3% of all plant species are invasive (Cal-IPC 2008). Though they are a small percentage of the overall number of plant species, these species occupy a large portion of the landscape. Public agencies are wary of invasive species because they can increase fire loads and help to create more frequent fires. In the City of Palo Alto foothills, management of Italian thistle (Caardus pycnocephalus I.), yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstittialis), and French broom (Genista monospessulana) is conducted at Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. Yellow star thistle is managed in both parks while Italian thistle is managed only in Pearson-Arastradero and French broom is managed only in Foothills Park. The California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) maintains an invasive plan inventory to track the status of invasive plants within California. As part of this inventory it ranks the threats individual plant species pose to California’s native ecology. According to Cal-IPC, Italian thistle has a moderate ranking while yellow star thistle and French broom have a high ranking. These rankings demonstrate the level of invasiveness for each species. However, in terms of the City of Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update and the effect of these species on fire, Italian thistle and French broom cause a greater ecological impact. Both of these species can cause an increase in fire frequency and movement of fire into the overstory in scrub, woodland and chaparral habitats (Cal-IPC 2006). Cal-IPC has recommended mechanical and hand-treatment for Italian thistle, French broom and yellow star thistle. The recommended method for Italian thistle is to hand pull so that the root is severed at least four inches (10 cm) below the ground level and well before the seed is set (Cal- Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 36 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 IPC 2008b). In Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, from 2007 – 2008, 10 – 12 acres south-west of the parking lot along Portola Pastures and Meadowlark Trails were grazed by goats to control Italian thistle (Curt Dunn pers. comm.). Discing, mowing and prescribed burning can all be effective at controlling yellow star thistle. However, for each of these methods it depends on the timing of the treatment. For each method it is important to conduct the method at the beginning of seed production when roughly two to five percent of the seed heads have matured (Cal-IPC 2008c). In Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, yellow star thistle is by and large the most invasive. Yellow star thistle has been mowed in two locations in Foothill Park: • five to seven acres in the Wildhorse Valley • three acres around a flat area south of Fire-Station 8 • and in four locations in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve: • four acres inside Gate-A near the concrete bridge • six and a half acres near Gate-B along the Ohlone trail • seven acres around Gate-C along Bowl Loop Trail • 30 foot clearance around the Gateway buildings. Cal-IPC recommends that removal of French broom be conducted by hand, a combination of cutting and pile burning, and through prescribed burning (Cal-IPC 2008a). However, the cutting must be done after the plant has gone to seed in July or August and five to eight centimeters above the soil surface. The Friends of the Foothills does hand pulling of French broom at small invasion locations throughout Foothills Park. 4.0 Impacts This section describes the impacts of proposed treatments on vegetation communities, special- status species, exotic invasive species, and erosion, which can adversely impact habitats. Vegetation Communities. The Foothills Fire Management Plan updates existing fire management practices in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, Foothills Park, and along the evacuation routes on Page Mill Road, Arastradero Road, Los Trancos Road, and Skyline Boulevard. It will reduce the impacts of mowing on Trappers Trail in Foothills Park by reducing the area that is mowed annually, and allowing some of the habitat there to recover. It will replace discing in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve (except near Liddicoat Circle) and in Foothills Park with mowing and/or grazing, which will restore grassland habitat. Overall, however, the Fire Management Plan will increase the area that is treated by about 135 acres. The impacts will mainly occur in grassland, including large areas in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve that will be grazed or subject to prescribed burn. It is estimated that, overall, about 65 more acres of grassland will be affected than under current activities. The new area of impacts to woodland and chaparral is mainly along the evacuation routes, where vegetation management will be expanded from the existing 10- foot zone to a 30-foot zone. Throughout the area of the fire plan, about 47 new acres of woodland and 13 new acres of chaparral will be affected. About one acre of riparian vegetation may be affected, primarily along Arastradero Creek but also along Los Trancos Creek, and about 9 new acres of coastal scrub will be affected. These estimates have been adjusted to take into account areas that will no longer be annually impacted by current activities. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 37 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 The habitats that will be affected by the various treatments are listed in Table 3 in Appendix A. The table also includes the measures that will be necessary to protect biological resources at each treatment site. The measures are listed at the end of the table and in section 6.0, below. In general, the fire management plan will result in fewer biological impacts than the current practices. Although the total area that is treated will increase, the methods to be used will foster restoration of native habitats. While grading, discing and brush mowing have been used in the past, the updated plan does not require grading or discing and reduces the amount of brush mowing. It uses hand labor and careful instructions in the amount of trimming that will occur. The vegetation management in the plan is intended to mimic the effects of more frequent, less intense fires which historically occurred in the area and which have been suppressed for many years. The more frequent, less intense fires typically cleared the undergrowth in the forest, reduced “ladder” fuels that could carry fire into the tree canopy where more intense damage could start, and opened areas to new plant growth. Grassland fires reduced thatch and fostered native plant diversity. Several studies related to range management indicate that methods used to mimic historic fire patterns enhance native plant diversity. In DiTomaso et.al. (1999), prescribed burning of grassland in Sugarloaf Ridge State Park in Sonoma County resulted in a dramatic increase in total plant diversity and species richness, and significantly reduced the seedbank of the invasive non-native weed, yellow star-thistle. In a study in seven nature preserves in the Czech Republic, Dostalek and Frantik (2008) found that low-intensity goat grazing in dry grassland can help to keep the dry grassland in good condition and conserve its plant diversity. Dodson et.al. (2007) studied restoration treatments in ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests that included thinning, burning and a combination of thinning and burning. It was found that active restoration treatments in these forests may foster plant diversity by minimally impacting common species while significantly benefiting disturbance-dependent native species. Grazing is one of the tools proposed in the fire management plan, and it could be used in all vegetation types except riparian forest. Overgrazing can adversely impact vegetation communities. The fire management plan includes best management practices that require a grazing management plan be prepared to insure proper stocking levels. A measure is also recommended that protects wetlands in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve from grazing (see BMP-13 and BIO-8 in section 6.0, below). Special-status Species. Implementation of the fire management plan could impact several special-status species. Measures to avoid those impacts, which are also required to comply with California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, are described in Section 6.0. The special-status species that are known to occur in the Foothills Fire Management Plan area are Steelhead (Los Trancos Creek), San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (throughout), white- tailed kite (breeding in Pearson-Arastradero), arcuate bush mallow (Pearson-Arastradero), and western leatherwood (Foothills Park and Los Trancos Creek). Suitable habitat for several others exists, as described in 4.0 above, but their presence has not been verified. The special-status species in each vegetation type are listed in Table 4 in Appendix A, and impacts are described below. American badger and burrowing owl could occur in grasslands in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. The Fire Management Plan Update removes discing in the grassland and will improve habitat for Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 38 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 these species. The area next to Liddicoat Circle that may continue to be disced has been disced annually for several years and does not provide burrow habitat for badger or burrowing owl. Bats may roost in tree crevices and tree bark throughout the woodlands in the fire management plan area. A significant impact would occur if a maternal roost is removed or significantly disturbed by cutting down a tree that contains such a roost. Tree removal may occur under the fire management plan, including thinning stands along the evacuation routes and removing individual eucalyptus trees. A pre-removal survey for bat roosting activity is recommended (see measure BIO-4). California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, San Francisco garter snake, Western pond turtle, and steelhead are aquatic-dependent species. Of these, only steelhead is confirmed present in Los Trancos. The frog, salamander, and turtle also have an upland habitat component, as they use burrows near creeks and ponds for part of the year. The Foothills Fire Management Plan Update does not require work in streams or ponds. It does require trimming of riparian vegetation along Arastradero Creek and a small section of Los Trancos Creek. The prescription for riparian vegetation is to avoid it, or if necessary to trim it, to do so every 10 to 15 years. The fire plan reduces discing, and does not require work that would impact burrows. The plan would not significantly impact these species. In the event that discing is implemented in the future, measure BIO-5 is included for protection of these species. Long-eared owl, saltmarsh common yellowthroat, loggerhead shrike, Cooper’s hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, other raptors (birds of prey), and nesting birds could be adversely affected by vegetation trimming under the Foothills Fire Management Plan Update that occurs during the breeding season. Avoidance of active bird nests is recommended (see measure BIO-1) by avoiding work during the breeding season or conducting a pre-removal survey for active bird nests and avoiding those during the breeding season. This applies to all designations in all vegetation types. Vegetation management activities that foster plant diversity will benefit wildlife species, including birds, and it is expected that vegetation management under this fire plan will foster plant diversity. San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat occurs in woodland, creek/riparian forest, coastal scrub, and chaparral habitat throughout the Foothills Fire Plan Update area. Because the SFDW houses look like a pile of woody debris, these are at risk of being removed during vegetation management activities. A pre-work survey and worker education program is recommended under measure BIO-3, and it would apply to all of the treatment designations except those in grassland. The houses should be avoided and left with a five-foot buffer. Ringtail has a low likelihood of occurrence in the fire management plan area. Vegetation management will not remove dens or nest sites and is not expected to impact this species. Special-status serpentine plants can occur where there are serpentine soils. Serpentine soils are mapped in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve in grassland habitat. These areas are proposed to be either left untreated or to be mowed/grazed. Pre-work surveys of these areas are recommended to avoid impacts to rare plants (see measure BIO-2). Other Special-status Plants occur in woodland, chaparral, coastal scrub and riparian forest habitats in the fire management plan area. Western leatherwood is known to occur in Foothills Park and along Los Trancos Creek, where it has been damaged in the past by roadside trimming. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 39 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 It is recommended that pre-work surveys be conducted during the bloom period of rare plants, and that any found be marked, mapped and avoided (see measure BIO-2. Plant communities of concern in the fire management plan area include arroyo willow riparian and wetland. These communities could be affected by fire management plan activities in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and along Los Trancos Creek where there is arroyo willow. Patches of wetland vegetation occur in the grassland areas of Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, and arroyo willow riparian is present along Arastradero Creek. The amount of vegetation that will be trimmed represents a minor amount of the riparian zone, and will not result in the permanent removal of riparian habitat. Adverse effects to arroyo willow riparian are not expected. Measures to protect wetland values from mowing and grazing are recommended (see measure BIO-8). Friend of Foothills Plants of Concern (see Table 3 in Appendix A) are not rare, but are of local value in Foothills Park. These plants could be impacted by vegetation management activities under the fire management plan update. Mitigation to reduce the impacts to these species is recommended (see measure BIO-9). Erosion. Maymen Rocky Fine Sandy Loam Eroded, and Maymen Fine Sandy Loam Eroded are located on approximately one and a half miles of the P.A. 1 treatment approximately 2 miles east of the Page Mill Road and Skyline Boulevard intersection. The P.A. 1 evacuation treatment, which passes through Monte Bello and Los Trancos Open Space Preserves, contains interspersed woodland and grassland and would be subject to vegetation trimming and no ground disturbance. The Los Gatos-Maymen soils are the most extensive and are found in Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve. At Foothills Park the soil is found on evacuation, firefighter safety, containment, ignition and defensible space treatments (F.E. 1, F.E. 3, F.E. 5, F.F.1, F.F. 2, F.F. 3, F.F. 4, F.C. 1, F.C. 2, F.C. 3, F.C. 6, F.D. 4, F.D. 6, F.I. 1, F.I. 2, F.I. 3). At Pearson- Arastradero Preserve the soil is found on prescribed burn, containment, and defensible space treatments (ARx2, A.C. 5, A.C. 10, A.D. 3). These treatments are located in grassland, woodland, chaparral, and riparian/aquatic habitats. The Fire Management Plan includes best management practices to prevent erosion, including those labeled as BMP-2, BMP-3, BMP-6, BMP-7 and BMP-8 in section 6.0 below. Mostly, however, the plan does not require soil disturbance, and leaves a protective vegetative cover over soils. The exception may be the 100-ft defensible space around structures. Significant impacts associated with erosive soils are not expected to result from implementation of the plan. Invasive Plant Species. As described in section 4.0 above, invasive plants pose an existing management problem in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and Foothills Park. The Foothills Fire Management Plan Update proposes the use of hand labor, mowing and grazing with goats. The goats, workers and vehicles can carry seed of invasive plants and either introduce new invasive species to the Park and Preserve, or foster the spread of those species already present. The fire management plan includes best management practices to guard against the spread of invasive plant species (see BMP-5 and BMP-15 under 6.0, below). Measures to prevent the spread of Sudden Oak Death are also recommended in BIO-10. The fire management plan provides the opportunity to remove invasive exotic species on a regular basis since it is a regular vegetation management program. The plan also recommends that areas infested with invasive species not be trimmed at seed set in order to reduce the amount of seed that is spread around by Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 40 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 management activities. Seed set for the invasive broom species known in the Park and Preserve is in the spring and summer, and trimming could occur in other seasons. However, yellow star thistle blooms between May and October, and would set seed during the time that it is necessary to mow the grasslands where it occurs. The plan provides for controlled burn as another method to control the worst infestation of yellow star thistle in Arastradero Preserve. The plan would neither improve nor exacerbate the effects the existing fire management methods have on yellow star thistle in Foothills Park. No significant impacts are expected as long as the best management practices incorporated into the plan and the additional measures for Sudden Oak Death are implemented. 5.0 Mitigation The Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update includes an extensive list of best management practices that are to be incorporated into the implementation of the Plan. These are listed in Section 5.1, below. These practices will prevent many biological impacts. Section 5.2 includes a list of additional measures and suggested modifications to the best management practices to ensure the Plan avoids significant biological impacts. The Best Management Practices that should be modified are listed below as BMP-4, BMP-5, BMP-13, and BMP-16. 5.1. Best Management Practices Included in the Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update The Plan lists best management practices under the heading of each treatment method (eg., hand labor, mechanical treatment, etc.). The following list combines all of the practices and assigns a number to each. BMP-1: Provide or confirm adequate training, experience, and oversight to ensure that personnel are familiar with the treatment method operations and planning, site conditions, potential and identified sensitive resources, and the identification of specific environmental features or conditions that must be avoided. BMP-2: Avoid treatment actions during conditions that may affect water or run-off including during storms, periods of precipitation, or immediately following severe weather. In addition, avoid scheduling any treatment actions during seasons with significant predicted precipitation. Cease operations or postpone planned operations including movement of vehicles or equipment during precipitation conditions that may combine with vehicle activity to cause damage to roads, trails, or adjacent land areas. BMP-3: Avoid excessive foot or vehicle traffic on slopes, unimproved or non-designated trails, or outside of preexisting roads or access points. BMP-4: Inspect areas for nesting birds to determine if activity should be postponed or adjusted by the establishment of a buffer area. This measure should be modified as described in measure BIO-1. BMP-5: Clean all tools and equipment following actions and prior to movement into new environmental areas to prevent the spread of invasive or non-native plants. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 41 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 BMP-6: Plan treatment actions and equipment selection to minimize damage or alterations to existing soils. Determine locations of potentially erosive soils prior to treatment. Restrict operations that may adversely affect sensitive soil systems such as serpentine soil areas, erosion prone soils, or riparian zones. Restriction may include using road-based operations only, and avoiding riparian set-backs established by regulatory agencies. BMP-7: Maintain a buffer of 25-50 feet between operations and water bodies or designated riparian areas. Avoid crossing drainage channels, run-off areas, or dry streambeds. Install and manage run-off barriers for rainwater in all treatment and operating areas. Restrict mechanical removal of trees to areas further than 50 feet from drainage channels. BMP-8: Restrict vehicle traffic to preexisting roads or pre-planned access points based on equipment size and operations. Limit transport and support equipment to existing roads. Limit heavy equipment use to slopes less than 30%. Install erosion control measures on all vehicle roads and traffic areas. BMP-9: Maintain strict monitoring and control of fueling and maintenance operations. All maintenance actions that may produce spills should be executed in areas with secondary containment protection, away from any water bodies or drainage areas. Clean up of all spills should be done on-site, with materials ready for use. Inspection of equipment for new leaks and mechanical problems should be performed daily, prior to operations. BMP-10: Plan operations around expected seeding conditions of targeted species (either prior to or sufficiently afterwards) to ensure efficiency of treatment action. BMP-11: Cease actions during periods of high fire danger or during red flag conditions. Ensure that all mechanical equipment have approved spark arrestors and comply with California Public Resources Code (PRC) sections 4431, 4435, 4442, and 4437 to limit potential for ignition of incidental fires. BMP-12: Maintain on-site fire suppression resources to include shovel, water pump, fire extinguisher, and two-way radio or communications for fire reporting. BMP-13: One of the primary adverse impacts of grazing is over-grazing and the resulting exposure of bare ground. Over-grazing can increase the potential for soil erosion, water run-off and drainage, elimination of native plant species, and spread of non-native plants and weeds. Prepare a grazing management plan by a certified range specialist that specifies goals, stocking levels, grazing periods, installation of range improvements (such as water sources) to evenly distribute utilization of feed, and monitoring and performance criteria. BMP-14: Develop a site-specific annual grazing plan that includes project-level plans for sticking, timing, and resource management goals. BMP-15: Prior to introduction, all animals should be quarantined and fed weed-free forage to limit spread of invasive or unwanted plant species as well as prevent spread of livestock diseases. BMP-16: Limit grazing to non-riparian areas. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 42 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 BMP-17: Develop a smoke management plan describing desired outcomes and specific actions for onsite personnel including a test burn, continual evaluation of smoke dispersal, monitoring of wind patterns, and monitoring of potential visibility impacts to primary roads and highways. BMP-18: Develop public safety plans to be executed throughout the prescribed burn cycle including press and information releases, signs and notifications, patrols on roads and access points, and development of a fire contingency plan. BMP-19: Maintain a buffer between the prescribed burn area and water bodies or drainage into riparian zones. Buffers should be a minimum of 25 feet for 5% slopes, 75 feet for 5-10% slopes, and 250 feet for 10% or greater slopes. No prescribed fires should be ignited near streams or in riparian zones. BMP-20: Plan the prescribed burn to minimize post-fire erosion into water bodies and drainages through natural barriers, proper construction of fire lines along contours, and proper erosion control barrier deployment. Minimize prescribed burning in areas with highly erodible soils. BMP-21: Cultural and social sites and structures shall be excluded from burn area through planning, hand-lines, or other fire protection operations. On-site personnel will be briefed on locations and features of cultural or social sites to include incident command or response personnel. Avoid prescribed burns in areas with utility infrastructure, existing property or structures, or archeological sites. BMP-22: Manage fuel moisture through pre-fire assessment and potential fuel modification. Prior to prescribed burn, remove ladder fuels into the tree canopy to increase safety and reduce torching. BMP-23: Conduct prescribed burns only on designated burn days as authorized by BAAQMD. BMP: 24: The application of herbicides for vegetation treatment should focus on the goal of applying the least amount of chemical required to achieve a desired outcome, consistent with the City of Palo Alto’s Integrated Pest Management policy. BMP-25: Herbicide is only applied per a prescription prepared by a Pesticide Control Advisor licensed in that county, and applied by a licensed Pesticide Control Applicator. BMP-26: Develop public safety plans to be executed throughout the treatment cycle including press and information releases, signs and notifications, and fencing or area restrictions. BMP-27: Develop a spill contingency plan and maintain strict monitoring and control of operations. Clean up of all spills should be done on-site, with materials ready for use. BMP-28: Chemical treatments within habitat of California Red-legged Frog should be conducted according to U.S. District Court injunction and order covering 66 pesticides (Oct 2006) and subsequent EPA effects determinations. BMP-29: Avoid treating areas adjacent to water bodies, riparian areas, and primary drainage access. Follow all herbicide labels and directions in determining applications near water Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 43 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 resources or riparian habitats. Limit aerial application to greater than 100 feet from water resources. Limit ground and hand application to greater than 50 feet. BMP-30: Avoid treating areas used for livestock operations or intended as grazing areas. 5.2. Additional Biological Mitigation Measures or Modifications to BMPs BIO-1: Vegetation removal in any vegetation type from February 15 to August 31 requires a survey for nesting birds by a qualified biologist2 or by park staff trained to do so by a qualified biologist and avoiding removal of nests in active use. If raptor nests are detected, a buffer area will need to be established around the nest in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. The buffer may be 250 feet. BIO-2: Vegetation removal in areas of serpentine soil, oak woodland, chaparral, coastal scrub and riparian forest habitats requires a survey for rare plant species by a qualified biologist/ botanist prior to vegetation removal. Known rare plant locations should be treated in a way that benefits the rare species. This may include limiting the area of treatment in order to provide a buffer around the plant(s), or may include selectively trimming competitive vegetation adjacent to the plant(s). Some species may benefit from disturbance; the specific actions to be taken should be determined in consultation with a botanist. The plant survey needs to occur during the bloom period. After surveys in the same locations over three separate years, subsequent surveys are not necessary in that area unless a newly listed plant species could occur in the habitat. This should be determined by consulting the California Department of Fish and Game. BIO-3: Vegetation removal, including dead and downed debris, requires a survey for presence of San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat by a qualified biologist or by park staff trained to identify woodrat houses by a qualified biologist. If woodrat houses are found, disturbance should be avoided and a minimum five-foot buffer should be provided around the house. If, for public safety reasons, it is necessary to move the house, the process must be coordinated with the California Department of Fish and Game. It is recommended that workers receive instruction regarding woodrat houses prior to their start of work. BIO-4: Prior to the removal of any tree that is 12 inches or more in diameter breast height, a survey for perennial bat roosts and, during the breeding season from February 15 to August 31, raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified biologist or park staff trained by a qualified biologist to identify these resources is required. If present, removal cannot continue without CDFG guidance. BIO-5: Discing within 500 feet of a lake, pond or creek, requires a biological survey to determine impacts to California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, San Francisco garter snake and Western pond turtle and whether permits are required from the USFWS/CDFG. BIO-6: Discing in grassland requires a pre-construction survey for American badger, California red-legged frog and burrowing owl by a qualified biologist. BIO-7: Trimming of coast live oaks shall follow the City’s Tree Ordinance (Title 8). Coast live oak or Valley oaks that are 11.5 inches in diameter or more measured at 54 inches above grade 2 A “qualified biologist” is a person with demonstrated ability to identify special-status plant and/or animal species in the San Francisco Bay Area. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 44 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 may not be removed without a permit, and may not be pruned such that more than 25 percent of the crown is removed or the tree is left unbalanced. BIO-8: Avoid wetlands mapped in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve when weed-whipping or mowing. Modify the Fire Management Plan Best Management Practice that requires that a grazing plan be prepared to include protection of drainages and wetlands from the impacts of grazing animals. BIO-9: For treatments in Foothills Park or on Page Mill Road along the Park border, a pre-work survey for stands of locally important plants (see Table 3 in Appendix A) should be conducted, and the plants avoided as long as it does not impair public safety. Field crews should be educated about the sensitivity of these plant species. BIO-10: In addition to BMP-5, it is recommended that measures be taken to clean equipment, tires, and shoes to prevent the spread of Sudden Oak Death, and that any materials infected with the disease be disposed of in accordance with State or County Agricultural Commission guidelines. To reduce the possibility of spreading the disease, it is recommended that work not be done in wet or muddy conditions, and that infested areas be avoided to the extent feasible. Additional guidelines are available from the County Agricultural Commissioner. 6.0 Response to CEQA Checklist Biology Questions a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? With mitigation incorporated, the Foothills Fire Management Plan will not result in adverse impacts to any special-status species. The special-status species that are known to occur in the Foothills Fire Management Plan area are Steelhead, San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat, white- tailed kite, arcuate bush mallow, and western leatherwood. Suitable habitat for several others exists, but their presence has not been verified. The mitigation measures that will prevent adverse effects to these species, primarily through avoidance, include the following: BIO-1: Vegetation removal in any vegetation type from February 15 to August 31 requires a survey for nesting birds by a qualified biologist or by park staff trained to do so by a qualified biologist and avoiding removal of nests in active use. If raptor nests are detected, a buffer area will need to be established around the nest in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. The buffer may be 250 feet. BIO-2: Vegetation removal in areas of serpentine soil, oak woodland, chaparral, coastal scrub and riparian forest habitats requires a survey for rare plant species by a qualified biologist/ botanist prior to vegetation removal. Known rare plant locations should be treated in a way that benefits the rare species. This may include limiting the area of treatment in order to provide a buffer around the plant(s), or may include selectively trimming competitive vegetation adjacent to the plant(s). Some species may benefit from disturbance; the specific actions to be taken should be determined in consultation with a botanist. The plant survey needs to occur during the Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 45 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 bloom period. After surveys in the same locations over three separate years, subsequent surveys are not necessary in that area unless there a newly listed plant species could occur in the habitat. This should be determined by consulting the California Department of Fish and Game. BIO-3: Vegetation removal, including dead and downed debris, requires a survey for presence of San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat by a qualified biologist or by park staff trained to identify woodrat houses by a qualified biologist. If woodrat houses are found, disturbance should be avoided and a minimum five-foot buffer should be provided around the house. If, for public safety reasons, it is necessary to move the house, the process must be coordinated with the California Department of Fish and Game. It is recommended that workers receive instruction regarding woodrat houses prior to their start of work. BIO-4: Prior to the removal of any tree that is 12 inches or more in diameter breast height, a survey for perennial bat roosts and, during the breeding season from February 15 to August 31, raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified biologist or park staff trained by a qualified biologist to identify these resources is required. If present, removal cannot continue without CDFG guidance. BIO-5: Discing within 500 feet of a lake, pond or creek, requires a biological survey to determine impacts to California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, San Francisco garter snake and Western pond turtle and whether permits are required from the USFWS/CDFG. BIO-6: Discing in grassland requires a pre-construction survey for American badger, California red-legged frog and burrowing owl by a qualified biologist. BIO-7: Trimming of coast live oaks shall follow the City’s Tree Ordinance (Title 8). Coast live oak or Valley oaks that are 11.5 inches in diameter or more measured at 54 inches above grade may not be removed without a permit, and may not be pruned such that more than 25 percent of the crown is removed or the tree is left unbalanced. BIO-8: Avoid wetlands mapped in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve when weed-whipping or mowing. Modify the Fire Management Plan Best Management Practice that requires that a grazing plan be prepared to include protection of drainages and wetlands from the impacts of grazing animals. BIO-9: For treatments in Foothills Park or on Page Mill Road along the Park border, a pre-work survey for stands of locally important plants (see Table 3 in Appendix A) should be conducted, and the plants avoided as long as it does not impair public safety. Field crews should be educated about the sensitivity of these plant species. BIO-10: In addition to BMP-5, it is recommended that measures be taken to clean equipment, tires, and shoes to prevent the spread of Sudden Oak Death, and that any materials infected with the disease be disposed of in accordance with State or County Agricultural Commission guidelines. To reduce the possibility of spreading the disease, it is recommended that work not be done in wet or muddy conditions, and that infested areas be avoided to the extent feasible. Additional guidelines are available from the County Agricultural Commissioner. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 46 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? No. The amount of vegetation that will be trimmed represents a minor amount of the riparian zone, and will not result in the permanent removal of riparian habitat. Adverse effects to arroyo willow riparian are not expected. Measures to protect wetland values from mowing and grazing are recommended (see measure BIO-8). c. 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? With mitigation, the Fire Management Plan will have no adverse effect on wetlands. Wetlands occur in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve and at Boronda Lake in Foothills Park. Implementation of the Foothills Fire Management Plan will not result in the removal or filling of wetlands, and will not affect their hydrology. Wetlands could be affected by the following treatments: A.E. 1 (Arastradero Road adjacent to the Preserve to be treated with mowing, grazing and hand labor), A.Rx. 1 and A.Rx.2 (prescribed fire in the middle of the Preserve), A.C.3 (grazing the grassland on the parking lot side of the Preserve), and A.C.11 (mowing Meadow Lark to Juan Bautista Trail). Measure BIO-8 is proposed to be included in the Fire Management Plan, which is to avoid mowing or weed-whipping wetlands, and to incorporate wetland protection measures in the grazing management plan required in the fire management plan. d. 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? The Foothills Fire Management Plan does not require activities in stream courses that would impede any fish passage. It does not require the construction of any structures that would block wildlife movement. e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Activities proposed in the Foothills Fire Management Plan are subject to the City of Palo Alto’s municipal code with regard to tree removal. Trimming or removal of coast live oak trees are subject to the requirements of Title 8, which include limits on trimming to less than 25 percent of the tree canopy and that the trimming not unbalance the tree. The Fire Management Plan may result in the removal or trimming of protected trees. Measure BIO-7 is included to require that trimming follow the tree preservation ordinance. With this measure included, the Fire Management Plan will comply with local ordinances protecting biological resources. f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The Foothills Fire Management Plan is not within an area subject to a Habitat Conservation Plan or any similar approved planning document. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 47 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 7.0 References California Department of Fish and Game. Rare and endangered species lists. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/plants_and_animals.asp. Viewed on October 27, 2008. California Department of Fish and Game. California Natural Diversity Database. Rare plant, animal and communities. Report created on October 27, 2008. California Department of Fish and Game. Fully protected species list. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/species/t_e_spp/fully_pro.html. Viewed on October 27, 2008. California Oak Mortality Task Force. www.suddenoakdeath.org. Viewed on December 12, 2008. Cal-IPC. 2008. www.cal-ipc.org . Viewed on November 29, 2008. Cal-IPC. 2008a. http://www.cal- ipc.org/ip/management/plant_profiles/Genista_monspessulana.php. Viewed on November 29, 2008. Cal-IPC. 2008b. http://www.cal- ipc.org/ip/management/plant_profiles/Carduus_pycnocephalus.php. Viewed on November 29, 2008. Cal-IPC. 2008c. http://www.cal-ipc.org/ip/management/plant_profiles/Centaurea_solstitialis.php. Viewed on November 29, 2008. California Native Plant Society. Online Inventory of rare and endangered plants. http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi. Viewed on October 27 2008. Cal-IPC. 2006. California Invasive Plant Inventory. Cal-IPC Publication 2006-02. California Invasive Plant Council: Berkeley, CA. City of Palo Alto. 2008. Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan Update: Wildland Fire Risk Assessement and Mititgation Program. Administrative Draft. Wildland Resource Management, Inc. National Marine Fisheries. Critical Habitat for endangered species. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/criticalhabitat.htm. Viewed on October 27, 2008. Soil Survey for Santa Clara County. 1968. Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Descriptions [Online WWW]. Available URL: “http://soils.usda.gov/technical/classification/osd/index.html” [Accessed 10 February 2008]. USDA-NRCS, Lincoln, NE. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment Page 48 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 United States Fish and Wildlife Service: Sacramento http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/es/spp_list.htm. Viewed on October 27, 2008. Persons Consulted Alan Launer, Campus Biologist, Stanford University. Sherri Lubin, Acterra. Stewardship Director. (Acruate bush mallow locations.) William Reed. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Santa Clara Soil Survey Project Leader. (Soil Survey data.) Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 49 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Appendix A. Tables Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment ....................................50 Table 2 Bat Species of Concern on the San Francisco Peninsula...............................................................62 Table 3 Non-listed Native Plants of Concern in Foothills Park..................................................................63 Table 4. Fire Plan Treatments, Habitats Affected, and Protective Measures..............................................67 Table 5. Special-status Species by Habitat Type and Treatment Location, with Protection Measures......74 Table 6. Change in Area Impacted under the Fire Management Plan........................................................78 Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 50 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent Invertebrates Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis) FT A medium-sized butterfly whose larvae are dependent on dwarf plantain and owls clover. It is mostly found within serpentine grassland habitat. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat is present but the serpentine grassland areas are to small to support a population. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Highly Unlikely. The closest population is located in Edgewood County Park 6.3 air miles north (CNDDB 2008). Leech’s skyline diving beetle (Hydroporus leechi) None, but considered special status by the CDFG Aquatic scavenger found in still pools and ponds. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat is present at Arastradero Lake and John Sobey Pond. Foothills – HP. Habitat is present at Boranda Lake. Highly Unlikely. The closest population is located in Edgewood County Park 6.3 air miles north (CNDDB 2008). Zayante band- winged grasshopper (Trimerotropis infantilis) FE Occurs in open sandy areas with sparse, low annual and perennial herbs on high ridges with sparse ponderosa pine. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Occurs only in the sandhills of Santa Cruz County greater than five miles from the site (CNDDB 2008). Amphibians California red- legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) FT/CSSC Lowlands and foothills in or near permanent sources of deep water with dense, shrubby or emergent riparian vegetation. Requires 11-20 weeks of permanent water for larval development. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Potential breeding habitat at Los Trancos Creek, and its tributaries, John Sobey Pond and Arastradero Creek Foothills – HP. Potential breeding habitat at Boronda Lake. Foraging habitat in riparian zones, grassland, and oak woodland above Los Trancos Creek and tributaries. Closest known occurrence is 1.35 air miles to the northeast at the confluence of Matadero and Deer creeks (CNDDB 2008). California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) FT/CSSC The California Tiger Salamander can grow to a length of about 8–10 inches (20–25 cm) and have black and have yellow or cream spots; larvae are greenish-grey in color. It depends on water for reproduction, Pearson-Arastradero - HP Breeding habitat may occur in the “bowl” near the unnamed tributary to Los Trancos Creek. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 51 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent therefore its habitat is limited to the vicinity of fishless vernal pools or similar water bodies. Foraging habitat present at John Sobey Pond and Arastradero Lake Foothills – HP Foraging habitat present at Boronda Lake. Not likely to occur. No known records after various surveys. Closest recorded population at Lake Lagunita 2.4 miles to the north of Pearson- Arastradero Reserve (CNDDB 2008). Birds Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) CDFG – fully protected species Uses rolling foothills and mountain terrain, wide arid plateaus deeply cut by streams and canyons, open mountain slopes, and cliffs and rock outcrops. Eats mostly rabbits and rodents; also takes other mammals, birds, reptiles, and some carrion. Pearson-Arastradero - HP May utilize habitat mosaic for foraging. No breeding habitat available. Foothills – HP May utilize habitat mosaic for foraging. No breeding habitat available. Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) CSSC Common locally throughout Central Valley and in coastal districts from Sonoma Co. south. Breeds near fresh water, preferably in emergent wetland with tall, dense cattails or tules, but also in thickets of willow, blackberry, wild rose, tall herbs. Feeds in grassland and cropland habitats. Feeds mostly on insects and spiders. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Breeding habitat available at Arastradero Lake. Foraging habitat occurs in the reserve grassland. Foothills – HP Breeding habitat available at Boronda Lake. Foraging habitat occurs in the reserve grassland. Not likely to occur. The closest recorded observation is greater than 5 miles southeast at the base of Calero reservoir (CNDDB 2008). Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) CSSC A yearlong resident of grassland habitats. Eats mostly insects; also small mammals, reptiles, birds, and carrion. Uses rodent or other burrow for roosting and nesting cover. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Breeding and foraging habitat is present. Unlikely to occur. Closest siting is the Palo Alto Municipal Airport 5.4 miles northeast (CNDDB 2008). Foothills – A. Habitat is not present on-site. Site is to steep and out of the elevation range for the species. Marbled Murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) FT Breeds in coniferous forests near coasts, nesting on large horizontal branches high up in trees. Winters at sea. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 52 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus) CSC Mostly found in flat, or hummocky, open areas of tall, dense grasses, moist or dry shrubs, and edges for nesting, cover, and feeding. Frequents meadows, grasslands, open rangelands, desert sinks, fresh and saltwater emergent wetlands; seldom found in wooded areas. Feeds mostly on voles and other small mammals, birds, frogs, small reptiles, crustaceans, insects, and, rarely on fish. Known to occur in the grasslands within the city limits. Breeds in open fields and meadows. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Foraging and breeding habitat present. Foothills – HP Foraging and breeding habitat present. Yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia) CSSC Usually found in riparian deciduous habitats in summer: cottonwoods, willows, alders, and other small trees and shrubs typical of low, open-canopy riparian woodland. Also breeds in montane shrubbery in open conifer forests. In migration, visits woodland, forest, and shrub habitats. Mostly eats insects and spiders. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Foraging and breeding habitat available in the Arastradero Creek and unnamed tributary riparian corridors. Foothills – HP Foraging and breeding habitat available in the Buckeye Creek riparian corridor. White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus) CDFG – fully protected species Uses herbaceous lowlands with variable tree growth and dense population of Voles. Substantial groves of dense, broad-leafed deciduous trees used for nesting and roosting. Preys mostly on voles and other small, diurnal mammals, occasionally on birds, insects, reptiles, and amphibians. Forages in undisturbed, open grasslands, meadows, farmlands and emergent wetlands. Known to occur throughout the town in all habitats mentioned here. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Foraging and breeding habitat present. Foothills – HP Foraging and breeding habitat present. Saltmarsh common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa) CSSC Resident of the San Francisco bay region, in fresh and salt water marshes. Requires thick, continuous cover down to water surface for foraging; tall grasses, tule patches, willows for nesting. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Foraging and breeding habitat available at Arastradero Lake, John Sobey Pond and in the riparian corridors associated with Arastradero Creek. Foothills – HP Foraging and Breeding habitat available at Boronda Lake and in the riparian corridors of Buckeye Creek. Closest known occurrence is 3.0 miles to the northwest at Searsville Lake (CNDDB 2008). Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 53 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) CSSC A common resident and winter visitor in lowlands and foothills throughout California. Prefers open habitats with scattered shrubs, trees, posts, fences, utility lines, or other perches. Eats mostly large insects; also takes small birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles, fish, carrion, and various other invertebrates. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Foraging and breeding habitat available on-site in the grasslands and oak woodland. Foothills – HP Foraging and breeding habitat available on-site in the grasslands, mixed evergreen forest and oak woodland savannah. Fish Steelhead - Distinct Population Segment (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) FT (CH) The Central California Coast Distinct Population Segment extends from the Russian River in the north to Soquel Creek in the south. Pearson-Arastradero – A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. * Present in Los Trancos Creek along evacuation route F.E6 and the southern Foothills Park border. Reptiles San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) FE/SE Vicinity of freshwater marshes, ponds, and slow moving streams. Prefers dense cover and water depths of at least one foot. Upland areas near water are important. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present on-site at Arastradero Lake, John Sobey Pond and Arastradero Creek. Foothills – HP Habitat present at Boronda Lake and Buckeye Creek. Western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) CSSC An aquatic turtle of ponds, marshes, rivers, streams & irrigation ditches with aquatic vegetation. WPT’s require basking sites with suitable (sandy banks or grassy open fields) upland habitat for egg-laying. Pearson-Arastradero – HP Habitat present on-site at Arastradero Lake, John Sobey Pond and Arastradero Creek. Foothills – HP Habitat present at Boronda Lake and Buckeye Creek. Closest recorded population is 3.0 miles to the northwest at Searsvillle Lake (CNDDB 2008). Mammals Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) CSSC Takes a wide variety of insects and arachnids, including beetles, grasshoppers, cicadas, moths, spiders, scorpions, and Jerusalem crickets. Prefers rocky outcrops, cliffs, and crevices with access to open habitats for foraging. Very sensitive to disturbance of roosting sites. Such sites are essential for metabolic economy, juvenile Pearson-Arastradero – HP Foraging habitat is present in the grassland. No roosting habitat available. Foothills – HP Small rocky outcrops may provide roosting habitat. Foraging habitat Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 54 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent growth and as night roosts to consume prey. present in the grassland. Ringtail (Bassaricus astutus) CSSC Uncommon and highly secretive. Nocturnal. Dens in rock outcrops and tree hollows. Eats small mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, carrion, and nuts and berries. Has a home range as large as 336 acres. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Den sites are available in oak woodland and riparian habitats. Foraging available in all habitats. Foothills – HP Den sites are available in oak woodland, mixed evergreen, and riparian habitats. Foraging available in all habitats. Western red bat (Lasiurus blosevillii) CSSC Roosts primarily in trees, less often in shrubs in edge habitats adjacent to streams, fields, or urban areas. Preferred roost sites are protected from above, open below, and located above dark ground-cover. Such sites minimize water loss. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Roosting habitat available in oak woodland, riparian, and edge habitats. Foraging available in all habitats. Foothills – HP. Roosting habitat available in oak woodland, mixed evergreen and riparian. Foraging available in all habitats. American badger (Taxidea taxus) CSSC Most abundant in drier open stages of most shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats with friable soils. Needs sufficient food source (mostly burrowing rodents) and open, uncultivated ground. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Foraging and burrow habitat available throughout the whole site. Foothills – HP. Foraging and burrow habitat available throughout the whole site. Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) None, but considered special status by the CDFG Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics with access to trees for cover and open areas or habitat edges for feeding. Roosts in dense foliage of medium to large trees, feeds primarily on moths. Requires water. Pearson-Arastradero – HP Foraging habitat present throughout the site. Roosting habitat is available in riparian and oak woodland. Foothills – HP Foraging habitat available throughout the site. Roosting habitat available in riparian, oak woodland, and mixed evergreen. Fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes) None, but considered special status by the CDFG Occurs in a wide variety of habitats. Optimal habitats are pinyon-juniper, valley foothill hardwoods, and hardwood-conifer. Uses caves, mines, building or crevices for maternity colonies and roosts. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Roosting available in the structures on-site. Foraging available throughout the site. Foothills – HP Roosting available in the structures on-site. Foraging available throughout the site. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 55 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens) CSSC Generalist herbivores, they consume a wide variety of nuts and fruits, fungi, foliage and some forbs. Dusky-footed woodrats are highly arboreal; evergreen or live oaks and other thick-leaved trees and shrubs are important habitat components for this species. Houses typically are placed on the ground against or straddling a log or exposed roots of a standing tree and are often located in dense brush. Houses also are placed in the crotches and cavities of trees and in hollow logs. Known to occur in scrubby and forested habitat throughout the town. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present in chaparral, mixed evergreen and oak woodland. Foothills – HP Habitat present in chaparral, mixed evergreen and oak woodland. Plants San Mateo thorn- mint (Acanthomintha duttonii) FE/SE, CNPS 1B Annual herb found in serpentine areas of chaparral, valley and foothill grassland, coastal scrub. 50 – 300 meters. Blooms April-July. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat is present at AC4 and AC7. Highly Unlikely. The closest population is located in Edgewood County Park 6.3 air miles north (CNDDB 2008). Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Franciscan onion (Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum) CNPS 1B Perennial bulbiferous herb found in valley and foothill grassland and cismontane woodland. Often in serpentine, clay, or volcanic soils. 100 – 300 meters. Blooms May-June. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present in grasslands. Foothills – HP Habitat is present in grasslands. Slender silver moss (Anomobryum julaceum) CPNS 2 Broadleaved upland forest, lower montane coniferous forest, North Coast coniferous forest/damp rock and soil on outcrops, usually roadcuts; 100 – 1000 meters. Pearson-Arastradero – A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Anderson’s manzanita (Arctostaphylos andersonii) CNPS 1B Broadleaved upland forest, chaparral, north coast coniferous forest. Open sites, redwood forest. 180-800m. Blooms November-April. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present in chaparral. Foothills – HP Habitat present in chaparral. Highly unlikely. Known from fewer than 15 occurrences in the Santa Cruz Mountains (CNDDB 2008). Schreiber’s manzanita (Arctostaphylos glutinosa) CNPS 1B Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral/diatomaceous shale; 170-685 meters. Blooms November – April. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present in chaparral. Foothills – HP Habitat present in chaparral. Highly unlikely. Known from fewer than 10 occurrences in Santa Cruz Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 56 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent County (CNDDB 2008). Kings mountain manzanita (Archtostaphylos regismontana) CNPS 1B Perennial evergreen shrub found on granite or sandstone outcrops in chaparral, coniferous and evergreen forests. 305 – 730 meters. Blooms March-April. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present in chaparral. Foothills – HP Habitat present in chaparral and mixed evergreen. Highly unlikely. Closest known occurrence is greater than five miles from the site at Teague Hill Open Space Preserve at Summit Springs Road in Redwood City (CNDDB 2008). Bonny Doon manzanita (Archtostaphylos silvicola) CNPS 1B Chaparral, closed-cone coniferous forest, lower montane coniferous forest/inland marine sands; 120-600 meters. Blooms February – March. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present in chaparral. Foothills – HP Habitat present in chaparral. Highly unlikely. Known from fewer than 20 occurrences greater than five miles from the site in the Santa Cruz County (CNDDB 2008). Alkali milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var. tener) CNPS 1B Playas, valley and foothill grassland (adobe clay), vernal pools/alkaline; 1-60 meters. Blooms March – June. Last collection 1959. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. There are no alkaline or adobe clay soils present on site. Santa Cruz Cypress (Callitropsis abramsiana) FE/SE, CNPS 1B Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, lower montane coniferous forest/sandstone or granitic; 280-800 meters. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – HP Habitat is present in chaparral. Highly unlikely. Known from fewer than 20 occurrences greater than five miles from the site in Santa Cruz County (CNDDB 2008). Santa Cruz mountain pussypaws (Calyptridium parryi var. hesseae) CNPS 1B Chaparral, cismontane woodland; 305 – 1115 meters. Blooms May – July. Pearson-Arastradero - A Habitat is not present. Foothills – HP Habitat is present in chaparral. Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii) CNPS 1B Valley and foothill grassland (alkaline); 1- 230 meters. Blooms June – November. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present on-site. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 57 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent Ben Lomond spineflower (Chorizanthe pungens var. hatwegiana) FE, CNPS 1B Lower montane coniferous forest (maritime pondersa pine sandhills); 90 – 610 meters. Blooms April – July. Known from sandhill parklands in the Santa Cruz Mtns. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Franciscan thistle (Cirsium andrewsii) CNPS 1B Occurs within coastal bluff scrub, broadleaved upland forest, and coastal scrub. Sometimes found on serpentine seeps. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Crystal Springs fountain thistle (Cirsium fontinale var. fontinale) FE, SE, CNPS 1B Chaparral (openings), valley and foothill grassland/serpentinite seeps; 90 – 175 meters. Blooms June – October. Known from four occurrences in the vicinity of Crystal Springs Reservoir. Pearson-Arastradero – HP Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. San Francisco collinisia (Collinisia multicolor) CNPS 1B Moist shady woodland, associated with California buckeye, honeysuckle, ferns, coast live oak, poison oak. Known from Edgewood Natural Preserve. Blooms March-May. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Norris’ beard moss (Didymodon norrisii) CNPS 2 Cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest/intermittently mesic, rock; 600 – 1700 meters. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis) CNPS 1B Broad-leafed upland forest, chaparral, closed-cone coniferous forest, cismontane woodland, north coast forest, riparian forest and woodland. On brushy slopes, mesic sites; mostly in mixed evergreen & foothill woodland communities. 30-550m. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – P. Habitat is not present. Found along Steep Hollow Trail San Mateo wooly sunflower (Eriophyllum latilobum) FE, SE, CNPS 1B Cismontane woodland (serpentinite, often on roadcuts); 45 – 150 meters. Blooms May – June. Pearson-Arastradero – HP. Habitat is present at AC4 and AC7. Highly unlikely. Known for only one occurrence (CNPS 2001). Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Fragrant fritillary (Fritillaria liliacea) CNPS 1B Perennial bulbiferous herb found in coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, coastal prairie. Often on serpentine; various soils reported though usually clay, in grassland. 3-410m. Blooms February-April Pearson-Arastradero – A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Marin Western Flax (Hesperolinon congestum) FT, ST, CNPS 1B Annual herb found in chaparral, valley and foothill grassland. In serpentine barrens and in serpentine grassland and chaparral. 5-370 meters. Blooms April-July. Pearson-Arastradero – HP Habitat is present at AC4 and AC7. Highly unlikely. Only fewer than 20 occurrences. Highly Unlikely. The closest population is located in Edgewood Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 58 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent County Park 6.3 air miles north (CNDDB 2008). Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Loma Prieta hoita (Hoita strobilina) CNPS 1B Chaparral, cismontane woodland, riparian woodland/usually serpentinite, mesic; 30 – 600 meters. Blooms May – October. Pearson-Arastradero – HP Habitat is present at AC4 and AC7. Highly unlikely. Highly unlikely. Closest known occurrence is greater than five miles to the south in the Santa Teresa Hills (CNDDB 2008). Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Crystal Springs lessingia (Lessingia arachnoidea) CNPS 1B Annual herb found in coastal sage scrub, valley and foothill grassland, cismontane woodland. Grassy slopes on serpentine; sometimes on roadsides. 60-200m. Blooms July – October. Pearson-Arastradero – HP Habitat is present at AC4 and AC7. Highly unlikely. Known from seven occurrences near Crystal Springs reservoir (CNDDB 2008). Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Arcuate bush- mallow (Malacothamnus arcuatus) CNPS 1B Grows in gravelly alluvium in chaparral and grassland. Also occurs on serpentine. 15 – 355 meters. Blooms April – September. Pearson-Arastradero – P Six locations within the reserve. Foothills – HP Habitat present in chaparral and grassland. Robust Monardella (Monardella villosa ssp. globosa) CNPS 1B Chaparral (openings), cismontane woodland, coastal scrub; 185 – 600 meters. Blooms June – July. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present in chaparral. Foothills – HP Habitat present in chaparral and mixed evergreen. Kellman’s bristle moss (Orthotrichum kellmanii) CNPS 1B Chaparral, cismontane woodland, sandstone, carbonate; 343 – 685 meters. Pearson-Arastradero – A. No habitat is present. Reserve is to low in elevation. Foothills – HP Habitat present in chaparral and mixed evergreen. Dudley’s lousewort (Pedicularis dudleyi) SR, CNPS 1B Perennial herb found in maritime chaparral, cismontane woodland, and North Coast coniferous forest. 60 – 900 meters. Known from fewer than 15 locations. Occurs at Edgewood County Park. Blooms April- June. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat is present in chaparral. Foothills – HP Habitat is present in chaparral. Highly unlikely. Closest known occurrence 6.3 air miles to the north at Edgewood County Park (CNDDB 2008). Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 59 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent White-rayed pentachaeta (Pentachaeta bellidiflora) FE/SE Occurs within valley and foothill grasslands on open, dry, and rocky slopes. Often found on soils derived from serpentine bedrock. 35-620m. Pearson-Arastradero – HP Habitat present in grassland. Not likely to occur. Only occurrence is at Edgewood County Park 6.3 air miles to the north. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) CNPS 1B Closed cone coniferous forest, cismontane woodland; 25 – 185 meters. Found in only three locations along the central coast. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Habitat is not present. Foothills – A. Habitat is not present. White-flowered rein orchid (Piperia candida) CNPS 1B Perennial herb found in broadleafed upland forest and coniferous forests, sometimes serpentine. 30 – 1310 meters. Blooms May-September. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present in riparian corridor. Foothills – HP Habitat present in mixed evergreen and riparian corridor. Found in adjacent Los Trancos Open Space Preserve (CNDDB 2008). San Francisco popcorn-flower (Plagiobothrys diffuses) SE, CNPS 1B Coastal prarie, valley and foothill grassland; mesic; 60 – 360 meters. Blooms March - June. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat is present in grassland Foothills – HP Habitat is present in grassland. Highly unlikely. The closest known occurrence is greater than 5 miles away in Santa Cruz County near Point Año Nuevo State Park (CNDDB 2008). San Francisco campion (Silene verecunda ssp. verecunda) CNPS 1B Perennial herb found in sandy areas of coastal scrub, valley & foothill grassland, coastal bluff scrub, chaparral, and coastal prairie. 30 – 645 meters. Blooms March- August. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present in grassland and chaparral. Foothills – HP Habitat present in grassland and chaparral. Not likely to occur. Only occurrence is at Edgewood County Park 6.3 air miles to the north (CNDDB 2008). Santa Cruz microseris (Stebbinsoseris decipiens) CNPS 1B Broad-leaved upland forest, closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal prarie, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland/open areas; sometimes serpentinite; 10 – 500 meters. Blooms April – May. Pearson-Arastradero - HP Habitat present in chaparral and grassland. Foothills – HP Habitat present in chaparral, mixed evergreen and grassland. Highly unlikely. The closest known occurrence is greater than 5 miles Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 60 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 1. Special-status Species Considered in the Biological Impact Assessment Species name State/Federal Status Habitat Habitat Present/Absent away in Santa Cruz County near Franklin Point (CNDDB 2008). Communities Northern maritime chaparral None, but considered special status by the CDFG Maritime chaparral contains plants adapted to areas with cool, foggy summers. Generally found on nutrient poor soils and occurs on windward uplands and coastal lowlands. Arctostaphylos and Ceanothus species characterize the habitat. Pearson-Arastradero - A. Community is not present on-site. Foothills – A. Community is not present on-site. Valley needlegrass grassland None, but considered special status by the CDFG Dominated by the perennial, tussock forming purple needlegrass (Nasella pulchra). Usually on fine-textured (often clay) soils; moist or even waterlogged in winter, but very dry in summer Pearson-Arastradero – P Restored purple needlegrass grassland. Foothills – A Community is not present on-site. Absent [A] - no habitat present and no further work needed. Habitat Present [HP] -habitat is, or may be present. The species may be present. Present [P] - the species is present. Critical Habitat [CH] - project footprint is located within a designated critical habitat unit, but does not necessarily mean that appropriate habitat is present. Notes: CNPS – California Native Plant Society (www.cnps.org) List 1A: plants presumed extinct in California List 1B: plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere List 2: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere List 3: Plants about which we need more information – a review list List 4: Plants of limited distribution – a watch list Threat Ranks: 0.1 – seriously threatened in California (high degree/immediacy of threat) 0.2 – fairly threatened in California (moderate degree/immediacy of threat) 0.3 – not very threatened in California (low degree/immediacy of threats or no current threats known CSSC – California Species of Concern FE – Federal endangered (listed by the federal government as an endangered species) FT – Federal threatened (listed by the federal government as a threatened species) SE – State endangered (listed by the state of California as an endangered species) ST – State threatened (listed by the state of California as a threatened species) SR – State rare (listed by the state of California as a rare species) References: United States Fish and Wildlife Service: Sacramento http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/es/spp_list.htm. Viewed on October 27, 2008. California Native Plant Society. Online Inventory of rare and endangered plants. http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi- bin/inv/inventory.cgi. Viewed on October 27 2008. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 61 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 California Department of Fish and Game. Rare and endangered species lists. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/plants_and_animals.asp. Viewed on October 27, 2008. California Department of Fish and Game. California Natural Diversity Database. Rare plant, animal and communities. Report created on October 27, 2008. National Marine Fisheries. Critical Habitat for endangered species. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/criticalhabitat.htm. Viewed on October 27, 2008. California Department of Fish and Game. Fully protected species list. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/species/t_e_spp/fully_pro.html. Viewed on October 27, 2008. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 62 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 2 Bat Species of Concern on the San Francisco Peninsula Bat Species Habits/Habitat Requirements California myotis (Myotis californicus) Roosts alone or in groups typically in trees cavities, caves, and buildings. Found over water, in forests, at edges of forests, and in open areas. Pups usually born in July. Mexican free-tailed (Tadarida brasiliensis) Colonial roosting typically in caves and building. Found in open areas, forests, over water and near buildings. A characteristic musty odor can be detected near their roosts. Pups born in the summer. Western red (Lasiurus blossevillii) Roosts alone typically in the leaves of large trees and shrubs. Found in forests, over water, in open areas, and in buildings. Pups born May-June. Yuma (Myotis yumanensis) Maternal roosts are colonial; males have solitary roosts. Uses buildings and caves for roosting. Found over water and near or in buildings. Pups born May-July. Pallid (Antrozous pallidus) Roosts in colonies in buildings and rock crevices, caves, mines, rock piles, and tree cavities. Tend to choose roosts where they can easily retreat into tight crevices when disturbed. Can be heard in the roost; roost has a faint skunk-like smell. Summer and winter roosting sites are the same, but the bats are more likely to roost singly or in pairs in the winter. Pups are born April-June. Found in or near buildings, rock crevices, mines, and tree cavities. Catches its prey on the ground or on leaves. Prey includes cicadas, katydids, scorpions, centipedes, beetles, grasshoppers, moths. Big brown (Eptesicus fuscus) Daytime roosts are in dark places, usually in buildings or trees. Night roosts include buildings. Females form maternity colonies, while males remain solitary. Females return to the same summer roost in March or April. Pups born in spring or early summer. Feeds on insects in meadows, over water, among trees, and in the urban environment. Long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis) Roosts both singly and in maternity colonies in abandoned buildings, hollow trees, niches under bark, caves, mines, cliff crevices. Forages around treetops and over water in forested areas. Pups born June-July. Fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes) Females roost in colonies, males usually roost alone. Roost in caves, mines, rock crevices, buildings. Forages along streams and in forested areas. Pups born June-July. Long-legged (Myotis volans) In the summer, roosts in colonies in buildings, crack, crevices, and in loose and peeling tree bark. In the winter, roosts in caves and mines. Forages for insects over water, in forests, over open habitat and near cliffs. Pups born spring/summer. Hoary (Lasiurus cinereus) A solitary bat that roosts in the foliage of trees, usually 7-20 feet above the ground and leafed above but open below. Roost trees are usually at the edge of a clearing. Markings blend well with tree bark. Regularly makes a chattering sound during flight audible to human ears. Forages at treetop levels in open areas, over streams, and may also be attracted to insects at outdoor lights. Pups born May-July. Silver-haired (Lasionycteris noctivagans) Roosts singly or in small groups in wooded areas. Prefers hollows, cracks and crevices of trees. Sometimes found roosting in old woodpecker holes and beneath rocks. Roosts usually between 3 and 16 feet above the ground. Forages over ponds and streams, and above treetop level in woodland. Has been observed to fly the same pattern each night. Migratory; during migration they can be found in open sheds, garages and outbuildings, lumber piles. On hibernation grounds they hibernate in trees, buildings, rock crevices, caves. Pups born June-July. Williams et al. 2002 Beginner’s Guide to Bats Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 63 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 3 Non-listed Native Plants of Concern in Foothills Park Plant Name Bloom Period Comments about occurrences in the Park Fire Plan Treatments of concern Rayless arnica Arnica discoidea May-July Open slopes and edges of chaparral; Los Trancos Trail F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 Crimson columbine Aquilegia formosa A. eximia May-August Mixed evergreen forest, brush covered slopes. Usually in damp, shady places along trails; Los Trancos Trail F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Maidenhair fern Adiantum jordanii na Moist, shaded slopes in woodland. Not uncommon, but can be severely impacted. Fern Loop, Steep Hollow Trails F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Kellogg’s or lax snapdragon Antirrhinum kelloggii March-May Disturbed areas, especially burns, and chaparral F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 Single-leaf onion Allium unifolium April-June Moist clay or serpentine, grassy streambanks none Indian paintbrush Castilleja affinis March-May Open slopes, borders of chaparral and wooded areas. Woodrat Trail. F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Wooly Indian paintbrush Castilleja foliolosa March-June Edges of chaparral, on dry rocky slopes F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 Venus thistle Cirsium occidentale venustum April-July Disturbed places in grassland and woodland F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.4, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.2, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.8 F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.1, F.C.2, F.C.4, F.C.5, F.C.6, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4 California larkspur Delphinium californicum May-June Grows in thickets and chaparral. Known along F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 64 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 3 Non-listed Native Plants of Concern in Foothills Park Plant Name Bloom Period Comments about occurrences in the Park Fire Plan Treatments of concern Los Trancos Trail F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 Hooker’s fairy bells Disporum hookeri March-May Shaded places in mixed forest and brush. Steep Hollow and Los Trancos Trails F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Red delphinium Delphinium nudicaule March-June Mixed evergreen forest, dense riparian woodland. Los Trancos Trail F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Bush poppy Dendromecon rigida April-August (highly variable) Chaparral. Trapper’s Trail F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 California fuschia Epilobium canum August-October Rocky soil in chaparral F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 Checker lily Fritillaria affinis February-May Wooded slopes, oak scrub, grasslands F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Rosilla or sneezeweed Helenium puberulum June-September Creek beds and marshy meadows along streams and lakes. Panorama Trail F.E.2, F.E.5 Hill lotus Lotus humistratus March-June Grassland, chaparral F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 California lotus Lotus wrangelianus March-June Chaparral, disturbed areas F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 Coffee fern Pellaea andromedifolia na Dry, open or shaded habitats often in chaparral. Los Trancos Trail F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 California polypody Polypodium californicum na Shaded canyons and streambanks F.E.1, F.E.2 Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 65 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 3 Non-listed Native Plants of Concern in Foothills Park Plant Name Bloom Period Comments about occurrences in the Park Fire Plan Treatments of concern Bird’s-foot fern Pellaea mucronata na Dry, rocky outcrops. Los Trancos Trail F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 Gold-back fern Pityrogramma triangularis na Shaded slopes in oak- madrone woodland, brushy slopes, moist banks F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Chaparral currant Ribes malvaceum October-March Shaded ravines and chaparral slopes. Bobcat Point F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 California tea Rupertia physodes April-June Oak-madrone woods, shaded chaparral. Panorama Trail. F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Victor’s gooseberry (Ribes victoris) March-April Canyon forests and chaparral. Costanoan Trail. F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D.9, F.C.3, F.C.4, F.C.6 Yerba buena Satureja douglasii April-September Shade in woodland F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Fat false solomon’s seal Smilacina racemosa March-May Shade and rich soil in mixed evergreen forest F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Slim false solomon’s seal Smilacina stellata April-June Wooded slopes in partial shade F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Dannie’s skullcap Scutellaria tuberosa March-July Oak-madrone woods, borders of shrubby F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 66 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 3 Non-listed Native Plants of Concern in Foothills Park Plant Name Bloom Period Comments about occurrences in the Park Fire Plan Treatments of concern vegetation F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Hartweg’s taushcia Tauschia hartwegii March-May Occasional on wooded slopes. F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Kellogg’s tauschia Tauschia kelloggii April-June Grassland, edges of chaparral F.C.1, F.C.2, F.C.3, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3. F.F.4, F.C.6 Pacific starflower Trientalis latifolia April-July Shaded slopes, moist woods F.E.1, F.E.2, F.E.3, F.E.6, F.D.1, F.D.3, F.D.4, F.D.5, F.D.6, F.D.9, F.I.1, F.I.2, F.I.3, F.I.4, F.I.6, F.C.6 Western verbena Verbena lasiostachys May-September Dry ground of disturbed areas, creek bottoms, roadsides, edges of brushy vegetation F.E.2, F.E.5 Source: Foothills Park Trails Management Plan 2001; TRA 2008; Munz and Keck 1968. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 67 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 4. Fire Plan Treatments, Habitats Affected, and Protective Measures Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Habitat(s) Affected1 Protection Measure ID2 Foothills Park Treatment Locations Evacuation Routes F.E1 Page Mill Road Within PA City from Arastradero to southern Pony Tracks 9.54 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor Grassland Chaparral Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10 F.E2 Evacuation Route - Park Road Entrance to Maintenance Yard Las Trampas Valley 5.96 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor Woodland Irrigated Meadow 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10 F.E3 Evacuation Route - Park North west Interpretive Center to Hewlett property 0.57 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor Grassland Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10 F.E4 Evacuation Route - Park North east Boronda Lake to Alexis Drive 1.21 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor Grassland 1, 9 F.E5 Secondary Evac Route Towle Campground to Las Trampas Valley 0.97 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor Riparian (coyote brush) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9 F.E6 Los Trancos Southwest corner of Arastradero Park 6.07 acres Hand labor Woodland Riparian (Willow) (*western leatherwood) 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10 Firefighter Safety Zone F.F1 Firefighter Safety Zone 1 Trappers Ridge & Los Trancos Trail 0.72 acre mow, graze Grassland Chaparral Coastal Scrub 1, 2, 3, 9 F.F2 Firefighter Safety Zone 2 Trappers Ridge & Madron Fire Road 0.72 acre mow, graze Grassland Chaparral Coastal Scrub 1, 2, 3, 9 F.F3 Firefighter Safety Zone 3 Trappers Ridge high point 0.72 acre mow, graze Grassland Chaparral Coastal Scrub 1, 2, 3, 9 F.F4 Firefighter Safety Zone 4 Trapper Ridge south end 0.72 acre mow, graze Grassland Chaparral Coastal Scrub 1, 2, 3, 9 Defensible Space F.D.1 Defensible Space Entry Gate 0.72 acre hand labor Grassland Woodland 1, 2, 3,`4, 7, 9, 10 Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 68 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 4. Fire Plan Treatments, Habitats Affected, and Protective Measures Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Habitat(s) Affected1 Protection Measure ID2 Foothills Park Treatment Locations F.D.2 Defensible Space Station 8 0.72 acre hand labor Grassland 1 F.D.3 Defensible Space Restrooms at Orchard Glen < ½ acre hand labor Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10 F.D.4 Defensible Space Interpretive Center 0.11 acre hand labor Woodland Irrigated Meadow 1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10 F.D.5 Defensible Space Maintenance Complex 0.72 acre hand labor Woodland 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 F.D.6 Defensible Space Boronda Pump Station at Campground 0.72 acre hand labor Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10 F.D.7 Defensible Space Dahl Water Tank < 1/2 acre hand labor, grazing Chaparral 1, 2, 3, 9 F.D.8 Defensible Space Boronda Tank < 1/2 acre hand labor, grazing Grassland 1 F.D.9 Defensible Space Park Tank < 1/2 acre hand labor, grazing Grassland Chaparral Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10 Ignition Prevention F.I.1 Ignition Prevention Shady Cove Picnic Area < 1/4 ac hand labor Woodland 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 F.I.2 Ignition Prevention Encinal Picnic Area < 1/4 ac hand labor Woodland 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 F.I.3 Ignition Prevention Pine Gulch Picnic Area < 1/4 ac hand labor Woodland 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 F.I.4 Ignition Prevention Orchard Glen < 1/4 ac hand labor Woodland 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 F.I.5 Ignition Prevention Oak Grove Group Picnic Area < 1/4 ac hand labor Woodland 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 F.I.6 Ignition Prevention Towle Camp < 1/4 ac hand labor Woodland 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 69 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 4. Fire Plan Treatments, Habitats Affected, and Protective Measures Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Habitat(s) Affected1 Protection Measure ID2 Foothills Park Treatment Locations Containment F.C1 Containment Trappers Trail 72.51 acres mowing, grazing Grassland Coastal Scrub 1, 2, 3, 9 F.C2 Containment Pony Tracks south of Trappers Ridge 1.37 acres mow annually 10-ft on either size of road, use a brush hog (or grazing animals) to mow areas to the break in slope both under wooded canopy and in grasslands with cover of coyote brush greater than 30% Grassland Coastal Scrub 1, 2, 3, 9 F.C3 Containment Pony Tracks north of Trappers Ridge 1.13 acres mowing, grazing Chaparral 1, 3, 9 F.C4 Containment Bobcat point 5.28 acres graze with goats Grassland Chaparral 1, 2, 3 F.C5 Containment North of entry Gate 3.47 acres graze with goats Grassland 1 F.C6 Containment "Valley View Fire Trail" 3.35 acres mowing Chaparral Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4 Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 70 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 4. Fire Plan Treatments, Habitats Affected, and Protective Measures Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Habitat Measure Pearson Arastradero Treatment Locations Evacuation Route A.E1 Evacuation Route Arastradero Road 2.32 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor Grassland Riparian (Willow) Eucalyptus Trees 1, 8 Defensible Space A.D1 Defensible Space Gateway Building 0.72 acre hand labor, mowing Grassland 1 A.D2 Defensible Space Restrooms 0.72 acre hand labor, mowing Grassland 1 A.D3 Defensible Space Corte Madera Pump Station 0.72 acre hand labor, mowing Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10 A.D4 Defensible Space Water Tank 0.72 acre hand labor, mowing Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10 Containment A.C1 Containment Property boundary adjacent to Liddicoat 5.39 acres grazing, mowing Grassland 1 A.C2 Containment Property boundary adjacent to Stanford and Portola Pastures grazing, mowing Grassland 1 A.C3 Containment Within Redtail Loop Trail, to entire eastern boundary of Preserve 48.72 acres grazing Grassland 1, 8 A.C4 Containment Property boundary adjacent to Paso del Robles 7.71 acres grazing Grassland (serpentine) 1, 2 A.C5 Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen - north 11.22 acres grazing Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4, 10 Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 71 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 4. Fire Plan Treatments, Habitats Affected, and Protective Measures Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Habitat Measure Pearson Arastradero Treatment Locations A.C6 Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen - south 4.05 acres grazing Grassland Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4 A.C7 Containment Property boundary west of Meadow Lark Trail 9.71 acres grazing, mowing Woodland Coastal Scrub (serpentine) 1, 2, 3, 4 A.C8 Containment Property boundary adjacent to 1791 Arastradero Rd. 8.08 acres grazing (mowing is not possible) Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4 A.C9 Containment Property boundary adjacent to John Marthens 0.79 acres mowing Grassland Woodland Riparian Coastal Scrub 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10 A.C10 Containment Arastradero Creek to Arastradero Road 14.08 acres mowing, hand labor near riparian zone Grassland Woodland Riparian 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10 A.C11 Containment Meadow Lark to Juan Bautista Trail 4.08 acres mowing Grassland 1, 2 A.C12 Containment Meadow Lark 0.72 acres mowing Grassland 1 A.C13 Containment Bowl Loop 0.64 acres mowing Grassland 1 A.C14 Containment Arastradero to extended split RX1 and RX2 0.84 acres mowing Grassland 1, 8 A.C15 Containment Acorn Trail 0.56 acres mowing Grassland 1, 8 Prescribed Burn – Containment A.Rx1 Containment Juan Bautista Prescribe fire north 18.25 acres Rx fire, grazing Grassland 1, 2, 8 Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 72 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 4. Fire Plan Treatments, Habitats Affected, and Protective Measures Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method Habitat Measure Pearson Arastradero Treatment Locations A.Rx2 Containment Acorn Trail Prescribed fire south 24.45 acres Rx fire, grazing Grassland Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4, 8 Off-site Treatment Locations PA.1 Page Mill Road From Foothill Park South to Skyline Blvd. 16.50 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor Chaparral Woodland Grassland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10 PA.2 Arastradero Road From Page Mill to Arastradero Pk, and from Arastradero Pk to Los Trancos 0.21 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor Grassland Woodland 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 PA.3 (Same as FE.6) Los Trancos Within PA City roughly from Buck Meadows Dr. to Meadow Creek Ct. 6.07 acres hand labor Riparian (Willow) Woodland (*western leatherwood) 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10 PA.4 Skyline Blvd. Skyline Blvd. 10.89 acres mowing, grazing, hand labor Grassland Woodland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 10 1See Table 5 for a list of special-status species by habitat type. 2 Recommended Measures to Avoid Significant Biological Impacts under CEQA 1. Vegetation removal in any vegetation type from February 15 to August 31 requires a survey for nesting birds by a qualified biologist3 or by park staff trained to do so by a qualified biologist and avoiding removal of nests in active use. If raptor nests are detected, a buffer area will need to be established around the nest in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. The buffer may be 250 feet. 2. Vegetation removal in areas of serpentine soil, oak woodland, chaparral, coastal scrub and riparian forest habitats requires a survey for rare plant species by a qualified biologist/ botanist prior to vegetation removal. Known rare plant locations should be treated in a way that benefits the rare species. This may include limiting the area of treatment in order to provide a buffer around the plant(s), or may include selectively trimming competitive vegetation adjacent to the plant(s). Some species may benefit from disturbance; the specific actions to be taken should be determined in consultation with a botanist. The plant survey needs to occur during the bloom period. After surveys in the same locations over three separate years, subsequent surveys are not necessary in that area unless a newly listed plant species could occur in the habitat. This should be determined by consulting the California Department of Fish and Game. 3. Vegetation removal, including dead and downed debris, requires a survey for presence of San Francisco dusky- footed woodrat by a qualified biologist or by park staff trained to identify woodrat houses by a qualified biologist . If woodrat houses are found, disturbance should be avoided and a minimum five-foot buffer should be provided around the house. If, for public safety reasons, it is necessary to move the house, the process must be coordinated with the California Department of Fish and Game. It is recommended that workers receive instruction regarding woodrat houses prior to their start of work. 3 A “qualified biologist” is a person with demonstrated ability to identify special-status plant and/or animal species in the San Francisco Bay Area. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 73 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 4. Prior to the removal of any tree that is 12 inches or more in diameter breast height, a survey for perennial bat roosts and, during the breeding season from February 15 to August 31, raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified biologist or park staff trained by a qualified biologist to identify these resources is required. If present, removal cannot continue without CDFG guidance. 5. Discing within 500 feet of a lake, pond or creek, requires a biological survey to determine impacts to California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, San Francisco garter snake and Western pond turtle and whether permits are required from the USFWS/CDFG. 6. Discing in grassland requires a pre-construction survey for American badger, California red-legged frog, and burrowing owl by a qualified biologist. 7. Trimming of coast live oaks shall follow the City’s Tree Ordinance (Title 8). Coast live oak or Valley oaks that are 11.5 inches in diameter or more measured at 54 inches above grade may not be removed without a permit, and may not be pruned such that more than 25 percent of the crown is removed or the tree is left unbalanced. 8. Avoid wetlands mapped in Pearson-Arastradero Preserve when weed-whipping or mowing. Modify the Fire Management Plan Best Management Practice that requires that a grazing plan be prepared to include protection of drainages and wetlands from the impacts of grazing animals. 9. For treatments in Foothills Park or on Page Mill Road along the Park border, a pre-work survey for stands of locally important plants (see Table 3 in Appendix A) should be conducted, and the plants avoided as long as it does not impair public safety. Field crews should be educated about the sensitivity of these plant species. 10. In addition to BMP-5, it is recommended that measures be taken to clean equipment, tires, and shoes to prevent the spread of Sudden Oak Death, and that any materials infected with the disease be disposed of in accordance with State or County Agricultural Commission guidelines. To reduce the possibility of spreading the disease, it is recommended that work not be done in wet or muddy conditions, and that infested areas be avoided to the extent feasible. Additional guidelines are available from the County Agricultural Commissioner. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 74 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 5. Special-status Species by Habitat Type and Treatment Location, with Protection Measures Species by Habitat Type Treatment Locations Protection Measures Chaparral San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat Ringtail Loggerhead shrike Arcuate bush mallow (serpentine) Kings Mountain manzanita Marin western flax (serpentine) San Francisco campion San Mateo thornmint Santa Cruz Mts manzanita Nesting birds Foothills Park F.E.1, F.F.1, F.F.2, F.F.3, F.F.4, F.D.7, F.D. 9, F.C. 3, F.C. 4, F.C. 6 Pearson- Arastradero Preserve P.A. 1 1. Vegetation removal from February 15 to August 31 requires a survey for nesting birds and avoiding removal of nests in active use. 2. Vegetation removal in areas of serpentine soil requires a survey for rare plant species prior to vegetation removal. Known rare plant locations should be treated in a way that benefits the rare species. The plant survey needs to occur during the bloom period. After surveys in the same locations over three separate years, subsequent surveys are not necessary in that area unless there are newly listed plant species that could occur in the habitat. 3. Vegetation removal, including dead and downed debris, requires a survey for presence of San Francisco dusky- footed woodrat and coordination with CDFG as necessary. Coastal Scrub San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat Bats (including pallid bat and red bat) Crystal Springs lessingia (serpentine) Fragrant fritillary (serpentine) Franciscan onion (serpentine) Kings Mountain manzanita San Francisco campion Wooly-headed lessingia Nesting birds Foothills Park F.F. 1, F.F. 2, F.F. 3, F.F. 4, F.C. 1, F.C. 2 Pearson- Arastradero Preserve A.C. 7, A.C. 9 1. Vegetation removal from February 15 to August 31 requires a survey for nesting birds and avoiding removal of nests in active use. 2. Vegetation removal in areas of serpentine soil requires a survey for rare plant species prior to vegetation removal. Known rare plant locations should be treated in a way that benefits the rare species. The plant survey needs to occur during the bloom period. After surveys in the same locations over three separate years, subsequent surveys are not necessary in that area unless there are newly listed plant species that could occur in the habitat. 3. Vegetation removal, including dead and downed debris, requires a survey for presence of San Francisco dusky- footed woodrat and coordination with CDFG as necessary. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 75 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 5. Special-status Species by Habitat Type and Treatment Location, with Protection Measures Species by Habitat Type Treatment Locations Protection Measures Grassland American badger California red-legged frog (burrows used during part of life cycle) California tiger salamander (burrows used) Western pond turtle (burrows used) White-tailed kite (forage, not nesting) Northern harrier (forage, not nesting) Golden eagle (forage, not nesting) Burrowing owl Long-eared owl (forage, not nesting) Loggerhead shrike Ground nesting birds (e.g. Meadowlark, killdeer) Saltmarsh common yellowthroat (forage, not nesting) Fountain thistle (serpentine) Crystal Springs lessingia (serpentine) Fragrant fritillary (serpentine) Franciscan onion (serpentine) Marin western flax (serpentine) San Francisco campion San Mateo thornmint Wooly-headed lessingia (serpentine) Foothills Park F.E. 1, F.E. 3, F.E. 4, F.F. 1, F.F. 2, F.F. 3, F.F. 4, F.D. 1, F.D. 2, F.D. 8, F.D. 9, F.C. 1, F.C. 2, F.C. 4, F.C. 5 Pearson- Arastradero Preserve A.E. 1, A.D. 1, A.D. 2, A.C. 1, A.C. 2, A.C. 3, A.C. 4, A.C. 6, A.C. 9, A.C. 10, A.C. 11, A.C. 13, A.C. 14, A.C.15, ARx1, ARx2, P.A. 1, P.A. 2, P.A. 4 1. Vegetation removal from February 15 to August 31 requires a survey for nesting birds and avoiding removal of nests in active use. 2. Vegetation removal in areas of serpentine soil requires a survey for rare plant species prior to vegetation removal. Known rare plant locations should be treated in a way that benefits the rare species. The plant survey needs to occur during the bloom period. After surveys in the same locations over three separate years, subsequent surveys are not necessary in that area unless there are newly listed plant species that could occur in the habitat. 4. Discing within 500 feet of a lake, pond or creek, requires a biological survey to determine impacts to California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, San Francisco garter snake and Western pond turtle and whether permits are required from the USFWS/CDFG. 5. Discing in grassland requires a pre- construction survey for American badger, California red-legged frog, and burrowing owl by a qualified biologist. Woodland San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat Bats (including pallid bat and red bat) American badger Ringtail California red-legged frog (aquatic and upland) Foothills Park F.E. 1, F.E 2, F.E. 3, F.E. 6, F.D. 1,F.D. 3, F.D. 4, F.D. 5, F.D. 6, F.D. 9, F.I. 1, F.I. 2, F.I. 3, F.I. 4, F.I. 6, 1. Vegetation removal from February 15 to August 31 requires a survey for nesting birds and avoiding removal of nests in active use. 2. Vegetation removal in areas of serpentine soil (in any habitat type), or in woodland, chaparral and riparian forest habitats requires a survey for rare plant species prior to vegetation Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 76 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 5. Special-status Species by Habitat Type and Treatment Location, with Protection Measures Species by Habitat Type Treatment Locations Protection Measures California tiger salamander White-tailed kite (nesting) Golden eagle (nesting) Loggerhead shrike Long-eared owl (nesting) Yellow warbler (nesting) Crystal Springs lessingia (serpentine) Dudley’s lousewort Franciscan onion Kings Mountain manzanita Santa Clara red ribbons San Francisco collinsia Santa Cruz Manzanita Western leatherwood Wooly-headed lessingia Nesting birds F.C. 6 Pearson- Arastradero Preserve A.D. 3, A.D. 4, A.C. 5, A.C. 6, A.C. 7, A.C. 8, A.C. 9, A.C. 10 ARx2, P.A. 1, P.A. 2, P.A. 3, P.A. 4 removal. Known rare plant locations should be treated in a way that benefits the rare species. The plant survey needs to occur during the bloom period. After surveys in the same locations over three separate years, subsequent surveys are not necessary in that area unless there are newly listed plant species that could occur in the habitat. 3. Vegetation removal, including dead and downed debris, requires a survey for presence of San Francisco dusky- footed woodrat and coordination with CDFG if it is necessary to move the woodrat house. 4. Prior to the removal of any tree that is 12 inches or more in diameter breast height, a survey for perennial bat roosts and raptor nests by a qualified biologist is required. If present, removal cannot continue without CDFG guidance. Riparian Forest/Aquatic San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat Ringtail Bats Western pond turtle California red-legged frog California tiger salamander Rainbow trout/steelhead Saltmarsh Common yellowthroat San Francisco garter snake Northern harrier White-tailed kite Arcuate bush mallow (serpentine) Western leatherwood Nesting birds Foothills Park F.E. 4, F.E. 5, F.E. 6 Pearson- Arastradero Preserve A.E. 1, A.C. 9, A.C. 10, ARx2, P.A. 3 1. Vegetation removal from February 15 to August 31 requires a survey for nesting birds and avoiding removal of nests in active use. 2. Vegetation removal in areas of serpentine soil (in any habitat type), or in woodland, chaparral and riparian forest habitats requires a survey for rare plant species prior to vegetation removal. Known rare plant locations should be treated in a way that benefits the rare species. The plant survey needs to occur during the bloom period. After surveys in the same locations over three separate years, subsequent surveys are not necessary in that area unless there are newly listed plant species that could occur in the habitat. 3. Vegetation removal, including dead and downed debris, requires a survey for presence of San Francisco dusky- footed woodrat and coordination with CDFG if it is necessary to move the Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 77 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 5. Special-status Species by Habitat Type and Treatment Location, with Protection Measures Species by Habitat Type Treatment Locations Protection Measures woodrat house. 4. Prior to the removal of any tree that is 12 inches or more in diameter breast height, a survey for perennial bat roosts and, during the breeding season from February 15 to August 31, raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified biologist is required. If present, removal cannot continue without CDFG guidance. Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 78 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 6. Change in Area Impacted under the Fire Management Plan Current Treatment Approximate Acreage Treatment Location Fireplan Treatment Acreage Change in treatment Habitat Type Foothill Park Disking annually; mowing 5 ft on both sides of road; 10ft annually 3.18 acres F.E. 1 Mowing, grazing, hand labor for 30 ft on both sides; 60 ft total 9.54 acres 6.36 acres Grassland Chaparral Woodland Mow 7 ft on both sides of the road; total 14 ft 2.32 acres F.E. 2 Mowing, grazing, hand labor for 30 ft on both sides; 60 ft total 5.96 acres 3.64 acres Woodland Irrigated Meadow Mow 7 ft on both sides of the road; total 14 ft 0.41 acres F.E. 3 Mowing, grazing, hand labor for 30 ft on both sides; 60 ft total .57 acres .16 acres Grassland Woodland Mow 7 ft on both sides of the road; total 14 ft; Disking annually 0.84 acres F.E. 4 Mowing, grazing, hand labor for 30 ft on both sides; 60 ft total 1.20 acres .36 acres Grassland Aquatic Mow 7 ft on both sides of the road; total 14 ft; mowing of valley for yellow star thistle control 0.91 acres F.E. 5 Mowing, grazing, hand labor for 15 ft on both sides; 30 ft total 0.97 acres 0.06 acre Riparian (coyote brush) No work -- F.E.6 Mowing, hand labor near riparian zone; 30 ft on both sides; 60 ft total 6.07 acres 6.07 acres Woodland Riparian (Willow) (*western leatherwood) No work -- F.D.1 Hand labor 0.72 acre 0.72 acre Grassland Woodland 100 ft clearance around Fire Station 8 0.72 acre F.D. 2 Hand labor; 100 ft clearance 0.72 acre 0 acre Grassland 20 foot clearance 0.01 acre F.D. 3 Hand labor; 100 ft clearance 0.72 acre 0.71 acre Woodland No work -- F.D. 4 Hand labor 0.11 acre 0.11 acre Woodland Irrigated Meadow 20 foot clearance 0.01 acre F.D. 5 Hand labor; 100 ft clearance 0.72 acre 0.71 acre Woodland No work -- F.D. 6 hand labor 0.72 acre 0.72 acre Woodland No work -- F.D. 7 hand labor, grazing 0.72 acre 0.72 acre Chaparral Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 79 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 6. Change in Area Impacted under the Fire Management Plan Current Treatment Approximate Acreage Treatment Location Fireplan Treatment Acreage Change in treatment Habitat Type No work -- F.D. 8 hand labor, grazing 0.72 acre 0.72 acre Grassland No work -- F.D. 9 hand labor, grazing 0.72 acre 0.72 acre Grassland Chaparral Woodland 300 foot firebreak on Trappers Ridge; mowing annually; brush mowing every 2-4 years 72.51 acres F.C. 1 Mowing, grazing, 10- 30 ft along Trappers Ridge annually, 300 ft every 3 years 72.51 acres 0 acre Grassland Coastal Scrub mowing annually; brush mowing every 2-4 years 1.37 acres F.C. 2 Mow annually 10- ft on either size of road, use a brush hog (or grazing animals) to mow areas to the break in slope both under wooded canopy and in grasslands with cover of coyote brush greater than 30% 1.37 acres 0 acre Grassland Coastal Scrub mowing annually; brush mowing every 2-4 years 1.13 acres F.C. 3 Mowing, grazing for 10 ft on both sides of the trial, 20 ft total 1.13 acres 0 acre Chaparral No work --- F.C. 4 graze with goats 5.28 acres 5.28 acres Grassland Chaparral Disking of half of the route 1.74 acres F.C. 5 Graze with goats 3.47 acres 1.73 acres Grassland Mowing annually, 2-4 year brush and tree trimming 3.35 acres F.C. 6 Mowing for 10 ft on both sides of the trail, 20 ft total 3.35 acres 0 acre Chaparral Woodland Mowing annually 0.72 acre F.F. 1 mow, graze 0.72 acre 0 acre Grassland Chaparral Coastal Scrub Mowing annually 0.72 acre F.F. 2 mow, graze 0.72 acre 0 acre Grassland Chaparral Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 80 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 6. Change in Area Impacted under the Fire Management Plan Current Treatment Approximate Acreage Treatment Location Fireplan Treatment Acreage Change in treatment Habitat Type Coastal Scrub Mowing annually 0.72 acre F.F. 3 mow, graze 0.72 acre 0 acre Grassland Chaparral Coastal Scrub Mowing annually 0.72 acre F.F. 4 mow, graze 0.72 acre 0 acre Grassland Chaparral Coastal Scrub Weed whipping annually < 1/4 ac F.I. 1 hand labor < 1/4 ac 0 acre Woodland Weed whipping annually < 1/4 ac F.I. 2 hand labor < 1/4 ac 0 acre Woodland Weed whipping annually < 1/4 ac F.I. 3 hand labor < 1/4 ac 0 acre Woodland Weed whipping annually < 1/4 ac F.I. 4 hand labor < 1/4 ac 0 acre Woodland Weed whipping annually < 1/4 ac F.I. 5 hand labor < 1/4 ac 0 acre Irrigated Meadow Weed whipping annually < 1/4 ac F.I. 6 hand labor < 1/4 ac 0 acre Woodland Pearson-Arastradeo Preserve No work -- A.C. 1 grazing, mowing 5.39 acres 5.39 acres Grassland Disking annually 2.47 acres A.C. 2 Grazing, mowing for 10 ft on both sides of the trail, 20 ft total 2.47 acres 0 acre Grassland No work -- A.C. 3 grazing 48.72 acres 48.72 acres Grassland Disking annually 5.00 acres A.C. 4 Grazing 7.71 acres 2.71 acres Grassland No work -- A.C. 5 grazing 11.22 acres 11.22 acres Woodland No work -- A.C. 6 grazing 4.05 acres 4.05 acres Grassland Woodland No work -- A.C. 7 grazing, mowing 9.71 acres 9.71 acres Woodland Coastal Scrub No work -- A.C. 8 grazing (mowing is not possible) 8.08 acres 8.08 acres Woodland Disking annually 0.79 acres A.C. 9 Mowing for 10 ft on both 0.79 acres 0 acre Grassland Woodland Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 81 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 6. Change in Area Impacted under the Fire Management Plan Current Treatment Approximate Acreage Treatment Location Fireplan Treatment Acreage Change in treatment Habitat Type sides of the trail, 20 ft total Riparian Coastal Scrub Mowing annually, 2-10 year brush mowing 7.04 acres A.C. 10 Mowing, hand labor near riparian zone; 10 ft on both sides of the trail, 20 ft total 14.08 acres 7.04 acres Grassland Woodland Riparian Mowing or weed whipping annually; 4 ft; 8 ft total 1.63 acres A.C. 11 Mowing for 10 ft on both sides of the trail, 20 ft total 4.08 acres 3.45 acres Grassland Mowing or weed whipping annually; 4 ft; 8 ft total 0.29 acres A.C. 12 Mowing for 10 ft on both sides of the trail, 20 ft total 0.72 acres 0.43 acre Grassland Mowing or weed whipping annually; 4 ft; 8 ft total 0.25 acres A.C. 13 Mowing for 10 ft on both sides of the trail, 20 ft total 0.64 acres 0.39 acre Grassland Mowing or weed whipping annually; 4 ft; 8 ft total 0.34 acres A.C. 14 Mowing for 10 ft on both sides of the trail, 20 ft total 0.84 acres 0.50 acre Grassland Mowing or weed whipping annually; 4 ft; 8 ft total 0.22 acres A.C. 15 Mowing for 10 ft on both sides of the trail, 20 ft total 0.56 acres 0.34 acre Grassland Mowing annually; 5 ft, 10 ft total 0.73 acres A.E. 1 Mowing, grazing, hand labor for 30 ft on both sides of the road; 60 ft total 4.36 acres 3.63 acres Grassland Riparian (Willow) Eucalyptus Trees Mowing; 30 feet clearance .02 acres A.D. 1 Hand labor, mowing for 100 ft clearance 0.72 acre 0.70 acre Grassland Mowing; 30 feet clearance .02 acres A.D. 2 Hand labor, mowing for 100 ft clearance 0.72 acre 0.70 acre Grassland No work -- A.D. 3 hand labor, mowing, 100ft clearance 0.72 acre 0.72 acre Woodland No work -- A.D. 4 hand labor, 0.72 acre 0.72 acre Woodland Foothills Fire Management Plan Biological Impact Assessment-Appendix A Page 82 TRA Environmental Sciences 1/8/2009 Table 6. Change in Area Impacted under the Fire Management Plan Current Treatment Approximate Acreage Treatment Location Fireplan Treatment Acreage Change in treatment Habitat Type mowing, 100ft clearance No work -- A.Rx1 Rx fire, grazing 18.25 acres 18.25 acres Grassland No work -- A.Rx2 Rx fire, grazing 24.45 acres 24.45 acres Grassland Woodland No work -- P.A. 1 mowing, grazing, hand labor 16.50 acres 16.50 acres Chaparral Woodland Grassland Mowing annually; 5 ft, 10 ft total 0.22 acres P.A. 2 mowing, grazing, hand labor for 30 ft both sides of the road, 60 ft total 0.22 acres 0 acres Grassland Woodland Mowing annually; 5 ft, 10 ft total 1.82 acres P.A. 3 hand labor for 30 ft both sides of the road, 60 ft total 6.07 acres 4.25 acres Riparian (Willow) Woodland (*western leatherwood) No work -- P.A. 4 mowing, grazing, hand labor 10.89 acres 10.89 acres Grassland Woodland Foothills Fire Management The City of Palo Alto Planning Department 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 240 West Charleston Road Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-493-3468 March 2, 2009 Attention: ~nndb O.,ekiio City Manager's Office: Clare Campbell, Planning Dept., Keilly Morariu, City of Palo Alto. Re Comments on Mitigated Negative Declaration Foothills Fire Management Plan Dear' Kenneth Dueker, The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Fire Management Plan is not complete, correct, or adequate. Completeness: The plan does not recognize that Foothills and Arastradero Parks are nature preserves. If saving the parks from fire means losing large areas of the parks as nature preserves, we have spent a lot of money we don't have and damaged the nature we were trying to save. 10 That is what this plan does not recognize. For example, clearing 300 feet on each side of Trappers Trail for a mile and a half means that is not a natural area but rather one that has been managed. The area is huge and looks unnatural. We lose native plants that can't tolerate mowing or grazing. The plants that remain are different with some gone forever, some with no lower branches, some smaller than they normally would be. The habitat that remains has been changed for birds, animals, and other plants. Also mechanical equipment has brought in purple star thistle, dittrichia, and plumless thistle (Carduus acanthoides).These are invasive plants we have found in the park only near roads. Correctness: It is clear when you know the area that some of the proposals in the fire plan really won't work and should not be carried out anyway. For example, Bobcat Point is not a good place to schedule for containment clearing by grazing and browsing, The point has a very steep slope with interesting and unusual chaparral plants and some trees growing on it. We should protect those plants and avoid erosion. In the park there is no place for mechanical equipment to drive in. Goats would have to walk the trails to get in. Goats try to eat everything. here is no place nearby to get water for the goats or to park the goat herder's trailer. That area should be left alone. Adequacy: It is often not clear in all the writing about the fire reduction proposals why they are needed, What do they accomplish exactly? Evacuation routes and clearing Foothills Fire Management '11 around barbecues are understandable, but area treatment of 300-ft-wide areas is not so simple. Are we saving the park from incoming fires or saving the houses outside the park from fires starting in the park? For example, the treatment of 72.51 acres on Trappers Ridge appears to be intended to save the part of the park on the other side of the Ridge. Do we really need 600 feet of clearing to do that? Is the cost both in dollars and plant loss worth what we are saving? Also it would be helpful to know more about how the decisions about the significance of various factors were made. In other words, why are those important check marks where they are? We have five references only. They were 1-the planner, 2-the Comp Plan, 3-Title18 Zoning Ordinance, 4-The Foothills Fire Management Plan by Wildland Resource Management, and 5-Biological Impact Assessment by TRA Environmental Sciences. Most of those check marks are 1 and 4. The actual work plan appears to have come from number 4. Additional sources on the fire management need ought to be found qnd used. Ther~ ought to be more on-the-ground knowledge behind those decisions. The following are our specific comments: Many of the impacts are significant rather than no impact or mitigated impacts. I am using the letters in the Draft EIR (A-Q). A. Aesthetics (pg21): Sections a, b, and c and the Comp Plan d should be considered significant impacts. Certainly any area that has been treated in the park is no longer a natural area but rather a managed area once it has been mowed, grazed, cut, burned, and cleared. It does not look like a natural area. That is what we look for in a nature preserve. That is what has been impacted. This applies to the 330 acres in Foothills an Arastradero Parks that are proposed as fuel management areas (pg 6 of the Draft Mitigated Declaration). Also as is pointed out in the discussion, the Comp Plan has designated Arastradero and Page Mill Roads as scenic routes and Skyline is a State Scenic Highway. They also would be aesthetically hurt by being treated for 30 feet on both sides of the pavement edge because they are evacuation routes. C. Air Quality (pg24): I note in the discussion that "Prescribed fires may be executed on non-burn days as necessitated by logistic concerns". This deserves a check mark under more than no impact. D. Biological Resources (pg24): Mitigation methods should protect locally important plants in all areas, not just those covered in B10-10 for plants on Page Mill Road. For example, Bobcat Point has a number of locally special plants. Also it is a special area because it is chaparral growing at an unusually low elevation. And the chaparral contains an unusual diversity of chaparral plants. There are other areas in the Parks that have special plants. Can we consider these situations special and class them under D a? Also, ordinary plants have an importance that should be recognized. Our wildflowers and plants like yerba buena, maidenhair fern, sticky monkey, Indian warrior, madrone, manzanita, ceanothus and many others all deserve protection even though they are common enough to not be considered special. They are wonderful parts of a nature preserve and deserve protection. As do the many plants that are not very interesting but do important jobs as benign occupiers of space. These plants should also be considered special under D a. Foothills Fire Management 12 Section D e should be considered potentially significant because this fire management plan conflicts with the city council established role for Foothills Park and presumably also Arastradero as a nature preserve or natural area. E. Cultural Resources (pg 28): Under E a is the nature preserve a local cultural resource? It is certainly recognized by the City Council. And taking 330 acres for fire management is a major loss. It is a significant issue. Under E e: Is the Interpretive Center a historic resource eligible for listing somewhere? Under E f: Is the fire plan eliminating areas important in the history of the Indian era in the park? F. Geology (Pg29) Section F b is checked as potentially significant. This implies that section F c should be checked because the eroded material would probable wind up as silt somewhere. Mitigation Geology F-8 would limit grazing on the Bobcat slope. (Sticking in Geology-9 looks like a typo of stocking). Mitigation Geology-7 would limit use of heavy equipment on Trappers Trail where there are slopes over 40%. G. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Pg 32) H i might be a place to mention the locked gates on the evacuation route through the Arillaga property. They are being worked on. A better plan is needed than relying on someone having a key to open the gates when there is a fire emergency. H, Hydrogeology and Water Quality (Pg 33) H k "Result in stream bank instability?" Should be checked Potentially Significant. Removing the Shrubs along the creek side of the WildHorse Valley Road has been suggested. Doing so would definitely decrease stream bank stability as the road is close to the creek and the shrubs are supporting the creek bank. I. Land Use Planning (Pg 35) Use of land for fire management conflicts with the city land use plan that designates the area a nature preserve -I b, d. The plan also does divide existing plant communities-I a. And the fire management plan would ignore previous efforts to protect native plants and strengthen biodiversity by removing invasive plants-1 c. K. Noise (Pg 37) A potential signi'ficant temporary increase in noise from use of mechanical equipment and removal of tree branches should be considered significant. One of the things we look for in a nature preserve is freedom from that kind of noise.- Kd. L. Population and Housing (Pg38) The proper question for this category is not asked. We should determine what decrease in animal and plant population would result from fire treatment activities. People are concerned and should be concerned about the effect of their activities on the environment. Treatment will damage the nature preserves. Treatment in areas in Foothills Park where invasive plants have been removed will damage native plants that Foothills Fire Management 13 have been encouraged. Treatment tends to bring in new seeds and encourage growth from invasive plants like yellow and purple starthistle, Italian thistle, and even Dittrichia graveolens. M. Public Services (Pg 39) M d The two parks would suffer severe adverse physical impacts to their the nature preserve function because of the mowing, grazing, mechanical clearing, cutting of trees and such in 330 acres of Foothills and Arastradero Parks. N. Recreation (Pg 39) N a The project would cause SUbstantial physical deterioration of the two parks. We would have not a natural area in 330 acres of the parks but rather a managed area of less interest. Note that the discussion of this section says that enhancing fire safety in the parks would not generate new users. O. Transportation and Traffic (Pg 40) Q a The plan does add new trips to the parks in order to carry out the additional mowing, grading, cutting and mechanical control of the fire load in various areas. Q d The plan will increase traffic hazards by adding new traffic to old narrow roads, 0 e Inadequate emergency access will continue to exist to Los Trancos Road until a better evacuation method than a person or person with keys to unlock the gates to the Arilliga property is agreed upon. The iron Chambers fence is also an emergency access problem. P. Utilities and Service Systems(pg 42) P c Additional drainage control will be necessary in areas where plants are removed that acted to limit erosion. P d The plan addresses fire fuel management needs but does not address water supply needs for fire fighting. This is a significant isssue. Q. Mandatory Findings of Significance (Pg 43) Q a The project does have the potential to threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community and to reduce the number or range of an endangered plant or animal community. Dirca (Ieatherwood) has already been impacted by trail clearing. It is a CNPS rare or endangered species found in Foothills Park. Q b This project when aI/ its aspects are considered will have a cumulative effect. There also have been past projects that involved clearing such as Trappers Trail which add to the park's problems. Q c The loss of trees and other plants in the interest of fire prevention may affect people by adding to global warming issues. The loss of habitat for plants and animals means a less rich environment for people as well. Conclusions: 1. The problem with this proposal is that it does not respect the purpose of Foothills Park and also Arastradero. The plaque dated June 18, 1965 from the city council on the top of Vista Hill says 'It is our purpose in establishing this park to conserve the natural features and scenic values within its boundaries; to protect and maintain the ecology of the area; to provide for the use and enjoyment of the resources found here, consistent with their preservation; to emphasize beauty, simplicity and serenity and to provide opportunities for the interpretation of natural history and our local heritage." This means protect what you have rather than manipulate it into something unnatural. .We should not make the park the default fire mitigation area for the surrounding Foothills Fire Management 14 houses. We should not artificially change the natural habitat where animals and other plants are growing. We should not try to force something to grow in an area that it is not suited for. The proposed plan presents the idea that the mowing, burning, grazing, cutting tree limbs and such is going to ecologically improve the park if done carefully. It should also point out that those same processes can destroy good plants as well. We have purple star thistle in Foothills Park along Trappers Trail and Pony Track Roads, near the end of Wildhorse Road, and in the burn area at the end of that road. It is obvious that it was brought into the park by vehicles. In the same way, we have found Dittrichia graveolens in the Interpretive Center parking area, along a section of Trappers Trail, and in the burn area at the end of Wild horse Road. Mowing and goats kill good plants as well as bad ones. Ceanothus and Bush Poppy don't recover wl1en they are cut down, for example. In the past the CCC crews removed some Dirca and a lot of currants forever in their efforts to clear trails. Also we have learned that removing one kind of invasive plant can lead to erosion or to the establishment of another invasive in the place that was cleared. We were told on February 24, 2009 at the Park and Recreation meeting that the state has just passed a law requiring that all evacuation routes be cleared 30 feet from the pavement edge. We know that Page Mill, Arastradero, Los Trancos, Skyline, and the road in Foothills Park are considered evacuation routes to get fire fighters in to areas where they are needed and to get people out. Are all roads between 280 and Skyline considered evacuation routes? How is this decision made? A logical fire mitigation plan would involve conforming to this law once we know more precisely what it requires, continuing to clear around important buildings like the Interpretive Center, Entry Hut, and Maintenance Shops, and Arastradero's structures and taking precautions near barbecues and other places where fire is allowed in the park. Beyond that, don't clear unless the purpose and need for that additional clearing is defined and supervised by a fire mitigation expert. Leave Bobcat Point alone. Reevaluate the need for Trappers Trail Clearing. Property owners should maintain their own property areas. The day may come where we won't have barbecues in the park and when building houses in the wildlands is not allowed at all. Jean Olmsted 240 West Charleston, Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-493-3468 jwo@svpal.org Acterra Foothill Fire Management Plan Update - Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration Comments Authored by Shani Kleinhaus, Ecological Consultant, Acterra Volunteer, Claire Elliott, Acting Director, Acterra Stewardship, and William Mutch, Chief Steward, Arastradero Preserve March 11, 2009 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION Foothill Park may be designated a Public Park, but its spirit and purpose are NOT of an urban park “whose character is essentially urban” as stated in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, but as stated in Palo Alto City’s Comprehensive Plan Policy L-1, Goal N-1its purpose is that of an “Open Space System that Protects and Conserves Palo Alto’s Natural Resources and Natural Setting”, with a focus on recreation and education in nature. Palo Alto Policy N-1 states that public open spaces areas should be managed to meet habitat protection goals, public safety concerns, and low impact recreation needs. Program N-3 elaborates that ecological values must be protected to realize the full benefits of open space. Any plan that has the potential to affect ecosystems and biodiversity in natural open space must be scrutinized in this spirit, especially in Pearson-Arastradero, where the proposed Fire Management Plan Update would directly impact one THIRD of the preserve area. In our opinion, a fire management / fuel reduction plan in natural open space should be a subset of a comprehensive conservation plan, and not the driving force that must be mitigated against. Palo Alto is currently preparing a conservation plan for the baylands. We think that the Palo Alto Foothill Open Space merits the same protection as the baylands, and recommend that the fire management plan be put on hold until a comprehensive multidisciplinary Open Space/Conservation Management Plan is prepared. 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Identification of potential treatment areas (page 7): The proposed Plan prioritizes access and aims to provide safe evacuation. While this is indeed the ultimate priority along evacuation routes, a better management options along internal park habitat and recreation trails should be a part of a larger conservation plan that may include fuel reduction as a subset of its goals, and may use less intensive treatments. 9-1 Hand Labor: The Mitigated Negative Declaration states that hand labor is slow and expensive, but moving slowly can be an asset in habitat restoration and conservation. Hand labor allows us to proceed slowly giving us a chance to stop if we are causing damage. Rather than finding we have taken the life of wildlife, especially a rare species (badger, for instance), we can proceed slowly and carefully, giving ourselves time to find such things along the way. 9-2 Mechanical Treatments. Discing: We agree with the Mitigated Negative Declaration that discing as a treatment method has several disadvantages, including creating “an excellent establishment for weedy species, which may be serious fire hazards” also “Surface erosion can be significant in areas prone to this process.” However, it appears to still be listed as a proposed treatment, and a mitigation measure related to discing (BIO-6) is in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. We do not see proposed disced areas in Figures 6 and 7, Proposed Treatment Areas. We recommend that the documents explicitly prohibit discing. 9-6 Herbicide Application: Describes hand and road-side application from a vehicle. We are glad that you are not considering aerial application. However, BIO-19, Hazards10 included mitigation for potential aerial application, we think aerial application should be prohibited. DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS A. AESTHETICS This plan has potential significant impacts on aesthetics and natural visual resources. Some of these impacts are not addressed by the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A.a. Substantially degrade the existing visual characters or quality of the site and its surroundings In both Foothill Park and Pearson-Arastradero preserve, the experience of a visitor combines wide scenic views with the aesthetic value and enjoyment of walking through natural low branches and hanging tree canopies, and observing small plants and animals along the trails (indeed, some of the restoration and education effort at Pearson-Arastradero focus on small scale natural value). Mowing and/or removing lower tree branches along nature trails (MeadowLark, Acorn, Juan Batista de Anza, Bowl Loop) can substantially and negatively affect these resources. Clearing vegetation from 72 acres along Trappers Fire Road in Foothill Park would also have a substantial visual impact that is not consistent with the parks natural atmosphere. We believe either an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared due to the significance of the aesthetic impact, or mitigation measures for these impacts should be developed and implemented. D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES D.a, b, c) The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies “Potentially Significant” impacts to biological resources “Unless Mitigation Incorporated”. This should already raise a red flag when the area in question is valued primarily for its biological resources, and includes a nature preserve. TRA Environmental Sciences prepared an Environmental Impact Assessment that lists 19 biological mitigation measures. In essence, these measures point to the difficulty of maintaining a healthy ecosystem while implementing large scale vegetation removal by mechanical methods, prescribed burning, grazing or field crews. The TRA assessment points out that some of the methods (grazing, burning, and mowing) have been shown, in some ecosystems, to enhance habitat value and diversity. The Environmental Impact Assessment suggests that the proposed update to the plan may in fact ameliorate conditions for native vegetation as it replaces some fuel removal practices (grading, discing) with other practices (prescribed burns, grazing). This is based on the assumption that prescribed burns and/or grazing is an appropriate alternative to low intensity fires that may have occurred in this area in the past, and that these applications can help native plant species compete against non- native grasses. While evidence exists to support this general assumption, application area, intensity, schedule and frequency are of paramount importance and vary among habitats and ecosystems, and since the primary goal is that of removing fuel, not that of conservation, their effectiveness in restoring or even maintaining habitat is questionable. We recommend the city prepare a comprehensive, multidisciplinary ecological conservation plan that incorporates fuel reduction for fire management rather than mitigates threats to the biological environment. D.e)“Conflict with any applicable Conservation Plan, Natural Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan.” There is no conflict only because there is no plan. There needs to be a comprehensive, multidisciplinary conservation plan for the foothills. SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES BIO-9 includes a modification to the Fire Management Plan Best Practice that requires that a grazing plan to incorporate protection of drainage and wetlands from the impact of grazing animals. We would add protection of hillside habitats, taking into consideration aspect and slope, to the proposed grazing plan, as well as consideration of grazing timing, intensity and duration. BIO-19, Hazards10 States “limit areal applications of herbicides to greater than 100 feet from water resources.” We would absolutely prohibit areal applications of herbicides over foothill park and the Pearson-Arastradero preserve. Geology-1 requires a study that identifies all potential erosive soils and the development of an erosion control plan. We recommend this study should include the mapping and inventory of native plants on serpentine soils that harbor rare species or have the potential to be restored to native vegetation. BIO-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, BIO-5, BIO-6, BIO-7 require biological surveys prior to implementation of various treatments at various locations. BIO-9 requires mapping, BIO-9, Geology-8, and Geology-9 require the preparation of grazing plans, Geology-10 requires the development of a prescribed burn erosion control plan, and Geology-1 requires a study that identifies all potential erosive soils and the development of an erosion control plan. These mitigations are more like meta-mitigations, they all call for additional information that would be necessary to mitigate the impacts of the plan. We recommend the City develop maps of sensitive habitats and species that would create the basis for an open space/conservation management plan. These measures should focus our attention on the need for a multidisciplinary approach that would consider all the challenges and opportunities involved in human management of natural landscapes. These challenges and opportunities include enhancement to natural assets and biodiversity, recreation, erosion control, slope stabilization, and downstream effects of upland activities, fire management and more. I. LAND USE PLANNING b,c,f) We think that the fire plan conflicts with the management of Palo Alto’s natural areas and may adversely impact nature conservation and enhancement as well as recreation and nature education. Palo Alto should take a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to the management of its open space. Contemporary conservation biology focuses on habitat conservation and enhancement as well as minimization of fragmentation. A sound conservation plan would protect not only special status species, but also habitat that would support biodiverse ecological communities. In concert with fuel reduction programs, it would remove accumulated matter in some areas, yet maintain some brush piles and dead trees for habitat conservation and enhancement. The focus of the plan would be multi-dimensional, with a larger scope that fire management. City of Palo Alto Planning Department Attention: Kelly Morariu 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Fire-breaks Dear Mr. Morariu Arastradero Road Homeowners 6 Arastradero Rd PortolaValleY,CA,94028 Received MAR 092.009 Department of PI.anning & Community EnV1ronment We are property owners adjacent to the Arastradero Preserve along a common boundary designated as AC-7 and AC-9 in the Foothills Fire Protection Plan. Over the past years, the common boundary between our residences and the Arastradero Preserve has been marked by a disked fire break provided by the City of Palo Alto within the City's property. The Foothills Fire Protection Plan, now in the public comment period, proposes to replace the disked firebreak with mowing. We wish to go on record as opposing such a change and respectfully submit the following factual basis for our opposition. 1. The disked firebreak in the reaches designated AC-7 and AC-9 is now well established easily renewed annually and shows no prevalence of weed growth. In particular, the growth of fire-prone Coyote Bush is inhibited by the disking. The firebreak area is stable and does not produce excessive runoff. With the success of each disking that carries over to the next year, there is no need for more than one disking per year. In other words, an effective fire prevention technique is in place. 2. We do not want to risk a loss, such as the Arastradero preserve fire in 1985, where personal property loss occurred for those unfortunate residents on the Los Altos border of the preserve. There was no disked firebreak at the time; and Palo Alto should not wish to expose itself to such liability, either. 3. A retreat to mowing, now that disking has been established, may not produce the nil consequences of a Negative Declaration. As stated in the Report (p.16-Neg.Dec) disking is considered to be a proven and effective firebreak. Mowing, by comparison, may harbor low smoldering fire sources from mower sparks, lightning or man's activity that can be brought to full flame by freshened wind. Mowing may well have to be repeated since no growth constraint is involved. In fact on our neighboring properties, mowing as much as three times a year is sometimes necessary. Clearly, a second mowing cycle when required will entail costs that, in total, exceed that of annual disking. Our appeal in favor of disking is specific in intent and location so that the success of past years in avoiding a fire threat can be perpetuated. Any other outcome can not meet the prescribed conditions of a Negative Declaration. We respectfully request that Disking be designated as the preferred means of maintaining the existing firebreak adjacent to our properties on the AC-7 and AC-9 reaches of the City's Hillside Fire Protection Plan. Signed Petitioners: i}~~ I!!a /rO#f/rlf/t. 13if.SS )? o,g/.::.-~r A-1. b~/S~~\')L 0.· ~I(V\I\.~IR.... ,l.L~~ ~~~ /)am.U~ /ld-f-on ~;;;:7r.·iGker /~a//VE /3/1: V'3"QhI\;e 5~ ~+~ 1 CEQA Comments Received via City Website and E-mail (in chronological order) Foothills Fire Management Plan - Public Comment Period 2/10/09 thru 3/11/09 03/08/2009 13:38:42 - Receipt No. 62CF563B07859208DEpOrP2E1F9D Thank you for submitting a comment for the Foothills Fire Management Plan - Public Comment Period 2/10/09 thru 3/11/09. This is a copy for your records. Comment Name Peter Neal Email to: pneal1@mindspring.com Organization Address 3880 El Centro City, State, Zip Palo Alto, CA 94306 Primary Phone 650-494-6808 Additional Information One of the stated goals of the fire plan and mitigation plan is to =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=9Cenhance_?= natural resource ecosystem =?utf-8?Q?health.=E2=80=9D_?= Instead, in an attempt to fire-proof the foothills, it appears that many of the proposed procedures have the potential to seriously harm the ecosystem health. Turning natural wildland into managed acreage is not an enhancement. It is altering nature. For example, how can clearing 72 acres of Trappers Ridge Trail masquerade as helping the ecosystem? Or how about brushing 30 feet on each side of Page Mill Road? Aside from the aesthetic issues and potential for soil erosion, these kinds of actions will most likely result in the loss of locally important native plants and wildlife habitat. Managing more than 300 acres in Foothills and Arastradero is too much. I also feel that many of check mark ratings in the impact analysis are subjective and arbitrary. For example, I strongly disagree that the proposed plan will 2 have no impact on the visual character of the area. I certainly do not want to see a huge barren firebreak when I am on Trappers Ridge. I support fire prevention-- monitoring picnic fires and observing red flag days--and clearing around important structures (but bathrooms?) and maintaining evacuation routes. But we need to keep some perspective about altering our precious wildlands and acknowledge the value of those dwindling natural areas. Receipt Number 62CF563B07859208DEpOrP2E1F9D Foothills Fire Management Plan - Public Comment Period 2/10/09 thru 3/11/09 03/10/2009 12:14:01 - Receipt No. 45E4C08E079211C2E2RtHmk24421 Thank you for submitting a comment for the Foothills Fire Management Plan - Public Comment Period 2/10/09 thru 3/11/09. This is a copy for your records. Comment Name Ann Teegardin Email to: citizenann@sbcglobal.net Organization 3 Address City, State, Zip , CA Primary Phone Additional Information I regularly enjoy the areas under consideration here and want them to remain as natural as possible. Methods of fire management that include disking, grazing or mowing all alter the natural state drastically and cause great harm to natural, native, plants. The resultant weedy plants are increased fodder for fires. Please investigate ways of encouraging native plants that naturally do not burn readily and do not result in quantities of flammable debris. These areas are a treasure to be preserved in the most ecologically sound way possible. Please do look into this further and find alternative methods. Thank you. Receipt Number 45E4C08E079211C2E2RtHmk24421 Foothills Fire Management Plan - Public Comment Period 2/10/09 thru 3/11/09 03/10/2009 15:27:50 - Receipt No. 4CCB7E610792124FE8OXPLID4F48 Thank you for submitting a comment for the Foothills Fire Management Plan - Public Comment Period 2/10/09 thru 3/11/09. This is a copy for your records. Comment Name Thomas Harder Email to: tcharder@juno.com Organization Address 1028 Loma Verde Avenue City, State, Zip Palo Alto, CA 94303-4031 Primary Phone 650-494-7598 Additional Information Public Safety/ Fire Management should support the Nature Preserve of Foothills Park, not ruin it. I question the 4 compromises made by increased mowing for islands for PAFD, the grazing of goats, the use of herbicides and other such activities cited as needed for support of fire management. Please preserve the nature preserve in Foothills Park. Receipt Number 4CCB7E610792124FE8OXPLID4F48 -----Original Message----- From: jwo@svpal.org [mailto:jwo@svpal.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 3:04 PM To: Council, City Subject: Foothills Fire Management Plan March 10, 2009 Dear Council Members: When the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Foothills Fire Management Plan reaches you, we hope the plan does not make its way through the process without any realization that the fire management plan could do more damage to our nature preserves, Foothills and Arastradero Parks, that the fires the plan attempts to mitigate. Mowing, disking, grazing by goats, cutting chaparral, removing 8 feet of lower tree branches, and such would leave us at best with unnatural gardened areas and at worst with weed patches, eroded areas, or dump areas. The treated area would cover 330 acres in the two parks and there would be clearing 30 feet from the pavement edges along evacuation routes like Page Mill, Arastradero, Los Trancos, Sklyline,and the main road in Foothills park. Clearing would cost $700,000 for 5 years according to the plan estimate, probably more in reality. And the money would have to come from grants since there is no room for the project in the regular city budget. We need a practical plan that clears around our buildings and limits treatment areas. The parks should not be made the default mitigation area for the houses outside the park as appears to be proposed. Thank you. 5 Jean Olmsted 240 West Charleston Road Palo Alto, CA 94306 jwo@svpal.org Foothills Fire Management Plan - Public Comment Period 2/10/09 thru 3/11/09 03/11/2009 11:15:35 - Receipt No. 43BC54DF079851AFB1Jjnk17315D Thank you for submitting a comment for the Foothills Fire Management Plan - Public Comment Period 2/10/09 thru 3/11/09. This is a copy for your records. Comment Name Connie Bowencamp Email to: ruth3539@comcast.net Organization Address 201 Ada Avenue #18 City, State, Zip Mountain View, CA 94043 Primary Phone 650-814-9212 Additional Information I am not a resident of Palo Alto but I do enjoy the Arastradero open area and have been a guest at Foothills Park. The proposed Foothill Fire Management Plan calls for 300 feet of cleared space along several trails by disking, removing chapparel, grazing by goats, and removing trees as I understand it. It would appear to me that these methods will make this a treated area rather than a natural area which is used by many birds and animals. I would be sorry to see this happen in a City that has a goal to maintain a healthy environment. 6 Receipt Number 43BC54DF079851AFB1Jjnk17315D Thank you for submitting a comment for the Foothills Fire Management Plan - Public Comment Period 2/10/09 thru 3/11/09. This is a copy for your records. Comment Name Claire Elliott Email to: clairee@acterra.org Organization Acterra Address 3921 East Bayshore Rd. City, State, Zip Palo Alto, CA 94306 Primary Phone 650-962-9876 ext. 311 Additional Information Acterra Foothill Fire Management Plan Update - Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration Comments Authored by Shani Kleinhaus, Ecological Consultant, Acterra Volunteer, Claire Elliott, Acting Director, Acterra Stewardship, and William Mutch, Chief Steward, Arastradero Preserve March 11, 2009 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION Foothill Park may be designated a Public Park, but its spirit and purpose are NOT of an urban park =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=9Cwhose_?= character is essentially =?utf-8?Q?urban=E2=80=9D_?= as stated in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, but as stated in Palo Alto =?utf-8?Q?City=E2=80=99s_?= Comprehensive Plan Policy L-1, Goal N-1its purpose is that of an =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=9COpen_?= Space System that Protects and Conserves Palo =?utf- 8?Q?Alto=E2=80=99s_?= Natural Resources and Natural =?utf-8?Q?Setting=E2=80=9D,_?= with a focus on recreation and education in nature. Palo Alto Policy N-1 states that public open spaces areas should be managed to Foothills Fire Management Plan - Public Comment Period 2/10/09 thru 3/11/09 03/11/2009 17:09:19 - Receipt No. 9D16FC4A0798529AF2yHOX2B19DA 7 meet habitat protection goals, public safety concerns, and low impact recreation needs. Program N-3 elaborates that ecological values must be protected to realize the full benefits of open space. Any plan that has the potential to affect ecosystems and biodiversity in natural open space must be scrutinized in this spirit, especially in Pearson- Arastradero, where the proposed Fire Management Plan Update would directly impact one THIRD of the preserve area. In our opinion, a fire management / fuel reduction plan in natural open space should be a subset of a comprehensive conservation plan, and not the driving force that must be mitigated against. Palo Alto is currently preparing a conservation plan for the baylands. We think that the Palo Alto Foothill Open Space merits the same protection as the baylands, and recommend that the fire management plan be put on hold until a comprehensive multidisciplinary Open Space/Conservation Management Plan is prepared. 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Identification of potential treatment areas (page 7): The proposed Plan prioritizes access and aims to provide safe evacuation. While this is indeed the ultimate priority along evacuation routes, a better management options along internal park habitat and recreation trails should be a part of a larger conservation plan that may include fuel reduction as a subset of its goals, and may use less intensive treatments. 9-1 Hand Labor: The Mitigated Negative Declaration states that hand labor is slow and expensive, but moving slowly can be an asset in habitat restoration and conservation. Hand labor allows us to proceed slowly giving us a chance to stop if we are causing damage. Rather than finding we have taken the life of wildlife, especially a rare species (badger, for instance), we can proceed slowly and carefully, giving ourselves time to find such things along the way. 9-2 Mechanical Treatments. Discing: We agree with the Mitigated Negative Declaration that discing as a treatment method has several disadvantages, including creating =?utf- 8?Q?=E2=80=9Can_?= excellent establishment for weedy species, which may be serious fire =?utf- 8?Q?hazards=E2=80=9D_?= also =?utf- 8?Q?=E2=80=9CSurface_?= erosion can be significant in areas prone to this =?utf-8?Q?process.=E2=80=9D_?= However, it appears to still be listed as a proposed treatment, and a mitigation measure related to discing (BIO- 6) is in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. We do not see proposed disced areas in Figures 6 and 7, Proposed 8 Treatment Areas. We recommend that the documents explicitly prohibit discing. 9-6 Herbicide Application: Describes hand and road-side application from a vehicle. We are glad that you are not considering aerial application. However, BIO-19, Hazards10 included mitigation for potential aerial application, we think aerial application should be prohibited. DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS A. AESTHETICS This plan has potential significant impacts on aesthetics and natural visual resources. Some of these impacts are not addressed by the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A.a. Substantially degrade the existing visual characters or quality of the site and its surroundings In both Foothill Park and Pearson-Arastradero preserve, the experience of a visitor combines wide scenic views with the aesthetic value and enjoyment of walking through natural low branches and hanging tree canopies, and observing small plants and animals along the trails (indeed, some of the restoration and education effort at Pearson-Arastradero focus on small scale natural value). Mowing and/or removing lower tree branches along nature trails (MeadowLark, Acorn, Juan Batista de Anza, Bowl Loop) can substantially and negatively affect these resources. Clearing vegetation from 72 acres along Trappers Fire Road in Foothill Park would also have a substantial visual impact that is not consistent with the parks natural atmosphere. We believe either an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared due to the significance of the aesthetic impact, or mitigation measures for these impacts should be developed and implemented. D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES D.a, b, c) The Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=9CPotentially_?= =?utf- 8?Q?Significant=E2=80=9D_?= impacts to biological resources =?utf-8?Q?=E2=80=9CUnless_?= Mitigation =?utf-8?Q?Incorporated=E2=80=9D._?= This should already raise a red flag when the area in question is valued primarily for its biological resources, and includes a nature preserve. TRA Environmental Sciences prepared an Environmental Impact Assessment that lists 19 biological mitigation measures. In essence, these measures point to the difficulty of maintaining a healthy ecosystem while implementing large scale vegetation removal by mechanical methods, prescribed burning, grazing or field crews. The TRA assessment points out that some of the methods (grazing, burning, and mowing) have been shown, in some ecosystems, to enhance habitat value and diversity. The 9 Environmental Impact Assessment suggests that the proposed update to the plan may in fact ameliorate conditions for native vegetation as it replaces some fuel removal practices (grading, discing) with other practices (prescribed burns, grazing). This is based on the assumption that prescribed burns and/or grazing is an appropriate alternative to low intensity fires that may have occurred in this area in the past, and that these applications can help native plant species compete against non-native grasses. While evidence exists to support this general assumption, application area, intensity, schedule and frequency are of paramount importance and vary among habitats and ecosystems, and since the primary goal is that of removing fuel, not that of conservation, their effectiveness in restoring or even maintaining habitat is questionable. We recommend the city prepare a comprehensive, multidisciplinary ecological conservation plan that incorporates fuel reduction for fire management rather than mitigates threats to the biological environment. =?utf- 8?Q?D.e)=E2=80=9CConflict_?= with any applicable Conservation Plan, Natural Community Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation =?utf- 8?Q?plan.=E2=80=9D_?= There is no conflict only because there is no plan. There needs to be a comprehensive, multidisciplinary conservation plan for the foothills. SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES BIO-9 includes a modification to the Fire Management Plan Best Practice that requires that a grazing plan to incorporate protection of drainage and wetlands from the impact of grazing animals. We would add protection of hillside habitats, taking into consideration aspect and slope, to the proposed grazing plan, as well as consideration of grazing timing, intensity and duration. BIO-19, Hazards10 States =?utf- 8?Q?=E2=80=9Climit_?= areal applications of herbicides to greater than 100 feet from water =?utf- 8?Q?resources.=E2=80=9D_?= We would absolutely prohibit areal applications of herbicides over foothill park and the Pearson-Arastradero preserve. Geology-1 requires a study that identifies all potential erosive soils and the development of an erosion control plan. We recommend this study should include the mapping and inventory of native plants on serpentine soils that harbor rare species or have the potential to be restored to native vegetation. BIO-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, BIO-5, BIO-6, BIO-7 require biological surveys prior to implementation of various treatments at 10 various locations. BIO-9 requires mapping, BIO-9, Geology-8, and Geology-9 require the preparation of grazing plans, Geology-10 requires the development of a prescribed burn erosion control plan, and Geology-1 requires a study that identifies all potential erosive soils and the development of an erosion control plan. These mitigations are more like meta-mitigations, they all call for additional information that would be necessary to mitigate the impacts of the plan. We recommend the City develop maps of sensitive habitats and species that would create the basis for an open space/conservation management plan. These measures should focus our attention on the need for a multidisciplinary approach that would consider all the challenges and opportunities involved in human management of natural landscapes. These challenges and opportunities include enhancement to natural assets and biodiversity, recreation, erosion control, slope stabilization, and downstream effects of upland activities, fire management and more. I. LAND USE PLANNING b,c,f) We think that the fire plan conflicts with the management of Palo =?utf-8?Q?Alto=E2=80=99s_?= natural areas and may adversely impact nature conservation and enhancement as well as recreation and nature education. Palo Alto should take a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to the management of its open space. Contemporary conservation biology focuses on habitat conservation and enhancement as well as minimization of fragmentation. A sound conservation plan would protect not only special status species, but also habitat that would support biodiverse ecological communities. In concert with fuel reduction programs, it would remove accumulated matter in some areas, yet maintain some brush piles and dead trees for habitat conservation and enhancement. The focus of the plan would be multi-dimensional, with a larger scope that fire management. Receipt Number 9D16FC4A0798529AF2yHOX2B19DA NOTE: THE ABOVE COMMENT IS A DUPLICATE OF A LETTER SUBMITTED MARCH 11 11 END “Comments from Stu Farwell” (Los Altos Hills Co. Fire Dist.): RECEIVED VIA CAROL RICE / FEB. 23, 2009 The apparatus that responds from this station is a Type III Engine Company. This is an apparatus that is primarily designed to respond to wildland fires instead of structure fires. This is similar to the types of companies used by major wildland agencies. The station provides an initial attack capability to an area that involves about 25 square miles of urban-wildland interface area. There are approximately 150 dwellings in the area, but that is not the primary risk. The fire history of this specific area is relatively free of major events in the past decades. The last reported major fire in the vicinity of the upper foothills was in 1912. Significant fires in the lower foothills (primarily light fuels) occurred in 1985, 1992, 2000 and 2007. However, that one factor creates an impact upon existing fuel loads. The lack of major fires in the past has resulted in fuel densities that may be ready to support a wide area fire. It has been estimated that the medium and high density fuels are about three times their normal density. The secondary response units into this area are deployed from the “El Monte” fire station of Los Altos Hills County Fire District (LAHCFD)Santa Clara County Fire located to the north and the Palo Alto Stations #2 and #5. The County (LAHCFD) Fire Station is equipped with Type I and Type IIIV engines. Currently there is no direct link to this station in the dispatching of equipment. Depending upon who reports an emergency in the area the call could go directly to the City of Palo Alto or it could be routed through the Santa Clara County Communication Center and Palo Alto would then be notified. The standard response into this area varies upon the level of dispatch. On medium or high dispatch days the Palo Alto Fire Department responds Engine 8 to reports of wildland fires and supports it with another Type III (3 personnel) that is cross staffed by the truck company from Station #6 on the Stanford Campus, one Type I from Station #2 (3 personnel), 2 Type IV cross-staffed patrol units from Stations #2 and #6 (6 personnel), one Paramedic ambulance from Station #2 (2 personnel) and one Battalion Chief from Station #6. Furthermore, the dispatch system provides a brush unit from the (LAHCFD)Santa Clara County El Monte Fire Station in Los Altos Hills at Foothill Community College (4 personnel from 1000-1900 hours) and can respond an additional 4 Type I’s (12 personnel) and 3 Type IIIV Brush units (9 personnel). Lastly, the system has the depth to provide additional resources from other mutual aid entities in the same area (e.g. Cal Fire Ranger Unit resources located in Cupertino and San Martin). These include additional Type III units (3 or more), air assets, hand crew resources, bulldozers and command staff to complete an overhead requirement in the event of a major fire. Other Type 1, Type III and Type IV resources may be made available through the Santa Clara County Mutual Aid System. The City of Palo Alto does currently not have an adopted Standards of Cover document, but operates with an informal response goal of 5 to 6 minutes for attendance of at least 90% of its calls for service. The department also provides paramedic (advanced life support – ALS) response to the basic built out portion of the city within 8 minutes for at least 90% of those types of calls (these response goal benchmarks are exclusive of the foothills area). Station 8 has not normally been considered an ALS resource. In the past 2 years a priority has been established to staff Engine 8 with an ALS resource whenever possible. The staffing for the station is provided in the overtime budget. Last year the amount set aside to provide coverage was $200,000. The City of Palo Alto Planning Department 250 Hamilton Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attention: Kenneth Dueker, City Manager's Office i!l,LJO, C~\ or-FleE 240 W. Charleston Rd. Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-493-3468 March 9, 2009 Re: Comments on Mitigated Negative Declaration, Foothills Fire Management Plan Dear Kenneth Dueker: The following comments are intended to supplement those submitted by my wife, Jean 0 Imsted, in a separate letter. My comments are confined to proposed fire-management treatments along evacuation routes and containment areas in the Fire Management Plan for Foothills Park. These places are where the proposed treatments most significantly affect the ecology of the Park. Evacuation routes. F.EI Page Mill Road. Only part of this route adjoins Foothills Park. Does the 9.54 acres indicated for this area include only",Foothills Park land, or does it include both sides of the road along the entire length indicated on Figure 6 of the Fire Management Plan Update? In any case, the negative impacts of the treatment on the aesthetic and ecological values along this corridor are substantial. One of the few positive results would be the removal of French, Scotch, and Spanish brooms. Treatment would likely be costly and difficult. F.E2 Park Road. Treatment of the 5.96 acres along this major road in the Park would seriously impact aesthetic and ecological values within the Park and would likely compromise some ofthe invasive- plant work done by Park volunteers along parts of this corridor. Optimal treatments for fire safety often conflict with rather than supplement or augment the treatments for restoration of native plants. F .E3 Park Northwest. Problems related to treatment of this 0.57-acre area are similar to those along other roads in the Park .. F .E4 Park Northeast. Potential conflicts of values along this 1.2I-acre route are significant, owing to the presence of some native forbs, notably including the rare dwarf owl's clover, Tryphysaria pusilla, near the Panorama Trail crossing. F.E5 Towle Campground. In the past, work along this route through Wildhorse Valley, including the sediment-catchment basin near Towle Camp, Chiefly by Park and Utilities staff, has resulted in the introduction of undesirable exotic invasive plants, notably stinkwort (Dittrichia graveolens), milk thistle (Silybum marianum), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis), purple starthistle (Centaurea calcitrapa), and poison hemlock (Conium maculatum). Seeds probably were introduced on the wheels and undercarriage of vehicles and other equipment. The problem was further exacerbated by untimely mowing that resulted in the growth of very short yellow starthistle plants having an unusual abundance of seed-producing flower heads. F.E6 Southwest comer of. On figure 6 ofthe Fire Management Plan Update, none of this route is adjacent to Foothills Park. Why is the 6.07-acre area included in mitigation area charged to Foothills Park? Containment areas. F.CI Trappers Trail. This 72.51-acre area along the crest of Trappers Ridge constitutes the most serious impact on the native vegetation of the Park of all the treatment areas. It is also an area cleared many times in the past, presumably to contain wildfires in the park to one side of the ridge. Although the proposed width of the cleared zone is 600 feet (300 feet on each side of the road), it is actually variable, depending on the local topography and is less than 100 feet wide above the junction with the Madrone fire trail (see figure 6) Incidentally, why is the Madrone fire trail not included as a containment area? Maintenance of the Trappers Ridge fuel break in recent years has involved considerable widening but also abandonment of earlier cleared areas some distance from the ridge top. Not all plants other than forbs and grasses were cleared. Scrub oaks, coast live oaks, and madrones, were spared, although the lower branches of these trees were removed. The result of all this clearing has been the permanent(?) removal of some chaparral taxa, notably bush poppy (Dendromecon rigida) and Ceanothus (both C. cuneatus var. cuneatus and C. oliganthus var. sorediatus) and the proliferation of yellow and purple starthistles as well as the introduction of stinkwort (Dittrichia graveolens) and plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides). On a more positive note, the rare and interesting forb, divaricate Phacelia (P. divaricata), manages somehow to survive all the clearing and may be found blooming at all times of the year. Is all this costly treatment really necessary? The visual and ecological impacts are an overwhelming alteration of what is supposed to be a nature preserve. F.C2 South of Pony Tracks Road and F.C3 North of Pony Tracks Road. Many of the comments above for Trappers Trail apply also to these much smaller areas. F.C4 Bobcat Point. I could say, this one really got my goat. The use of goats to maintain a drastically altered and ecologically inappropriate plant community is really too much. The map (figure 6) is erroneous in this area, and the proposed treated area, if it includes a 300-foot-wide zone along the Park boundary, is at least double the 5.28-acre area indicated. Apparently this is an attempt to protect residences just outside the Park boundary. This would be accomplished by changing an unusual and interesting mixed chaparral and woodland plant community to a grassland containing islands of trees and shrubs. The remaining plants might not include rare and interesting plants now present, such as chaparral currant (Ribes malvaceum), previously nearly extirpated by over-zealous and under-supervised trail maintenance, oso berry (Oemlaria cerasijormis), and red-flowering currant (Ribes sanguineum, very unusual in such an environment). Although there is much chaparral elsewhere in the Park, the plant assemblage here is almost unique in that it represents this type of vegetation on a north-facing slope at a relatively low altitude for chaparral in the region. On another note, the treatment proposed here would involve the logistically difficult and costly use of goats in an area where denudation by the goats would result in accelerated erosion on slopes that locally exceed 50 percent. In short, don't do it! F.C5 North of entry gate. The situation here both differs from and resembles that at Bobcat Point. This 3.47-acre area constitutes a real woodland (no chaparral,justtrees and some shrubs as understory) but, like Bobcat Point, it is on a north-facing slope adjacent to residences just outside the Park boundary. Elsewhere in the Fire Management Plan Update, the type of vegetation here is assigned a fairly low burning potential. In this situation, however, where there are houses nearby, it is deemed necessary to eliminate understory shrubs more than 18 inches tall. and to eliminate the lower branches of the trees. Again, the Park apparently is the default mitigation area for places outside the park. F.C6 VaUey View Fire Trail. I understand that the top ofthis ridge is to be maintained as a fire road rather than as a minor fuel break. Even as a fire road, care should be taken to prevent introduction of yellow starthistle seeds by vehicles. Oaks along the edge of the fire road should be protected; two of these oaks are unusual hybrids of scrub and valley oaks and should not be removed or damaged by any maintenance operations. ~¥~ Franklin H. Olmsted Foothills Fire Management 14 February 24, 2009 Draft Notes for Park and Recreation Commission Meeting Jean Olmsted: I and my husband and a lot of other volunteers spend a lot of time in Foothills Park removing invasive plants. We know less about Arastradero. This fire plan scares me. We need your help. Why? Because the things you do to prevent fires, things like mowing and disking and grazing and cutting tree limbs and so forth are things that can destroy a nature preserve. If lucky, you might wind up with a garden, but that is not natural. Using the plans figures, this fire prevention scheme if followed will cost for five years $700,000 (which Palo Alto's city budget does not have) and treat 330 acres in the two parks. It is a huge project that probably would cost a lot more than is estimated. And our precious parks will be damaged. This plan does not recognize that the purpose of the parks is to save natural areas. I have been learning about some fire fighting history. The Indians managed well with lots of small 'fires that helped them keep grassy areas that they wanted. I remember Smokey the Bear and the era where we tried to stop all wildland fires and were pretty successful. But then the fires we did have were huge, impossible to stop, and even killed firefighters. So now we concentrate our wildland fire fighting on saving the homes of people who build in wildland areas. Perhaps that is what we should be doing here. As for this plan, it is difficult to understand why certain areas were chosen for treatment. And some of the ideas do not fit with the on-the-ground situation. My husband is going to tell you about one sample of that kind of problem. The plan and the Mitigated Negative Declaration somehow surfaced for public view together on February 10. I was surprised that the sources used in the EIR were so limited. The specific fire mitigation proposals must have come from reference #4 (The Plan) and more on the ground experience would have helped. The easiest way to get a grip on what is proposed is to look at the tables. I found pages 8-11 of the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration helpful because those tables include for identified purposes the place, area, and treatment method for Foothills Park. I could not find the same summary information for Arastradero. The Arastradero tables are in the Plan starting with pg 47 but they are interspersed with Foothills Park and other information. The cost estimates are in The Plan starting on page 67. And here are a few if my odds and ends. I am wondering whether it is necessary to define a Foothills Park restrooms as defensible space. It is concrete. Might be cheaper not to clear and then fix it after a fire with the money saved. Clearing perimeter space in Arastradero 300 feet from park boundaries in deSignated places sounds pretty drastic. And what about clearing 30 Feet on both sides of the pavement edge of evacuation routes? That means Page Mill, Arastradero, Los Trancos, Skyline, and I think the main road inside Foothills Park. A lot of these are private property whose owners might not agree. Just remember, it makes no sense to save the parks from fire if you have destroyed them by saving them. Consider a reduced plan where you define evacuation routes and encourage everyone to prepare their own property. DRAFT February 24, 2009 Draft Minutes 1 MINUTES PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION February 24, 2009 City Hall 250 Hamilton Ave Commissioners Present: Deirdre Crommie, Joel Davidson, Sunny Dykwel, Carl King, Paul Losch, Pat Markevitch, Daria Walsh, Commissioners Absent: Others Present: Council Liaison Espinosa Staff Present: Greg Betts, Catherine Bourquin, Lester Hodgins, Rob de Geus, Donald Piana I. ROLL CALL CONDUCTED BY: Catherine Bourquin II. AGENDA CHANGES, REQUESTS, and DELETIONS: Item 3, Presentation by PABAC will not be presented tonight. Staff de Geus and Commissioner Crommie will provide a short update on this topic. Item 5 will not be an Action item but the Commissioners comments will be taken and submitted with the staff report that will go to Council from Kenneth Dueker, City Managers office. II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Kevin Coleman, spoke on the lack of gym space in Palo Alto. He would like to see attention put on the short and long term impacts of this problem. IV. BUSINESS: 1. Approval of Draft Minutes of January 26, 2008 regular meeting – The Draft Minutes of the January 26, 2009 regular meeting were unanimously approved as written. Approved 7:0 2. Welcome new City Council Liaison Sid Espinosa - Council Member Espinosa was welcomed as our new City Council Liaison for the Parks and Recreation Commission. 3. Informational presentation from Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC) – Staff de Geus informed the commission that Richard Swent who was to speak tonight had back surgery and was unable to make it to tonight’s meeting. Staff de Geus spoke DRAFT February 24, 2009 Draft Minutes 2 with Mr. Swent and shared with the Commission some of the points of interest that PABAC is involved with. Among other interests PABAC has been involved in improving bicycle access to the Baylands. They have been working with VTA on the concept of a Highway 101 underpass/overpass to the Baylands in South Palo Alto. Commissioner Crommie also advised the Commission that PABAC is also interested in the existing Adobe Creek underpass and expanding the open hours of the underpass for pedestrians and bicyclists. PABAC will be invited to the March 24th regular meeting. 4. Discussion with Anne Cribbs on the Senior Games – Anne Cribbs came to the Commission to provide an update on the 2009 National Summer Senior Games. The count down has started and there is only approximately 150 days left until the games commence. The official dates for the senior games are August 1 – 15, 2009. The expectation is 12,500 athletes will participate in the games. There are 4000 volunteers needed to put this event on. Anne Cribbs provided a demonstration on using the Senior Games website to register volunteer Commissioner Chair Markevitch as the first to sign up. The website to register for these volunteer opportunities is www.2009seniorgames.org. The Commissioners were given time to ask questions following the presentation. Commissioner Davidson challenged the Commission to come up with a total of 250 volunteers. A motion was made by Commissioner Davidson and seconded by Commissioner Crommie. Motion: To have the Parks and Recreation Commission cooperate together to achieve a 250 volunteer quota for the 2009 National Summer Senior Games. Approved 7:0 5. Approval of a Recommendation to City Council for the Adoption of a “Foothills Fire Management Plan” – Staff de Geus reminded the commission of the item change at the beginning of the meeting referring to the staff memo he provided correcting the title of the item. The Commission was asked for a recommendation to City Council but instead they are only being asked tonight to provide comments, and notations of errors or omissions on the draft plan. Staff will capture all the Commissioners comments in the minutes and the minutes will be attached to the Staff report that goes to Council in April. Kelly Morariu, Interim Deputy City Manager, provided the Commission with a brief update on the purpose of the Foothills Fire Management Plan. She stated that the plan came about from a discussion with the City Council during the 2008 city budget process. The fire safety in the foothills and the staffing of fire station 8 were discussed and a request from City Council was made to the City Manager’s Office to have a fire management plan created for the foothills area in Palo Alto. The key players for this plan were introduced, Carol Rice and Cheryl Miller consultants of Wildland Resource Management, Ken Drueker, Police Department on special assignment for the City Managers Office, Lester Hodgins, Supervisor Open Space and Greg Betts, Interim DRAFT February 24, 2009 Draft Minutes 3 Director of Community Services. A PowerPoint presentation was provided by the Wildland Resource Management consultants focusing on the information in the Wildland Fire Risk Assessment and mitigation draft that was provided to the Commission and Public. The Fire Management Plan Update addresses the following key items: • Fire hazard assessment • Regional evacuation routes • Review of municipal ordinances • Staffing of Station 8 • Wildland Fire Management Recommendations and Mitigations • Updates to Pearson-Arastradero Trails Master Plan and Foothills Trail Maintenance Plan • CEQA documentation • Implementation plan and potential funding Oral communications followed the presentation: Jean Olmsted, 240 West Charleston, Palo Alto – Mrs. Olmstead who is a volunteer at Foothills Park removing evasive plants spoke on how she feels that the plan is designed to prevent fires but will destroy the nature preserve. The plan calls to treat 330 acres “but we will be lucky if we are left with a garden” she said. The prevention treatments need to be reconsidered so the natural areas are not destroyed. Franklin Olmsted, 240 West Charleston, Palo Alto – Mr. Olmsted provided the Commission and Public with some handouts of a map and a list of plants that are in an area that is on the treatment plan for the Fire Management Plan. His concern of the area is that the area is very steep and in the area of the chaparral are very rare species. The treatment suggested in the plan would wipe out these rare species and change the unique ecology that only occurs in this particular area of the park. He would like to see something else be done in that area of the park. Interim Deputy City Manager Morariu reported that the staff report that will be going to Council will have the Foothills Park and Arastradero Preserve specifically mentioned in the report and the comments and concerns from the Parks and Recreation Commission will be included. Commissioners Questions and Comments: Commissioner Davidson – Commissioner Davidson was concerned with the draft mitigated negative declaration. DRAFT February 24, 2009 Draft Minutes 4 1. Under BIO–1, what is meant by “the legal consequences of take of protected species or habitat”? Answer by Consultant Rice: She said that it was a Fish and Game technical jargon that they use. 2. Why do chemical herbicide treatments and not biological treatments get more attention in the report? Answer by Consultant Rice: The concern is on the eucalyptus stumps and the sprouting, they felt that herbicides would be a more affective treatment. Commissioner Davidson would like to see an emphasis put on biological treatments in the report. 3. The words “Not anticipated” come up a lot in the report. Would like to see more of a reason why it is not anticipated. 4. The area around Los Trancos has a lot of eucalyptus trees, neighbors in that area would like to know how to have them removed. Is this part of our jurisdiction and how does the City intend to assist with eucalyptus removal? Is the report going to address this problem? Answer by Consultant Rice: The treatments prescribed are within the Palo Alto property lines. There will be collaboration with other jurisdictions that are impacted by potential fire hazard areas. 5. Why does noise in that area not reflect a problem in the mitigation report? Answer by Consultant Rice: There is a threshold requirement, and the anticipated level of noise from machinery was not determined to reach that threshold. Commissioner Dykwel – 1. Make sure the report addresses the ingress and egress routes for the neighbors that would be impacted if there was a fire. She wanted to ensure that communication was implemented with all concerned residents. 2. That an emphasis is placed on the community for regional cooperation for evacuations. 3. Ensure that the plan does not have any adverse impacts on the natural environment of the nature preserves. Answer: Consultant Rice referenced the Draft Mitigation Declaration and noted the BIO’s section references any concerns with plant species, wildlife, etc. Commissioner Walsh – Commissioner Walsh thanked everyone involved in the report and to the residents that came forward today with their comments. 1. How will the Public’s and the Commission’s comments be incorporated into the plan? And what is the date to have them in by? Answer by Consultant Rice: It is her understanding that the comments, suggestions will be sent in a list form asking the consultants to modify the plan DRAFT February 24, 2009 Draft Minutes 5 and include them before the final adoption by Council in April. All comments should be received by March 11, 2009. 2. The question relates to the mowing of the sides of the small trails. If you have to mow every year, wouldn’t it make sense to just make the mowed fire breaks accessible to the public as trails? Answer: Staff Betts replied by given a little history on how trails were developed. In Pearson Arastradero Preserve, the trail system is 10 miles that can be safely patrolled by staffed rangers, and in Foothills Park there are 15 miles of trails that can be safely patrolled by staffed rangers. Commissioner Losch – 1. If we did nothing on a scale of 1 – 10, 10 being the highest risk, where do these two parks fall, if we maintain the status quo? Answer by Consultant Rice: The State looks at the building codes and the park preserves are in the 75% of that code. The containment area is the most concern. By accepting this plan the approximate percentile that you will be improving would be about 50% in relation to the original 75%. 2. If there is an incident, are we reducing the degree of havoc? Answer by Consultant Rice: We would be reducing it dramatically. Commissioner Losch wanted to emphasize that if we show that there will be a dramatic decrease by using the treatments in the plan, there will be those who will argue the necessity of keeping Fire Station 8 open. 3. This is a $700,000 project, how much does it cost to raise $700,000? Answer by Deputy City Manager Morariu: She said it will depend on the structure; it will be a multi-pronged plan and we will be partnering with regional stakeholders. The regional areas will have their own fire plans in place in order to make the process easier to apply for grants. Commissioner Crommie – 1. Where would the fire most likely start from? Answer by Consultant Rice: We targeted the ignition source in our report, BBQ’s were focused on, road side fires were main concern. She added most fires are human caused. 2. Commissioner Crommie would like to see the BBQ’s removed from residents homes that impact the areas closes to the fence line then to have the wildlife habitat be impacted by mowing or grazing. Answer by Consultant Rice: Residents are supposed to be doing there own fire management program. The fire department regulates this and does home site inspections. 3. Commissioner Crommie questioned the error in prioritization. Answer by Consultant Rice: She replied that life, property and resources are used universally to prioritize a fire plan. DRAFT February 24, 2009 Draft Minutes 6 4. Commissioner Crommie expressed her concern over sudden oak death; she wanted to double check that the processes for the treatments would not increase the chance of contamination. Answer: Consultant Rice suggested a vehicle and equipment washing machine be included in the grant proposal to prevent seed spreading and any contamination of diseases. Commissioner King - 1. How does it get implemented by the actual fire department? Answer by Officer Ken Dueker: It doesn’t involve just the Fire Department; it involves the Police, Fire and Open Space and Parks departments. This is a multi-faceted problem. The plan is technical and isn’t a reference document for the fire department to rely on. We’re hoping to spawn interagency cooperation, so we can solve the gaps that have been identified in this Fire Management Plan. 2. Commissioner King shared his concern that he did not see the metrics for how the City will determine how best to use limited resources to implement the plan. For example the plan provided an example of grazing vs. mowing but it was not clear what numerical analysis will be used to determine which of the recommendations will be implemented. Commissioner King also asked about how the environmental costs get factored into the decision making process? Answer by Consultant Rice and Miller: During the implementation process there will be an implementation team who will investigate the options that have been highlighted in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. Once there has been a determination, the recommendations and actions have to be followed. There are some dollars associated with this because of the monitoring costs that are involved. Interim Deputy City Manager Morariu informed the commission that following the close of comments to the Foothill Fire Management Plan staff in planning will walk through with the concerned parties who submitted comments. Often times the plan will change slightly. Any changes and recommendations will be incorporated. We will probably sit down with the Olmsteds and look into their concerns. Commissioner Markevitch - Commissioner Chair Markevitch had suggested at a previous meeting that the BBQ’s at Foothill Park be changed to propane. She did not see it in the report. 1. Commissioner Markevitch would like to see converting the BBQ’s to propane be considered as an option for Foothill Park. This would eliminate the potential fire hazard from hot coals and the chance of them blowing out. Council Liaison Espinosa – DRAFT February 24, 2009 Draft Minutes 7 1. Council Liaison Espinosa inquired if the report would be coming back to the Commission to flush out items such as the cost benefits vs. environmental impacts. Answer by Interim Deputy City Manager Morariu: She responded that it would not, unless directed by Council to. Once the implementation of the plan was underway, there will be a lot of dialogue occurring and she could see engaging the Commission in this process. We are still working on how that strategy is going to work. 2. He added that he was impressed on how much outreach has been done. He also wanted to recommend that when it comes before the Council it is presented with how we’ve been doing outreach, what will be different and what we will be doing. The process in which the plan was developed doesn’t need to be the main focus. Station 8 – the “big elephant in the room”, will probably be a big part of the discussion, so being prepared for that discussion will be helpful. Interim Deputy City Manager Morariu responded by agreeing and her feeling was that the plan was the starting point and the focus on the implementation will require a lot of discussion. 6. Agenda setting – Review suggested topics for consideration at future meetings – The Commission engaged in a discussion on topics for future meetings. Staff de Geus suggested that the Commission first reaffirm the existing priorities. Then, once the priorities are reaffirmed, concentrate on the additional items that were suggested and see where they fit in with the priorities. The Commission can then have two or more Commissioners choose topics of interest that they will work on and bring to the Commission when the item is ready for a meaningful and productive discussion. After some discussion on the existing priorities a motion was made by Commissioner King and seconded by Commissioner Losch: a. Playing Areas – A. Develop a field allocation policy necessary to meet the recreation and non- recreation demands of our residents at a fair and reason cost. B. Engage in a CSD Strategic Planning process 1. Analysis of existing conditions and capacity of CSD programs, services and facilities. 2. Analysis of community perspective on CSD programs, services and facility needs for the future, and 3. Development of specific strategies and actions to best meet these needs within realistic budget constraints. b. Open Space 1. Provide citizens and staff clear statements and guidelines on balancing recreational uses with habitat preservation in Open Space. DRAFT February 24, 2009 Draft Minutes 8 c. Culture of Fitness 1. Encourage the citizens and employees of Palo Alto to embrace a healthier lifestyle through increased physical activity. d. Partnership 1. Identify and compile a comprehensive list of all partnerships pertaining to the Parks & Recreation Department with an eye towards forging new ones. e. Palo Alto as a Magnet 1. Understand Palo Alto’s role and cost structure with regards to providing Parks and Recreation services to residents and non-residents. Motion: To have the following changes reflected in the Commissioners 2009 Priorities. 1. Remove from Playing Areas “B.” Engage in a CSD Strategic Planning process 2. Change the title “a. Playing Areas” to “a. Reserved recreational facilities”. 3. Move “e. Palo Alto as a Magnet” under “a. Playing Areas” as “B” 4. Make “Engage CSD strategic planning process as priority “e”. Approved 7:0 Items to be included as potential agenda items on the work plan were identified as follows: • Overview of Open Space and Parks Division operations – Opportunity to introduce Rangers and CIP project coordinator. • Access to Baylands – move to March meeting • Informational presentation on update of CIP funding/projects • Greer Park renovation – CIP project • The policy on the terms of office for the Commission – Commissioners King and Davidson. • Creek/Urban trails – Commissioners Dykwel and Crommie • Public Art in Parks – Chair Markevitch will be meeting with the Chair of the Art Commission to discuss how art is placed in parks. • Parks and Recreation Commission and PAUSD liaison – Commissioner Losch and Walsh will work on formalizing a plan and then meet with Chair Markevitch. • Revisiting recreational opportunities for dog owners – Commissioners Walsh and Losch • Middle School Athletic program and policy – Commissioners Walsh and Markevitch • Community Garden opportunities – Commissioners Davidson and Crommie • Open Space Vision statement – Commissioners Walsh and Crommie • JCC/Cubberley Gym transition – Informational V. COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Adopt-A-Park list – Traditionally whoever got the information to Catherine first had their pick of parks. Return your forms to Catherine. 2. CPRS conference is next week March 3rd – 8th. DRAFT February 24, 2009 Draft Minutes 9 3. Staff de Geus informed the Commission that he received a letter from a concerned user of the impact that will take place during the Greer Park renovation. Staff is working on responding. 4. Commissioner Davidson remarked on the documentation that the Commission receives is sometimes unreadable. 5. Commissioner Davidson announced that staff Minka Van der Zwaag is working on Earth Day. He would like to have a heads up when programs are coming up. Staff de Geus said he would send out the work schedule for Earth Day. 6. Commissioner Davidson formally apologized to the Commission for his remarks on the Commission’s work load at last months meeting. 7. Commissioner Crommie would like to have a laser light pointer available for presentations. VI. TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR MARCH 24, 2009 REGULAR MEETING: 1. A public meeting for Seale and Greer Park will be on Wednesday, March 11th. Commissioners will receive notification to follow the Brown Act laws. March 24, 2009 Tentative Agenda - PABAC presentation - Lytton Plaza Project review and recommendation to Council to adopt a Park Improvement Ordinance for the Project Plan. - Presentation on Recreational Aquatic Program with staff Annie Bunten VII. ADJOURNMENT Adjourned at 11:02pm CITY OF PALO ALTO Memorandum TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DATE: JUNE 1,2009 CMR:226:09 REPORT TYPE: REPORTS OF OFFICIAL SUBJECT: Discussion on Termination of Option Agreements Between the City and Essex Park Boulevard, LLC and Brown-Fairchild Park Investment Company, L.P. for the Purchase of the Properties Located at 2785 Park Boulevard and 2747 Park Boulevard, Respectively and Direction to Pursue Alternative Land Banking Options for Public Safety Building The above-referenced City Manager's Report (CMR:226:09) was continued from the Council meeting of May 18, 2009. Copies of this report and attachments can be viewed http;llwww.cityofpaloalto.orglknowzone/agendas/council.asp or by contacting Engineering Division, Elizabeth Ames, Senior Engineer at 650-329-2502. iil~ - GLENN S. ROBERTS Director of Public Works on-line at Public Works TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DATE: MAY 18,2009 REPORT TYPE: REPORTS OF OFFICIAL DEP ARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES CMR:226:09 SUBJECT: Discussion on Termination of Option Agreements Between the City and Essex Park Boulevard, LLC and Brown-Fairchild Park Investment Company, L.P. for the Purchase of the Properties Located at 2785 Park Boulevard and 2747 Park Boulevard, Respectively and Direction to Pursue Alternative Land Banking Options for Public Safety Building EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides information leading to a staff recommendation to terminate the land purchase option agreements with Essex Park Boulevard, LLC and Brown-Fairchild Investment Company, L.P. for properties located at 2785 and 2747 Park Boulevard respectively. These properties were to be used for the City's Public Safety Building project but since the downturn in the economy the values of the two properties have dropped dramatically and the City does not have a sound financing plan to fund the project. Instead, staff recommends pursuing an alternative land banking proposal which will allow the City to acquire property in a record low market, but defer larger capital costs until the economy improves. Design on the project has been suspended at the 35% stage. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council authorize: 1. The City Manager to execute the attached Notices of Termination of the Option Agreements (Attachment A) between the City and Essex Park Boulevard, LLC, for the purchase of the property located at 2785 Park Boulevard; and between the City and Brown Fairchild-Park Investment Company, L.P., for the purchase of the property located at 2747 Park Boulevard, Palo Alto and 2. Staff to pursue landbanking options which will generally accommodate the facility needs set forth in the Blue Ribbon Task Force Report approved by the Council in June 2006. BACKGROUND In December 2005, Council directed the Mayor to appoint a community-based Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) to evaluate the need, size, cost and site for a public safety building. In June 2006, the Council accepted and approved the Public Safety Building Blue Ribbon Task Force recommendations to consider a new Public Safety Building totaling 49,600 square feet at the two-parcel, 1.51 acre site located at 2785 Park Boulevard. CMR:226:09 Page 1 On November 17, 2007 (CMR:420:07) Council authorized the City Manager to enter into an Option Agreement to purchase the property from the owner, Essex Park Boulevard, LLC (Essex) for the purchase price of $10,900,000. Structuring the transaction as an option agreement, rather than an outright purchase, allowed the City to secure the property and lock in a price. Terms of the option agreement include a 30-month term which began in November 2007 and terminates in April 2010. The first option payment, in the amount of $436,000 was paid upon execution of the 'Agreement. The second through nineteenth option payments, $36,333 each, are due each month. To date the City has paid a total of $617,665 in option payments on the Essex Property. The option payments are nonrefundable and were to be credited against the total purchase price. The Agreement provides that the City may terminate the option at any time during the option term by providing Essex with a written notice. In February 2008, upon Counsel's direction, staff assembled a peer review team with architectural, construction and development expertise to evaluate the PSB project. The group expressed concern over the single L shaped option's long, inefficient rectangular parking configuration and suggested that acquisition of the adjacent .3 acre parcel located at 2747 Park Boulevard would allow for additional design flexibility and construction cost efficiencies. On May 1, 2008, staff received an offer from the owners of 2747 Park Boulevard, the Brown Fairchild-Park Investment Company, L.P. (Brown), to enter into a sale or option to purchase agreement with the City for the property. On May 12th, the City Council directed staff to proceed with the negotiations for purchase of the property and on May 19, 2008, staff received a letter of intent from Brown to enter into an option to purchase the .3 acre property for the price of $2,732,000. The terms of the option agreement include a 23-month term which began July 2008 and terminates on May 29, 2010. The first payment in the amount of $109,280, made in July 2008, secured the option for one year. The beginning of twelve monthly option payments in the amount of $9,106 is due to begin this July 1,2009. The option payments are nonrefundable, and were to be credited against the total purchase price. The Agreement provides that the City may terminate the option at any time during the option term by providing Brown with a written notice. On July 14, 2008, Council approved a design contract with RossDrulisCusenbery Architecture, Inc. (RDC) to complete the design of the PSB through construction documents. The proposed design is based on the findings of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) and Outside Peer Review that recommended a 50,000 sq. ft. new building be built on a 2-parcel site located at 2747 (Brown) and 2785 Park Boulevard (Essex Properties). The design and construction documents were to be completed by summer 2009. In November 2008, the City commissioned an appraisal of the Essex property which concluded that the property had significantly decreased in value. While the City did not re-appraise the smaller Brown property, a comparable decline would be expected. It is difficult to predict whether the commercial market has bottomed as there is still uncertainty created by the high level of vacancies and possibly far more layoffs in the valley. Accordingly, the negotiated option prices are now considerably above market with little likelihood of catching up by the time the City must exercise the options. CMR:226:09 Page 2 of4 DISCUSSION As reported in the First Quarter Fiscal Year 2009 Financial Results Discussion Report to Council on December 16, 2008 (CMR:462:08), the Country continues to deal with its worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. And, as reported, the national and local economy is faced with a tight credit market, growing unemployment, weak banks, and a severe housing downturn. The effect on local real estate prices is being felt up and down the peninsula and Palo Alto's market is not immune. As reported by various local real estate agents, appraisers and studies, prices for commercial and residential properties have declined and commercial vacancy rates continue to rIse. As the current option agreements with Essex and Brown are no longer reflective of market conditions and there is little likelihood that the market price will catch up to the option price, staff recommends cancelling both options. Land Banking Alternative In lieu of pursuing a full scale buildout of the Public Safety Building in this economic downturn, an alternative approach is a land banking option. Under this approach, the Council may decide to purchase a property now and if the City's financial position improves, the property could be developed at a later time. Alternatively, if the City's financial position does not improve, the City could elect to sell the property. One advantage to a land banking option, is it could allow the City to recognize interim income from rental of the property. City staff has had preliminary discussions with the owners of the EssexIBrown properties and it appears that they would be willing to consider a substantial price reduction if the City were to acquire the properties now. In addition, staff has identified another site at 3045 Park Boulevard that is currently on the market and which meets the general site parameters identified by the Blue Ribbon Task Force. This site contains an approximate 17,956 square foot building and thus has significant rental income potential. Both EssexIBrown and 3045 Park have indicated a willingness to finance a large part of the purchase price. If Council is interested in pursuing a "land banking" option, staff recommends that Council direct staff to continue to negotiate with the owners of the respective properties and return to Council for consideration of a Purchase Agreement. At that time, Staff would review other long term options for a Public Safety building, such as build out of the Mezzanine floor of the current Public Safety Building and a split facility. Current Project Status Because of the severe economic downturn and its impact on City revenues, it is evident that the fmancing options for the Public Safety Building (PSB) need to be re-evaluated. There is considerable uncertainty surrounding the level of City revenues which is expected to continue at least through year 2010. The City's revised Long Range Financial Forecast shows a deficit of $7.8 million this fiscal yea( and a $10.0 million deficit next fiscal year. Under these conditions, funding the estimated $5.2 million in annual debt service for the PSB land acquisition and construction costs needs to be reassessed. Resources cited in a February 11, 2008 report to the Council (CMR:144:08 with attached CMRs:140:08 and 114:08) to pay debt service will need to be analyzed anew as economic and budget conditions remain volatile. Staff has suspended the PSB project at the 35% design stage in light of the current financial climate. CMR:226:09 Page 3 of4 Police Wing Mezzanine and other alternatives In view of the economic conditions, staff is exploring other options in addition to land banking. There has been some interest in exploring building out the mezzanine level of the existing police wing in the Civic Center. In 2002 staff and the design consultant evaluated the feasibility of this option and concluded it would require major structural work at significant additional cost and would also require temporary facilities for the Police Department during construction. Staff is reviewing this earlier report as well as other downsized options and will report back to Council in the next couple of months. RESOURCE IMPACT The City has expended the following sums on these two properties, 1) DesignlEIR Costs (September 2008 to February 2009) $1,202,667, 2) Option payments to Essex and Brown totaling $726,945 for a grand total of$1,929,612. POLICY IMPLICATIONS This recommendation does not represent a change to existing City policies. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The actions requested in this report do not constitute a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Notices of Termination of Option Agreements PREPARED BY: MARTHA MILLER DEPARTMENT HEADS: ~?:[Re7eXA=: GLENN S. ROBERTS LA Director, Administrative Services CITY MANAGER: "5/.(' Page Attachment A ~j~ .. QfJ~~2_~!9 Office of the City Manager May 18,2009 VIA PERSONAL DELIVERY Brown Fairchild-Park Investment Company, L.P. clo Vance Brown Inc. 3197 Park Blvd. Palo Alto, CA 94306 Attn: Loren K. Brown RE: Notice of Termination of Option: 2747 Park Boulevard, Palo Alto Dear Mr. Brown: Pursuant to Section 12.1 of the Option Agreement dated July 22, 2008 between the City of Palo Alto and Brown Fairchild-Park Investment Company, L.P., the City of Palo Alto hereby terminates the Option to purchase the property commonly known as 2747 Park Boulevard, Palo Alto. Very truly yours, James Keene City Manager cc: North American Title Company 090413 jb 0130459 P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.329.2563 650.325.5025 fax VIA PERSONAL DELIVERY Essex Park Boulevard, LLC c/o Essex Property Trust, Inc. 925 East Meadow Drive Palo Alto, CA 94303 Attn: Bruce Knoblock and Jordan E. Ritter ~~~QfJ?~qM~Q Office of the City Manager May 18,2009 RE: Notice of Termination of Option: 2785 Park Boulevard, Palo Alto Dear Messrs. Knoblock and Ritter: Pursuant to Section 12.1 of the Option Agreement dated November 20, 2007 between the City of Palo Alto and Essex Park Boulevard, LLC, the City ofPalo Alto hereby terminates the Option to purchase the property commonly known as 2785 Park Boulevard, Palo Alto. Very truly yours, James Keene City Manager cc: North American Title Company 090413 jb 0130458 p.o. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.329.2563 650.325.5025 fax TO: FROM: DATE: REPORT TYPE: SUBJECT: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: City Manager's Office MAY 18,2009 CMR: 253:09 COUNCIL MATTERS Council Direction to High Speed Rail Ad Hoc Committee and Report and Update on High Speed Rail Activities RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council review and adopt the draft Guiding Principles as a means to provide ongoing direction to the High Speed Rail Ad Hoc Committee. BACKGROUND Since passage of Proposition lA in November last year, the High Speed Rail Authority . (HSR) has initiated environmental and engineering studies for implementation of the system statewide. The HSR consulting team began scoping the Environmental Impact Report for the San Jose to San Francisco segment. Soon after scoping sessions began, Mayor Peter Drekmeier appointed Council members Kishimoto, Barton and Burt to the Ad Hoc High Speed Rail Committee. Since this time, the Ad Hoc Committee has met informally and, because of its temporary status, has not been subject to the Brown Act. The Ad Hoc Committee has focused much of its efforts on working with other peninsula communities who are potentially impacted by high speed rail. A draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), forming the Peninsula Cities Coalition (PCC), was prepared and distributed to peninsula cities. The Ad Hoc Committee has also begun to engage various community groups organized around the potential impacts of high speed rail to coordinate local, statewide and national legislation. The Peninsula Cities MOU is under consideration by several cities. The MOU requires a minimum of five cities to join the consortium in order to create a recognized entity. Currently, four cities have acted on the MOU: Palo Alto; Menlo Park; Belmont; and Burlingame have all ratified the MOU. Atherton, who previously ratified the MOU, is scheduled for a re-vote because the document was modified and is expected to ratify the revised document this month. CMR: 253:09 Page 1 of4 The City of Palo Alto has filed an amicus brief in the Town of Atherton v. High Speed Rail case. The hearing on the C.E.Q.A. lawsuit is scheduled for May 29 in Sacramento. DISCUSSION Brown Act Issues Brown Act guidelines require that committees whose task extends beyond six months should be considered a standing committee subject to the open meeting requirements of the Brown Act. Once Atherton ratifies the MOU, it will be clear that the PCC will be active in High Speed Rail issues well beyond six months and will be subject to Brown Act requirements including posting of agendas and providing the public with an opportunity to comment. If City Council were to provide the Ad Hoc Committee with direction to represent City Council positions to other governmental agencies and the community, it is also clear that the Ad Hoc Committee will exist beyond six months. Consequently, when a quorum (two or more members) is present, the Ad Hoc Committee will be subject to Brown Act requirements. One on one meetings with single committee members are acceptable on an informal basis without the need for noticing. The Mayor may appoint a fourth member to the Ad Hoc Committee. If there are four members, then two members could meet with outside agencies without the need for Brown Act Compliance. Legislative Update Attached is a legislative summary of the numerous bills pending on HSR issues. Staff and members of the Ad Hoc Committee have been in communication with Senator Joe Simitian's office to discuss possible legislative actions to ensure HSR is compatible with the peninsula's built environment. Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) is a collaborative design approach which seeks to engage all stakeholders prior to development of a transportation improvement. The intended result of CSS is to adapt public infrastructure project to the location rather than the imposition of strict engineering standards which ignore the local context. For more information on CSS, please see the attachments. Conversations with Senator Simitian's office suggest exploring the possibility of amending a pending bill to require HSR to employ CSS in its community process and design. CSS provides the framework to positively affect the outcome of HSR's design by opening up the process to the public at the earliest possible stage. While it is unfortunate that HSR has yet to adopt CSS as a policy, legislation may be required to ensure a more transparent and collaborative community process. Because of the sheer number of HSR related bills pending, staff has been fortunate to have the support of volunteer resources that have provided comprehensive legislative summaries. Staff will post these periodic updates on its High Speed Rail web site as they become available. CMR: 253:09 Page 2 of4 Guiding Principles The City Council High Speed Rail Ad Hoc Committee is designated by the City Council to represent the City in public at meetings with community groups and stakeholders, when speaking to other public agencies, and when providing written correspondence or testimony in advocating for legislation related to high speed rail. The Ad Hoc Committee will have the authority to speak on behalf of the City Council at hearings on short notice when full City Council discussion at a regularly scheduled Council meeting is not feasible. In such cases, the Ad Hoc Committee should be guided by broad principles that are consistent with the existing City Comprehensive Plan and adopted City Council policies. In order to ensure consistency with existing City Council positions and policies, the Ad Hoc Committee will be guided by the following principles: • The City recognizes that High Speed Rail, if done correctly, has the potential to minimize adverse impacts and be beneficial to the community. • While acknowledging that the current direction for the San Jose to San Francisco High Speed Train project is to use the Caltrain right-of-way as the high speed rail corridor between San Jose and San Francisco, the City is open to and could support alternative alignments. • The Ad Hoc Committee will be guided by the City of Palo Alto Scoping Comments for the California High Speed Rail Authority'S San Francisco to San Jose High Speed Train (HST) Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS). • The City supports Caltrain electrification and improved commuter rail services between San Francisco and San Jose. The City is supportive of operating conditions along the Caltrain right-of-way that would be conducive to a high speed rail intercity connection in San Jose, with improved Caltrain commuter rail service between San Jose and San Francisco. • The City is supportive of exploring creative urban design and use of context- sensitive solutions that consider community values in collaborative community- sensitive solutions for the high speed rail project. • The Ad Hoc Committee shall provide regular reports to the Council on the activities of the Peninsula cities Consortium. • The Ad Hoc Committee will meet regularly with community leaders and stakeholders to inform and involve the larger Palo Alto community in the planning, review, oversight and decision-making for the San Francisco to San Jose HST project. CMR: 253:09 Page 3 of4 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: CARRD High-Speed Rail Legislation Attachment B: Context Sensitive Solutions Attachment C: Context Sensitive Solutions -Changing the Mindset in Transportation Planning PREPARED BY: r--.c ~;/?~ STEVE EMSLIE, Deputy City Manager GAYLE LIKENS, Transportation Manager CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CMR: 253:09 Page 4 of4 Attachment A CARRO High-Speed Rail Legislation Recently passed legislation and new legislation under consideration. Updated 4/30/09 Bill numbers are hyperlinked to their doc set; links in the Description column are of particular interest; votes are recorded & linked. Changes: added AB 289, SB 391, SB 476, SB 526, SB 783; added hearing times & links to live web video; added subcommittees. i Senate Bills I Bill Author Hearing Description Status/Update Committee Date Location ! S853 Ducheny Studies creation of Dept. of Railroads. Chaptered in Sept 2008. !;;PUCAnall'sis Against 5B 53 7/2008. S8409 Ducheny Creates Dept. of Railroads, transferring all rail 4/14 Trans Com: placed on hold, Sen Trans Com functions from Caltrans to new dept; also moves rail waiting for CA Research Bureau's safety from CPUC to rail dept. (see CPUC ReQort) study due 5/1. SB455 Lowenthal May-4 Gov appointed members of CHSRA are subject to 4/21 Sen Trans: do pass (10-1) & Sen. advice/consent of Senate. Also affects acquiring & re-refer to Appr. Appropriations insuring property, adds CHSRA to exemptions 4/28 May 4 hearing canceled at Caltrans benefits from, including property request of author. acquisition. Like Caltrans, they'd be exempt from DGS, SPW8 and DOF body of law. Author amendments on 4/16. Trans Com Analvsis added on 4/16. S8734 Lowenthal Arvil;W Allocates funds for various projects including grade 4/28 Sen Trans: pass (10-0) to Sen Trans Com separation, freight, etc. Appr recommend Consent Cal. Trans Com Anal\,sis added 4/23. S8526 Ashburn Ap'iI 18 Requires the operation of at least 1 Amtrak train on 4/28 Sen Trans: pass (10-0) Sen Trans Com San Joaquin (Altamont) route that terminates in SF. Trans Com Anall'sis added 4/23. S8527 Ashburn ~ States intent of Legislature to reorganize the CHSRA 3/12 to RLS Com Sen Trans Com to ensure greater oversight and accountability for 4/16 referred to Trans. HSR project. (lip service) Committee. 4/28 Trans hearing canceled at request of author. S8783 Ashburn File date Establishes additional requirements for CHSRA 3/19 to RLS Com Senate April 30 business plan. 4/16 referred to Trans. Com. Trans Com Analvsis added 4/23. . 4/28 Sen Trans: pass (l0-0) i 58686 DeSaulnier Adds to the CEQA process. 4/20 Env Quai Com: do pass (7-0) Assembly Env. Q.ual. Com Anall'sis {bll Simitianl added 4/19. & to Consent Cal; 4/23 from cc. Senate Analysis Consent added 4/22. 4/27 Sen floor: 3'd read pass {36-01 Senate Analvsis Third Read added 4/23. 4/27 in Assembly, first read. S8476 Correa File date Prohibits taking action against an agency for 4/23 re-referred to Env Qual Com Senate April 30 noncompliance with CEQA unless the complaints 4/27 Env Qual: do pass (6-01 re- were presented to the agency orally or in writing refer to Appropriations during the public comment period. Author Amended 4/23 significantly alters intent. i Env Q.ual Com Anall'sis 4/23 by Simitian. 58555 Kehoe /\p!ii 28 Revises Eminent Domain Law to prohibit person 4/21 Jud Com: do pass {3-2) as Sen Appr from acquiring conservation easement by eminent amended & re-referred to Sen domain unless specified procedures are followed. Appr. Allows current holder to state objections. 4/28 Second read, amend, to Appr. Jud Com Anall'sis added on 4/20. Author amendments on 4/28. S8391 Liu, April 27 Requires Caltrans to address trans. planning policy 4/21 Trans: do pass {7-41 Sen Appr Lowenthal & process; relates to sustainable communities 4/27 Env Qual: do pass strategy. Does not specifically include HSR. S8454 Lowenthal Non-substantive wording change. 3/12 referred to Com on RLS. Sen Rules Com S8165 Lowenthal April 2B Sale of surplus Caftrans properties along Highway 4/14 Author amendments Sen Appr 84 in Fremont & Union City apply to only non-4/16 re-referred to Trans Com. residential props; will be used for alt. trans plan. 4/28 Trans; do pass {9-11 to Appr. Trans Com Anall'sis added 4/23. Assembly Bills Bill Author Hearing Description Status/Update Committee Date location AB153 Ma April 29 Exempts CHSRA from certain contingencies related 3/23 Trans Com: do pass 1f!:ru & re-Asm 9:00am to eminent domain, giving them greater autonomy referred to Jud. Appropriations when acquiring rights-of-way. 4/14 Jud Com: do pass (7·2) & re- Jud Com AnalysiS 4/13. Trans Com Analysis 3/20. referred to Appr Com. AoorCom Analvsis 4/28. 4/29 Appr: do pass 111-5) AB338 Ma File date Increases definition of transit village from }:i to Y, 4/2 Com on Local Gov: do pass (4-2) Assembly April 30 mile of main entrance of a transit station. Affects & re-referred to Appr Com. affordable housing, denSity, funding ofTODs. 4/22 Appr Com: do pass (11-5) Unclear whether it adds or removes protections to i 4/27 Second reading affected properties. Authorizes city or county to 4/28 Third reading ! make infrastructure improvements without voter approval. Requires local govs to use at least 20% of tax increment of certain bond funds for affordable housing. Asm Com on Local Gov Analysis 3/31. Asm Aom Analvsis 4/21. Asm Analvsis 4/29. AB289 Galgiani File date Exempts high-speed grade separation projects 4/15 re-referred to Trans Com Assembly April 30 from having to meet CEQA. 4/27 Trans: do pass to floor (13-0) 3rd reading Author amendments on 4/14, significantly altered 4/29 Second reading content. m Analvsis 4/24. Asm AnalySiS 4/27 AB733 Galgiani April 20 Authorizes CHSRA to create jobs, award contracts, 4/20 Trans. Com: do pass (13-01 & Assembly 9:00am purchase trains. re-referred to Appr Com. Appropriations Trans Com Analysis 4/17. Aoor Com Analvsis 4/28. 4/29 Appr: do pass L16-Ql AB 1375 Galgiani c\pril27 Repeal and reenact CHST Act in Public Utilities 3/31 Referred to Trans. Committee. Asm Code. Creates new Dept. of Rail. Similar to SB 409. 4/27 Trans: do pass (9-4) & refer to Appropriations Trans Com Analysis 4/24. Appr. Com. Senate Committee Info: Committee (no. members) Hearings Chair Vice Chair Upcoming hearings of interest (non-bill items) AlilifOl2riations (13) Mon 11:00 Kehoe Cox Budget& Fiscal Review (40) Thurs 8:00 Ducheny Dutton Budget Sub N02 Resources, Thurs 9:30 Simitian April 30: CHSRA Env EnerJ~v. Trans (3) Environmental Qualitv (7) 1/3 Mon 1:30 Simitian Runner Jygicia!:y (5) Tues 1:00 Corbett Harman Rules (5) Wed 1:30 Steinberg Aanestad Transliortation & Housing (11) Thurs 1:30 Lowenthal Huff Assembly Committee Info: Committee (no. members) Hearings Chair Vice Chair Upcoming hearings of interest (non-bill items) A[l[lro[!riations (17) Wed 9:00 De Leon Nielsen Budget (27) Wed, on call Evans Niello Budget NoS Tech Trans (5) Wed 4:00 Blumenfield April 29: CHSRA Judiciary (10) Tues 9:00 Feuer Tran Natural Resources Skinner Gilmore Rules (11) Mon, on call lieu Blakeslee Trans[!ortation (14) Mon 1:30 Eng Jeffries Select Committee Trans (7) Davis Fletcher This legislative update is provided by CARRO -Citizens Advocating Reasonable Rail Design. To receive an electronic version with active hyperlinks send email torwes[li@mathmatinee.com. Next update: 5/7/09. Attachment B California Department o/Transportation DIRECTOR'S POLICY TITLE POLICY INTENDED RESULTS Effective Date: 11-29-01 .Context Sensitive Solutions The Department uses "Context Sensitive Solutions" as an approach to plan, design, construct, maintain, and operate its transportation system. These solutions use innovative and inclusive approaches that integrate and balance community, aesthetic, historic, and environmental values with transportation safety, maintenance, and performance goals. Context sensitive solutions are reached through a collaborative, interdisciplinary approach involving all stakeholders. The context of all projects and activities is a key factor in reaching decisions. It is considered for all State transportation and support facilities when defining, developing, and evaluating options. When considering the context, issues such as funding feasibility, maintenance feasibility, tr::iffic demand, impact on alternate routes, impact on safety, and relevant laws, rules, and regulations must be addressed. In towns and cities across California, the State highway may be the only through street or may function as a local street. These communities desire that their main street be an economic, social, and cultural asset as well as provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods. In urban areas, communities want transportation projects to provide opportunities for enhanced non-motorized travel and visual quality. In natural areas, projects can fit aesthetically into the surroundings by including contour grading, aesthetic bridge railings, and special architectural and structural elements. Addressing these needs will assure that transportation solutions meet more . than transportation objectives. The Department can be proud of the many contributions it has made to improve highways that are main streets and the aesthetics of its highways and structures; however, there is a strongly expressed desire across California for this concept to be the norm. Director's Policy Page 2 RESPONSIBILITIES Context sensitive solutions meet transportation goals in harmony with community goals and natural environments. They require careful, imaginative, and early planning, and continuous community involvement. The Department's Highway Design Manual, Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) regulations, FHW A's Flexibility in Highway Design publication, and the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials' A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets all share a philosophy that explicitly allows flexibility in applying design standards and approving exceptions to design standards where validated by applying sound engineering judgment. This design philosophy seeks transportation solutions that improve mobility and safety while complementing and enhancing community values and objectives. Director: • Creates an environment in which innovative actions, such as context sensitive solutions, can flourish. • Recognizes and highlights individuals, teams, and projects that advance the goals of this policy. • Encourages staff to conduct and participate in meetings and conferences to expand the knowledge of context sensitive solutions internally and externally. Chief Counsel: Evaluates and provides opinions on legal issues ass~iated with context sensitive solutions. Deputy Director. Maintenance and Operations; Chiefs. Divisions of Traffic Operations and Maintenance: • Support context sensitive solutions in the maintenance and operation of transportation facilities. • Revise'manuals and procedure documents to facilitate the application of context sensitive solutions. • Initiate and coordinate research to enable context sensitive solutions. Director1s Policy Page 3 Chief, Division of New Technology and Research: • Conducts research and develops and improves techniques and materials to enable context sensitive solutions, • Revises manuals and procedure documents to facilitate the application of context sensitive solutions. Chief Engineer (Deputy Director, Project Delivery): • Supports context sensitive solutions in the design and construction of transportation facilities. • Encourages innovation and flexibility in design. • Ensures projects are well coordinated to support the application of context sensitive solutions through the life of projects. Chief, Division of Engineering Services: • Conducts research and develops and improves techniques and materials to enable context sensitive solutions. • Trains staff in the application of context sensitive solutions. • Revises manuals and procedure documents to facilitate the application of context sensitive solutions. Chief, Division of Proiect Management: Ensures resources are distributed to enable implementation of context sensitive approaches. Chiefs, Divisions of Right of Way and Construction: • Train staff in the application of context sensitive solutions. • Revise manuals and procedure documents to facilitate the application of context sensitive solutions. Chief, Division of Design: • Works in cooperation with district and other functional units to develop guidance on design flexibility. • Identifies good examples of the application of context sensitive solutions to share with departmental and local agency staff. • Initiates and coordinates research to enable context sensitive solutions. • Trains staff in the application of context sensitive solutions. Director's Policy Page 4 • Revises manuals and procedure documents to facilitate the application of context sensitive solutions. Chief, Division of Environmental Analysis: • Facilitates coordination with resource agencies to assure facilities and activities are in harmony with the surrounding environment. • Ensures communities have the opportunity to be actively involved in the environmental stage of the project development process. • Ensures context sensitive commitments are sustained, as warranted, as a project moves through the environmental approval process. • Trains staff in the application of context sensitive solutions. • Revises manuals and procedure documents to facilitate the application of context sensitive solutions. Chief Financial Officer (Deputy Director, Finance); Chief, Division of Transportation Programming: • Support the inclusion of context sensitive solutions when programming transportation projects. • Communicate the importance of context sensitive solutions to the California Transportation Commission. • Facilitate district development of funding partnerships for. context sensitive solutions. Deputy Director, Administration: Supports context sensitive solutions in the planning, design, construction, maintenance, and operation of offices, maintenance stations, and other departmental support facilities. Deputy Director, Planning and Modal Programs: Supports context sensitive solutions in the planning of transportation programs and facilities. Chief, Division of Local Assistance: • Facilitates training of local agencies in the principles of context sensitive solutions. • Trains staff in the application of context sensitive solutions. • Revises manuals and procedure documents to facilitate the application of context sensitive solutions. Director's Policy Page 5 APPLICABILITY Chief, Division of Transportation Planning: • Develops and maintains community planning guidance. • Trains staff in the application of context sensitive solutions. • Revises manuals and procedure documents to facilitate the application of context sensitive solutions. • Works with regional transportation planning agencies, metropolitan transportation organizations, counties, cities, and the private sector to support and incorporate context sensitive solutions in planning, programming, and developing transportation facilities and services. District Directors: • Provide leadership in the application of context sensitive solutions in all planning, programming, project development, construction, maintenance, and operational activities of the district. • Proactively ensure early and continuous involvement of stakeholders. • Are responsive to requests by local communities, resource and other agencies, and the general public for context sensitive solutions. • Assure that context sensitivity is applied to local and other projects within the State right-of-way. • Train staff in the application of context sensitive solutions. All employees and others involved in the planning, development, construction, maintenance, and operation of State transportation and support facilities. Originally Signed by 11-29-01 JEFF MORALES Director Date Signed I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ '~~") \"'~_// Attachment C September/October 2006 model NATIONAL TRUST forHrSTORIC PRESERVATION~ ublic olicies A Public Policy Repon published by National T rusr Forum, a pi"ogram of the Center for Preservation Leadership Context Sensitive Solutions: Changing the Mindset in Transportation Planning . . • . . • • . . . • • . • . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . • • • • . . • • • • • . • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • by Meg MagUIre Historic preservationists are all too familiar with road projects that rip through communities with little regard for cultural assets or com- munity values, often in the name of providing "safety" or "increasing capacity." Preservation lore is rich in victories, defeats, and battles with state departments of transportation. Fortunately, these battles have also helped open the state-'trans- portation door to a more sensitive approach to road design known as Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS). The challenge is to move this approach (rom occasional state practice into official state policy. What Are Context Sensitive Solutions? The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) defines CSS as , " ... a collaborative, interdisciplinalY approach that involves all stakeholders to develop a transportation facility that fits its physical setting and preserves scenic, aesthetic, historic and environmental resources, while maintaining safety and mobility. CSS is an approach that considers the total context within which a trans- portation improvement project will exist." CSS is applicable to highways, mass transit, and all other trans- portation improvements. This approach can help ensure that transportation planning engages the public in balancing community, cultural, aesthetic, environmental, and transportation needs. For example, CSS can be applied to everything from relocating a highway interchange that would adversely affect a historic park to a traffic calming design fi)r a historic main street. Brief History ofCSS Congress first officially acknowledged the concept of "flexibility in highway design" with the passage of the Intennodal Surface Trans- portation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) and the National Highway System Act of 1995 (NHS). The NHS stated: A design for new construction, reconstruction, resur- facing ... restoration, or rehabilitation of a highway on the National Highway System (other than a highway also on the Interstate System) may take into account ... [in addition to safety, durability, and economy of maintenance] ... (A) the constructed and natural environment of the area; (B) the environmental, scenic, aesthetic,' historic, com- l11LU1ity, and preservation impacts of the activity; and (C) access for other modes of transportation, 111 Timton, N.j., NjDOTcomtmcted the Route 29 Timnel ro rekmlte the heavy traffic that literally shook the lOO-year-o!d row hOllSes on Lambertoll Street. As part ~f the imp/'Ollcments NjDOT cO/IS/rUctcd a flw'-SCf/SOtl waterjeaturc alld a waterside pl=. Pboto courtesy oJNjDOT and VoUmer Associates. Congress again reinforced CSS in the most recent federal sll1{ace transportation bill, the Safe, Accessible. Flexible, Efficient Trans- portation Equity Act of2005-A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). Section 6008, Integration of Natural Resource Concerns into Trans- portation Project Planning. specifically recognizes these key reference materials: • Flexibility in Highway Design, FHWA's 1997 seminal publication that affimls the flexible, well-documented application of design guide- lines established by the American Association of State Highway and 1i:ansportation Officials (AASHTO) in A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, more commonly known as "the Green Book"; • Eight Characteristics of the Process That Yield Excellence [see sidebar]; and • Seven Qualities of Excellence in Transportation Design [see sidebar]. SAFETEA-LU authorizes the Secretary of1i:ansportation to con- sider these references in establishing standards to be used on the National Highway System. For preservation advocates, federal law can provide the basic framework and rationale for state CSS legislation affecting all state roads and bridges. What Works in the States? A growing number of state departments of transportation, including those in Maryland, Minnesota. New Jersey, New York, and In-egon, are The urblln park that !(IllS cOll5tl7lcted over the tunnel section oJRtlllte 29 ill1rmtoll, Nj, jell/ures a bi<)'cle pllth lind pedestrum walkwt1.K paviliollS, plaY?,Ivund. andll historic illtelpl'Cth'e llrea. Photo courtesy oJNJDOT lind VoUmer Associates. adopting CSS policies and beginning to retrain highway engineers, planners, and other transportation professionals to put this philosophy into practice. The result is better projects, a higher degree of public sat- isfaction, and often a shorter project delivery that saves time and money and promotes goodwill. Best Practices in Context-Sensitive Solutions, a CSS project C0111- petition sponsored by the MSHTO Center for Environmental Excel- lence in 2005, recognized several states with successful CSS poliCies: Best Pn~iect: Minnesota's TruJ1k Highway 38, the Edge of the Wilder- ness National SceJ1ic Byway Corridor is a cOlTidor reconsttuction project focus~d on maintaining the historic roadway's existing alignment. It incorporates four-foot paved shoulders with a rumble strip and an additional two feet of reinforced soft shoulder to improve safety and accommodate bicyclists, while reducing the roadway's impact on the land. Best Program: Oregon's Transportation l1westrnent Act Swte Bridge Deuq}ery Program is an innovative effort to replace or repair more than 300 bridges including a number of historic bridges. The program includes a collaborative effort to streamline the process fo~' permits, to be implemented using a context sensitive and sustainable solutions approach. Best Institutional Clwnge: Tile New York Srate DelJartmellt of7J'ans- /Jortation:s Context Sensitiw Solutions Implementation Initiative includes a CSS policy directive for the department as well as an annual CSS award to recognize exemplary practices, a CSS website, numerous CSS training courses, and incorporation of CSS into the agency's Project Development Manual. However, without state legislation mandating CSS, progress is based entirely on enlightened gubernatorial or departmental leader- ship. And unfortunately, for all the talk about designing roads that pro- tect community character, there is still too little progress in too few states. Here are three steps to implement CSS policies in your state. Step 1: Advocate for State CSS Legislation Recognizing that most decisions about transportation projects are made at the state level, FHWA has established, as one of its vital strate- gies, "to provide guidance, infonnation, and training to States on 'inte- grating the planning and environmental processes' and encouraging context-sensitive solutions/context-sensitive design" (FHWA Memo- randum, October 29,2002). e··········· MOD E But how (ar are states really willing to go to institutionalize CSS principles and practices? Will state departments of transportation adopt only CSS administrative guidelines that are subJect to change with each new department head? Or will state legislatures pas~ CSS legislation that advances CSS from one administration to the next? The answer lies in the power and effectiveness of citizen advocates, including preservationists, to bring about real change. Only a handful of states-Connecticut, 1Ilinois. New Jersey. Ver- mont-have passed authoriZing legislation that proVides a statutory basis for CSS. However, official support is increasing for state legisla- tion. The AASHTO 2004 publication A Guide to Achieving Flexibility in Highway Design recommends that each state enact CSS authorizing legislation as one important way of addressing liability issues. - Advocates may encounter resistance to CSS legislation. Some transportation officials will say that CSS is nothing new, that they have always done business this way. Others misrepresent CSS as concerned mostly with design "frills," failing to grasp the underlyirig emphasis on public engagement and community values. But everyone can agree that good transportation design should he the rule, not the exception. Insti- tutionalizing CSS can only improve the odds that projects will be well d~signed and meet public expectations .. Step 2: Provide Trainingfol' DOT Stt1;ff Enacting state CSS legislation is not enough, however. Compre- hensive training within the transportation agency is needed for skillful and successful implementation of CSS. Without ongoing training and retraining of personnel-from engineers and planners to maintenance workers and aclministrators-CSS will remain on the sidelines, overwhelmed by standard ways of thinking and inadequate public engagement. Several states have instituted excellent ongoing CSS training pro- grams. In New Jersey, The Congestion Relief and Transportation Tnlst Fund Renewal Act, signed into law in July 2000, requires the state's DOT to have a CSS training program. A useful training manual is Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable Communities developed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers and the Congress for the New Urbanism. Engineer-sanctioned guidelines provide an invaluable tool for activists to work with state and local transportation agencies on better community design. PUB c POL c E 's Step 3: Etta/wlte CSS Peiformallce Does CSS really produce better results and better participation? To date, little bas been done to measure outcomes, and performance methodology is still evolving. Perfonnance Measures .for Context Sellsitive Solutiolls-A Guidebool< for State DOTs, published in October 2004 by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program [Project 20-24(30)), sets forth a CSS Measurement Program Frame- work that promises to be a significant tool for state officials and citizen advocates alike. Case Study: New Jersey Route 29 Tunnel and Park New jersey Department of Transportation (N]DOT) engineers, plan- ners, project managers, and community relations representatives, as wen as consultants and community leaders, have been trained in CSS techniques-flexible design, respectful communication, consensus-huilding and community participation, negotiation and conflict resolution-and already see the public benefits. Gary Toth, N]DOT director of Project Planning and Develop- ment, says that the department encourages communities to develop a vision of their own future to guide transportation decisions. "Residents must develop a formal concept of what they want theif towns to look like in five, ten, and twenty years. NJDOT can then be a partner in fulfilling that vision and also explain any limits on (illl' delivery of the project so local expectations can be realized." The New jersey Route 29 Tunnel and Landscape Deck Park/South Riverwalk Project is a good example of CSS. In Trenton, Route 29 is primarily a four-to six-lane freeway IUlming along the Delaware Ri ver. It connects with Interstate 295 to the south via a section of historic Lamberton Street, which features 100-year-old brick row houses and mature trees. Residents were inundated with traffic that literally shook their homes and depressed property values. NjDOT recognized that the situation was unacceptable and undertook the N] Route 29 Tunnel and Landscape Deck Park/South Rh'erwalk Project to move goods and people through the area while creating a major pubhc park and preserving historic and archeological resources. One of the most exciting aspects of the Deck Park project is its historic interpretive area that is subdivided into five octagonal spaces graced by arches designed to reflect the typical architecture of the century they represent. This design helps park visitors easily assimilate what would otherwise be an ovelwhelming amount of information. Preservationists were involved in the project, both as citizen advocates and as professionals. Hunter Research. the firm retained to conduct archeological studies, produced six popular booklets based on their research on subjects as varied as Native Americans in South Trenton, 1O,OOOB.G. to A.D. 1700 and RiverviewCemeteryalUlTren- ton's Dead. In addition, the finn helped to interpret the archeological excavations to schoolchildren and community members. Website: www.state.nj.us!transportati\)I1/engJCSD Conclusion If universally adopted by state and local transportation agencies, CSS could transform transportation planning and project delivery. By more efficiently integrating all planning and design concerns in one process, and by addreSSing a variety of environmental obligations under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Section 4(f) of the Department llfTransportation Act of 1966, and s E p T E M B E R I o c T o B E R the National Environmental Policy Act (If 1969, CSS could save time and money and promote community goodwill. Most impor- tantly, it could produce superior results with and fi)r the public. Conservationists and preservationists have long demanded hetter transportation products and community outcomes. Through advocacy at the state level, preservationists can realistically press an designed to achieve transportation excellence. Meg Milguirr sf11led tiS president of Scmic AmcriCfl from 1996" to 2004 and mrrentb' i.I a romrllll1lity CIITISer1!IJtilill comu/tant. Key CSS Documents That Congress Recognized in SAFETEA-LU From the Thinking Beyond the Pavement Conference, Baltimore, 1998: Eight Characteristics of the Process That Yield Excellence 1. Communication with all stakeholders is open, honest, early, and continuous. 2. A multidisciplinary team is established early,. with disciplines based on the needs ofthe specific project. and with the inclusion of the public. 3. A full range of stakeholders is involved with transportation officials in the scoping phase. The purposes of the project are clearly defined, and consensus on the scope is forged before proceeding. 4. The highway development process is tailored to meet the circumstances. This process should examine multiple alterna- tives that will result in a consensus of approach methods. 5. A commitment to the process from top agency officials and local leaders is secured. 6. The public involvement process, which includes informal meet- ings, is tailored to the project. . 7. The landscape, the community, and valued resources are understood before engineering design is started. 8. A full range of tools for communication about project alterna· tives is used (e.g., visualization). Seven Qualities of Excellence in Transportation Design 1. The project satisfies the purpose and needs as agreed to by a full range of stakeholders. This agreement is forged in the earliest phase of the project and amended as warranted as the project develops. 2. The project is a safe facility for both the user and the community. 3. The project is in harmony with the community, and it preserves environmental, scenic, aesthetiC, histOriC, and natural resource values of the area, i.e., exhibits context sensitive design. .4. The project exceeds the expectations of both designers and stakeholders and achieves a level of excellence in people's minds. 5. The project involves efficient and effective use of the resources (time, budget, community) of all involved parties. 6. The project is designed and built with minimal disruption to the community. 7. The project is seen as having added lasting value to the community. 2 o o 6 ·····················e Resources American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Center for Environmental Excellence Best Practices in Context-Sensitive Solutions Award Announcement: http:j jnews.transportation.orgJpressJelease.aspx?Action=ViewNews&NewsID=81 Federal Highway AdminIstration (FHWA) Context Sensitive Solutions website: www.contextsensitivesolutions.org FHWA publication, Flexibility In Highway Design: www.fhwa.dot.govjenvlronmentjflexjindex.htm FHWA October 2002 Memorandum on Context Sensitive Solutions: www.fhwa.dot.govjcsdjl02902.htm FHWA List of CSS Program Activities: www.fhwa.dot.govjcsdjactivities.htm Institute of Transportation Engineers publication, Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable Communities: www.ite.orgJbookstorejRP036.pdf National Cooperative Highway Research Program publication, Performance Measures for Context Sensitive Solutions-A Guidebook for State DOTs: http://trb,orgJnews/blurb_detail.asp?id=4400 State CSS Policy Profiles: www.contextsensitivesolutions.org!contentj genj state-profilesj sp-policy e··················,········· 'M"; 0 E p u B L c p o L c E S